Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 6 February 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Bank Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (COM(2013)0520 – C7-0223/2013 – 2013/0253(COD))(1) (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

P7_TA(2014)0095 A7-0478/2013

Amendment 1
AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT(2)
to the Commission proposal
---------------------------------------------------------
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Bank Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank(3),

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee(4),

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure(5),

Whereas:

(1)  Having a better integrated internal market for banking services is essential in order to foster economic recovery in the Union. However, the current financial and economic crisis has shown that the functioning of the internal market in this area is under threat and that there is an increasing risk of financial fragmentation. Interbank markets have become less liquid and cross-border bank activities are decreasing due to fear of contagion, lack of confidence in other national banking systems and in the ability of Member States to support banks. This is a real source of concern in the internal market in which banking institutions have the use of a European passport and where the majority of those institutions operate in several Member States.

(2)  Divergences in national resolution rules between different Member States and corresponding administrative practices and the lack of a unified decision making process at Union level for the resolution of cross-border banks contribute to this lack of confidence and market instability, as they do not ensure certainty and predictability as to the possible outcome of a bank failure. Resolution decisions taken at the national level only and under non-harmonised legal frameworks may lead to distortions of competition and ultimately to the undermining of the internal market.

(3)  In particular, the different practices of Member States in the treatment of creditors of banks in resolution and in the bail-out of failing banks have an impact on the perceived credit risk, financial soundness and solvency of their banks. This undermines public confidence in the banking sector and obstructs the exercise of the freedom of establishment and the free provision of services within the internal market because financing costs would be lower without such differences in practices of Member States.

(4)  Divergences in national resolution rules between different Member States and corresponding administrative practices may lead banks and customers to have higher borrowing costs only because of their place of establishment and irrespective of their real creditworthiness. In addition, customers of banks in some Member States face higher borrowing rates than customers of banks in others irrespective of their own creditworthiness.

(4a)  The inability of certain Member States to have well-functioning institutions in the field of bank resolution has increased the damage of the banking crisis over the last years.

(4b)  National authorities may have incentives to bail out the banks with public money before embarking on a resolution process, and so the creation of a single European resolution mechanism (SRM) is fundamental to create a level playing field and a more neutral approach to decide if a bank should be resolved.

(5)  As long as resolution rules, practices and approaches to burden-sharing remain national and the financial resources needed for funding resolution are raised and spent at national level, the internal market will remain fragmented. Moreover, national supervisors have strong incentives to minimise the potential impact of bank crises on their national economies by adopting unilateral action to ring-fence banking operations, for instance by limiting intra-group transfers and lending, or by imposing higher liquidity and capital requirements on subsidiaries in their jurisdictions of potentially failing parent undertakings. National and contentious home-host issues substantially reduce efficiency in cross-border resolution processes. This restricts the cross-border activities of banks and thus creates obstacles to the exercise of fundamental freedoms and distorts competition in the internal market.

(6)  Directive [BRRD] of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) is a decisive step towards harmonisation of national bank resolution rules and has provided for cooperation among resolution authorities when dealing with the failure of cross-border banks. However, the harmonisation provided by the Directive [BRRD] is not absolute and the decision making process is not centralised. Directive [BRRD] essentially provides for common resolution tools and powers available for the national authorities of every Member State but leaves some level of discretion to national authorities in the application of the tools and in the use of national financing arrangements in support of resolution procedures. Despite attributing regulatory and mediation tasks to the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) ('EBA'), established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(7), Directive [BRRD] does not completely avoid the taking of separate and potentially inconsistent decisions by Member States regarding the resolution of cross-border groups which may affect the overall costs of resolution. Moreover, as it provides for national financing arrangements, it does not sufficiently reduce the dependence of banks on the support from national budgets and does not completely prevent different approaches by Member States to the use of the financing arrangements.

(7)  Ensuring effective uniform resolution decisions for failing banks within the Union, including on the use of funding raised at Union level, is essential for the completion of the internal market in financial services. Within the internal market, the failure of banks in one Member State may affect the stability of the financial markets of the whole Union. Ensuring effective and uniform resolution rules and equal conditions of resolution financing across Member States is in the best interest not only of the Member States in which banks operate, but also of all Member States in general as a means to preserve competition and improve the functioning of the internal market. Banking systems in the internal market are highly interconnected, bank groups are international and banks have a large percentage of foreign assets. In the absence of a single resolution mechanism, bank crises in Member States participating in the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) would have stronger negative systemic impact also in non-participating Member States. The establishment of SRM will increase stability of the banks of the participating Member States and prevent the spill-over of crises into non-participating Member States and will thus facilitate the functioning of the whole of the internal market. The mechanisms for cooperation regarding institutions established in both participating and non-participating Member States should be clear, and it is important to ensure that non-participating Member States are not discriminated against.

(7a)  In order to restore trust and credibility in the banking sector, the European Central Bank (ECB) will conduct a comprehensive balance sheet assessment of all banks supervised directly. For those banks in the participating Member States that are not subject to direct supervision by the ECB, the competent authorities should, in cooperation with the ECB, perform an equivalent balance sheet assessment that is proportionate to the size and business model of the bank. This would equally contribute to restore credibility and ensure that all banks will be subject to review.

(7b)  In order to ensure a level playing field within the internal market as a whole, every framework for banking recovery and resolution within the Union should be governed by Directive [BRRD] and by any delegated acts adopted pursuant thereto. In performing their tasks under this Regulation, the Commission and the Board should act in accordance with the requirements of that Directive and of those delegated acts. That Directive should govern recovery and resolution planning, early intervention, conditions for and principles of resolution as well as the use of resolution tools by the SRM. The main aim of this Regulation is to cover those aspects required to ensure that the SRM implements that Directive and that the appropriate funding required is at its disposal. The Commission and the Board should also be subject to all other relevant Union law, including binding regulatory and implementing technical standards developed by EBA and adopted by the Commission in accordance with Articles 10 to 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. The Board should be subject to the guidelines and recommendations adopted by EBA in relation to Directive [BRRD] in accordance with Article 16 of that Regulation and, where applicable, to any decisions of EBA in the course of binding mediation pursuant to Article 19(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.

(8)  Following the establishment of the SSM by Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 (8) where banks in the participating Member States are centrally supervised by the ECB, there is a misalignment between the Union supervision of such banks and the national treatment of those banks in the resolution proceedings pursuant to Directive [BRRD].

(8a)  Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 allows for the possibility of a non-euro area opt-in Member State to terminate its close cooperation with the SSM. Thus a situation may arise in which a Member State decides to leave the SSM but has on its territory an institution benefitting from resolution financing from the SRM fund. This Regulation may, when revised, set out the provisions for addressing such a situation.

(9)  Whilst banks in Member States remaining outside the SSM benefit at national level from supervision, resolution and financial backstop arrangements which are aligned, banks in Member States participating in the SSM are subject to Union arrangements for supervision and national arrangements for resolution and financial backstops. This misalignment creates a competitive disadvantage for the banks in the Member States participating in the SSM compared to those in the other Member States. Because supervision and resolution are at two different levels within the SSM, intervention and resolution in banks in the Member States participating in the SSM would not be as rapid, consistent and effective as in banks in the Member States outside of the SSM. This has negative repercussions on the funding costs for these banks and creates a competitive disadvantage with detrimental effects for the Member States in which those banks operate and for the overall functioning of the internal market. Therefore, a centralised resolution mechanism for all banks operating in the Member States participating in the SSM is essential to guarantee a level playing field.

(10)  The sharing of resolution responsibilities between the national and the Union levels should be aligned to the sharing of supervision responsibilities between those levels. As long as supervision remains national in a Member State, that Member State should remain responsible for the financial consequences of a bank failure. The single resolution mechanism should therefore only extend to banks and financial institutions established in Member States participating in the SSM and subject to the supervision of the ECB within the framework of the SSM. Banks established in the Member States not participating in the SSM should not be subject to the single resolution mechanism. If such Member States became subject to the single resolution mechanism, this would create the wrong incentives for them. In particular, supervisors in these Member States may become more lenient towards banks in their jurisdictions as they would not have to bear the full financial risk of their failures. Therefore, in order to ensure parallelism with the SSM, the single resolution mechanism should apply to Member States participating in the SSM. As Member States join the SSM, they should also automatically become subject to the single resolution mechanism. Ultimately, the single resolution mechanism is expected to extend to the entire internal market.

(11)  A single bank resolution fund (hereinafter referred to as the 'Fund') is an essential element without which a single resolution mechanism could not work properly. Different systems of national funding would distort the application of single bank resolution rules in the internal market. If the funding of resolution were to remain national, the link between sovereigns and the banking sector would not be broken, and investors would continue to establish borrowing conditions according to the place of establishment of the banks rather than according to their creditworthiness. The current severe fragmentation of the financial market would also remain. The Fund should help to ensure a uniform administrative practice in the financing of resolution and to avoid the creation of obstacles for the exercise of fundamental freedoms or the distortion of competition in the internal market due to divergent national practices. The Fund should be financed directly by banks and should be pooled at Union level so that the resolution resources can be objectively allocated across Member States thus increasing financial stability and limiting the link between the perceived fiscal position of individual Member States and the funding costs of banks and undertakings operating in those Member States. To further break that link, there should be a prohibition against the decisions of the SRM impinging directly on the fiscal responsibilities of the Member States.

(12)  It is therefore necessary to adopt measures to create a single resolution mechanism for all Member States participating in the single supervisory mechanism in order to facilitate the proper and stable functioning of the internal market.

(13)  A centralised application of the bank resolution rules set out in Directive [BRRD] by a single Union resolution authority in the participating Member States can only be ensured where the rules governing the establishment and functioning of a single resolution mechanism are directly applicable in the Member States to avoid divergent interpretations across the Member States. In order to ensure the harmonised application of the resolution tools, the Board, together with the Commission, should adopt a resolution handbook setting out clear and detailed guidance for the use of the resolution tools set out in Directive [BRRD]. This should bring benefits to the internal market as a whole because it will contribute to ensuring fair competition and to preventing obstacles to the free exercise of fundamental freedoms not only in the participating Member States but in the whole internal market.

(14)  Mirroring the scope of the Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, a single resolution mechanism should cover all credit institutions established in the participating Member States. However, within the framework of a single resolution mechanism, it should be possible to resolve directly any credit institution of a participating Member State in order to avoid asymmetries within the internal market in the treatment of failing institutions and creditors during a resolution process. To the extent that parent undertakings, investment firms and financial institutions are included in the consolidated supervision by the ECB, they should be included in the scope of the single resolution mechanism. Although the ECB will not supervise those institutions on a solo basis, it will be the only supervisor that will have a global perception of the risk to which a group, and indirectly the individual members, is exposed to. To exclude entities which form part of the consolidated supervision within the scope of the ECB from the scope of the single resolution mechanism would make it impossible to plan for the resolution of banking groups and to adopt a group resolution strategy, and would make any resolution decisions much less effective.

(15)  Within the single resolution mechanism, decisions should be taken at the most appropriate level. The Board, and in particular its executive session, should be empowered to prepare and take all decisions concerning the resolution procedure to the fullest extent possible, while respecting the role of the Commission as established in the TFEU, in particular in Articles 114 and 107 thereof.

(15a)  The Commission should, when performing its tasks under this Regulation, act separately from its other tasks, and strictly in accordance with the objectives and principles set out in this Regulation and in Directive [BRRD]. The separation of tasks should be guaranteed through organisational separation.

(16)  The ECB, as the supervisor within the SSM, is the best placed to assess whether a credit institution is failing or likely to fail and whether there is no reasonable prospect that any alternative private sector or supervisory action would prevent its failure within a reasonable timeframe. The Board, in its executive session, upon notification of the ECB and assessment of the resolution conditions, should provide a draft decision to the Commission ▐ to place an institution under resolution. That draft decision should include a recommendation for a clear and detailed ▐ framework of the resolution tools and, where applicable, of the use of the Fund. Within this framework, the Board, in its executive session, should decide on a resolution scheme and instruct the national resolution authorities on the resolution tools and powers to be executed at national level. Without prejudice to the effectiveness of the Board's decision-making procedures, the members of the Board should strive for consensus when takings decisions.

(17)  The Board should be empowered to take decisions, in particular, in connection with resolution planning, the assessment of resolvability, the removal of impediments to resolvability and the preparation of resolution actions. National resolution authorities should assist the Board in resolution planning and in the preparation of resolution decisions. In addition, as the exercise of resolution powers involves the application of national law, national resolution authorities should be responsible for the implementation of resolution decisions.

(18)  It is instrumental for the good functioning of the internal market that the same rules apply to all resolution measures, regardless of whether they are taken by national resolution authorities under Directive [BRRD] or within the framework of the single resolution mechanism The Commission will assess those measures under Article 107 [...] TFEU. Where the use of resolution financing arrangements does not involve State aid pursuant to Article 107 (1) [...] TFEU, the Commission should, in order to ensure a level playing field within the internal market, assess those measures by analogy to Art 107 [...] TFEU. If a notification under Article 108 of the TFEU is not necessary as no state aid pursuant to Article 107 of the TFEU is entailed in the proposed use of the Fund by the Board, as envisaged in its executive session, in order to ensure the integrity of the internal market between participating and non-participating Member States, the Commission should apply the relevant State aid rules under Article 107 [...] TFEU by way of analogy when assessing the proposed use of the Fund. The Board should not decide on a resolution scheme until the Commission has ensured, by way of analogy with State aid rules, that the use of the Fund follows the same rules as interventions by national financing arrangements.

(19)  In order to ensure a swift and effective decision making process in resolution, the Board should be a specific Union agency with a specific structure, corresponding to its specific tasks, and which departs from the model of all other agencies of the Union. Its composition should ensure that due account is taken of all relevant interests at stake in resolution procedures. The Board should operate in executive and plenary sessions. In its executive session, it should be composed of an Executive Director, a Deputy Executive Director, and members appointed by the Commission and the ECB, which should act independently and objectively in the interest of the Union as a whole. Considering the missions of the Board, the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director should be appointed on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of banking and financial matters, and experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation. The Executive Director and the Deputy Director should be chosen on the basis of an open selection procedure of which the European Parliament and the Council should be kept duly informed. The selection procedure should respect the principle of gender balance. The Commission should provide the European Parliament's competent committee with a shortlist of candidates for the positions of Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director. The Commission should submit a proposal for the appointment of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director to the European Parliament for approval. Following the European Parliament’s approval of that proposal, the Council should adopt an implementing decision to appoint the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. When deliberating on the resolution of a bank or group established within a single participating Member State, the executive session of the Board should also convene and involve in the decision-making process the member appointed by the Member State concerned representing its national resolution authority. When deliberating on a cross-border group, the members appointed by the home and all host Member States concerned representing the relevant national resolution authorities should also be convened and involved in the decision-making process of the executive session of the Board. However, home authorities and host authorities should have a balanced influence on the decision, so host authorities should have jointly one single vote. In the decision-making process, due consideration should be given to the relative size and importance of the subsidiary, branch or entity covered by consolidated supervision in the economies of the different Member States and in the group as a whole.

(19a)  Since the participants on the decision-making process of the Board in its executive sessions would change depending on the Member State(s) where the relevant institution or group operates, the permanent participants - the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director and the members appointed by the Commission and by the ECB - should ensure that the decisions throughout the different formations of the executive sessions of the Board are coherent, appropriate and proportionate.

(19b)  EBA should attend the meetings of the Board as an observer. Other observers, such as a representative of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), may, where appropriate, also be invited to attend the meetings of the Board. The observers should be subject to the same professional secrecy requirements as the members and the staff of the Board and staff exchanged with or seconded by participating Member States carrying out resolution duties.

(19c)  The Board should be able to establish internal resolution teams composed of its own staff and staff of the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States, that should be headed by Coordinators appointed from the Board's senior staff, who might be invited as observers to participate in the executive sessions of the Board, but would not be attributed any voting rights.

(19d)  The principle of sincere cooperation between the Union’s institutions is enshrined in the Treaties, in particular in Article 13(2) of the Treaty on European Union.

(20)  In the light of the Board’s and of the Commission's missions under this Regulation and the resolution objectives which include the protection of public funds, the functioning of the SRM should be financed from contributions paid by the institutions in the participating Member States. Under no circumstances should the budgetary liability of the Member States or the Union be engaged in meeting those costs.

(21)  The Commission and the Board, where relevant, should replace the national resolution authorities designated under Directive [BRRD] in respect of all aspects relating to the resolution decision-making process. The national resolution authorities designated under Directive [BRRD] should continue to carry out activities relating to the implementation of resolution schemes adopted by the Board. In order to ensure transparency and democratic control, as well as to safeguard the rights of the Union institutions, the Board should be accountable to the European Parliament and to the Council for any decisions taken on the basis of this proposal. For the same reasons of transparency and democratic control, national parliaments should have certain rights to obtain information about the activities of the Board and to engage in a dialogue with it.

(21a)  All relevant authorities should consider the principle of proportionality when applying this Regulation. The principle of proportionality implies, in particular, the evaluation of the impact that the failure of an institution could have, due to the nature of its business, its shareholding structure, its legal form, its risk profile, its size and its legal status, for example, whether it benefits from a waiver pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, its interconnectedness with other institutions or to the financial system in general, the scope and the complexity of its activities and its membership of an institutional protection scheme (IPS) that meets the requirements of Article 113(7) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 or of another cooperative mutual solidarity systems as referred to in Article 113(6) of that Regulation, and whether it exercises any investment services or activities as defined in Article 4(1)(2) of Directive 2004/39/EC.

(21b)  At the request of the national parliaments of the participating Member States, it should be possible for the relevant committees of those parliaments to hold a hearing, in the presence of the competent national authority, with a representative of the Board.

(22)  Where Directive [BRRD] provides for the possibility of applying simplified obligations or waivers by the national resolution authorities in relation to the requirement of drafting resolution plans, a procedure should be provided for whereby the Board could authorise the application of such simplified obligations.

(23)  To ensure a uniform approach for institutions and groups the Board should be empowered to draw up resolution plans for such institutions and groups, in cooperation with the national resolution authorities, which the Board may require to perform tasks relating to the drawing up of resolution plans. The Board should assess the resolvability of institutions and groups, and take measures aimed at removing impediments to resolvability, if any. The Board should require national resolution authorities to apply such appropriate measures designed to remove impediments to resolvability in order to ensure consistency and the resolvability of the institutions concerned. Because of the institution-specific and confidential nature of the information contained in the resolution plans, decisions concerning the drawing up, assessment, and approval of the resolution plans and the application of appropriate measures should be taken by the Board in its executive session.

(24)  Resolution planning is an essential component of effective resolution. The Board should therefore have the power to require changes to the structure and organization of institutions or groups in order to remove practical impediments to the application of resolution tools and ensure the resolvability of the entities concerned. Due to the potentially systemic nature of all institutions, it is crucial in order to maintain financial stability that authorities have the possibility to resolve any institution. In order to respect the right to conduct business laid down by Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Board's discretion should be limited to what is necessary to simplify the structure and operations of the institution solely to improve its resolvability. In addition, any measure imposed for such purposes should be consistent with Union law. Measures should neither directly nor indirectly be discriminatory on ground of nationality, and should be justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in financial stability. To determine whether an action was taken in the general public interest, the Board, acting in the general public interest, should be able to achieve the resolution objectives without encountering impediments to the application of resolution tools or its ability to exercise the powers conferred on it. Furthermore, an action should not go beyond the minimum necessary to attain the objectives.

(24a)  Resolution plans should take the impact on employees into account and, in accordance with Directive [BRRD], should include procedures for informing and consulting with employees or their representatives throughout the resolution process. Where applicable, collective agreements, or other arrangements provided for by the social partners, should be respected in this regard. Information about resolution plans, including any updates, should be communicated to the employees or their representatives as provided for in Directive [BRRD].

(25)  The single resolution mechanism should be based on the frameworks of Directive [BRRD] and the SSM. Therefore, the Board should be empowered to intervene at an early stage where the financial situation or the solvency of an institution is deteriorating. The information that the Board receives from ▐ the ECB at this stage is instrumental in making a determination on the action it might take in order to prepare for the resolution of the institution concerned.

(26)  In order to ensure rapid resolution action when it becomes necessary, the Board should closely monitor, in cooperation with the relevant competent authority or the ECB, the situation of the institutions concerned and the compliance of those institutions with any early intervention measure taken in their respect.

(27)  In order to minimise disruption of the financial market and to the economy, the resolution process should be accomplished in a short time. Depositors should be granted access at least to the guaranteed deposits as promptly as possible, and in any event before depositors are afforded access to guaranteed deposits in the context of a normal insolvency procedure, in accordance with Directive [DGS]. The Commission should, throughout the resolution procedure, have access to any information which it deems necessary to take an informed decision in the resolution process. Where the Commission decides to adopt the draft decision prepared by the Board to put an institution under resolution, the Board should immediately adopt a resolution scheme establishing the details of the resolution tools and powers to be applied, and the use of any financing arrangements.

(28)  Liquidation of a failing institution under normal insolvency proceedings could jeopardise financial stability, interrupt the provision of essential services, and affect the protection of depositors. In such a case there is a public interest in applying resolution tools. The objectives of resolution should therefore be to ensure the continuity of essential financial services, to maintain the stability of the financial system, to reduce moral hazard by minimising reliance on public financial support to failing institutions, and to protect depositors.

(29)  However, the winding up of an insolvent institution through normal insolvency proceedings should always be considered before a decision could be taken to maintain the institution as a going concern. An insolvent institution should be maintained as a going concern for financial stability purposes and with the use, to the extent possible, of private funds. That may be achieved either through sale to or merger with a private sector purchaser, or after having written down the liabilities of the institution, or after having converted its debt to equity in order to do a recapitalisation.

(30)  When exercising resolution powers, the Commission and the Board should make sure that shareholders and creditors bear an appropriate share of the losses, that the managers are replaced or that further managers added, that the costs of the resolution of the institution are minimised, and that all creditors of an insolvent institution that are of the same class are treated in a similar manner in accordance with this Regulation and with Directive [BRRD].

(31)  The limitations on the rights of shareholders and creditors should comply with Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The resolution tools should therefore be applied only to those institutions that are failing or likely to fail, and only when it is necessary to pursue the objective of financial stability in the general interest. In particular, resolution tools should be applied where the institution cannot be wound up under normal insolvency proceedings without destabilizing the financial system and the measures are necessary in order to ensure the rapid transfer and continuation of systemically important functions and where there is no reasonable prospect for any alternative private solution, including any increase of capital by the existing shareholders or by any third party, sufficient to restore the full viability of the institution.

(32)  Interference with property rights should not be disproportionate. As a consequence, affected shareholders and creditors should not incur greater losses than those which they would have incurred had the institution been wound up at the time that the resolution decision is taken. In the event of partial transfer of assets of an institution under resolution to a private purchaser or to a bridge institution, the residual part of the institution under resolution should be wound up under normal insolvency proceedings. In order to protect existing shareholders and creditors of the institution during the winding up proceedings, they should be entitled to receive in payment of their claims not less than what it is estimated they would have recovered if the whole institution had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings.

(33)  In order to protect the right of shareholders and ensure that creditors do not receive less than what they would receive in normal insolvency proceedings, clear obligations should be laid down concerning the valuation of the assets and liabilities of the institution and sufficient time should be allowed to estimate properly the treatment that they would have received if the institution had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings. There should be the possibility to start such a valuation already in the early intervention phase. Before any resolution action is taken, an estimate should be carried out of the value of the assets and liabilities of the institution and of the treatment that shareholders and creditors would receive under normal insolvency proceedings.

(34)  It is important that losses be recognised upon failure of the institution. The guiding principles for the valuation of assets and liabilities of failing institutions are provided for in Directive [BRRD]. It should be possible, for reasons of urgency, that the Board makes a rapid provisional valuation of the assets or liabilities of a failing institution which should apply until an independent valuation is carried out.

(35)  So as to ensure that the resolution process remains objective and certain, it is necessary to lay down the order in which unsecured claims of creditors against an institution put under resolution should be written down or converted. In order to limit the risk of creditors incurring greater losses than if the institution had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings, the order to be laid down should be applicable both in normal insolvency proceedings and in the write down or conversion process under resolution. This would also facilitate the pricing of debt.

(35a)  Harmonisation of the insolvency law throughout the Union, which would constitute a major step in the construction of a truly internal market, has not yet been achieved. However, both for the entities established in Member States participating in the SSM and for those established in other Member States, due to the harmonisation introduced by Directive [BRRD], the hierarchy of the claims of the creditors in the case of insolvency, which includes depositor's preference, will be the same. Such harmonisation eliminates an important source of regulatory arbitrage. Nevertheless, there should be a progressive move towards a Union regime for insolvency.

(36)  The Commission, based on a draft decision prepared by the Board, should provide the framework for the resolution action to be taken following the resolution plans of the entities concerned and depending on the circumstances of the case and should be able to designate for use all necessary resolution tools. Within that clear and precise framework, the Board should decide on the detailed resolution scheme. The relevant resolution tools should include the sale of business tool, the bridge institution tool, the bail-in tool and the asset separation tool, as provided for by Directive [BRRD]. The framework should also make it possible to assess whether the conditions for the write-down and conversion of capital instruments are met.

(37)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], the sale of business tool should enable the sale of the institution or parts of its business to one or more purchasers without the consent of shareholders.

(38)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], the asset separation tool should enable authorities to transfer under-performing or impaired assets to a separate vehicle. That tool should be used only in conjunction with other tools to prevent an undue competitive advantage for the failing institution.

(39)  An effective resolution regime should minimise the costs of the resolution of a failing institution borne by the taxpayers. It should also ensure that even large institutions of systemic importance can be resolved without jeopardising financial stability. The bail-in tool achieves that objective by ensuring that shareholders and creditors of the entity suffer appropriate losses and bear an appropriate part of those costs. To this end, statutory debt write down powers should be included in a framework for resolution as an additional option in conjunction with other resolution tools, as recommended by the Financial Stability Board.

(40)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], in order to ensure the necessary flexibility to allocate losses to creditors in a range of circumstances, it is appropriate that the bail-in tool be applicable both where the objective is to resolve the failing institution as a going concern if there is a realistic prospect that the institution’s viability may be restored, and where systemically important services are transferred to a bridge institution and the residual part of the institution ceases to operate and is wound up.

(41)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], where the bail-in tool is applied with the objective of restoring the capital of the failing institution to enable it to continue to operate as a going concern, resolution through bail-in should always be accompanied by the replacement of management and a subsequent restructuring of the institution and its activities in a way that addresses the reasons for its failure. That restructuring should be achieved through the implementation of a business reorganisation plan.

(42)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], it is not appropriate to apply the bail-in tool to claims in so far as they are secured, collateralised or otherwise guaranteed. However, in order to ensure that the bail-in tool is effective and achieves its objectives, it should be possible to apply it to as wide a range of the unsecured liabilities of a failing institution as possible. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to exclude certain kinds of unsecured liability from the scope of application of the bail-in tool. For reasons of public policy and effective resolution, the bail-in tool should not apply to those deposits that are protected under Directive 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(9), to liabilities to employees of the failing institution or to commercial claims that relate to goods and services necessary for the daily functioning of the institution.

(43)  In accordance with Directive [BRRD], depositors that hold deposits guaranteed by a deposit guarantee scheme should not be subject to the exercise of the bail-in tool. ▐The exercise of the bail-in powers would ensure that depositors continue having access to their deposits▐.

(44)  In order to implement the burden-sharing by shareholders and junior creditors, as required under State aid rules, the single resolution mechanism would be able to apply, by way of analogy, as of the entry into application of this Regulation and of Directive [BRRD], the bail-in tool.

(45)  To avoid institutions structuring their liabilities in a manner that impedes the effectiveness of the bail in tool, the Board should be able to establish that the institutions hold an aggregate amount of own funds, subordinated debt and senior liabilities subject to the bail-in tool expressed as a percentage of the total liabilities of the institution, that do not qualify as own funds for the purposes of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10) and of Directive 2013/36/EU of 26 June 2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(11) , which institutions should have at all times and which is set out in the resolution plans.

(46)  The best method of resolution should be chosen depending on the circumstances of the case and for this purpose, all the resolution tools provided for by Directive [BRRD] should be available and applied in accordance with that Directive.

(47)  Directive [BRRD] has conferred the power to write down and convert capital instruments on national resolution authorities, since the conditions for the write-down and conversion of capital instruments may coincide with the conditions for resolution and in such a case, an assessment is to be made of whether the sole write-down and conversion of the capital instruments is sufficient to restore the financial soundness of the entity concerned or it is also necessary to take resolution action. As a rule, it will be used in the context of resolution. The Board and the Commission should replace national resolution authorities also in this function and should therefore be empowered to assess whether the conditions for the write-down and conversion of capital instruments are met and to decide whether to place an entity under resolution, if the requirements for resolution are also fulfilled.

(48)  The efficiency and uniformity of resolution action should be ensured in all the participating Member States. For this purpose, the Board should be empowered, ▐ where a national resolution authority has not or not sufficiently applied the decision of the Board, to issue orders directly to an institution under resolution ▐.

(49)  In order to enhance the effectiveness of the single resolution mechanism, the Board should closely cooperate with the European Banking Authority in all circumstances. Where appropriate the Board should also cooperate with the European Securities and Markets Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Systemic Risk Board, and the other authorities which form part of the European System of Financial Supervision. Moreover, the Board should closely cooperate with the ECB and the other authorities empowered to supervise credit institutions within the SSM, in particular for groups subject to the consolidated supervision by the ECB. To effectively manage the resolution process of failing banks, the Board should cooperate with the national resolution authorities at all stages of the resolution process. Thus, cooperation with the latter is necessary not only for the implementation of resolution decisions taken by the Board, but also prior to the adoption of any resolution decision, at the stage of resolution planning or during the phase of early intervention. In the exercise of its tasks under this Regulation, the Commission should cooperate closely with EBA and should take appropriate account of the guidelines and recommendations issued by it.

(49a)  When applying resolution tools and exercising resolution powers, the Board should ensure that the representatives of the employees of the entities concerned are informed and, where appropriate, are consulted, as provided for in Directive [BRRD]. Where applicable, collective agreements, or other arrangements provided for by social partners, should be respected in this regard.

(50)  Since the Board replaces national resolution authorities of the participating Member States in their resolution decisions, the Board should also replace those authorities for the purposes of the cooperation with non-participating Member States as far as the resolution functions are concerned. In particular, the Board should represent all authorities from the participating Members in the resolution colleges including authorities from non-participating Member States.

(50a)  The Board and the resolution authorities of Member States that are not participating Member States should conclude a memorandum of understanding describing in general terms how they will cooperate with one another in the performance of their tasks under Directive [BRRD]. The memoranda of understanding could, inter alia, clarify the consultation relating to decisions of the Commission and the Board having effect on subsidiaries or branches established in the non-participating Member State whose parent undertaking is established in a participating Member State. The memoranda should be reviewed on a regular basis.

(51)  As many institutions operate not only within the Union, but internationally, an effective resolution mechanism needs to set out principles of cooperation with the relevant third country authorities. Support to third country authorities should be provided in accordance with the legal framework provided by Article 88 of Directive [BRRD]. For this purpose, as the Board should be the single authority empowered to resolve failing banks in the participating Member States, the Board should be exclusively empowered to conclude non-binding cooperation agreements with those third country authorities, on behalf of the national authorities of the participating Member States.

(52)  In order to carry out its tasks effectively, the Board should have appropriate investigatory powers. It should be able to require all necessary information either directly or through national resolution authorities, and to conduct investigations and on-site inspections, where appropriate in cooperation with national competent authorities, making full use of all information available to the ECB and the national competent authorities. In the context of resolution, on-site inspections would be available for the Board to effectively monitor implementation by national authorities and to ensure that the Commission and the Board take their decisions on the basis of fully accurate information.

(53)  So as to ensure that the Board has access to all relevant information, the relevant entities and their employees should not be able to invoke professional secrecy rules to prevent the disclosure of information to the Board. At the same time, the disclosure of such information to the Board should never be seen as a breach of professional secrecy.

(54)  In order to ensure that decisions adopted within the framework of the single resolution mechanism are respected, proportionate and dissuasive penalties should be imposed in the case of an infringement. The Board should be entitled to instruct national resolution authorities to impose administrative penalties or periodic penalty payments on entities for failure to comply with obligations under its decisions. In order to ensure consistent, efficient and effective enforcement practices the Board should be entitled to issue guidelines addressed to national resolution authorities concerning the application of administrative penalties and penalty payments.

(55)  Where a national resolution authority infringes the rules of the single resolution mechanism by not using the powers conferred on it under national law to implement an instruction by the Board, the Member State concerned may be liable to make good any damage caused to individuals, including where applicable to the entity or group under resolution, or any creditor of any part of that entity or group in any Member State, in accordance with that case law.

(56)  Appropriate rules should be laid down governing the budget of the Board, the preparation of the budget, the adoption of internal rules specifying the procedure for the establishment and implementation of its budget, the monitoring and control of the budget by the Board in its plenary session, and the internal and external audit of the accounts.

(56a)  The Board in its plenary session should also adopt, monitor and control its annual work programme and issue opinions and recommendations on the draft report by the Executive Director which should include a section on the resolution activities, including the ongoing resolution cases, and a section on financial and administrative matters.

(57)  There are circumstances when the effectiveness of the resolution tools applied may depend on the availability of short-term funding for the institution or a bridge institution, the provision of guarantees to potential purchasers, or the provision of capital to the bridge institution. It is therefore important to set up a fund to avoid that public funds are used for such purposes.

(58)  It is necessary to ensure that the Fund is fully available for the purpose of the resolution of failing institutions. Therefore, the Fund should not be used for any other purpose than the efficient implementation of resolution tools and powers. Furthermore, it should be used only in accordance with the applicable resolution objectives and principles, fully respecting the provisions laid down in Directive [BRRD]. Accordingly, the Board should ensure that any losses, costs or other expenses incurred in connection with the use of the resolution tools are first borne by the shareholders and the creditors of the institution under resolution. It is only if the resources from shareholders and creditors are exhausted, that the losses, costs or other expenses incurred with the resolution tools should be borne by the Fund.

(59)  As a rule, contributions should be collected from the financial industry prior to and independently of any operation of resolution. When prior funding is insufficient to cover the losses or costs incurred by the use of the Fund, additional contributions should be collected to bear the additional cost or loss. Moreover, the Fund should be able to contract borrowings or other forms of support from financial institutions or other third parties where its available funds are not sufficient to cover the losses, costs and other expenses incurred by the use of the Fund and the extraordinary ex post contributions are not immediately accessible.

(59a)  If national bank levies, taxes or resolution contributions in response to the crisis are in place in participating Member States, those should be replaced by contributions to the Fund in order to avoid double payments.

(60)  In order to reach a critical mass and to avoid pro-cyclical effects which would arise if the Fund had to rely solely on ex post contributions in a systemic crisis, it is indispensable that the ex-ante available financial means of the Fund amount to a certain target level.

(60a)  The target level of the Fund should be established as a percentage of the amount of covered deposits of all credit institutions authorised in the participating Member States. However, since the amount of the total liabilities of those institutions would be, regarding the functions of the Fund, a more adequate benchmark, the Commission should assess if a reference value relating to total liabilities, to be reached additionally to the target funding level, should be introduced in the future, maintaining the level playing field in accordance with Directive [BRRD].

(61)  An appropriate time frame should be set to reach the target funding level for the Fund. However, it should be possible for the Board to adjust the contribution period to take into account significant disbursements made from the Fund.

(61a)  With a view to breaking the link between sovereigns and banks and ensuring the efficiency and the credibility of the SRM, in particular while the Fund is not entirely funded, it is essential to establish a European public loan facility within a reasonable time after the entry into force of this Regulation. Any loan from that loan facility should be reimbursed by the Fund within an agreed timeframe. That loan facility would ensure the immediate availability of adequate financial means for the purposes established in this Regulation.

(62)  Where participating Member States have already established national resolution financing arrangements, they should be able to provide that the national resolution financing arrangements use their available financial means, collected from institutions in the past by way of ex-ante contributions, to compensate institutions for the ex-ante contributions which those institutions should pay into the Fund. Such restitution should be without prejudice to the obligations of Member States under Directive 94/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(12).

(63)  In order to ensure a fair calculation of contributions and provide incentives to operate under a model which presents less risk, contributions to the Fund, which are to be determined by the Board in accordance with Directive [BRRD] and the delegated acts adopted pursuant thereto, after consulting the competent authority, should take account of the degree of risk incurred by credit institutions.

▐

(65)  So as to protect the value of the amounts held in the Fund, these amounts should be invested in sufficiently safe, diversified and liquid assets.

(66)  The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU in order to determine the type of contributions to the Fund and the matters for which contributions are due, the manner in which the amount of the contributions is calculated and the way in which they are to be paid; specify registration, accounting, reporting and other rules necessary to ensure that the contributions are fully and timely paid; determine the contribution system for institutions that have been authorized to operate after the Fund has reached its target level; determine the criteria for the spreading out in time of the contributions; determine the circumstances under which the payment of contributions may be advanced; determine the criteria for establishing the amount of annual contributions; determine the measures to specify the circumstances and modalities under which an institution may be partially or entirely exempted from ex post contributions, and the measures to specify the circumstances and modalities under which an institution may be partially or entirely exempted from ex-post contributions.

(67)  To preserve the confidentiality of the work of the Board, its members, staff of the Board, including the staff exchanged with or seconded by participating Member States for the purpose of carrying out resolution duties should be subject to requirements of professional secrecy, even after their duties have ceased. Those requirements should also apply to other persons authorised by the Board and persons authorised or appointed by the national resolution authorities of the Member States to conduct on-site inspections, and to observers invited to attend the plenary and executive session meetings of the Board. For the purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred upon it, the Board should be authorized, subject to conditions, to exchange information with national or Union authorities and bodies.

(68)  In order to ensure that the Board is represented in the European System of Financial Supervision, Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 should be amended in order to include the Board in the concept of competent authorities established by that Regulation. Such assimilation between the Board and competent authorities pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 is consistent with the functions attributed to EBA pursuant to Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 to contribute and participate actively in the development and coordination of recovery and resolution plans and to aim at the facilitation of the resolution of failing institutions and in particular cross border groups.

(69)  Until the Board is fully operational, the Commission should be responsible for the initial operations including collecting contributions necessary to cover administrative expenses and the designation of an interim executive director to authorise all necessary payments on behalf of the Board.

(70)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to property, the protection of personal data, the freedom to conduct a business, employees’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, and has to be implemented in accordance with those rights and principles.

(71)  Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely to set up an efficient and effective single European framework for the resolution of credit institutions and to ensure the consistent application of resolution rules, cannot be sufficiently achieved at the Member State level but can rather be better achieved at the Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

PART I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

Subject matter

This Regulation establishes uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of the entities referred to in Article 2 that are established in the participating Member States referred to in Article 4.

Those uniform rules and procedure shall be applied by the Board, as established under Article 38, together with the Commission and the resolution authorities of the participating Member States within the framework of a single resolution mechanism established by this Regulation. The single resolution mechanism shall be supported by a single bank resolution fund (hereinafter called the 'Fund').

Article 2

Scope

This Regulation shall apply to the following entities:

(a)  credit institutions established in participating Member States;

(b)  parent undertakings established in one of the participating Member States, including financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies when subject to consolidated supervision carried out by the ECB in accordance with Article 4(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013;

(c)  investment firms and financial institutions established in participating Member States when they are covered by the consolidated supervision of the parent undertaking carried out by the ECB in accordance with Article 4(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013.

Article 3

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the definitions laid down in Article 2 of Directive [BRRD] and Article 3 of Directive 2013/36/EU apply. In addition, the following definitions [...] apply:

(1)  ‘national competent authority’ means any national competent authority as defined in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013;

(1a)  ‘competent authority’ means a competent authority as defined in Article 4(1)(40) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and the ECB in its supervisory function in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013;

(2)  ‘national resolution authority’ means an authority designated by a Member State in accordance with Article 3 of Directive [BRRD];

(3)  ‘resolution action’ means the application of a resolution tool to an institution or an entity referred to in Article 2, or the exercise of one or more resolution powers in relation thereto;

(3a)  'the Board' means the Single Resolution Board established in accordance with Article 38 of this Regulation;

(4)  ‘covered deposits’ mean deposits which are guaranteed by deposit guarantee schemes under national law in accordance with Directive 94/19/EC and up to the coverage level provided for in Article 7 of Directive 94/19/EC;

(5)  ‘eligible deposits’ means deposits defined in Article 1 of Directive 94/19/EC which are not excluded from protection according to Article 2 of that Directive, regardless of their amount;

▐

(11)  ‘institution under resolution’ means an entity referred to in Article 2 in respect of which a resolution action is taken;

(12)  ‘institution’ means a credit institution or an investment firm covered by consolidated supervision in accordance with point (c) of Article 2;

(13)  ‘group’ means a parent undertaking and its subsidiaries, which are entities as referred to in Article 2;

▐

(19)  ‘available financial means’ means the cash, deposits, assets and irrevocable payment commitments available to the Fund for the purposes referred to in Article 74;

(20)  ‘target funding level’ means the amount of available financial means to be reached under Article 68.

Article 4

Participating Member States

A participating Member States shall be a Member States whose currency is the euro or a Member State whose currency is not the euro which has established a close cooperation in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013.

Article 5

Relation to Directive [BRRD] and applicable national law

-1. Subject to this Regulation, the exercise by the Commission and the Board of tasks or powers under this Regulation shall be governed by Directive [BRRD] and any delegated acts adopted pursuant thereto.

1.  Where, by virtue of this Regulation, the Commission or the Board exercises tasks or powers, which, according to Directive [BRRD] are to be exercised by the national resolution authority of a participating Member State, the Board shall, for the application of this Regulation and of Directive [BRRD], be considered to be the relevant national resolution authority or, in the case of cross-border group resolution, the relevant group level resolution authority.

1a.  Where the Board exercises the powers conferred on it by this Regulation, it shall be subject to binding regulatory and implementing technical standards developed by EBA and adopted by the Commission in accordance with Articles 10 to 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, to any guidelines and recommendations adopted by EBA in accordance to Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 and to any decisions of EBA in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 under the relevant provisions of Directive [BRRD].

2.  The Board, when acting as national resolution authority, shall act, where relevant, under authorisation of the Commission.

3.  Subject to the provisions of this Regulation, the national resolution authorities of the participating Member State shall act on the basis of and in conformity with the relevant provisions of national law, as harmonised by Directive [BRRD].

Article 6

General principles

1.  No action, proposal or policy of the Board, the Commission or a national resolution authority shall discriminate against entities referred to in Article 2, deposit holders, investors or other creditors established in the Union on grounds of their nationality, or place of business.

1a.  Every action, proposal or policy of the Board, the Commission or of a national resolution authority in the framework of the SRM shall be undertaken with a view to promoting the stability of the financial system within the Union and within each participating Member State with full regard and duty of care for the unity and integrity of the internal market.

2.  When making decisions or taking action, which may have an impact in more than one ▐ Member State, and in particular when taking decisions concerning groups established in two or more participating Member States, the Commission and the Board shall give due consideration to all of the following factors:

(a)  the interests of the ▐ Member States where a group operates and in particular the impact of any decision or action or inaction on the financial stability, the economy, the deposit guarantee scheme or the investor compensation scheme of any of those Member States;

(b)  the objective of balancing the interests of the various Member States involved and avoiding unfairly prejudicing or unfairly protecting the interests of a ▐ Member State;

(c)  the need to avoid a negative impact for other parts of a group of which an entity referred to in Article 2, which is subject to a resolution, is a member;

(ca)  where possible, the interest of the group to continue its cross-border activity;

(d)  the need to avoid a disproportionate increase in the costs imposed on the creditors of the entities referred to in Article 2, to the extent that it would be greater than the one that they will have incurred had they been resolved through normal insolvency proceedings;

(e)  the decisions to be taken under Article 107 of the TFEU and referred to in Article 16(10).

3.  The Commission and the Board shall balance the factors referred to in paragraph 2 with the resolution objectives referred to in Article 12 as appropriate to the nature and circumstances of each case.

4.   Decisions or actions of the Board or of the Commission shall neither require Member States to provide extraordinary public financial support nor directly impinge on the fiscal responsibilities of the Member States.

4a.  When making decisions or taking actions, the Board shall ensure that the representatives of the employees of the entities concerned are informed and, where appropriate, consulted.

4b.  Actions, proposals and policies of the Commission, the Board and national resolution authorities under this Regulation shall respect the principle of non-discrimination with regard to any Member State or group of Member States.

4c.  When carrying out the tasks conferred on it by this Regulation, the Commission shall act independently, separately from its other tasks, and strictly in accordance with the objectives and principles set out in this Regulation and in Directive [BRRD]. The separation of tasks should be guaranteed through appropriate organisational adjustments.

PART II

SPECIFIC PROVISIONS

TITLE I

Functions within the Single Resolution Mechanism and procedural rules

Chapter 1

Resolution planning

Article 7

Resolution plans

1.  The Board shall draw up, together with national resolution authorities, and shall approve resolution plans for the entities referred to in Article 2 and for groups.

2.  For the purposes of paragraph 1, the national resolution authorities shall forward to the Board all information necessary to draw up and implement the resolution plans, as obtained by them in accordance with Article 10 and Article 12(1) of Directive [BRRD], without prejudice to Chapter 5 of this Title.

2a.  The resolution plan for each entity and group resolution plans shall be prepared in accordance with Articles 9 to 12 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

7.  The Board shall draw up the resolution plans in cooperation with the supervisor or consolidating supervisor and with the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States in which the entities are established. The Board shall cooperate with resolution authorities in non-participating Member States where there are entities in those Member States included in consolidated supervision.

8.  The Board may require national resolution authorities to prepare preliminary draft resolution plans and the group level resolution authority to prepare a preliminary draft group resolution plan for revision and approval by the Board. The Board may require national resolution authorities to perform other tasks relating to the drawing up of resolution plans.

9.  Resolution plans shall be reviewed, and where appropriate updated, in accordance with Articles 9 and 12 of Directive [BRRD].

9a.  Decisions regarding the drawing up, assessment and approval of the resolution plans and the application of appropriate measures shall be taken by the Board in its executive session.

Article 8

Assessment of resolvability

1.  When drafting resolution plans in accordance with Article 7, the Board, after consulting the competent authorities, including the ECB, and the resolution authorities of non-participating Member States in which subsidiaries are located or in which significant branches are located insofar as is relevant to the significant branch as determined in Articles 13 and 13a of Directive [BRRD], shall conduct an assessment of the extent to which institutions and groups are resolvable as required by Articles 13 and 13a of Directive [BRRD].

2.  ▐ An entity shall be deemed to be resolvable in the situations provided for in Article 13 of Directive [BRRD].

3.  ▐ A group shall be deemed resolvable in the situations provided for in Article 13a of Directive [BRRD].

4.  For the purpose of the assessment, the Board shall, as a minimum, examine the matters specified in Section C of the Annex of Directive [BRRD].

5.  If pursuant to an assessment of resolvability for an entity or a group carried out in accordance with paragraph 1, the Board, after consulting the competent authority, including the ECB, determines that there are potential substantive impediments to the resolvability of that entity or group, the Board shall prepare a report, in consultation with the competent authorities, addressed to the institution or the parent undertaking analysing the substantive impediments to the effective application of the resolution tools and the exercising of the resolution powers. That report shall also recommend any measures that, in the Board’s view, are necessary or appropriate to remove those impediments in accordance with paragraph 8.

6.  The report shall be notified to the entity or parent undertaking concerned, to the competent authorities and to the resolution authorities of non-participating Member States in which significant branches or subsidiaries are located. It shall be supported by reasons for the assessment or determination in question and shall indicate how that assessment or determination complies with the requirement for proportionate application set out in Article 6.

7.  Within four months from the date of receipt of the report, the entity or the parent undertaking may submit observations and propose to the Board alternative measures to remedy the impediments identified in the report. The Board shall communicate any measure proposed by the entity or parent undertaking to the competent authorities and to the resolution authorities of non-participating Member States in which significant branches or subsidiaries are located.

8.  If the measures proposed by the entity or parent undertaking concerned do not effectively remove the impediments to resolvability, the Board shall take a decision, after consultation with the competent authorities and, where appropriate, the macroprudential authority, indicating that the measures proposed do not effectively remove the impediments to resolvability, and instructing the national resolution authorities to require the institution, the parent undertaking, or any subsidiary of the group concerned, to take any of the measures listed in Article 14 of Directive [BRRD], based on the following criteria:

(a)  the effectiveness of the measure in removing the impediments to resolvability;

(b)  the need to avoid a negative impact on financial stability in ▐ Member States where the group operates;

(c)  the need to avoid an impact on the institution or the group concerned which would go beyond what is necessary to remove the impediment to resolvability or would be disproportionate.

9.  For the purpose of paragraph 8, the Board shall instruct national resolution authorities to take any of the ▐ measures referred to in Article 14 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

10.  The national resolution authorities shall implement the instructions of the Board in accordance with Article 26.

Article 8a

Resolvability of systemically important institutions

Without prejudice to its powers and independence, the Board shall prioritise the assessment of the resolvability of institutions that carry systemic risks, including but not limited to institutions identified as global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) or as other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) pursuant to Article 131 of Directive 2013/36/EU, and, where appropriate, shall draw up a plan for each of those institutions to remove impediments to resolvability in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation and with Article 14 of Directive [BRRD].

Article 9

Simplified obligations and waivers

1.  The Board, on its own initiative or upon proposal by a national resolution authority, may apply simplified obligations in relation to the drafting of recovery and resolution plans in accordance with Article 4 of Directive [BRRD].

2.  National resolution authorities may propose to the Board to apply simplified obligations regarding the drafting of the plans for specific institutions or groups. That proposal shall be reasoned and shall be supported by all the relevant documentation.

3.  On receiving a proposal pursuant to paragraph 1, or when acting on its own initiative, the Board shall conduct an assessment of the institutions or group concerned. The assessment shall be made having regard to the elements provided for in Article 4 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

4.  The Board shall assess the continuing application of simplified obligations and cease to apply those in the situations provided for in Article 4 of Directive [BRRD].

Where the national resolution authority which has proposed the application of simplified obligation ▐ in accordance with paragraph 1 considers that the decision to apply simplified obligation ▐ must be withdrawn, it shall submit a proposal to the Board to that end. In that case, the Board shall take a decision on the proposed withdrawal taking full account of the justification for withdrawal put forward by the national resolution authority in the light of the elements set out in paragraph 3.

▐

7.  The Board shall inform the EBA about its application of paragraphs 1 and 4.

Article 10

Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities

1.  The Board shall, after consulting competent authorities, including the ECB, determine the minimum requirement of own funds and eligible liabilities, as referred to in paragraph 2, subject to write down and conversion powers, that institutions and parent undertakings referred to in Article 2 shall be required to maintain.

2.  The minimum requirement shall be calculated in accordance with Article 39 of Directive [BRRD].

3.  The determination referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made on the basis of the ▐ criteria laid down in Article 39 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

The determination shall specify the minimum requirement that the institutions shall be required to comply with on an individual basis, and that parent undertakings shall be required to comply with on a consolidated basis. The Board may decide to waive the minimum requirement on a consolidated or individual basis in the situations referred to in Article 39 of Directive [BRRD] ▐.

4.  The determination referred to in paragraph 1 may provide that the minimum requirement of own funds and eligible liabilities is partially met on a consolidated or an individual basis through contractual bail-in instrument in accordance with Article 39 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

6.  The Board shall take any determination referred to in paragraph 1 in the course of developing and maintaining resolution plans pursuant to Article 7.

7.  The Board shall address its determination to the national resolution authorities. The national resolution authorities shall implement the instructions of the Board in accordance with Article 26. The Board shall require that the national resolution authorities verify and ensure that institutions and parent undertakings maintain the minimum requirement provided for in paragraph 1.

8.  The Board shall inform the ECB and the EBA of the minimum requirement that it has determined for each institution and parent undertaking under paragraph 1.

Chapter 2

Early intervention

Article 11

Early intervention

1.  The ECB, on its own initiative or following a communication from a national competent authority of a participating Member State ▐, shall inform the Board of any measure that they require an institution or group to take or that they take themselves pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, pursuant to Articles 23(1) or 24 of Directive [BRRD], or pursuant to Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU.

The Board shall notify the Commission of any information which it has received pursuant to the first subparagraph.

2.  From the date of receipt of the information referred to in paragraph 1, and without prejudice to the powers of the ECB and competent authorities in accordance with other Union law, the Board may prepare for the resolution of the institution or group concerned.

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the Board shall closely monitor, in cooperation with the ECB and relevant competent authority, the conditions of the institution or the parent undertaking, and their compliance with any early intervention measure that has been required to take.

3.  The Board shall have the power:

(a)  to require, in accordance with Chapter 5 of this Title, all information that is necessary in order to prepare for the resolution of the institution or of the group;

(b)  to carry out a valuation of the assets and liabilities of the institution or group in accordance with Article 17;

(c)  to contact potential purchasers in order to prepare for the resolution of the institution or the group, or to require the institution, parent undertaking, or the national resolution authority to do so, subject to compliance with the confidentiality requirements established by this Regulation and by Article 76 of Directive [BRRD];

(d)  to require the relevant national resolution authority to draft a preliminary resolution scheme for the institution or group concerned.

4.  If the ECB or the national competent authorities of the participating Member States intend to impose on an institution or a group any additional measure under Article 16 of Regulation (EU)No 1024/2013 or under Articles 23 or 24 of Directive [BRRD] or under Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU, before the institution or group has fully complied with the first measure notified to the Board, the ECB, on its own initiative or following a communication from the national competent authority, shall inform the Board before ▐ such additional measure is imposed on the institution or group concerned.

5.  The ECB or the competent authority and the Board shall ensure that the additional measure referred to in paragraph 4 and any action of the Board aimed at preparing for resolution under paragraph 2 are consistent.

Chapter 3

Resolution

Article 12

Resolution Objectives

1.  When acting under the resolution procedure referred to in Article 16, the Commission and the Board, in respect of their respective responsibilities, shall have regard to the resolution objectives provided for in Article 26 of Directive [BRRD], and choose the tools and powers that, in its view, best achieve the objectives that are relevant in the circumstances of the case.

2.  ▐ When pursuing the above objectives, the Commission and the Board shall act in accordance with Article 26 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

Article 13

General principles governing resolution

When acting under the resolution procedure referred to in Article 16, the Commission and the Board shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the resolution action is taken in accordance with the ▐ principles laid down in Article 29 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

Article 14

Resolution of financial institutions and parent undertakings

Resolution action in relation to financial institutions and their parent undertakings shall be taken by the Commission, based on a draft decision prepared by the Board, in accordance with Article 28 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

Article 15

Order of priority of claims

When applying the bail-in tool to an institution under resolution, and without prejudice to liabilities excluded from the bail-in tool under Article 24(3), the Commission, based on a draft decision prepared by the Board, shall decide on, and the Board and the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States shall exercise the write down and conversion powers to claims following the sequence laid down in Article 43 of Directive [BRRD].

Article 16

Resolution procedure

1.  Where the ECB, on its own initiative or following a communication from a national competent authority of a participating Member State, assesses that the conditions referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 are met in relation to an entity referred to in Article 2, it shall notify that assessment without delay to the Commission and the Board.

The notification referred to in the first subparagraph may take place following a request for assessment from the Board or from a national resolution authority, if any of them considers that there is reason to consider that an institution is failing or likely to fail.

The notification referred to in the first subparagraph shall take place after consultation of the Board and of the national resolution authority.

1a.  The Board shall prepare and take all its decisions relating to the resolution procedure in its executive session in accordance with Article 50.

2.  On receiving a notification pursuant to paragraph 1, ▐ the Board in its executive session shall conduct an assessment to verify that the following conditions are met:

(a)  the entity is failing or likely to fail;

(b)  having regard to timing and other relevant circumstances, there is no reasonable prospect that any alternative private sector measures, including measures by IPS, or supervisory action (including early intervention measures or the write down or conversion of capital instruments in accordance with Article 18), taken in respect of the entity, would prevent its failure within a reasonable timeframe;

(c)  a resolution action is necessary in the public interest pursuant to paragraph 4.

3.  For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 2, the entity is deemed to be failing or likely to fail in any of the ▐ circumstances referred to in Article 27(2) of Directive [BRRD].

▐

4.  For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 2, a resolution action shall be treated as in the public interest in the circumstances referred to in Article 27(3) of Directive [BRRD].

5.  Where it assesses that all the conditions established in paragraph 2 are met, the Board shall submit to the Commission, taking into account the notification referred to in paragraph 1, a draft decision providing that the entity be placed under resolution. The draft decision shall include at least the following:

(a)  the recommendation to place the entity under resolution;

(b)  the framework of the resolution tools referred to in Article 19(32);

(c)  the framework of the use of the Fund to support the resolution action in accordance with Article 71.

6.  Upon receiving the draft decision from the Board, the Commission shall decide whether or not to adopt the draft decision, on the framework of the resolution tools that shall be applied in respect of the entity concerned and, where appropriate, on the use of the Fund to support the resolution action. ▐

Where the Commission intends not to adopt the draft decision submitted by the Board or to adopt it with amendments, it shall send the draft decision back to the Board, explaining why it does not intend to adopt it or, as the case may be, explaining the reasons for its intended amendments, and requesting its revision. The Commission may establish a deadline within which the Board may amend its initial draft decision on the basis of the Commission's proposed amendments and resubmit it to the Commission. Except in duly justified cases of emergency, the Board shall have at least five working days to revise the draft decision following a request by the Commission.

The Commission shall make every effort to comply with any guidelines and recommendations issued by EBA concerning the exercise of the tasks conferred on it under this paragraph and act, regarding the confirmation of whether it complies or intends to comply with that guideline or recommendation, as provided for in Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.

7.  The decision of the Commission shall be addressed to the Board. If the Commission decides not to place the entity under resolution, because the condition laid down in paragraph 2(c) is not met, the entity concerned shall be wound up in accordance with national insolvency law.

8.  Within the framework set by the Commission decision, the Board, in its executive session, shall decide on the resolution scheme referred to in Article 20 and shall ensure that the necessary resolution action is taken to carry out the resolution scheme by the relevant national resolution authorities. The decision of the Board shall be addressed to the relevant national resolution authorities and shall instruct those authorities, which shall take all necessary measures to implement the decision of the Board in accordance with Article 26, by exercising any of the resolution powers provided for in Directive [BRRD], in particular those in Articles 56 to 64 of that Directive. Where State aid is present, the Board may only decide after the Commission has taken a decision on that State aid.

9.  If the Board considers that resolution measures could constitute State aid pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU, it shall invite the participating Member State or Member States concerned to immediately notify the envisaged measures to the Commission under Article 108(3) TFEU.

10.  To the extent that the resolution action as proposed by the Board, in its executive session, involves the use of the Fund and does not entail the grant of State aid pursuant to Article 107(1) of the TFEU, the Commission shall apply in parallel, by way of analogy, the criteria established for the application of Article 107 TFEU.

11.  The Commission shall have the power to obtain from the Board any information which it deems relevant for fulfilling its tasks under this Regulation and, where applicable, Article 107 TFEU. The Board shall have the power to obtain from any person, in accordance with Chapter 5 of this Title, any information necessary for it to prepare and decide upon a resolution action including updates and supplements of information provided in the resolution plans.

12.  The Board shall have the power to submit to the Commission draft decisions to amend the framework for the resolution tools and for the use of the Fund in respect of an entity placed under resolution.

12a.  In order to preserve a level playing field, the Commission shall, in the performance of its State aid competences and in accordance with Directive [BRRD], treat the use of the Fund as it would treat a national resolution financing arrangement.

Article 17

Valuation

1.  Before taking resolution action or exercising the power to write down or convert capital instruments, the Board shall ensure that a fair and realistic valuation of the assets and liabilities of an entity referred to in Article 2 is carried out in accordance with Article 30 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

16.  After the resolution action has been effected, for the purposes of assessing whether shareholders and creditors would have received better treatment if the institution under resolution had entered into normal insolvency proceedings, the Board shall ensure that a valuation is carried out in accordance with Article 66 of Directive [BRRD], distinct from the valuation carried out under paragraph 1▐.

▐

Article 18

Write down and conversion of capital instruments

1.  The ECB, on its own initiative or following a communication from a national competent authority of a participating Member State, shall inform the Board where it assesses that the conditions for write down and conversion of capital instruments provided for in Directive [BRRD] are met in relation to an entity referred to in Article 2 or a group established in a participating Member State.

▐

1a.  The ECB shall provide the Board with information under paragraph 1 following a request for assessment from the Board or from a national resolution authority, if any of them considers that there is reason to consider that the conditions for write down and conversion of capital instruments are met in relation to an entity referred to in Article 2 or a group established in a participating Member State.

1b.   If the conditions established in paragraph 1 are met, the Board shall submit to the Commission, taking into account the information referred to in paragraph 1, a draft decision providing that the powers to write down or convert capital instruments are exercised and whether those powers shall be exercised singly or, following the procedure under Article 16(4) to (7), together with a resolution action.

▌

5.  Upon receiving the draft decision from the Board the Commission ▐ shall decide whether or not to adopt the draft decision and whether the powers to write down or convert capital instruments shall be exercised singly or, following the procedure under Article 16(4) to (7), together with a resolution action.

6.  Where ▐ the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 are met, but the conditions for resolution in accordance with Article 16(2) are not met, the Board, following a decision of the Commission, shall instruct the national resolution authorities to exercise the write down or conversion powers in accordance with Articles 51 and 52 of Directive [BRRD].

7.  Where the conditions for write down and conversion of capital instruments referred to in paragraph 1 are met, and the conditions for resolution referred to in Article 16(2) are also met, the procedure set out in Article 16(4) to (7) shall apply.

8.  The Board shall ensure that national resolution authorities exercise the write down or conversion powers in accordance with Directive [BRRD].

▐

9.  The national resolution authorities shall implement the instructions of the Board and exercise the write down or conversion of capital instruments in accordance with Article 26.

Article 19

General principles of resolution tools

1.  Where the Board decides to apply a resolution tool to an entity referred to in Article 2, and that resolution action would result in losses being borne by creditors or their claims being converted, the Board shall exercise the power under Article 18 immediately before or together with the application of the resolution tool.

2.  The resolution tools referred to in point be of Article 16(5) are the following:

(a)  the sale of business tool;

(b)  the bridge institution tool;

(c)  the asset separation tool;

(d)  the bail-in tool.

3.  When adopting the draft decision referred to in Article 16(5), the Board shall consider the following factors:

(a)  the assets and liabilities of the institution under resolution on the basis of the valuation pursuant to Article 17;

(b)  the liquidity position of the institution under resolution;

(c)  the marketability of the franchise value of the institution under resolution in the light of the competitive and economic conditions of the market;

(d)  the time available.

4.  The resolution tools may be applied either separately or together, except for the asset separation tool which may be applied only together with another resolution tool.

4a.  For the purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred on it by this Regulation, and with the objective of ensuring a level playing field in the application of the resolution tools, the Board, together with the Commission, shall adopt a resolution handbook setting out clear and detailed guidance for the use of the resolution tools.

The resolution handbook referred to in the first subparagraph shall take the form of a delegated act adopted by the Commission in accordance with Article 82.

Article 20

Resolution Scheme

The resolution scheme adopted by the Board under Article 16(8) shall establish, in compliance with the decisions of the Commission on the resolution framework under Article 16(6) and with any decision on State aid where applicable by analogy, the details of the resolution tools to be applied to the institution under resolution concerning at least the measures referred to in Articles 21(2), 22(2), 23(2) and 24(1) and determine the specific amounts and purposes for which the Fund shall be used.

In the course of the resolution process, the Board may amend and update the resolution scheme as appropriate in light of the circumstances in the case and within the resolution framework decided upon by the Commission pursuant to Article 16(6).

Article 21

Sale of business tool

1.  Within the framework decided by the Commission, the sale of business tool shall consist of the transfer to a purchaser that is not a bridge institution of the following:

(a)  shares or other instruments of ownership of an institution under resolution; or

(b)  all or specified assets, rights or liabilities of an institution under resolution.

2.  Concerning the sale of business tool, the resolution scheme referred to in Article 16(8) shall establish in particular:

(a)  the instruments, assets, rights and liabilities to be transferred by the national resolution authority in accordance with Article 32(1) and (7) to (11) of the Directive [BRRD];

(b)  the commercial terms, having regard to the circumstances and to the costs and expenses incurred in the resolution process, pursuant to which the national resolution authority shall make the transfer in accordance with Article 32(2) to (4) of Directive [BRRD];

(c)  whether the transfer powers may be exercised by the national resolution authority more than once in accordance with Article 32(5) and (6) of Directive [BRRD];

(d)  the arrangements for the marketing by the national resolution authority of that entity or those instruments, assets, rights and liabilities in accordance with Article 33 (1) and (2) of Directive [BRRD];

(e)  whether the compliance with the marketing requirements by the national resolution authority is likely to undermine the resolution objectives in accordance with paragraph 3.

3.  The Board shall apply the sale of business tool without complying with the marketing requirements under point (e) of paragraph 2 when it determines that compliance with those requirements would be likely to undermine one or more of the resolution objectives and in particular where the following conditions are met:

(a)  it considers that there is a material threat to financial stability arising from or aggravated by the failure or potential failure of the institution under resolution;

(b)  it considers that compliance with those requirements would be likely to undermine the effectiveness of the sale of business tool in addressing that threat or achieving the resolution objective specified in point (b) of Article 12(2).

Article 22

Bridge institution tool

1.  Within the framework decided by the Commission, the bridge institution tool shall consist of the transfer to a bridge institution of any of the following:

(a)  shares or other instruments of ownership issued by one or more institutions under resolution;

(b)  all or any assets, rights or liabilities of one or more institutions under resolution.

2.  With regard to the bridge institution tool the resolution scheme referred to in Article 20 shall establish in particular:

(a)  the instruments, assets, rights and liabilities to be transferred to a bridge institution by the national resolution authority in accordance with Article 34(1) to (9) of Directive [BRRD];

(b)  the arrangements for the setting up, the operation and the termination of the bridge institution by the national resolution authority in accordance with Article 35(1) to (3) and (5) to (8) of Directive [BRRD];

(c)  the arrangements for the marketing of the bridge institution or its assets or liabilities by the national resolution authority in accordance with Article 35(4) of Directive [BRRD].

3.  The Board shall make sure that the total value of liabilities transferred by the national resolution authority to the bridge institution does not exceed the total value of the rights and assets transferred from the institution under resolution or provided by other sources.

3a.  Any consideration received for the bridge institution or some or all of the property rights and liabilities of the bridge institution shall comply with the relevant provisions within the [BRRD].

Article 23

Asset separation tool

1.  Within the framework decided by the Commission, the asset separation tool shall consist of the transfer of assets, rights or liabilities of an institution under resolution to an asset management vehicle that meets the requirements established in Directive [BRRD] for a legal entity to be an asset management vehicle.

▐

2.  Concerning the asset separation tool the resolution scheme referred to in Article 20 shall establish in particular:

(a)  the instruments, assets, rights and liabilities to be transferred by the national resolution authority to an asset management vehicle in accordance with Article 36(1) to (4) and (6) to (10) of Directive [BRRD];

(b)  the consideration for which the assets shall be transferred by the national resolution authority to the asset management vehicle, in accordance with the principles established in Article 17. This provision does not prevent the consideration having nominal or negative value.

2a.  Any consideration received for the asset management vehicle or some or all of the property rights and liabilities of the asset management vehicle shall comply with the relevant provisions within Directive [BRRD].

Article 24

Bail-in tool

1.  The bail-in tool may be applied for ▐ the ▐ purposes referred to in Article 37 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

Within the framework decided by the Commission concerning the bail-in tool, the resolution scheme shall establish in particular:

(a)  the aggregate amount by which eligible liabilities must be reduced or converted, in accordance with paragraph 6;

(b)  the liabilities that may be excluded in accordance with paragraphs 5 to 13;

(c)  the objectives and minimum content of the business reorganisation plan to be submitted in accordance with paragraph 16.

2.  ▐

If the condition for the bail-in tool to be applied to recapitalise an entity set out in Article 37(3) of Directive [BRRD] is not fulfilled, any of the resolution tools referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 of Article 19, and the bail-in tool referred to in point (d) of paragraph 2 of Article 19, shall apply, as appropriate.

3.  The ▐ liabilities laid down in Article 38(2) of Directive [BRRD] shall not be subject to write down and conversion.▐

5.  The exclusion, in exceptional circumstances, of certain liabilities ▐ from the application of the write-down and conversion powers may take place in accordance with Article 38(2a) of Directive [BRRD].

▐

Where an eligible liability or class of eligible liabilities is excluded, or partially excluded, the level of write down or conversion applied to other eligible liabilities may be increased to take account of such exclusions, provided that the level of write down and conversion applied to other eligible liabilities respects the principle that no creditor shall incur greater losses than would have been incurred if the entity referred to in Article 2 had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings.

6.  Where an eligible liability or class of eligible liabilities is excluded or partially excluded, pursuant to paragraph 5, and the losses that would have been borne by those liabilities have not been passed on fully to other creditors, a contribution from the Fund may be made to the institution under resolution for the purposes referred to in, and in accordance with, Article 38 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

8.  The contribution of the Fund may be financed by:

(a)  the amount available to the Fund which has been raised through contributions by entities referred to in Article 2 in accordance with Article 66;

(b)  the amount that can be raised through ex post contributions in accordance with Article 67 within a period of three years; and

(c)  where the amounts referred to in points (a) and (b) are insufficient, amounts raised from alternative financing sources in accordance with Article 69, including in the framework of the loan facility referred to in that Article.

9.  In the extraordinary circumstances provided for in Article 38(...) of Directive [BRRD], further funding may be sought from alternative financing sources in accordance with that Article.

▐

10.  As an alternative or in addition, when the conditions for a contribution by the Fund to be made provided for in Article 38 of Directive [BRRD] are met, a contribution may be made from resources which have been raised through ex-ante contributions in accordance with Article 66 and which have not yet been used.

▐

12.  When taking the decision to exclude certain liabilities from the application of the write-down and conversion powers referred to in paragraph 5, due consideration shall be given to the ▐ factors referred to in Article 38 of Directive [BRRD].▐

13.  When applying the bail-in tool, the Board shall make an assessment in accordance with Article 41 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

14.  Exclusions under paragraph 5 may be applied either to completely exclude a liability from write down or to limit the extent of the write down applied to that liability.

15.  The write down and conversion powers shall respect the requirements on the priority of claims set out in Article 15.

16.  The national resolution authority shall immediately forward to the Board the business reorganisation plan received after the application of the bail-in tool from the administrator appointed in accordance with Article 47(1) of Directive [BRRD].

Within two weeks from the date of submission of the business reorganisation plan, the resolution authority shall provide the Board with its assessment of the plan. Within one month from the date of submission of the business reorganisation plan the Board shall assess the likelihood that the plan, if implemented, restores the long term viability of the entity referred to Article 2. The assessment shall be completed in agreement with the competent authority.

Where the Board is satisfied that the plan would achieve that objective, it shall allow the national resolution authority to approve the plan in accordance with Article 47(5) of Directive [BRRD]. Where the Board is not satisfied that the plan would achieve that objective, it shall instruct the national resolution authority to notify the administrator of its concerns and require the administrator to amend the plan in way that addresses those concerns in accordance with Article 47(6) of Directive [BRRD]. This shall be done in agreement with the competent authority.

The national resolution authority shall forward to the Board the amended plan. The Board shall instruct the national resolution authority to notify the administrator within one week whether it is satisfied that the plan, as amended, addresses the concerns notified or whether further amendment is required.

Article 25

Monitoring by the Board

1.  The Board shall closely monitor the execution of the resolution scheme by the national resolution authorities. For that purpose, the national resolution authorities shall:

(a)  cooperate with and assist the Board in the performance of its monitoring duty;

(b)  provide, at regular intervals established by the Board, accurate, reliable and complete information on the execution of the resolution scheme, the application of the resolution tools and the exercise of the resolution powers, that might be requested by the Board, including on the following:

(i)  the operation and financial situation of the institution under resolution, the bridge institution and the asset management vehicle;

(ii)  the treatment that shareholders and creditors would have received in the liquidation of the institution under normal insolvency proceedings;

(iii)  any on-going court proceedings relating to the liquidation of the assets of failed institution, to challenges to the resolution decision and to the valuation or relating to applications for compensation filed by the shareholders or creditors;

(iv)  the appointment, removal or replacement of evaluators, administrators, accountants, lawyers and other professionals that may be necessary to assist the national resolution authority, and on the performance of their duties;

(v)  any other matter that may be referred to by the Board;

(vi)  the extent to which and manner in which the powers for the national resolution authorities listed in Chapter V of Title IV of Directive [BRRD] are exercised by them;

(vii)  the economic viability, feasibility, and implementation of the business reorganisation plan provided for in Article 24(16).

The national resolution authorities shall submit to the Board a final report on the execution of the resolution scheme.

2.  On the basis of the information provided, the Board may give instructions to the national resolution authorities as to any aspect of the execution of the resolution scheme, and in particular the elements referred to in Article 20 and to the exercise of the resolution powers.

3.  Where this is necessary in order to achieve the resolution objectives, the Commission, following a recommendation of the Board ▐, may review its decision on the resolution framework and adopt the appropriate amendments.

Article 26

Implementation of resolution decisions

1.  National resolution authorities shall take the necessary action to implement the resolution decision referred to in Article 16(8), in particular by exercising control over the entities referred to in Article 2, by taking the necessary measures in accordance with Article 64 of Directive [BRRD] and by ensuring that the safeguards provided for in that Directive [BRRD] are complied with. National resolution authorities shall implement all decisions addressed to them by the Board.

For these purposes, subject to this Regulation, they shall make use of their powers under national law transposing the Directive [BRRD] and in accordance with the conditions set out in national law. National resolution authorities shall fully inform the Board about the exercise of these powers. Any action they take shall comply with the decision referred to in Article 16(8).

2.  Where a national resolution authority has not applied a decision referred to in Article 16, or has applied it in a way which fails to achieve the resolution objectives under this Regulation, the Board shall have the power to directly order an institution under resolution to:

(a)  ▐ transfer to another legal person specified rights, assets or liabilities of an institution under resolution;

(b)  ▐ require the conversion of any debt instruments which contain a contractual term for conversion in the circumstances provided for in Article 18.

The Board shall also have the power to exercise directly any other power provided for in Directive [BRRD].

3.  The institution under resolution shall comply with any decision taken referred to in paragraph 2. Those decisions shall prevail over any previous decision adopted by the national authorities on the same matter.

4.  When taking action in relation to issues which are subject to a decision taken pursuant to paragraph 2, national authorities shall comply with that decision.

Chapter 4

Cooperation

Article 27

Obligation to cooperate

1.  The Board shall inform the Commission of any action it takes in order to prepare for resolution. With regard to any information received from the Board, the members of the Commission and Commission staff shall be subject to the professional secrecy requirement laid down in Article 79.

2.  In the exercise of their respective responsibilities under this Regulation, the Board, the Commission, the ▐ competent authorities and resolution authorities shall cooperate closely, in particular in the resolution planning, early intervention and resolution phases pursuant to Articles 7 to 26. They shall provide each other with all information necessary for the exercise of their tasks.

▐

4.  For the purposes of this Regulation, where the ECB invites the Executive Director of the Board to participate as an observer in the Supervisory Board of the ECB established in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU)No 1024/2013, the Board may appoint another representative to participate.

5.  For the purposes of this Regulation, the Board shall appoint a representative which shall participate in the Resolution Committee of the European Banking Authority established in accordance with Article 113 of Directive [BRRD].

6.  The Board shall co-operate closely with the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and any similar European entity in future, in particular where the EFSF, ▐ the ESM or any similar European entity in future has granted or is likely to grant, direct or indirect financial assistance to entities established in a participating Member State, in particular in those extraordinary circumstances referred to in Article 24(9).

7.  The Board and the ECB shall conclude a memorandum of understanding describing the general terms how they will cooperate under paragraph 2. The memorandum shall be reviewed on a regular basis and shall be published subject to appropriate treatment of confidential information.

7a.  The Board and the resolution authorities of the non-participating Member States shall conclude memoranda of understanding describing in general terms how they will cooperate with one another in the performance of their tasks under Directive [BRRD].

Without prejudice to the first subparagraph the Board shall conclude a memorandum of understanding with the resolution authority of each non-participating Member State that is home to at least one global systemically important institution, identified as such pursuant to Article 131 of Directive 2013/36/EU.

Each memorandum shall be reviewed on a regular basis and shall be published subject to appropriate treatment of confidential information.

Article 28

Information exchange within the SRM

1.  Both the Board and the national resolution authorities shall be subject to a duty of cooperation in good faith and an obligation to exchange information.

2.  The Board shall provide the Commission with any information relevant for fulfilling its tasks under this Regulation and, where applicable, Article 107 of the TFEU.

Article 29

Cooperation within the SRM and group treatment

Paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 15 of Articles 12 and Articles 80 to 83 in Directive [BRRD] shall not apply to relations between national resolution authorities of participating Member States. The relevant provisions of this Regulation shall apply instead.

Article 30

Cooperation with non-participating Member States

Where a group includes entities established in participating Member States as well as in non-participating Member States, without prejudice to ▐ this Regulation, the Board shall represent the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States, for the purposes of cooperation with non-participating Member States in accordance with Articles 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 50, and 80 to 83 of Directive [BRRD].

Article 31

Cooperation with third country authorities

The Commission and the Board within each of their respective responsibilities shall be exclusively responsible to conclude, on behalf of the national resolution authorities of participating Member States, the non-binding cooperation arrangements referred to in Article 88 (4) of Directive [BRRD] and shall notify them in accordance with paragraph 6 of that Article.

Chapter 5

Investigatory powers

Article 32

Requests for information

1.  For the purpose of exercising the tasks referred to in this Regulation, the Board may, either directly or through the national resolution authorities, making full use of all information available to the ECB or to the national competent authorities, require the following legal or natural persons to provide all information that is necessary in order to carry out the tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation:

(a)  the entities referred to in Article 2;

(b)  employees of the entities referred to in Article 2;

(c)  third parties to whom the entities referred to in Article 2 have outsourced functions or activities.

2.  The entities ▐ and ▐ persons referred to in ▐ paragraph 1 shall supply the information requested pursuant to paragraph 1. Professional secrecy provisions shall not exempt those entities and persons from the duty to provide that information. The supply of the information requested shall not be deemed to be a breach of professional secrecy.

3.  Where the Board obtains information directly from those entities and persons, it shall make that information available to the national resolution authorities concerned.

4.  The Board shall be able to obtain on a continuous basis any information necessary for the exercise of its functions under this Regulation, in particular on capital, liquidity, assets and liabilities concerning any institution subject to its resolution powers▐.

5.  The Board, the competent authorities and the national resolution authorities may draw up memorandum of understanding with a procedure concerning the exchange of information. The exchange of information between the Board, the competent authorities and the national resolution authorities shall not be deemed to be a breach of professional secrecy.

6.  Competent authorities, including the ECB where relevant, and national resolution authorities shall cooperate with the Board in order to verify whether some or all of the information requested is already available. Where such information is available, competent authorities, including the ECB where relevant, or national resolution authorities shall provide that information to the Board.

Article 33

General investigations

1.  For the purpose of exercising the tasks referred to in this Regulation, and subject to any other conditions set out in relevant Union law, the Board may conduct all necessary investigations of any person referred to in Article 32(1) established or located in a participating Member State.

To that end, the Board shall have the right to:

(a)  require the submission of documents;

(b)  examine the books and records of the persons referred to in Article 32(1) and take copies or extracts from such books and records;

(c)  obtain written or oral explanations from any person referred to in Article 32(1) or their representatives or staff;

(d)  interview any other person who consents to be interviewed for the purpose of collecting information relating to the subject matter of an investigation.

2.  The persons referred to in Article 32(1) shall be subject to investigations launched on the basis of a decision of the Board.

When a person obstructs the conduct of the investigation, the national resolution authorities of the participating Member State where the relevant premises are located shall afford, in compliance with national law, the necessary assistance including facilitating the access by the Board to the business premises of the legal persons referred to in Article 32(1), so that the aforementioned rights can be exercised.

Article 34

On-site inspections

1.  For the purpose of exercising the tasks referred to in this Regulation, and subject to other conditions set out in relevant Union law, the Board may, subject to prior notification to the national resolution authorities and the competent authorities concerned, conduct all necessary on-site inspections at the business premises of the legal persons referred to in Article 32(1). In addition, prior to exercising the powers referred to in Article 11, the Board shall consult the competent authority. Where the proper conduct and efficiency of the inspection so require, the Board may carry out the on-site inspection without prior announcement to those legal persons.

2.  The officials of and other persons authorised by the Board to conduct an on-site inspection may enter any business premises and land of the legal persons subject to an investigation decision adopted by the Board pursuant to Article 33(2) and shall have all the powers stipulated in Article 33(1).

3.  The legal persons referred to in Article 32(1) shall be subject to on-site inspections on the basis of a decision of the Board.

4.  Officials and other accompanying persons authorised or appointed by the national resolution authorities of the Member States where the inspection is to be conducted shall, under the supervision and coordination of the Board, actively assist the officials of and other persons authorised by the Board. To that end, they shall enjoy the powers set out in paragraph 2. Officials of the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States concerned shall also have the right to participate in the on-site inspections.

5.  Where the officials of and other accompanying persons authorised or appointed by the Board find that a person opposes an inspection ordered pursuant to paragraph 1, the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States concerned shall afford them the necessary assistance in accordance with national law. To the extent necessary for the inspection, this assistance shall include the sealing of any business premises and books or records. Where that power is not available to the national resolution authorities concerned, it shall use its powers to request the necessary assistance of other ▐ national ▐ authorities.

Article 35

Authorization by a judicial authority

1.  If an on-site inspection provided for in Article 34(1) and (2) or the assistance provided for in Article 34(5) requires authorisation by a judicial authority according to national rules, such authorisation shall be applied for.

2.  Where authorisation as referred to in paragraph 1 is applied for, the national judicial authority shall, promptly and without delay, control that the decision of the Board is authentic and that the coercive measures envisaged are neither arbitrary nor excessive having regard to the subject matter of the inspection. In its control of the proportionality of the coercive measures, the national judicial authority may ask the Board for detailed explanations, in particular relating to the grounds the Board has for suspecting that an infringement of the acts referred to in Article 26 has taken place and the seriousness of the suspected infringement and the nature of the involvement of the person subject to the coercive measures. However, the national judicial authority shall not review the necessity for the inspection or demand to be provided with the information on the Board's file. The lawfulness of the Board's decision shall be subject to review only by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Chapter 6

Penalties

Article 36

Power to impose administrative penalties

1.  Where the Board finds that an entity referred to in Article 2 intentionally or negligently committed one of the infringements referred to in paragraph 2, the Board shall instruct the national resolution authority concerned to impose an administrative penalty in respect of the relevant entity referred to in Article 2 in accordance with Directive [BRRD].

An infringement by such an entity shall be considered to have been committed intentionally if there are objective factors which demonstrate that the entity or its senior management acted deliberately to commit the infringement.

2.  The administrative penalties may be imposed on entities referred to in Article 2 for the following infringements:

(a)  Where they do not supply the information requested in accordance with Article 32;

(b)  Where they do not submit to a general investigation in accordance with Article 33 or an on-site inspection in accordance with Article 34;

(c)  Where they do not contribute to the Fund in accordance with Articles 66 or 67;

(d)  Where they do not comply with a decision addressed to them by the Board pursuant to Article 26.

3.  The national resolution authorities shall publish any administrative penalties imposed pursuant to paragraph 1. Where publication would cause a disproportionate damage to the parties involved, the national resolution authorities shall publish the penalty without revealing the identity of the parties.

4.  The Board shall, with a view to establishing consistent, efficient and effective enforcement practices, and to ensuring the common, uniform and consistent application of this Regulation, issue guidelines on the application of administrative penalties and periodic penalty payments addressed to the national resolution authorities.

Article 37

Periodic penalty payments

1.  The Board shall instruct the national resolution authority concerned to impose a periodic penalty payment in respect of the relevant entity referred to in Article 2 ▐ in order to compel:

(a)  an entity referred to in Article 2 to comply with a decision adopted under Article 32;

(b)  a person referred to in Article 32(1) to supply complete information which has been required by a decision pursuant to that Article;

(c)  a person referred to in Article 33(1) to submit to an investigation and in particular to produce complete records, data, procedures or any other material required and to complete and correct other information provided in an investigation launched by a decision taken pursuant to that Article;

(d)  a person referred to in Article 34(1) to submit to an on-site inspection ordered by a decision taken pursuant to that Article.

2.  A periodic penalty payment shall be effective and proportionate. The periodic penalty payment shall be imposed on a daily basis until the entity referred to in Article 2 or person concerned complies with the relevant decisions referred to in points (a) to (d) of paragraph 1.

3.  A periodic penalty payment may be imposed for a period of no more than six months.

PART III

INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

TITLE I

The Board

Article 38

Legal status

1.  A Single Resolution Board is hereby established. The Board shall be a European Union agency with a specific structure corresponding to its tasks. It shall have legal personality.

2.  The Board shall enjoy in each Member State the most extensive legal capacity accorded to legal persons under national law. The Board may, in particular, acquire or dispose of movable and immovable property and be a party to legal proceedings.

3.  The Board shall be represented by its Executive Director.

Article 39

Composition

1.  The Board shall be composed of:

(a)  the Executive Director, with voting rights;

(b)  the Deputy Executive Director, with voting rights;

(c)  a member appointed by the Commission, with voting rights;

(d)  a member appointed by the ECB, with voting rights;

(e)  a member appointed by each participating Member State, representing the national resolution authority, with voting rights in accordance with Articles 48 and 51;

(ea)  a member appointed by EBA, participating as observer, without voting rights.

2.  The term of office of the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director and of the members of the Board appointed by the Commission and the ECB shall be five years. Subject to Article 52(6), that term shall not be renewable.

3.  The Board’s administrative and management structure shall comprise:

(a)  a plenary session of the Board, which shall exercise the tasks set out in Article 46;

(b)  an executive session of the Board, which shall exercise the tasks set out in Article 50;

(c)  an Executive Director, which shall exercise the tasks set out in Article 52.

Article 40

Compliance with Union law

The Board shall act in compliance with Union law, in particular with the Commission decisions pursuant to this Regulation.

Article 41

Accountability

1.  The Board shall be accountable to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission for the implementation of this Regulation, in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 8.

2.  The Board shall submit each year a report to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the European Court of Auditors on the execution of the tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation. Subject to the requirements on professional secrecy, that report shall be published on the Board's website.

3.  The Executive Director shall present that report in public to the European Parliament, and to the Council.

4.  At the request of the European Parliament, the Executive Director shall participate in a hearing on the execution of its resolution tasks by the competent committees of the Parliament. A hearing shall take place at least annually.

4a.  At the request of the European Parliament, the Deputy Executive Director shall participate in a hearing on the execution of its resolution tasks by the competent committees of the European Parliament.

5.  The Executive Director may, at the request of the Council, be heard on the execution of its resolution tasks by the Council.

6.  The Board shall reply orally or in writing to questions addressed to it by the European Parliament or by the Council, according to its own procedures as promptly as possible, and in any event within five weeks of transmission.

7.  Upon request, the Executive Director shall hold confidential oral discussions behind closed doors with the Chair and Vice-Chairs of the competent committee of the European Parliament where such discussions are required for the exercise of the European Parliament’s powers under the Treaty. An agreement shall be concluded between the European Parliament and the Board on the detailed modalities of organising such discussions, with a view to ensuring full confidentiality in accordance with the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Regulation and by Article 76 of Directive [BRRD] on the Board acting as a national resolution authority as referred to in Article 5 of this Regulation.

8.  During any investigations by the Parliament, the Board shall cooperate with the Parliament, subject to the TFEU. The Board and the European Parliament shall conclude by 1 March 2015 appropriate arrangements on the practical modalities of the exercise of democratic accountability and oversight over the exercise of the tasks conferred on the Board by this Regulation. Those arrangements shall cover, inter alia, access to information, cooperation in investigations and information on the selection procedure of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. Those arrangements shall have a similar scope to that of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) between the European Parliament and the ECB concluded pursuant to Article 20(9) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013.

Those arrangements shall include an agreement between the Board and the European Parliament on the principles and procedures for the classification, transmission to Parliament and delayed public disclosure of confidential information other than those covered by the IIA concluded pursuant to Article 20(9) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013.

Article 42

National Parliaments

-1. When submitting the report provided for in Article 41(2), the Board shall simultaneously forward that report directly to the national parliaments of the participating Member States.

National parliaments may address to the Board their reasoned observations on that report.

1.  Due to the specific tasks of the Board, national Parliaments of the participating Member States, through their own procedures, may request the Board to reply in writing to any observations or questions submitted by them to the Board in respect of the functions of the Board under this Regulation.

2.  The national Parliament of a participating Member State may invite the Executive Director to participate in an exchange of views in relation to the resolution of entities referred to in Article 2 in that Member State together with a representative of the national resolution authority.

3.  This Regulation shall be without prejudice to the accountability of national resolution authorities to national Parliaments in accordance with national law for the performance of tasks not conferred on the Board or on the Commission by this Regulation.

Article 43

Independence

1.  When carrying out the tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation, the Board and the national resolution authorities shall act independently and in the general interest.

2.  The members of the Board referred to in Article 39(2) shall act independently and objectively in the interest of the Union as a whole and shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union’s institutions or bodies, from any Government of a Member State or from any other public or private body.

Article 43a

General principles applicable to the Board

The Board shall be subject to the following principles:

(a)  it shall act independently, in accordance with Article 43;

(b)  its members shall have the necessary expertise on bank restructuring and insolvency;

(c)  it shall have the capacity to deal with large banking groups;

(d)  it shall have the capacity to act swiftly and impartially;

(e)  it shall ensure that appropriate account is taken of national financial stability, financial stability of the Union and the internal market; and

(f)  it shall be accountable to the European Parliament and the Council, in accordance with Article 41.

Article 44

Seat

The Board shall have its seat in Brussels, Belgium.

TITLE II

Plenary Session of the Board

Article 45

Participation in plenary sessions

All members of the Board shall participate in its plenary sessions.

Article 46

Tasks

1.  In its plenary session, the Board shall:

(a)  adopt, by 30 November of each year, the Board’s annual work programme for the coming year ▐, based on a draft put forward by the Executive Director and shall transmit it for information to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, and the ECB, the implementation of which is to be monitored and controlled by the Board in its plenary session;

(b)  adopt, monitor and control, the annual budget of the Board in accordance with Article 58(2);

(ba)  issue opinions and recommendations on the draft report of the Executive Director mentioned in Article 52(2)(g);

(c)  decide on the voluntary borrowing between financing arrangements in accordance with Article 68, the mutualisation of national financing arrangements in accordance with Article 72 and on the lending to deposit guarantee scheme in accordance with Article 73(4);

(d)  adopt the annual activity report on the Board’s activities referred to in Article 41, which is to present detailed explanations on the implementation of the budget;

(e)  adopt the financial rules applicable to the Board in accordance with Article 61;

(f)  adopt an anti-fraud strategy, proportionate to fraud risks taking into account the costs and benefits of the measures to be implemented;

(g)  adopt rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of its members;

(h)  adopt its rules of procedure;

(i)  in accordance with paragraph 2, exercise, with respect to the staff of the Board, the powers conferred by the Staff Regulations on the Appointing Authority and by the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants on the Authority Empowered to Conclude a Contract of Employment ("the appointing authority powers");

(j)  adopt appropriate implementing rules for giving effect to the Staff Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations;

(k)  appoint an Accounting Officer, subject to the Staff Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, who shall be functionally independent in the performance of his/her duties;

(l)  ensure adequate follow-up to findings and recommendations stemming from the internal or external audit reports and evaluations, as well as from investigations of the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF);

(m)  take all the decisions on the establishment of the Board’s internal structures and, where necessary, their modification.

2.  In its plenary session, the Board shall adopt, in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations, a decision based on Article 2(1) of the Staff Regulations and on Article 6 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, delegating relevant appointing authority powers to the Executive Director and defining the conditions under which the delegation of powers can be suspended. The Executive Director shall be authorised to sub-delegate those powers.

Where exceptional circumstances so require, the Board in its plenary session may by way of a decision temporarily suspend the delegation of the appointing authority powers to the Executive Director and those sub-delegated by the latter and exercise them itself or delegate them to one of its members or to a staff member other than the Executive Director.

Article 47

Meeting of the plenary session of the Board

1.  The Executive Director shall convene meetings of the plenary session of the Board.

2.  The Board in its plenary session shall hold at least two ordinary meetings a year. In addition, it shall meet on the initiative of the Executive Director, at the request of the Commission, or at the request of at least one-third of its members.

3.  The Board in its plenary session may invite observers to attend its meetings on an ad hoc basis. In particular, upon request, the Board may invite a representative of the ESM to participate as observer.

4.  The Board shall provide for the secretariat of the plenary session of the Board.

Article 48

Decision-making process

1.  The Board, in its plenary session, shall take its decisions by a simple majority of its members referred to in Article 39(1)(a) to (e). However, decisions referred to in point (c) of Article 46(1) shall be taken by a majority of two-thirds of those members.

2.  The Executive Director shall take part in the voting.

3.  The Board shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. The rules of procedure shall establish more detailed voting arrangements, in particular the circumstances in which a member may act on behalf of another member and including, where appropriate, the rules governing quorums.

TITLE III

Executive session of the Board

Article 49

Participation in the executive sessions

1.  The members of the Board referred to in Article 39(1)(a) to (d) shall participate in the executive sessions of the Board.

2.  When deliberating on an entity referred to in Article 2 or a group of entities established only in one participating Member State, the member appointed by that Member State shall also participate in the deliberations and in the decision-making process in accordance with Article 51(1).

3.  When deliberating on a cross-border group the member appointed by the Member State in which the group level resolution authority is situated, as well as the members appointed by the Member States in which a subsidiary or entity covered by consolidated supervision is established, shall also participate in the deliberations and in the decision-making process in accordance with Article 51(2).

3a.  The members of the Board referred to in Article 39(1)(a) to (d) shall ensure that the resolution decisions and actions, in particular with regard to the use of the Fund, across the different formations of the executive sessions of the Board are coherent, appropriate and proportionate.

Article 50

Tasks

1.  The Board, in its plenary session, shall be assisted by an executive session of the Board.

2.  The Board, in its executive session, shall:

(a)  prepare all decisions to be adopted by the Board in its plenary session;

(b)  take all decisions to implement this Regulation.

2a.   The tasks of the Board, in its executive session, as referred to in paragraph 2, shall include:

(-i)  preparing, assessing and approving resolution plans in accordance with Articles 7 to 9;

(-ia)  determining the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities that institutions and parent undertakings need to maintain in accordance with Article 10;

(i)  providing the Commission, as early as possible, with a draft decision in accordance with Article 16 accompanied by all relevant information allowing the Commission to assess and take an reasoned decision pursuant to Article 16(6);

(ii)  deciding upon the Board’s part II of the budget on the Fund.

3.  When necessary, because of urgency, the Board, in its executive session may take certain provisional decisions on behalf of the Board in its plenary session, in particular on administrative management matters, including budgetary matters.

4.  The Board, in its executive session, shall meet on the initiative of the Executive Director or at the request of any of its members.

5.  The Board, in its plenary session, shall lay down the rules of procedure of the Board in its executive session.

Article 51

Decision-making

1.  When deliberating on an individual entity or a group established only in one participating Member State, the Board ▐ in its executive sessions shall strive for consensus. In the absence of consensus, the Board shall take its decisions by a simple majority of the voting members referred to in Article 39(1)(a) to (d) and the participating members referred to in Article 49(2). In the case of a tie the Executive Director shall have a casting vote.

2.  When deliberating on a cross-border group, the Board ▐ in its executive sessions shall strive for consensus. In the absence of consensus, the Board shall take its decisions by a simple majority of the voting members referred to in Article 39(1) (a) to (d) and the participating members referred to in Article 49(3). The members of the Board referred to in Article 39(1)(a) to (d) and the member appointed by the Member State in which the group level resolution authority is situated shall each have one vote. The national resolution authority of each participating Member State in which a subsidiary or entity covered by consolidated supervision is established shall each have a voting right equal to a fraction of one vote. In the case of a tie the Executive Director shall have a casting vote.

▐

3.  The Board, in its executive session, shall adopt and make public the rules of procedure for its executive sessions.

Meetings of the Board in its executive session shall be convened by the Executive Director on his own initiative or upon request of any of its members, and shall be chaired by the Executive Director. The Board in its executive session may invite observers to attend its meetings on an ad hoc basis. In particular, upon request, the Board may invite a representative of the ESM to participate as observer.

TITLE IV

Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director

Article 52

Appointment and tasks

1.  The Board shall be headed by a full-time Executive Director who shall not hold any offices at national level.

2.  The Executive Director shall be responsible for:

(a)  preparing the work of the Board, in its plenary and executive sessions, and convening and chairing its meetings;

(b)  all staff matters;

(c)  matters of day-to-day administration;

(d)  implementation of the budget of the Board, in accordance with Article 58(3);

(e)  the management of the Board;

(f)  the implementation of the annual work programme of the Board;

(g)  the preparation, each year▐, of a draft report with a section on the resolution activities of the Board and a section on financial and administrative matters.

3.  The Executive Director shall be assisted by a Deputy Executive Director.

The Deputy Executive Director shall carry out the functions of the Executive Director in his absence.

4.  The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall be appointed on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of banking and financial matters, of experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation.

The Executive Director and the Deputy Director shall be chosen on the basis of an open selection procedure, which shall respect the principle of gender balance, of which the European Parliament and the Council shall be kept duly informed.

5.   The Commission shall provide the competent committee of the European Parliament with a shortlist of candidates for the positions of Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director.

The Commission shall submit a proposal for the appointment of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director to the European Parliament for approval. Following the approval of that proposal, the Council shall adopt an implementing decision to appoint the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director ▐ .

6.  By derogation from Article 39(2), the term of office of the first Deputy Executive Director appointed after the entry into force of this Regulation shall be three years; this term is renewable once for a period of five years. The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall remain in office until their successors are appointed.

7.  A Deputy Executive Director whose term of office has been extended shall not participate in another selection procedure for the same post at the end of the overall period.

8.  If the Executive Director or the Deputy Executive Director no longer fulfil the conditions required for the performance of their duties or have been guilty of serious misconduct, the Council may, on a proposal from the Commission which has been approved by the European Parliament, adopt an implementing decision to remove the Executive Director or the Deputy Executive Director from office.

For those purposes, the European Parliament or the Council may inform the Commission that they consider that the conditions for the removal of the Executive Director or the Deputy Executive Director from office are fulfilled, to which the Commission shall respond.

Article 53

Independence

1.  The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall exercise their tasks in conformity with the decisions of the Commission and of the Board.

When taking part in the deliberations and decision-making processes within the Board, the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, but express their own views and vote independently. In those deliberations and decision-making processes the Deputy Executive Director shall not be under the authority of the Executive Director.

2.  Neither Member States nor any other public or private body shall seek to influence the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director in the performance of their tasks.

3.  In accordance with the Staff Regulations referred to in Article 78(6), the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall, after leaving service, continue to be bound by the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance of certain appointments or benefits.

TITLE V

FINANCIAL PROVISIONS

Chapter 1

General provisions

Article 54

Resources

The Board shall be responsible for devoting the necessary financial and human resources to the exercise of the tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation.

Article 55

Budget

1.  Estimates of all the Board's revenue and expenditure shall be prepared for each financial year, corresponding to the calendar year, and shall be shown in the Board's budget.

2.  The Board’s budget shall be balanced in terms of revenue and expenditure.

3.  The budget shall comprise two parts: Part I for the administration of the Board and Part II for the Fund.

Article 56

Part I of the budget on the administration of the Board

1.  The revenues of Part I of the budget shall consist of the annual contributions necessary to cover the annual estimated administrative expenditure in accordance with Article 62(1)(a).

2.  The expenditure of Part I of the budget shall include at least staff, remuneration, administrative, infrastructure, professional training and operational expenses.

Article 57

Part II of the budget on the Fund

1.  The revenues of Part II of the budget shall consist, in particular, of the following:

(a)  contributions paid by institutions established in the participating Member States in accordance with Article 62 except for the annual contributions referred to in Article 62(1)(a);

(b)  loans received from other resolution financing arrangements in non-participating Member States in accordance with Article 68(1);

(c)  loans received from financial institutions or other third parties in accordance with Article 69, including within the framework of the loan facility referred to in that Article;

(d)  returns on the investments of the amounts held in the Fund in accordance with Article 70.

2.  The expenditure of Part II of the budget shall consist of the following:

(a)  expenses for the purposes indicated in Article 71;

(b)  investments in accordance with Article 70;

(c)  interest paid on loans received from other resolution financing arrangements in non-participating Member States in accordance with Article 68(1);

(d)  interest paid on loans received from financial institutions or other third parties in accordance with Article 69, including within the framework of the loan facility referred to in that Article.

Article 58

Establishment and implementation of the budget

1.  By 15 February each year, the Executive Director shall draw up an estimate of the Board's revenue and expenditure for the following year and shall send it to the Board, in its plenary session, for approval, not later than 31 March each year.

2.  The budget of the Board shall be adopted by the plenary session of the Board on the basis of the statement of estimates. Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly, following its monitoring and control by the Board in its plenary session.

3.  The Executive Director shall implement the Board’s budget.

Article 59

Audit and control

1.  An internal audit function shall be set up within the Board, to be performed in compliance with the relevant international standards. The internal auditor, appointed by the Board, shall be responsible to it for verifying the proper operation of budget implementation systems and procedures of the Board.

2.  The internal auditor shall advise the Board on dealing with risks, by issuing independent opinions on the quality of management and control systems and by issuing recommendations for improving the conditions of implementation of operations and promoting sound financial management.

3.  The responsibility for putting in place internal control systems and procedures suitable for carrying out his tasks shall lie with the Board.

Article 60

Presentation of accounts and discharge

1.  The Executive Director shall act as authorising officer.

2.  By 1 March of the following financial year, the Board’s Accounting Officer shall send the provisional accounts to the Board.

3.  By 31 March of each year the Board, in its executive session, shall transmit to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, and the Court of Auditors ▐ the Board's provisional accounts for the preceding financial year.

4.  On receipt of the Court of Auditors’ observations on the Board’s provisional accounts, the Executive Director shall draw up the Board’s final accounts under his/her own responsibility and shall send them to the Board in its plenary session, for approval.

5.  The Executive Director shall, by 1 July following each financial year, ▐ send the final accounts to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, and the Court of Auditors.

6.  The Executive Director shall send the Court of Auditors a reply to its observations by1 July.

7.  The final accounts shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by 15 November of the following year.

8.  The Board, in its plenary session, shall give discharge to the Executive Director in respect of the implementation of the budget.

9.  The Executive Director shall submit to the European Parliament, at the latter’s request, any information required in relation to the Board’s accounts.

9a.  Following consideration of the final accounts prepared by the Board pursuant to this Article, the Court of Auditors shall prepare a report on its findings and shall submit the report to the European Parliament and to the Council by 1 December following each financial year.

9b.  The Court of Auditors shall, in particular, report on:

(a)  the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which funds, including from the Fund, have been used;

(b)  any contingent liabilities, whether for the Board, the Commission or otherwise, arising as a result of the performance by the Commission and the Board of their tasks under this Regulation.

Article 61

Financial rules

The Board shall, after consulting the Court of Auditors of the Union and the Commission, adopt internal financial provisions specifying, in particular, the procedure for establishing and implementing its budget.

As far as is compatible with the particular nature of the Board, the financial provisions shall be based on the framework financial Regulation adopted for bodies set up under the TFEU in accordance with Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council [...](13).

Article 62

Contributions

1.  Entities referred to in Article 2 shall contribute to the budget of the Board in accordance with this Regulation and the delegated acts on contributions adopted pursuant to paragraph 5. The contributions shall comprise the following:

(a)  annual contributions necessary to cover the administrative expenditures;

(b)  annual ex-ante contributions necessary to reach the target funding level of the Fund specified in Article 65, calculated in accordance with Article 66;

(c)  extraordinary ex post contributions, calculated in accordance with Article 67.

2.  The amounts of the contributions shall be fixed at such a level as to ensure that the revenue in respect thereof is in principle sufficient for the budget of the Board to be balanced each year and for the missions of the Fund.

3.  The Board shall determine, after consulting the competent authority, in accordance with the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 5, the contributions due by each entity referred to in Article 2 in a decision addressed to the entity concerned. The Board shall apply procedural, reporting and other rules ensuring that contributions are fully and timely paid.

4.  The amounts raised in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2, 3 shall only be used for the purposes of this Regulation.

5.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts on contributions in accordance with Article 82 in order to:

(a)  determine the type of contributions and the matters for which contributions are due, the manner in which the amount of the contributions is calculated, the way in which they are to be paid;

(b)  specify registration, accounting, reporting and other rules referred to in paragraph 3 necessary to ensure that the contributions are fully and timely paid;

(c)  determine the contribution system for institutions that have been authorized to operate after the Fund has reached its target level;

(d)  determine the annual contributions necessary to cover the administrative expenditure of the Board before it becomes fully operational.

Article 63

Anti-fraud measures

1.  In order to facilitate combating fraud, corruption and any other unlawful activity under Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999, within six months from the day the Board becomes operational, it shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning internal investigations by European Anti-fraud Office OLAF and adopt appropriate provisions applicable to all staff of the Board using the template set out in the Annex to that Agreement.

2.  The European Court of Auditors shall have the power of audit, on the basis of documents and on the spot, over the beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors who have received ▐ funds from the Board.

3.  OLAF may carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union in connection with a contract funded by the Board in accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 and Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96.

Chapter 2

The Single Bank Resolution Fund

Section 1

CONSTITUTION OF THE FUND

Article 64

General provisions

1.  The Single Bank Resolution Fund is hereby established.

2.  The Board shall use the Fund only for the purpose of ensuring the efficient implementation of the resolution tools and powers ▐ and in accordance with the resolution objectives and the principles governing resolution ▐. Under no circumstances shall the Union budget or the national budgets of Member States be held liable for expenses or losses of the Fund or for any liability of the Board.

3.  The owner of the Fund shall be the Board.

Article 65

Target funding level

1.  In a period no longer than 10 years after the entry into force of this Regulation, the available financial means of the Fund shall reach at least the percentage of the amount of deposits of all credit institutions authorised in the participating Member States which are guaranteed under Directive [DGS] and in accordance with Article 93(1) of Directive [BRRD].

2.  During the initial period of time referred to in paragraph 1, contributions to the Fund calculated in accordance with Article 66, and raised in accordance with Article 62 shall be spread out in time as evenly as possible until the target level is reached unless, depending on the circumstances, they can be advanced in consideration of the favourable market conditions or the funding needs.

3.  The Board may extend the initial period of time for a maximum of four years in the case the Fund makes cumulated disbursements superior to the percentage provided for in Article 93(2) of Directive [BRRD] of the total amount referred to in paragraph 1.

4.  If, after the initial period of time referred to in paragraph 1, the available financial means diminish below the target level specified in paragraph 1, contributions calculated in accordance with Article 66 shall be raised until the target level is reached. Where the available financial means amount to less than half of the target level, the annual contributions shall ▐ be established in accordance with Article 93(3) of Directive [BRRD].

5.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 82 to specify the following:

(a)  criteria for the spreading out in time of the contributions to the Fund calculated under paragraph 2;

(b)  circumstances under which the payment of contributions may be advanced under paragraph 2;

(c)  criteria for determining the number of years by which the initial period referred to in paragraph 1 can be extended under paragraph 3;

(d)  criteria for establishing the annual contributions provided for in paragraph 4.

Article 66

Ex-ante Contributions

1.  The individual contribution of each institution shall be raised at least annually and shall be calculated pro-rata to the amount of its liabilities excluding own funds and covered deposits, with respect to the total liabilities, excluding own funds and covered deposits, of all the institutions authorised in the territories of the participating Member States.

It shall be adjusted in proportion to the risk profile of each institution, in accordance with the criteria specified in the delegated acts referred to in Article 94(7) of Directive [BRRD].

2.  The available financial means to be taken into account in order to reach the target funding level specified in Article 65 may include cash, near-cash equivalents, assets eligible as high quality liquid assets under the liquidity coverage ratio or payment commitments which are fully backed by collateral of low risk assets unencumbered by any third party rights, at the free disposal and earmarked for the exclusive use by the Board for the purposes specified in Article 71(1). The share of these irrevocable payment commitments shall not exceed the percentage provided for in Article 94(3) of Directive [BRRD] of the total amount of contributions raised in accordance with paragraph 1.

2a.  The individual contributions of each institution referred to in paragraph 1 shall be definitive and shall, under no circumstances, be reimbursed retroactively.

2b.  Where participating Member States have already established national resolution financing arrangements, they may provide that the national resolution financing arrangements use their available financial means, collected from institutions in the past by way of ex-ante contributions, to compensate institutions for the ex-ante contributions which those institutions may be required to pay into the Fund. Such restitution shall be without prejudice to the obligations of Member States under Directive 94/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.

3.  Subject to the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 82 to specify the following:

(a)  the method of calculation of individual contributions referred to in paragraph 1;

(b)  the quality of the collateral backing the payment commitments in paragraph 2;

(c)  the criteria for the calculation of the share of payment commitments referred to in paragraph 2.

Article 67

Extraordinary ex post contributions

1.  Where the available financial means are not sufficient to cover the losses, costs or other expenses incurred by the use of the Fund, the Board shall raise in accordance with Article 62 extraordinary ex post contributions from the institutions authorised in the territories of participating Member States, in order to cover the additional amounts. These extraordinary contributions shall be allocated between institutions in accordance with the rules set out in Article 66 and in accordance with Article 95(1) of Directive [BRRD].

2.  The Board may entirely or partially exempt in accordance with the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3, an institution from the obligation to pay ex post contributions in accordance with paragraph 1 if the sum of payments referred to in Article 66 and in paragraph 1 of this Article would jeopardize the settlement of claims of other creditors against it. Such exemption shall not be granted for a longer period than 6 months but may be renewed on request of the institution.

3.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 82 to specify the circumstances and conditions under which an entity referred to in Article 2 may be partially or entirely exempted from ex post contributions under paragraph 2.

Article 68

Voluntary borrowing between financing arrangements

1.  The Board may make a request to borrow for the Fund from all other resolution financing arrangements within non-participating Member States, in the event that:

(a)  the amounts raised under Article 66 are not sufficient to cover the losses, costs or other expenses incurred by the use of the Fund;

(b)  the extraordinary ex post contributions foreseen in Article 67 are not immediately accessible.

▐

2.  Those resolution financing arrangements shall decide on such a request in accordance with Article 97 of Directive [BRRD]. The borrowing conditions shall be subject to points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 97(3) of that Directive.

Article 69

Alternative funding means

1.  The Board shall endeavour to contract for the Fund borrowings or other forms of support from financial institutions or other third parties, in the event that the amounts raised in accordance with Articles 66 and 67 are not immediately accessible or sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the use of the Fund.

In particular, the Board shall endeavour to contract for the Fund a loan facility, preferably utilising a European public instrument, to ensure the immediate availability of adequate financial means to be used in accordance with Article 71, where the amounts raised or available in accordance with Articles 66 and 67 are not sufficient. Any loan from that loan facility shall be reimbursed by the Fund under an agreed timeframe.

2.  The borrowing or other forms of support referred to in paragraph 1 shall be fully recouped in accordance with Article 62 within the maturity period of the loan.

3.  Any expenses incurred by the use of the borrowings specified in paragraph 1 have to be borne by the Board itself and not by the Union budget or the participating Member States.

Section 2

administration of the fund

Article 70

Investments

1.  The Board shall administer the Fund and may request the Commission to perform certain tasks relating to the administration of the Fund.

2.  The amounts received from an institution under resolution or a bridge institution, the interests and other earnings on investments and any other earnings shall benefit only the Fund.

3.  The Board shall have a prudent and safe investment policy, in particular by investing the amounts held in the Fund in ▐ assets of high credit worthiness. Investments should be sufficiently, sectorally and geographically diversified to mitigate concentration risks. The return on those investments shall benefit the Fund. The Board shall make public an investment framework, specifying the Fund's investment policy.

4.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts on the detailed rules for the administration of the Fund, in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 82.

Section 3

use of the fund

Article 71

Mission of the Fund

1.  Within the framework decided by the Commission, when applying the resolution tools to entities referred to in Article 2, the Board may use the Fund for the following purposes:

(a)  to guarantee the assets or the liabilities of the institution under resolution, its subsidiaries, a bridge institution or an asset management vehicle;

(b)  to make loans to the institution under resolution, its subsidiaries, a bridge institution or an asset management vehicle;

(c)  to purchase assets of the institution under resolution;

(d)  to contribute capital to a bridge institution or an asset management vehicle;

(e)  to pay compensation to shareholders or creditors if, following an evaluation pursuant to Article 17(5), they have received less, in payment of their credits, than what they would have received, following a valuation pursuant to Article 17(16), in a winding up under normal insolvency proceedings;

(f)  to make a contribution to the institution under resolution in lieu of the contribution which would have been achieved by the write down of certain creditors, when the bail-in tool is applied and the resolution authority decides to exclude certain creditors from the scope of bail-in in accordance with Article 24(3);

(g)  to take any combination of the actions referred to in points (a) to (f).

2.  The Fund may be used to take the actions referred to in points (a) to (g) also with respect to the purchaser in the context of the sale of business tool.

3.  The Fund shall not be used directly to absorb the losses of an institution or an entity referred to in Article 2 or to recapitalise an institution or an entity referred to in Article 2. In the event that the use of the resolution financing arrangement for the purposes in paragraph 1 indirectly results in part of the losses of an institution or an entity referred to in Article 2 being passed on to the Fund, the principles governing the use of the resolution financing arrangement set out in Article 38 of Directive [BRRD] and Article 24 shall apply.

4.  The Board may not hold the capital contributed to in accordance with point (f) of paragraph 1 for a period exceeding five years.

Article 72

Mutualisation of national financing arrangements in the case of group resolution involving institutions in non-participating Member States

In the case of a group resolution involving institutions authorised in one or more participating Member States on the one hand, and institutions authorised in one or more non-participating Member States on the other hand, the Fund shall contribute to the financing of the group resolution in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 98 of Directive [BRRD].

▐

TITLE VI

Other provisions

Article 74

Privileges and Immunities

The Protocol (No 7) on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union shall apply to the Board and its staff.

Article 75

Languages

1.  Council Regulation No 1(14) shall apply to the Board.

2.  The Board shall decide on the internal language arrangements for the Board.

3.  The Board may decide which of the official languages to use when sending documents to Union institutions or bodies.

4.  The Board may agree with each national resolution authority on the language or languages in which the documents to be send to or by the national resolution authorities shall be drafted.

5.  The translation services required for the functioning of the Board shall be provided by the Translation Centre of the bodies of the European Union.

Article 76

Staff of the Board

1.  The Staff Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants and the rules adopted by agreement between the institutions of the Union giving effect to those Staff Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, shall apply to the staff of the Board, including the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director.

2.  The Board, in agreement with the Commission, shall adopt the appropriate implementing rules for giving effect to the Staff Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations.

Article 76a

Organisation of the Staff of the Board

1.  The Board may establish internal resolution teams composed of staff of the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States and of its own staff.

2.  Where the Board establishes internal resolution teams as provided for in paragraph 1, it shall appoint coordinators of those teams from its own staff. In accordance with Article 47(3), the coordinators may be invited as observers to attend the meetings of the executive session of the Board in which the members appointed by the respective Member States participate in accordance with Article 49(2) and (3).

3.  The Board may establish internal committees to provide it with advice and guidance to the discharge of its functions under this Regulation.

Article 77

Staff exchange

1.  The Board may make use of seconded national experts or other staff not employed by the Board.

2.  The Board in its plenary session shall adopt appropriate decision laying down rules on the exchange and secondment of staff from and among the national resolution authorities of the participating Member States to the Board.

▐

Article 78

Liability of the Board

1.  The Board’s contractual liability shall be governed by the law applicable to the contract in question.

2.  The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give judgement pursuant to any arbitration clause contained in a contract concluded by the Board.

3.  In the case of non-contractual liability, the Board shall, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws concerning the liability of public authorities of the Member States, make good any damage caused by it or by its staff in the performance of their duties, in particular their resolution functions, including acts and omissions in support of foreign resolution proceedings.

4.  The Board shall compensate a national resolution authority of a participating Member State for the damages to which it has been condemned by a national court, or which it has, in agreement with the Board, committed to pay in accordance with an amicable settlement, which are the consequences of an act or omission committed by that national resolution authority in the course of any resolution under this Regulation, unless that act or omission constituted a violation of Union law, this Regulation, a Decision of the Commission or a Decision of the Board, intentional or by means of manifest and serious error of judgement.

5.  The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction in any dispute relating to paragraphs 3 and 4. Proceedings in matters arising from non-contractual liability shall be barred after a period of five years from the occurrence of the event giving rise thereto.

6.  The personal liability of its staff towards the Board shall be governed by the provisions laid down in the Staff Regulations or Conditions of Employment applicable to them.

Article 79

Professional secrecy and exchange of information

1.  Members of Board, staff of the Board and staff exchanged with or seconded by participating Member States carrying out resolution duties, even after their duties are ceased, shall be subject to the requirements of professional secrecy pursuant to Article 339 TFEU and the relevant provisions in Union law, even after their duties have ceased.

2.  The Board shall ensure that individuals who provide any service, directly or indirectly, permanently or occasionally, relating to the discharge of its duties, including officials of and other persons authorised by the Board or appointed by the national resolution authorities to conduct on-site inspections, are subject to equivalent professional secrecy requirements.

2a.  The professional secrecy requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 also apply to observers who attend the Board’s meetings on an ad hoc basis.

2b.  The professional secrecy requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 apply notwithstanding Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.

3.  For the purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation, the Board shall be authorised, within the limits and under the conditions set out in relevant Union law, to exchange information with national or Union authorities and bodies in the cases where relevant Union law allows national competent authorities to disclose information to those entities or where Member States may provide for such disclosure under the relevant Union law.

Article 80

Access to information and processing of personal data

▐

4.  The processing of personal data by the Board shall be subject to Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council(15). The processing of personal data by the national resolution authorities shall be subject to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(16).

4a.  Persons who are the subject of the Board’s decisions shall be entitled to have access to the Board's file, subject to the legitimate interest of other persons in the protection of their business secrets. The right of access to the file shall not extend to confidential information.

Article 81

Security rules on the protection of classified and sensitive non-classified information

The Board shall apply the security principles contained in the Commission’s security rules for protecting European Union Classified Information (EUCI) and sensitive non-classified information, as set out in the annex to Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom. Applying the security principles shall include applying provisions for the exchange, processing and storage of such information.

PART IV

POWERS OF EXECUTION AND FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 82

Exercise of the delegation

1.  The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.

2.  The delegation of powers shall be conferred for an indeterminate period of time from the date referred to in Article 88.

2a.  The consistency between this Regulation and Directive [BRRD] shall be ensured. Any delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Regulation shall be consistent with Directive [BRRD] and delegated acts adopted pursuant to that Directive.

3.  The delegation of powers referred to in Article 19(4a), Article 62(5), Article 65(5), Article 66(3), Article 67(3) and Article 70(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

4.  As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.

5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 62(5), Article 65(5), Article 66(3), Article 67(3) and Article 70(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of three months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

Article 83

Review

1.  By 31 December 2016, and subsequently every five years thereafter, the Commission shall publish a report on the application of this Regulation, with a special emphasis on monitoring the potential impact on the smooth functioning of the internal market. That report shall evaluate:

(a)  the functioning of the SRM and the impact of ▐ its resolution activities on the interests of the Union as a whole and on the coherence and integrity of the internal market in financial services, including its possible impact on the structures of the national banking systems within the Union, on their competitiveness in comparison with other banking systems outside the SRM and outside the Union, and regarding the effectiveness of cooperation and information sharing arrangements within the SRM, between the SRM and the SSM, and between the SRM and national resolution authorities and national competent authorities of non-participating Member States.

The report shall, in particular, assess whether:

(i)  there is a need that the functions allocated by this Regulation to the Board and to the Commission be exercised exclusively by an independent Union institution;

(ii)  cooperation between the SRM, the SSM, ESRB, EBA, ESMA and EIOPA, and the other authorities which form part of the ESFS, is appropriate;

(iii)  the investment portfolio in accordance with Article 70 of this Regulation is made of sound and diversified assets;

(iv)  the link between sovereign debt and banking risk has been broken;

(v)  the voting arrangements are appropriate;

(vi)  a reference value relating to total liabilities of all credit institutions authorised in the participating Member States, to be reached additionally to the target funding level established as a percentage of the covered deposits of those institutions, should be introduced;

(vii)  the target funding level established for the Fund and the level of contributions to the Fund are in line with the target funding levels and the levels of contributions imposed by non-participating Member States.

The report shall also identify any possible Treaty change necessary to accommodate the SRM, in particular the possible establishment of an independent Union institution to exercise the functions allocated in this Regulation to the Board and to the Commission;

(b)  the effectiveness of independence and accountability arrangements;

(c)  the interaction between the Board and EBA;

(d)  the interaction between the Board and the national resolution authorities of non-participating Member States and the effects of the SRM on these Member States, and the interaction between the Board and third-country authorities as defined in Article 2(80) [BRRD].

2.  The report shall be forwarded to the European Parliament and to the Council. The Commission shall make accompanying proposals, as appropriate.

2a.  Any review of Directive [BRRD] shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a corresponding review of this Regulation.

Article 84

Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010

Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 is amended as follows:

1.  in Article 4 point (2) is replaced by the following:"

2.  in Article 25, the following paragraph is inserted:"

“1a. The Authority may organise and conduct peer reviews of the exchange of information and of the joint activities of the Single Resolution Board and national resolution authorities of Member States not participating in the SRM in the resolution of cross border groups to strengthen effectiveness and consistency in outcomes. To that end, the Authority shall develop methods to allow for objective assessment and comparison.”;

3.  in Article 40(6), the following third subparagraph is added:"

"For the purpose of acting within the scope of Article 62(5), Article 65(5), Article 66(3), Article 67(4) and Article 70(4), the Executive Director of the Single Resolution Board shall be an observer to the Board of Supervisors.".

Article 85

Replacement of national resolution financing arrangements

From the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 88, the Fund shall replace the resolution financing arrangement of the participating Member States under Title VII of Directive [BRRD].

Article 86

Headquarters Agreement and operating conditions

1.  The necessary arrangements concerning the accommodation to be provided for the Board in the host Member State and the facilities to be made available by that Member State together with the specific rules applicable in the host Member State to the Executive Director, members of the Board in its plenary session, Board staff and members of their families shall be laid down in a Headquarters Agreement between the Board and the host Member State, concluded after obtaining the approval of the Board in its plenary session and no later than two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.

2.  The Board’s host Member State shall provide the best possible conditions to ensure the functioning of the Board, including multilingual, European-oriented schooling and appropriate transport connections.

Article 87

Start of the Board’s activities

1.  The Board shall become fully operational by 1 January 2015.

2.  The Commission shall be responsible for the establishment and initial operation of the Board until the Board has the operational capacity to implement its own budget. For that purpose:

(a)  until the Executive Director takes up his duties following his appointment by the Council in accordance with Article 53, the Commission may designate a Commission official to act as interim Executive Director and exercise the duties assigned to the Executive Director;

(b)  by derogation from Article 46(1)(i) and until the adoption of a decision as referred to in Article 46(2), the interim Executive Director shall exercise the appointing authority powers;

(c)  the Commission may offer assistance to the Board, in particular by seconding Commission officials to carry out the activities of the agency under the responsibility of the interim Executive Director or the Executive Director;

(d)  the Commission shall collect the annual contributions referred to in Article 62(5)(d) on behalf of the Board.

3.  The interim Executive Director may authorise all payments covered by appropriations entered in the Board's budget and may conclude contracts, including staff contracts.

Article 88

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Articles 7 to 23 and Articles 25 to 37 shall apply from 1 January 2015.

Article 24 shall apply from 1 January 2016.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done ...,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

(1) This matter was referred back to the committee responsible for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 57(2), second subparagraph (A7-0478/2013). (2) * Amendments: new or amended text is highlighted in bold italics; deletions are indicated by the symbol ▌. (3) Opinion of 6 November 2013 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (4) Opinion of 17 October 2013 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (5) Position of the European Parliament of .... (6) Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Council Directives 77/91/EEC and 82/891/EEC, Directives 2001/24/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2005/56/EC, 2007/36/EC and 2011/35/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L ...). (7) Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 12). (8) Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 63). (9) Directive 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on deposit-guarantee schemes, OJ L 135, 31.5.1994, p. 5. (10) Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p.1. (11) Directive 2013/36/EU of 26 June 2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC, OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338. (12) Directive 94/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 amending Directive 80/390/EEC coordinating the requirements for the drawing up, scrutiny and distribution of the listing particulars to be published for the admission of securities to official stock-exchange listing, with regard to the obligation to publish listing particulars (OJ L 135, 31.5.1994, p. 1). (13) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1). (14) OJ 17, 6.10.1958, p. 385. (15) Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1. (16) Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1337/2013 resolution of 13 December 2013 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry (2014/2530(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0096 B7-0087/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1337/2013 of 13 December 2013 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry(1),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004(2) (the ‘Food Information to Consumers Regulation’), and in particular Articles 7(1) and 26, (2), (8) and (9) thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(3), and in particular Article 11 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 88(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Article 26(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 requires country of origin labelling for meat falling within the Combined Nomenclature (CN) codes listed in Annex XI to that Regulation (which includes fresh, chilled or frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry);

B.  whereas the application of Article 26(2) is subject to the adoption of implementing acts pursuant to paragraph (8) of that article, hence the adoption of the Commission implementing regulation in question; whereas, in accordance with recital 59 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, those implementing acts must lay down the manner of indicating the country of origin or place of provenance for meat referred to in Article 26(2)(b);

C.  whereas paragraph 9 of Article 26 requires the Commission to consider, in its impact assessments and reports on the application of point (b) of paragraph (2) of that article, inter alia the options for the modalities of expressing the country of origin or place of provenance of those foods, in particular with respect to each of the following determining points in the life of the animal: place of birth, place of rearing and place of slaughter;

D.  whereas, in its vote of 16 June 2010 on the Food Information to Consumers Regulation, Parliament supported labelling the country of origin for birth, rearing and slaughter for fresh, chilled and frozen meat(4);

E.  whereas, according to Article 7(1) of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation, food information should not be misleading as to the characteristics of the food and, in particular, as to its country of origin or place of provenance;

F.  whereas indication of origin has been mandatory for beef and beef products in the Union as a consequence of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis(5), and Union rules for beef labelling have been in place since 1 January 2002; whereas these labelling requirements already include place of birth, rearing and slaughter;

G.  whereas the above-mentioned requirements applicable to beef and beef products have raised consumer expectations as regards information on the origin of other types of meat widely consumed in the Union;

H.  whereas recital 31 of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation underlines the fact that the origin of meat is of prime concern to consumers and as a result consumers expect to be properly informed about the country of origin of meat; whereas this is further confirmed by recent studies and consumer research reports(6);

I.  whereas, in order to provide consumers with accurate information on the origin of meat, the indication of the places of birth, rearing and slaughter should appear on the food label; whereas this would also allow consumers to obtain a more comprehensive picture of the animal welfare standards and environmental impact relating to a meat product;

J.  whereas the recent food scandals, including the fraudulent substitution of horsemeat for beef, have shown that stricter rules on traceability and consumer information are both needed and wanted by consumers;

K.  whereas applying an ‘EU’ or ‘non-EU’ label to minced meat and trimmings is almost meaningless and might set an undesirable precedent, especially regarding any future labelling of the country of origin for meat used as an ingredient; whereas origin labelling requirements for beef show that more precise indication of the origin of minced meat and trimmings is both feasible and appropriate in order to ensure consumer information and traceability;

1.  Considers that the Commission implementing regulation exceeds the implementing powers conferred on the Commission under Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011;

2.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw the implementing regulation;

3.  Calls on the Commission to draw up a revised version of the implementing regulation, which should include a mandatory labelling requirement for the place of birth, as well as those of rearing and slaughter, for unprocessed meat of pigs, poultry, sheep and goats in accordance with the existing beef origin labelling legislation;

4.  Calls on the Commission to remove any derogation in the implementing regulation for minced meat and trimmings;

5.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 335, 14.12.2013, p.19. (2) OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18. (3) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13. (4) OJ C 236 E, 12.8.2011, p. 187. (5) Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97 (OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p.1). (6) For example: Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and Council regarding the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for meat used as an ingredient (COM (2013)0755), and the accompanying Commission Staff Working document of 17 December 2013 on origin labelling for meat used as an ingredient: consumers’ attitudes, feasibility of possible scenarios and impacts (SWD (2013)0437); and the survey of the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) of 24 January 2013 on origin labelling (see: http://www.beuc.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=2139).

European Parliament decision of 6 February 2014 to raise no objections to draft Commission Regulation (EU) No.../... amending Regulation (EU) No 1031/2010 in particular to determine the volumes of greenhouse gas emission allowances to be auctioned in 2013-2020 (D031326/02 – 2014/2523(RPS))

P7_TA(2014)0097 B7-0090/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to draft Commission Regulation (EU) No..../....amending Regulation (EU) No 1031/2010 in particular to determine the volumes of greenhouse gas emission allowances to be auctioned in 2013-2020,

–  having regard to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC(1),

–  having regard to the opinion delivered on 8 January 2014 by the committee referred to in Article 23 of the above directive,

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 7 January 2014 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the draft regulation,

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 30 January 2014,

–  having regard to Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(2),

–  having regard to Rules 88(4)(d) and 87a(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

1.  Declares that it has no objections to the draft Commission regulation;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Commission, and, for information, to the Council.

(1) OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32. (2) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the situation in Ukraine (2014/2547(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0098 RC-B7-0138/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on the outcome of the Vilnius Summit and the future of the Eastern Partnership, in particular as regards Ukraine(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on the ‘European Neighbourhood Policy: towards a strengthening of the partnership – position of the European Parliament on the 2012 reports’(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the pressure exerted by Russia on Eastern Partnership countries (in the context of the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius)(3),

–  having regard to the Joint Declaration of the Vilnius Eastern Partnership Summit of 29 November 2013,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on Ukraine of 20 January 2014,

–  having regard to the resignation of Prime Minister Azarov and his government on 28 January 2014,

–  having regard to the Joint Statement of the Prime Ministers of the Visegrad Group countries on Ukraine of 29 January 2014,

–  having regard to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the European Union and Ukraine, which entered into force on 1 March 1998, and to the new Association Agreement initialled on 30 March 2012,

–  having regard to the EU-Russia Summit of 28 January 2014,

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the demonstrations that started more than two months ago as a consequence of President Yanukovych’s decision not to sign the Association Agreement with the EU continue to the present day in the capital and the discontent is spreading to other cities, including in eastern regions of Ukraine; whereas the popular uprising in Ukraine has reached a majority of the regions, with the administrations of those regions being under the control of the people;

B.  whereas over the past weeks the situation has further deteriorated at an increasing pace, with people taking to the streets to defend democracy and civil liberties after brutal crackdowns by Berkut riot police on demonstrators, human rights activists and journalists;

C.  whereas despite international pressure, the Ukrainian authorities continue to pursue a policy of intimidation, repression, torture and violence against protesters, which has resulted in more than 2 000 people being injured, many people being abducted and at least six people killed;

D.  whereas the adoption on 16 January 2014 of a series of anti-protest laws by the government majority severely limiting the freedoms of expression and assembly provoked international outrage and sparked violent clashes in Kyiv resulting in the loss of human lives;

E.  whereas any forcible crackdown or declaration of a state of emergency will be considered as a criminal act and a violation of fundamental rights with profound international consequences;

F.  whereas the visit to Kyiv from 28 to 30 January 2014 of the ad hoc European Parliament delegation met with the authorities and with Euromaidan, the political opposition and church leaders and obtained a thorough and in-depth analysis of the situation in Ukraine;

1.  Welcomes the democratic spirit and resilience of the Ukrainian people after two months of courageous protests which have met with a brutal response from the authorities, and expresses its full solidarity and support for the people’s efforts for a free, democratic, independent Ukraine and its European perspective;

2.  Expresses deep concern about the serious political crisis in Ukraine and the violent confrontations in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities; calls strongly for a political solution to the crisis and insists on a truly democratic debate on the ways and means of overcoming the confrontation and divisions in the country;

3.  Strongly condemns the escalation of violence against peaceful citizens, journalists, students, civil society activists, opposition politicians and clergy, and expresses its sincere condolences to the families of the victims of the violence in Ukraine; calls on the Ukrainian authorities to fully respect people’s civil rights and fundamental freedoms and to take immediate steps to end the state of impunity by investigating and punishing the authors of violence against peaceful demonstrators;

4.  Calls also on the Maidan protesters to refrain from the use of force and to maintain the legitimacy of their cause in a peaceful way, and asks all opposition leaders to continue to refrain from unprovoked violence and to keep the protest peaceful;

5.  Is concerned by the excessive use of violence by the security forces and the Titushki and by the violent actions of ultranationalists;

6.  Demands in particular that President Yanukovych cease the shameful deployment of Berkut riot police and other security forces in provoking, kidnapping, harassing, torturing, beating and humiliating supporters of the EuroMaidans, as well as arbitrary arrests and over-extended pre-trial detentions; is particularly concerned about reports of torture and stresses Ukraine’s international commitments in this respect; points out the most recent case of Dmytro Bulatov, the leader of ‘AutoMaidan’, who was kidnapped and tortured;

7.  Calls on President Yanukovych to order a stop to these practices and demands the immediate and unconditional release and political rehabilitation of all the demonstrators and political prisoners illegally detained, including Yulya Tymoshenko; calls for the setting-up of an independent investigative committee under the auspices of a recognised international body, such as the Council of Europe, in order to investigate all the human rights violations that have taken place since the demonstrations began;

8.  Recalls the EU’s readiness to sign an AA/DCFTA with Ukraine as soon as the political crisis is overcome and the relevant requirements are met as defined by the Foreign Affairs Council of 10 December 2012 and supported by Parliament’s resolution of 13 December 2012;

9.  Welcomes the Verkhovna Rada’s decision to repeal the anti-protest laws, and its signature by President Yanukovych, as a positive step towards the political resolution of the crisis; regrets, however, that the amnesty law turning victims into hostages was approved on 29 January 2014 without the consent of the opposition; takes the view that an unconditional release of protesters would greatly facilitate the talks and appease society;

10.  Urges the President and the government to engage seriously in an inclusive dialogue with the opposition, civil society and the Maidan protesters in order to de-escalate the tense and polarised situation and to find ways of overcoming the current political and societal crisis in Ukraine through peaceful means;

11.  Reminds President Yanukovych of his responsibility before the Ukrainian people and the international community to refrain from using repressive methods, to remedy the current political crisis and to respect the right to peaceful protest;

12.  Calls for the continued engagement of the EU to mediate and facilitate a process leading to a de-escalation, a more constructive political dialogue in the country and a solution to the crisis, and bridging the gap of a total lack of trust; underlines the fact that such a dialogue should be transparent and fully involve EuroMaidan and civil society;

13.  Takes the view, following numerous requests by ordinary Ukrainian citizens, activists and politicians, that the active involvement of Members of the European Parliament in Kyiv could prevent a further escalation of the crisis and calls, in this regard, for the establishment of a permanent European Parliament mission in Ukraine, with a view to defusing tension and facilitating dialogue between the parties; instructs the Conference of Presidents to set up this mission as soon as possible;

14.  Calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to take immediate action, including increased diplomatic pressure and the preparation of personalised targeted measures (travel sanctions and asset and property freezes) with regard to all those Ukrainian officials and legislators and their business sponsors (oligarchs) who are responsible for the crackdowns on and deaths of protestors, and to step up efforts to stop money laundering and tax evasion by Ukrainian companies and businesspeople in European banks;

15.  Calls for the EU, the US, the IMF, the World Bank, the EBRD and the EIB to continue to prepare a long-term package of concrete financial support to help Ukraine tackle its worsening financial and social situation and provide economic support to launch the necessary deep and comprehensive reforms of the Ukrainian economy by the government;

16.  Welcomes and supports the ongoing work of the European Union and the United States to create a substantial support package for Ukraine which should be offered to a credible new interim government in order to alleviate the present tight situation in respect of payments;

17.  Is of the opinion that one of the important measures for resolving the crisis in Ukraine is a return to the 2004 constitution, which was illegally abolished in 2010 by the Constitutional Court, bypassing the Ukrainian Parliament, together with the establishment of an interim government and early elections;

18.  Calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to commit to a broad opening to Ukrainian society, in particular through a swift agreement on a cost-free visa regime and ultimately a visa-free regime; is of the opinion that the visa fee should immediately be drastically reduced for young Ukrainians, along with strengthened research cooperation, expanded youth exchanges and increased availability of scholarships;

19.  Considers that further efforts should be made to include Ukraine in the EU’s energy market via the Energy Community; underlines the fact that it is for the Ukrainian people – and only for them – to decide, free from foreign interference, on the geopolitical orientation of the country and on which international agreements and communities Ukraine should join;

20.  Calls on Russia to adopt a constructive attitude and to stop retaliatory measures and undue pressure aimed at undermining the sovereign right of its neighbours freely to determine their future; urges the EU and its Member States to speak to Russia with one voice in support of the European aspirations of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries that freely choose to deepen their relations with the EU; emphasises that applying political, economic and other coercion is in breach of the Helsinki Final Act and the 1994 Budapest Memorandum concerning Ukraine’s security; points out that both the EU and Russia bear responsibility for making an active contribution towards peace and prosperity in the common neighbourhood that benefits both the EU and Russia; reiterates its belief that cooperation to achieve this goal is the only way forward;

21.  Supports the further involvement of civil society in national reform processes; encourages enhanced interparliamentary cooperation with the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly; welcomes the involvement of the Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of the Eastern Partnership;

22.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign and Security Policy, the Member States, the President of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Government, the Verkhovna Rada, the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, and the Parliamentary Assemblies of the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0595. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0446. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0383.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the situation in Syria (2014/2531(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0099 RC-B7-0141/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Syria,

–  having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions on Syria, in particular those of 20 January 2014; having regard to the European Council conclusions on Syria,

–  having regard to the statements by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR), Catherine Ashton, on Syria, and in particular her remarks at the Geneva II Conference on Syria of 22 January 2014, and to her statement on the decision of the General Assembly of the Syrian Opposition Coalition to attend the Geneva II Conference of 18 January 2014,

–  having regard to UN Security Council resolution 2118 of 27 September 2013 on the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons; having regard to the final report of the United Nations Mission to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic, published on 12 December 2013,

–  having regard to the statements by the Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, Kristalina Georgieva, on Syria,

–  having regard to the resolution of the UN Human Rights Council of 24 September 2013 on the continuing grave deterioration of the human rights and humanitarian situation in the Syrian Arab Republic,

–  having regard to the 6th Report of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic of 11 September 2013,

–  having regard to the final communiqué of the Action Group for Syria (‘the Geneva Communiqué’) of 30 June 2012; having regard to the Geneva II meeting launched on 22 January 2014 and the opening and concluding remarks by the UN Secretary-General,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to Syria’s international obligations, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocol thereto on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,

–  having regard to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the additional protocols thereto,

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas violence in Syria is escalating further and the death toll is constantly rising; whereas, according to the United Nations, since the start of the violent crackdown on peaceful protesters in Syria, more than 130 000 people, most of them civilians, have been killed; whereas according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), an estimated 9 million people are in need of humanitarian aid inside Syria, including more than 6,5 million people internally displaced and there are more than 2.3 million Syrian refugees, mainly in Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Iraq;

B.  whereas the dramatic human rights, humanitarian and security situation continues to deteriorate; whereas human rights are being violated on a large scale by the Assad regime and hard-line groups supporting the regime, including massacres and other unlawful killings, arbitrary arrests and unlawful detentions, hostage-taking, enforced disappearances, executions of prisoners, systematic torture and ill-treatment, sexual violence and violations of children’s rights; whereas the Syrian regime has demolished entire neighbourhoods, as a collective punishment policy towards civilians; whereas the large-scale destruction of urban areas has led to desperation and significant expulsions of civilians;

C.  whereas there is evidence of summary extrajudicial executions and other forms of human rights violations committed by forces opposing the Assad regime; whereas up to 2 000 different factions are fighting the Assad regime, including many organised criminal elements; whereas the presence and infiltration of al-Qaeda-linked militant groups such as ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, also including many fighters of foreign and EU origin with a radical Islamist agenda, is increasing; whereas radicalisation is a big danger in the region;

D.  whereas the increasing interference by foreign actors, their military supplies and political support, and the persistence of division in the international community, including the UNSC, are transforming the conflict into a proxy war;

E.  whereas a photographer who defected from the Syrian military police delivered 55 000 digital images of some 11 000 victims to the Syrian National Movement, which suggested widespread and systemic violations of international humanitarian law by the regime; whereas a team of high-level international legal experts examined the images and concluded that ‘upon the material it has reviewed there is clear evidence, capable of being believed by a tribunal of fact in a court of law, of systemic torture and killing of detained persons by the agents of the Syrian government’ and that such evidence would support findings of crimes against humanity and could also support findings of war crimes;

F.  whereas the violent crisis in Syria has resulted in a humanitarian catastrophe of a scale unprecedented in recent history, with no end in sight; whereas more than half of those affected are children suffering from starvation, malnutrition and disease; whereas the lack of access to food, water, basic health care, hygiene, shelter and education is a critical dimension of this humanitarian catastrophe; whereas the delivery of humanitarian aid is being hindered by the lack of security, denial of access by the Syrian authorities, and infrastructure obstacles;

G.  whereas the 560 000 Palestinian refugees in Syria constitute a particularly vulnerable group affected by the conflict; whereas 250 000 Syrians are stuck in besieged or hard-to-access areas, including 18 000 Palestinian refugees in the Yarmouk refugee camp outside Damascus who are facing mass suffering, with 57 people reportedly having starved to death; whereas following the outcome of negotiations regarding the Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus, some aid has been delivered to its residents, though much more is needed;

H.  whereas the continuous violence has had a dramatic destabilisation effect on neighbouring countries, notably due to the mass refugee flows; whereas these countries are facing tremendous domestic challenges of their own, with Lebanon and Jordan being particularly vulnerable; whereas any descent into violent conflict in Lebanon not only promises a humanitarian crisis, but also entails the risk of a regional collapse;

I.  whereas the Geneva II Conference on Syria was opened by the UN Secretary-General on 22 January 2014, its aim being to achieve a political solution to the conflict through a comprehensive agreement between the Syrian Government and opposition for the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, which called for the creation of a transitional government leading to the holding of elections; whereas the constructive participation of all relevant actors in the peace process is crucial to achieving a lasting political solution; whereas, on 18 January 2014, the General Assembly of the Syrian Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition Forces decided to accept the invitation to join this process, but several rebel groups were not represented; whereas Iran was invited and then disinvited to the conference held in Switzerland; whereas negotiations were suspended on 31 January 2014 and the next round of talks is planned for 10 February 2014; whereas fighting continues during the Geneva II talks;

J.  whereas on 15 January 2014 the Second International Pledging Conference for Syria took place in Kuwait, raising USD 2.4 billion in pledges, but this sum still falls short of the vast humanitarian need which has been estimated at USD 6,5 billion by various UN bodies; whereas EU funding for humanitarian assistance to Syria and neighbouring countries has reached EUR 1,1 billion;

K.  whereas a large number of peaceful civil society activists, human rights defenders, intellectuals, religious figures including two kidnapped bishops Ioann Ibrahim and Bulos Jazigi, journalists and medical professionals are subject to harassment, arrest, torture or disappearance at the hands of the Syrian regime, and increasingly also of the several rebel groups; whereas 2011 Sakharov laureate Razan Zeitouneh was abducted alongside her husband and other human rights defenders in Damascus in December 2013 and their fate remains unknown;

L.  whereas on 12 December 2013 the Mission to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic concluded that chemical weapons were used against soldiers and/or civilians, including children, in 2013; whereas 27 September 2013 saw the unanimous adoption of UN Security Council resolution 2118(2013), which inter alia, endorsed the expeditious destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons programme, to be completed by 30 June 2014; whereas only 5 % of the total stockpile has been shipped out of the country for destruction; whereas, however, the overwhelming majority of deaths and injuries are caused by conventional weapons; whereas barrel bombs have been used on a large scale by the Assad regime in recent months, claiming massive casualties;

M.  whereas asylum claims in the EU from Syrians have continued to increase over the past year and the Syrian refugee crisis constitutes a first test for the newly revised Common European Asylum System;

N.  whereas, in its resolution of 9 October 2013, Parliament encouraged the Member States to address acute needs by providing safe entry into the EU in order to temporarily admit Syrians and through resettlement in addition to existing national quotas and through humanitarian admission;

1.  Strongly condemns the widespread violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by the Assad regime, including all acts of violence, systematic torture and execution of prisoners; condemns any human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law by armed groups opposing the regime; strongly condemns all violations and abuses committed against children and women, especially sexual abuse and violence, including in the name of jihad (Jihad al-Nikah); strongly condemns the increasing number of terrorist attacks, resulting in numerous casualties and destruction, carried out by extremist organisations and individuals associated with Al-Qaeda; calls for the cessation of all hostilities in Syria; stresses that those responsible for the widespread, systemic and gross human rights violations committed in Syria must be held accountable and brought to justice, and supports the EU’s call on all foreign fighters in Syria, including Hezbollah, to withdraw immediately, and to cease all external funding and support;

2.  Extends its condolences to the victims’ families; applauds the courage of the Syrian people and reiterates its solidarity with their struggle for freedom, dignity and democracy;

3.  Expresses its concern at the increasing involvement of extremist Islamist groups and foreign fighters in the conflict in Syria, the rise of religiously and ethnically motivated violence in the country, and the continued fragmentation and internal divisions within the opposition; continues to encourage the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces to create a more united, inclusive and organised opposition front both internally and externally;

4.  Reiterates its position that the political solution should safeguard the unity, territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Syria;

5.  Fully supports the Geneva II Conference on Syria, which should be the first step in a process that will lead to a political and democratic solution to the conflict, and stresses the fundamental importance of keeping the Geneva II process going; welcomes the efforts of UN Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi in enabling this first, direct interaction between the warring parties; is convinced that a lasting solution to the current crisis in Syria can only be achieved through a Syrian-led, inclusive political process with the backing of the international community; underlines the need for a genuine political transition in the country, thereby addressing the people’s aspiration for freedom and democracy; reiterates its call for President Assad to step aside;

6.  Notes the crucial importance of confidence-building measures in this context; urges the negotiating delegations, therefore, to agree on and implement local ceasefires, the lifting of sieges on certain urban areas, including Homs, the release or exchange of prisoners and the facilitation of humanitarian access to civilians in need, as stepping stones to substantive negotiations on the basis of the Geneva Communiqué; notes that no serious breakthrough or major change in the position of either side was witnessed during the first talks; notes also the importance of involving all key international actors concerned in the Geneva II process; takes the view that a long-term rapprochement between the West and Iran may help to produce a regional context conducive to the reconciliation process in Syria;

7.  Welcomes the progress and the international cooperation as regards the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons, and calls for full implementation of the decision of the Executive Council of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons of 27 September 2013; is concerned at reports that, by the end of January 2014, only 5 % of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile had been removed from the country for destruction, and urges the Syrian authorities to abide by the timetable laid down in UNSC resolution 2118 (2013); calls for particular attention to be paid to the environmental safety of the destruction process and the management of the remaining waste; emphasises, however, that the overwhelming majority of the deaths and injuries that have occurred in the violent crisis in Syria have been caused by conventional weapons;

8.  Stresses that, in view of the unprecedented scale of the crisis, alleviating the suffering of millions of Syrians in need of basic goods and services must be a priority for the EU and the international community at large; calls for an urgent UNSC humanitarian resolution on this subject; calls in particular on Russia and China, as permanent members of the UNSC, to fulfil their responsibilities and facilitate the adoption of a humanitarian resolution; urges again the EU and its Member States to live up to their humanitarian responsibilities and increase their assistance to Syrian refugees, and to coordinate their efforts more effectively in this field; condemns the consistent thwarting of attempts to deliver humanitarian aid and calls on all parties involved in the conflict, and in particular the Assad regime, to facilitate the provision of humanitarian aid and assistance through all possible channels, including across borders and conflict lines, and to ensure the safety of all medical personnel and humanitarian workers;

9.  Recalls that under international humanitarian law the wounded and sick must receive, to the fullest extent practicable and with the least possible delay, the medical care and attention required by their condition; highlights the fact that deliberate starvation of civilians and attacks on health facilities are prohibited under international law and will be considered war crimes;

10.  Reiterates its call for the establishment of safe havens along the Turkish-Syrian border, and possibly within Syria, and for the creation of humanitarian corridors by the international community;

11.  Calls for the immediate, unconditional and safe release of all political prisoners, medical personnel, humanitarian workers, journalists, religious figures and human rights activists, including 2011 Sakharov Prize winner Razan Zeitouneh, and for coordinated EU action to secure her release; calls on all parties to ensure their safety; urges the Syrian Government to grant immediate and unfettered access to all its detention facilities for international documentation bodies, including the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria;

12.  Condemns the intimidation and attacks against peaceful activists and journalists; regrets the existence of web censorship and limited access to blogs and social networks; recalls that safeguarding freedom of expression, the protection of journalists and a free and independent media sector are fundamental elements in the democratic political process; stresses also the importance of strengthening civil society actors in Syria, and of the active and meaningful participation of women, young people and civil society representatives in the Geneva II process and in the rebuilding of the country;

13.  Stresses the importance of all actors providing protection to particularly vulnerable groups in Syrian society, such as ethnic and religious minorities, including Christians, in the current crisis, and of their participation in the Geneva II process, with the aim of preserving the tradition of intercultural, interethnic and interreligious coexistence in the country for a future new Syria;

14.  Calls for zero tolerance with regard to the killing, abduction and recruitment of children in particular, and calls on all parties to the conflict to comply fully with UNSC resolution 1612 (2005) of 26 July 2005 on children and armed conflicts; underlines also the importance of preventing acts of sexual and gender-based violence and of providing appropriate support to victims; stresses, in this context, the importance of early response programmes in respect of gender-based violence (GBV); welcomes also the ‘No Lost Generation’ initiative of the UN and its humanitarian partners, which aims to heal the wounds of Syrian children and to preserve their future, and encourages the EU to actively support this initiative;

15.  Calls for special attention to be paid to the situation of Palestinian refugees in Syria, and particularly the alarming humanitarian situation in the Yarmouk refugee camp; calls on all the parties involved in the conflict to allow the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and other international aid organisations immediate and unconditional access to this camp, with the aim of alleviating the extreme suffering of its population;

16.  Continues to support the work of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, established by the UN Human Rights Council, and reiterates its call for the UNSC to refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court for a formal investigation; asks the Vice-President / High Representative (VP/HR) to take action in this direction;

17.  Pays tribute to host communities and to Syria’s neighbouring countries, in particular Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt, for their resourcefulness in providing shelter and humanitarian aid to families fleeing the armed conflict in Syria; reiterates its grave concern regarding the humanitarian, social, economic, political and security impact of the Syrian crisis on the entire region, especially Lebanon and Jordan; recalls that a cohesive response is needed to support the host countries, including humanitarian, development, and macroeconomic assistance, and reiterates its calls for the EU to convene a humanitarian conference on the Syrian refugee crisis, with priority being given to actions directed at host countries in the region so as to support them in their efforts to host ever-growing refugee populations and maintain an open-door policy;

18.  Stresses that the crisis in Syria requires a coherent common approach by the EU and its Member States in the field of humanitarian aid delivery and beyond, and continues to support VP/HR Catherine Ashton and Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva in their efforts to ensure better coordination in this field;

19.  Welcomes the USD 2,4 billion in pledges raised in Kuwait and calls on the donors to fulfil their promises and deliver on those pledges in a swift manner; welcomes the commitments made by the EU and its Member States, as the biggest donor in terms of financial aid and future pledges; notes, however, that further significant efforts are required in order to meet the humanitarian needs in Syria, and calls, therefore, for additional financial contributions from international actors;

20.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice‑President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the parliaments and governments of the Member States, the Secretary‑General of the United Nations, the UN-Arab League Special Envoy to Syria, the Parliament and Government of Iraq, the Parliament and Government of Jordan, the Parliament and Government of Lebanon, the Parliament and Government of Turkey, the Parliament and Government of Egypt, the Parliament and Government of Russia, the Parliament and Government of China, and all the parties involved in the conflict in Syria.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the situation in Egypt (2014/2532(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0100 RC-B7-0145/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Egypt, in particular that of 12 September 2013 on the situation in Egypt(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on ‘the European Neighbourhood Policy: towards a strengthening of the partnership. Position of the European Parliament on the 2012 reports’(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 May 2013 on asset recovery by Arab Spring countries in transition(3),

–  having regard to the statements by Vice-President / High Representative Catherine Ashton of 24 January 2014 on the recent violent attacks in Egypt, of 19 January 2014 on the constitutional referendum in Egypt, of 11 January 2014 on the situation in Egypt ahead of the constitutional referendum, of 24 December 2013 on the car bombs in Mansoura, Egypt, and of 23 December 2013 on the sentencing of political activists in Egypt,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 8 February 2013 on the Arab Spring,

–  having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions of 22 July and 21 August 2013 on Egypt,

–  having regard to the EU-Egypt Association Agreement of 2001, which entered into force in 2004, strengthened by the Action Plan of 2007, and to the Commission’s progress report on its implementation of 20 March 2013,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, to which Egypt is a party,

–  having regard to the Constitutional Declaration issued in Egypt on 8 July 2013, proposing a roadmap for constitutional amendments and new elections,

–  having regard to the Constitution of Egypt, drafted by the Constitutional Committee and adopted by referendum on 14 and 15 January 2014,

–  having regard to the Egyptian interim Government’s ‘Programme to Sustain the Path to Democracy’,

–  having regard to Egyptian Law 107 on the Right to Public Meetings, Processions and Peaceful Demonstrations of 24 November 2013,

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 1 December 2013 interim President Adly Mansour approved the new Egyptian constitution agreed by the Constitutional Committee, composed of 50 experts, including a wide range of political and religious representatives but with no representative of the Muslim Brotherhood;

B.  whereas on 14 and 15 January 2014 the referendum on the constitution took place, with a 38,6 % turnout and 98,1 % support for the constitution; whereas the run-up to the referendum was marred by acts of violence and the harassment and arrest of activists campaigning for a ‘no’ vote, which led to a one-sided public debate ahead of the referendum; whereas according to a statement by Vice-President / High Representative Catherine Ashton ‘while the EU is not in a position to make a thorough assessment of the conduct of the referendum or verify alleged irregularities, these do not appear to have fundamentally affected the outcome’;

C.  whereas the new constitution of Egypt has many positive elements, in the fields of fundamental freedoms and human rights, the protection of minorities, and women’s rights in particular, but also includes articles that exempt the armed forces from civilian oversight and their budget from parliamentary scrutiny, and allow military judges to try civilians, while another article restricts the freedom of practising religious rituals and establishing places of worship to the followers of the Abrahamic religions;

D.  whereas political tensions and the deep polarisation of society continue to provoke terrorist attacks and violent clashes in Egypt; whereas since July 2013 more than a thousand people have lost their lives and many more have been injured in clashes between protesters and security forces and between opponents and supporters of former President Morsi; whereas the security forces have reportedly been using excessive force against protesters and thousands have been arrested and detained, while the practice of impunity continues to prevail; whereas on 12 November 2013 the state of emergency was lifted in the country;

E.  whereas the constitutional declaration of 8 July 2013 defined a political roadmap for Egypt; whereas, contrary to the roadmap, Egyptian interim President Adly Mansour has since called for presidential elections to take place first; whereas the programme of the interim government affirmed its commitment to working towards building a democratic system which guarantees the rights and freedoms of all Egyptians, and to completing this roadmap with the full participation of all political players and a referendum on the new constitution, to be followed by free and fair parliamentary and presidential elections to be held in due time in accordance with all legislative rules;

F.  whereas violations of fundamental freedoms and human rights remain widespread in Egypt; whereas violence, incitement and harassment against political opponents, journalists and civil society activists further increased in the run-up to the referendum; whereas many political and civil society activists, including Alaa Abdel Fattah, Mohamed Abdel from the Egyptian Centre for Economic and Social Rights, and Ahmed Maher and Ahmed Douma, leaders of the April 6 movement, as well as members of various political parties, were arrested and convicted over the past weeks; whereas on 12 January 2014 the Egyptian National Council for Human Rights released a report after having visited the aforementioned prominent activists in Tora prison, criticising their conditions of detention and calling for an end to their mistreatment; whereas the Committee for the Protection of Journalists has reported that since July 2013 at least five journalists have been killed and 45 assaulted, 11 news outlets have been raided, and at least 44 journalists have been detained without charge under lengthy pre-trial procedures; whereas on 29 January 2014, 20 Al-Jazeera journalists, of whom eight are now in detention and three are Europeans, were charged with belonging to a ‘terrorist organisation’ or ‘spreading false news’;

G.  whereas the Muslim Brotherhood has repeatedly refused to participate in the political process announced by the interim government and called for a boycott of the referendum, while several of its leaders continue inciting to violence against state authorities and security forces; whereas the Egyptian interim authorities have banned the Muslim Brotherhood, imprisoned its leaders, seized its assets, silenced its media, and criminalised its membership, while the movement’s Freedom and Justice Party continues to exist; whereas former President Morsi has been detained since 3 July 2013 and faces multiple criminal charges;

H.  whereas fundamental freedoms and human rights, as well as social justice and a higher standard of living for citizens, are crucial dimensions of the transition towards an open, free, democratic and prosperous Egyptian society; whereas independent trade unions and civil society organisations have a crucial role to play in this process, and free media form a crucial part of society in any democracy; whereas Egyptian women continue to be in a particularly vulnerable situation in the current period of political and social transition in the country;

I.  whereas tensions between jihadists and Coptic Christians have increased in Egypt since the removal from power of President Morsi last summer and have led to the destruction of scores of Coptic Christian churches; whereas 2013 in Egypt saw the highest number of incidents involving Christians in the world, with at least 167 cases reported in the media; whereas there were nearly 500 attempts to close or destroy churches in the country and at least 83 cases of religiously motivated killings of Christians;

J.  whereas the security situation has further deteriorated and acts of terrorism and violent attacks against security forces have further intensified in Sinai; whereas, according to official data, at least 95 security personnel have died in violent attacks since 30 June 2013;

K.  whereas thousands of people, mainly refugees from Eritrea and Somalia, including many women and children, are losing their lives, are disappearing, or are being kidnapped and held hostage for ransom, tortured, sexually exploited or killed for organ trade by human traffickers in this area;

L.  whereas Law 107 on the Right to Public Meetings, Processions and Peaceful Demonstrations of 24 November 2013 provoked widespread and strong criticism in Egypt and beyond; whereas Vice-President / High Representative Catherine Ashton, in her statement of 23 December 2013, said this law was widely seen as excessively limiting freedom of expression and assembly; whereas peaceful protests were dispersed and many protesters were arrested and detained under this law over the past weeks;

M.  whereas Egypt’s economy is in great difficulty; whereas since 2011 the unemployment rate has risen and poverty rates worsened; whereas economic prosperity in the country requires political stability, sound economic policies, action to fight corruption, and international support; whereas political, economic and social developments in Egypt have significant implications for the whole region and beyond;

N.  whereas, in line with its reviewed European Neighbourhood Policy and notably the ‘more for more’ approach, the EU’s level and scope of engagement with Egypt is incentive-based and therefore dependent on progress with regard to the country’s respecting its commitments, including those on democracy, the rule of law, human rights and gender equality;

1.  Expresses again its strong solidarity with the Egyptian people and continues to support their legitimate democratic aspirations and efforts to secure a peaceful democratic transition towards political, economic and social reforms;

2.  Strongly condemns all acts of violence, terrorism, incitement, harassment, hate speech and censorship; urges all political actors and security forces to show the utmost restraint and avoid provocation, with the aim of avoiding further violence in the best interests of the country; extends its sincere condolences to the families of the victims;

3.  Urges the Egyptian interim authorities and security forces to ensure the security of all citizens, irrespective of their political views, affiliation or confession, to uphold the rule of law and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, to protect the freedoms of association, of peaceful assembly, of expression and of the press, to commit to dialogue and non-violence, and to respect and fulfil the country’s international obligations;

4.  Takes note of the new Constitution of Egypt, approved by the referendum held on 14 and 15 January 2014, which should be an important step forward in the country’s troubled transition to democracy; welcomes the new Egyptian constitution’s reference to a civilian government, freedom of belief and the equality of all citizens, including the improvement of women’s rights, the provision on children’s rights, the ban on torture in all its forms and manifestations, the prohibition and criminalisation of all forms of slavery and the commitment to abide by international human rights treaties signed by Egypt; calls for full and effective implementation of the provisions on fundamental freedoms – including the freedoms of assembly, association and expression – and human rights in the new constitution, as well as for all existing and future legislation in these fields to be in compliance with it;

5.  Expresses, however, its concern over certain articles in the new Constitution, with special regard to those related to the status of the armed forces, including the following: Article 202, which declares that the Minister of Defence, who is also the Commander-in-Chief, shall be appointed from among the armed forces’ officers; Article 203 on the budget of the armed forces; Article 204 allowing the trial of civilians by military judges in case of crimes of direct assaults against military installations, military zones, military equipment, military documents and secrets, public funds of the armed forces, military factories, and military personnel, as well as in case of crimes pertaining to military service; and Article 234 declaring that the Minister of Defence shall be appointed upon the approval of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which provision shall remain in force for two full presidential terms, with no indication on how and by whom the minister can be removed from office;

6.  Underlines the fact that the constitutional referendum constituted an opportunity to build national consensus, reconciliation and institutional and political stability for the country; takes note of the overwhelming majority support for the new constitution, the relatively low turnout and the reports of alleged irregularities during the vote; strongly regrets the violent clashes before, during and after the referendum, which lead to deaths and injuries;

7.  Condemns all acts of violence and intimidation, and calls on all actors and the security forces to show restraint, with the aim of preventing further loss of life or injury and in the best interests of the country; urges the Egyptian interim government to ensure that there are prompt, independent, serious and impartial investigations in all such cases and that those responsible are held accountable; reminds the interim government of its responsibility to ensure the security of all Egyptian citizens, regardless of their political views or religious affiliation, as well as the non-partisan accountability of those responsible for violence, incitement to violence, or human rights violations;

8.  Stresses again that reconciliation and a civilian-led inclusive political process, with the participation of all democratic political actors, are crucial elements of the democratic transition in Egypt, and that holding free and fair parliamentary and presidential elections within the timeframe defined by the new Constitution – leading to adequate representation of different political views and of women and minority communities – is another crucial step in this process; encourages all political and social actors, including the supporters of former President Morsi, to avoid any act of violence, incitement to violence, or provocation, and to contribute to reconciliation efforts; calls for the release of all political detainees held for peacefully exercising their right to freedom of assembly, association and expression; stresses the importance of free and fair trials for all those detained; suggests reforming the judicial authority law to ensure a genuine separation of powers;

9.  Calls for an immediate end to all acts of violence, harassment or intimidation – by state authorities, security forces or other groups – against political opponents, peaceful protesters, trade union representatives, journalists, women’s rights activists, and other civil society actors in Egypt; calls for serious and impartial investigations in such cases and for those responsible to be brought to justice; calls again on the interim government to guarantee that domestic and international civil society organisations, independent trade unions and journalists can operate freely, without government interference, in the country;

10.  Is concerned about Law 107 of 2013 on Regulating the Right to Public Gatherings, Processions and Peaceful Protests, and urges the Egyptian interim authorities to reform or repeal this law in order to guarantee the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and abidance by international standards and obligations;

11.  Condemns the recent terrorist attacks against security forces in Egypt; is deeply concerned about the further deterioration of the security situation in Sinai, and calls for intensified efforts by the Egyptian interim government and security forces to restore security, in particular by fighting human traffickers, in this area; recalls, in this context, that Article 89 of the new Constitution declares that all forms of slavery, oppression, forced exploitation of human beings, sex trade, and other forms of human trafficking are prohibited and criminalised by law in Egypt;

12.  Strongly condemns the violence against the Coptic community and the destruction of a large number of churches, community centres and businesses throughout the country; expresses concern that the authorities failed to take adequate security measures to protect the Coptic community in spite of many warnings;

13.  Requests that the Council place Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, the group which claimed responsibility for several recent attacks and bombings in the Sinai as well as in Cairo and elsewhere, on its list of designated terrorist organisations;

14.  Calls on the Egyptian interim authorities to develop, adopt and implement legislation to combat all forms of gender-based violence, including marital rape and sexual violence against women participating in protests and demonstrations; calls, furthermore, on the Egyptian interim authorities to ensure effective and accessible reporting channels and protection measures that are sensitive to victims’ needs and confidentiality; urges for an end to be put to impunity and for appropriate criminal sanctions against perpetrators to be ensured;

15.  Welcomes the willingness that has been announced on the part of the Egyptian interim Government, following the recommendation by the Egyptian National Council for Human Rights, to open a regional office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Cairo, and urges the Egyptian interim Government to do the necessary to speed up the opening of this office;

16.  Welcomes and supports the efforts of Vice‑President / High Representative Catherine Ashton and Special Representative Bernardino León to mediate between the parties with the aim of brokering a way out of the current political crisis; urges again the Council, the VP/HR and the Commission to take into consideration both the principle of conditionality (‘more for more’) and the serious economic challenges faced by Egypt in its bilateral relations with, and its financial support for, the country; reiterates its call for clear and jointly agreed benchmarks in this regard; reaffirms its commitment to assisting the Egyptian people in the process of moving towards democratic and economic reform;

17.  Calls on Vice‑President / High Representative Catherine Ashton to make public the report of the EU Expert Electoral Mission that monitored the constitutional referendum in Egypt on 14 and 15 January 2014;

18.  Invites the Egyptian Government to request the deployment of an EU Election Observation Mission to monitor the upcoming presidential elections;

19.  Stresses again that facilitating the return of assets stolen by former dictators and their regimes is a moral imperative for the EU and is a highly political issue, by reason of its symbolic value, in the Union’s relations with its southern neighbourhood;

20.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the parliaments and governments of the Member States, and the interim government of the Arab Republic of Egypt.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0379. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0446. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0224.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the EU-Russia summit (2014/2533(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0101 RC-B7-0150/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Russia,

–  having regard to the existing Agreement on partnership and cooperation (PCA) establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Russian Federation, of the other part, and to the ongoing negotiations for a new EU‑Russia agreement,

–  having regard to the ‘Partnership for Modernisation’ initiated in 2010 at Rostov-on-Don and to the commitment made by the Russian leadership to the rule of law as a fundamental basis for the modernisation of Russia,

–  having regard to the objective shared by the EU and Russia, set out in the joint statement issued on 31 May 2003 following the 11th EU-Russia summit held in St Petersburg, of creating a common economic space, a common space of freedom, security and justice, a common space of cooperation in the field of external security and a common space of research and education, including cultural aspects (the ‘four common spaces’),

–  having regard to the EU-Russia human rights consultations of 28 November 2013,

–  having regard to the Eastern Partnership Summit of 28 and 29 November 2013,

–  having regard to the EU-Russia summit of 28 January 2014,

–  having regard to the statement by the President of the Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso, and the remarks by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, following the EU-Russia summit of 28 January 2014,

–  having regard to the joint EU-Russia statement of 28 January 2014 on combating terrorism,

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the EU remains committed to further deepening and developing EU-Russia relations, as is shown by its commitment to seriously engage in negotiating a new framework agreement for their further development, and whereas the EU and Russia have established deep and comprehensive relations, particularly in the energy, economic and business sectors;

B.  whereas the EU-Russia summit of 28 January 2014 was reduced to a three-hour restricted meeting that focused on a limited number of issues, reflecting the challenges in EU-Russia relations, mostly as a result of Russia’s pressure on Eastern Partners;

C.  whereas enhanced cooperation and good-neighbourly relations between the EU and Russia are crucial for the stability, security and prosperity of Europe and, in particular, the common neighbourhood; whereas the development of a strategic partnership between the EU and the Russian Federation can only be built on shared common values; whereas it is of the utmost importance to step up cooperation at international level between the two partners in all institutions, organisations and forums with a view to improving global governance and addressing common challenges;

D.  whereas there remains concern over developments in the Russian Federation with regard to respect for and protection of human rights and respect for commonly agreed democratic principles and the rule of law; whereas the Russian Federation is a full member of the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and has therefore committed itself to the principles of democracy and respect for human rights;

E.  whereas at the Vilnius Eastern Partnership Summit all participants reconfirmed their commitment to the principles of international law and to fundamental values including democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights;

F.  whereas good-neighbourly relations, peace and stability in their common neighbouring countries are in the interests of both Russia and the EU; whereas an open, frank and result‑oriented dialogue should develop on the crises in these countries with regard, in particular, to the frozen conflicts, with a view to strengthening security and stability, supporting the territorial integrity of the countries concerned and developing joint crisis management mechanisms;

G.  whereas Eastern Partnership countries have the full sovereign right and freedom to build relations, as equal partners, with partners of their choice, in line with the Helsinki Accords;

H.  whereas the process of borderisation around Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia has accelerated and become hostile, with the support of Russian forces and to the detriment of the Georgian territories;

I.  whereas, as of 1 December 2013, Advanced Passenger Information (API) data is being transferred by air carriers to the Russian authorities, and whereas from 1 July 2014 full passenger and crew data will be required by the Russian authorities for overflights; whereas the Russian authorities are aiming to establish a fully fledged Passenger Name Record collection system;

1.  Takes note of the EU-Russia summit of 28 January 2014 as an opportunity to reflect on the nature and direction of the EU-Russia Strategic Partnership and to clarify points of disagreement; notes that the reduced format of the EU-Russia summit is a reflection of the current state of affairs in EU-Russia relations, which allows for a pragmatic exchange on topical issues while also symbolising the challenges EU-Russia cooperation currently faces; expects that the discussions will lead to improved mutual trust and create conditions for a renewed political impetus to move the partnership forward;

2.  Reaffirms its belief that Russia remains one of the EU’s most important partners in building strategic cooperation, sharing not only economic and trade interests but also aspiring to the realisation of commonly agreed democratic values; stresses that progress in bilateral relations requires an open discussion to clarify issues of mutual disagreement;

3.  Underlines the need for a sustained and constructive dialogue to discuss developments in our common neighbourhood, along with different regional economic integration initiatives, and in particular their trade implications, on the basis of existing World Trade Organisation (WTO) commitments; encourages the EU and Russia to find ways of making the respective regional integration processes more compatible, while continuing to work towards a vision of a common trade and economic zone in the future;

4.  Reiterates that the EU-Russia dialogue on issues relating to a common neighbourhood must be based on the fundamental principle of sovereignty and the independence of neighbouring countries as regards choosing political and trade alliances; is convinced that further political and economic reform in Eastern Partnership countries, including Ukraine, based on EU values and standards, is ultimately in Russia’s own interest, as it would expand the zone of stability, prosperity and cooperation along its borders; recalls the EU’s standing invitation for Russia to contribute to this process via constructive engagement with the Eastern Partnership countries; opposes Russia’s intention to continue to consider the Eastern Partnership region as its sphere of influence; believes that Ukrainian citizens alone should have the right to decide the future of their country;

5.  Regrets the fact that the Russian leadership regards the EU’s Eastern Partnership as a threat to its own political and economic interests; underlines the fact that, on the contrary, Russia will gain from increased trade and economic activities and that its security will be enhanced by a stable and predictable neighbourhood; stresses the importance of developing synergies so as to allow the countries in the common neighbourhood to benefit from and make the most of bilateral relations with both the EU and the Russian Federation;

6.  Reiterates that, unlike the Customs Union championed by Russia, the EU’s agreements with Eastern Partnership countries on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) do not prohibit the latter from engaging in free trade with third countries; points out, therefore, that, following the signing of an association agreement including a DCFTA, Eastern Partners will still be able to conduct free trade with Russia under the free trade agreements currently signed as part of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS);

7.  Expects, if the conditions are properly prepared, to launch the new agreement negotiations at the next summit, to be held in Sochi in June 2014; regrets the lack of progress in the negotiations on a new PCA to replace the current one, mainly owing to the lack of commitment from the Russian side to engaging in substantial negotiations on the trade chapter; underlines the necessity of maintaining the commitment to the Partnership for Modernisation;

8.  Calls for effective coordination of EU policy responsibility towards Russia in the next term of the European Commission, with a clear and central role for the High Representative / Vice-President and with the Member States committed to speaking to Russia with one voice;

9.  Calls on Russia to comply with all its multilateral obligations deriving from its accession to the WTO and to implement its WTO commitments fully; calls on Russia to refrain from imposing arbitrary bans on products from EU Member States, as such measures are harmful to bilateral relations between individual Member States and Russia, and to EU-Russia relations;

10.  Firmly condemns the recent terrorist attacks in Volgograd; welcomes the adoption of the joint EU-Russia statement of 28 January 2014 on combating terrorism, in which the EU and Russia agreed to consider possibilities for further strengthening cooperation in response to crimes committed by terrorists and organised crime, to expand cooperation in exchanging best practices vis-à-vis counterterrorism and training experts in counterterrorism, and to intensify their cooperation both within the UN framework and in other multilateral forums;

11.  Notes the EU-Russia Common Spaces Progress Reports, which outline progress, or regress, in the implementation of the EU-Russia Common Spaces and of the road maps adopted in 2005; especially supports cooperation in the field of research and development and stresses that the four Common Spaces rely on the principle of reciprocity;

12.  Stresses the importance of energy security and the fact that the supply of natural resources should not be used as a political tool; underlines the mutual importance of collaboration in the energy field, which represents an opportunity for further trade and economic collaboration in an opened and transparent market, with full understanding of the EU’s need to diversify transportation channels and energy providers; stresses that the principles of interdependence and transparency should be the basis for such cooperation, together with equal access to markets, infrastructure and investment; calls for EU-Russia cooperation in the energy field to be based firmly on the principles of the internal market, including the Third Energy Package, in particular with regard to third-party access, and of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT); is convinced that full acceptance of the principles of the ECT by Russia would have mutually beneficial effects on bilateral energy relations; calls for close cooperation between the EU and Russia regarding the supply of raw materials and rare earths, especially those considered critical, and calls for compliance with international rules, especially WTO rules;

13.  Urges the Russian Federation to step up its contribution to addressing climate change; calls, in particular, on Russia to take on a second commitment period target by ratifying the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change;

14.  Reiterates its commitment to the long-term objective of visa-free travel between the EU and Russia, on the basis of a step-by-step approach focused on substance and practical progress; notes that negotiations on an upgraded visa facilitation agreement are ongoing, while the implementation of the ‘common steps towards visa-free short-term travel’ is under way; expresses its concern over the plans to include a great number of Russian officials with ‘service passports’ of convenience in the visa facilitation agreement;

15.  Expresses its concern over developments in the Russian Federation with regard to respect for and the protection of human rights and respect for commonly agreed democratic principles, rules and procedures, particularly as regards the law on foreign agents, the anti-LGBT legislation, the recriminalisation of defamation, the treason law and the legislation regulating public protests; urges Russia to abide by its international commitments as a member of the Council of Europe;

16.  Welcomes the recent cases of amnesty and underlines the fact that a clear and reliable understanding of fundamental freedoms, human rights and the rule of law will help further advance our strategic partnership; emphasises that an independent, impartial and efficient justice system is a core element of the rule of law and contributes greatly to the development of a reliable and stable business environment and investment climate;

17.  Reiterates its concern about the overall human rights situation in Russia and the absence of any evolution on the modalities of the EU-Russia human rights consultations; regrets, in particular, the fact that this dialogue has become a process rather than a means to achieve measurable and tangible results; insists once more on the need to include public indicators of progress in these human rights consultations, to improve the dialogue’s modalities, for example by alternating the location of the consultations, through interaction between Russian NGOs and the Russian authorities as part of this process and on the composition of the Russian delegation, and to issue public assessments of progress on the occasion of EU‑Russia summits and following the Partnership Council meetings;

18.  Calls on Russia to repeal fully the federal law on ‘propaganda for non-traditional sexual relations’ and similar regional anti-propaganda laws which curtail human rights, notably freedom of expression and assembly in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity; expresses its sincere concern over the negative consequences of these laws on society, with discrimination and violence against LGBTI individuals increasing; calls on the EU Delegation to increase its support for defenders of the human rights of LGBTI people, in line with the relevant guidelines;

19.  Reiterates its call on the Commission, with a view to the ongoing programming of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) and the Civil Society Organisations and Local Authorities (CSO-LA) financial instrument, to significantly step up efforts to provide assistance to the oppressed civil society by doubling its financial allocations to the country;

20.  Stresses that regular political dialogue meetings on a wide range of foreign policy issues are an essential element in EU-Russia relations; states that Russia, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council (UNSC), must assume its responsibility in international crises; calls on Russia to take a very constructive approach at the Geneva II Conference on Syria, where the aim is to achieve a political solution to the conflict; welcomes Russia’s efforts, together with the USA and the international community, to approve a UNSC resolution regarding the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons and the launch of the Geneva II talks;

21.  Underlines the importance of dialogue and cooperation with Russia on global questions with a view to tackling effectively issues such as Afghanistan, the work of the Middle East Quartet and anti-piracy efforts off the Horn of Africa; encourages the deepening and strengthening of this cooperation, aiming at joint action regarding Iran’s nuclear programme;

22.  Calls on Russia to reverse its recognition of the separation of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali / South Ossetia; strongly condemns the process of borderisation around Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, which has led to the expansion of the area of occupied territories, to the detriment of Georgia; calls on Georgia and Russia to engage in direct talks without preconditions on a range of subjects, with mediation, if needed, by a mutually acceptable third party, which should complement, but not replace, the existing Geneva process;

23.  Calls on the Russian Federation to fulfil the commitments made in 1996 in the Council of Europe and reflected in OSCE Summit decisions (in Istanbul in 1999 and Oporto in 2002) concerning the withdrawal of Russian troops and arms from the territory of Moldova; expresses concern over the lack of progress on this issue; underlines the fact that all sides of the 5+2 talks have committed to solving the conflict on the basis of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova; calls on Russia to play a constructive role in efforts to resolve the protracted conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, in the framework of the Minsk Group;

24.  Believes that renewed efforts are needed to advance cooperation and dialogue between the EU and Russia on matters of regional security, including the resolution of protracted conflicts in the neighbourhood;

25.  Underlines the importance of fostering EU-Russia intercultural dialogue and knowledge of each other’s history and cultural heritage, as well as encouraging the mobility and exchange of students, teachers, professors and researchers in order to facilitate people-to-people contacts that would provide a visible and tangible testimony to a sustainable partnership leading in the long term to a community of values;

26.  Appeals to the Russian authorities to cooperate in opening up Russian archives, enabling access for researchers and declassifying relevant documents, including in relation to the fate of Raoul Wallenberg, who 70 years ago saved thousands of Hungarian Jews from genocide;

27.  Welcomes the work of the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee as a platform for the development of cooperation and for continued dialogue between the two parliamentary institutions;

28.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the governments and parliaments of the Eastern Partnership countries, the President, Government and Parliament of the Russian Federation, the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the 2013 progress report on Bosnia and Herzegovina (2013/2884(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0102 B7-0074/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), of the other part, signed on 16 June 2008 and ratified by all EU Member States and Bosnia and Herzegovina,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 19 and 20 June 2003 on the Western Balkans and to the annex thereto entitled ‘The Thessaloniki Agenda for the Western Balkans: moving towards European integration’,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 11 December 2012 and 21 October 2013 on Bosnia and Herzegovina,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 16 October 2013 entitled ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2013-2014’ (COM(2013)0700), accompanied by Commission Staff Working Document of 16 October 2013 entitled ‘Bosnia and Herzegovina: 2013 Progress Report’ SWD(2013)0415 ,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions, in particular those of 23 May 2013 on the 2012 Progress Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina(1) and of 22 November 2012 on Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests(2),

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the EU continues to be strongly committed to a sovereign and united BiH and to the country’s membership prospects;

B.  whereas the complex and inefficient institutional architecture deriving from Annex 4 of the Dayton Agreement, as well as the inaction of the BiH political leaders and their inability to compromise, have continued to have a negative impact on the country’s capacity to progress towards the EU and to improve citizens’ lives; whereas constitutional reform towards a functioning and inclusive democratic state is urgently needed;

C.  whereas the prospect of EU membership has been offered to Bosnia and Herzegovina as a single country;

D.  whereas a new dynamic and respect vis-à-vis citizens and international obligations are required to prevent renewed deadlock in the run-up to the October 2014 general elections;

E.  whereas widespread corruption, very high unemployment and a lack of future prospects for BiH citizens continue to seriously hamper socio-economic and political developments in the country;

F.  whereas cooperation with other countries in the region in a good neighbourly spirit is a prerequisite for peaceful coexistence and reconciliation within BiH and the South East European region;

General considerations

1.  Is deeply concerned at the continuing lack of common vision displayed by the political leaders of the country’s three ethnic communities; urges the political groups at all levels of power in the country to step up cooperation and dialogue in order to overcome existing disputes with the aim of achieving progress on the reform path and improving the lives of BiH citizens; calls for civil society to be more involved in efforts to reform the country;

2.  Welcomes the six-point agreement reached in Brussels on 1 October 2013, but deplores the obstruction of its implementation by centralist forces; stresses the importance of following the principles of federalism and legitimate representation in order to ensure BiH’s path;

3.  Calls for a shift away from the nationalist and ethnocentric rhetoric coming from the leadership of the three constitutive peoples in BiH; condemns all kinds of segregation and discrimination on religious or ethnic grounds in a country;

4.  Urges political leaders to focus on implementing the Road Map of the High Level Dialogue, thus making it possible to meet the requirements that would enable the SAA to come into force;

5.  Urges the governments and competent authorities to strengthen the efficiency and functionality of their institutions and to establish an effective EU coordination mechanism to ensure the harmonised transposition and enforcement of the EU acquis throughout the country in the interests of the overall prosperity of its citizens; in this context, calls on them to ensure that they can speak with one voice at state level; underlines the fact that, without such a mechanism, the EU accession process will remain deadlocked; calls on all political parties to work towards improving political dialogue and enhancing political culture;

6.  Reminds the Commission that EU enlargement goes beyond a mere transfer of the EU acquis and must be based on a true and comprehensive commitment to European values; calls for continued EU engagement with the BiH leaders and a rethinking of the EU’s approach towards BiH, given the stalling of progress towards EU candidate status compared with the progress being made by other countries in the region; urges the international community, the European Council, and the Member States in particular, to step up efforts to foster consensus among BiH political leaders to move forward with constitutional reform and EU-related reforms; calls on the next Vice‑President / High Representative and the Enlargement Commissioner to make BiH a central priority following the appointment of the next Commission in 2014; points, in this regard, to the important role and engagement of the EU Delegation and the EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

7.  Invites the Commission to further strengthen efforts to facilitate an agreement on the implementation of the Sejdić-Finci ruling guaranteeing equal rights for all constituent peoples and citizens, and to be instrumental in implementing the objectives of the EU agenda, including a functional system of good governance, democratic development and economic prosperity and respect for human rights;

8.  Asks the EU’s Heads of State and Government and Foreign Ministers to strengthen their personal commitment to the country;

9.  Invites the authorities to meet the outstanding objectives and conditions for the closure of the Office of the High Representative, so as to allow greater local ownership and responsibility; underlines the fact that the dissolution of the Office of the High Representative can be considered only when all the conditions have been met;

10.  Is deeply concerned that a four-year‑long disagreement between political leaders led the Council of Europe to initially consider suspending the country’s right of representation in the organisation if no substantial progress was made on the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judgment before the elections; stresses that the legitimacy of the 2014 elections for the Presidency and the House of Peoples of BiH will be questioned if the ECHR judgment is not implemented;

11.  Reiterates that constitutional reform remains key to transforming BiH into an effective and fully functional state; urges the Federation to consider concrete proposals in this regard, including the merger of some cantons and the redistribution of competences, in order to simplify its complex institutional structure, ensure a more balanced representation of all constituent people and citizens, eliminate ethnic discrimination and make the state more functional, less expensive and more accountable to its citizens; invites all political parties to take part in this process in a constructive and open manner and to make use of the advice and guidance that the Venice Commission can provide during this process; welcomes and supports the efforts of civil society organisations to influence the constitutional reform process;

12.  Welcomes the smooth running and completion of the enumeration phase of the first population and housing census since 1991; calls on the responsible authorities to ensure that the census remains a statistical exercise and that it complies with international standards; urges all the competent authorities not to politicise a census whose purpose is to provide objective socio-economic data;

13.  Is seriously concerned that disputes about the distribution of competences are impeding EU financial assistance; regrets, but fully supports, the Commission decision to cancel projects under the Instrument for Pre‑accession Assistance-I (IPA‑I); is concerned that inaction may have implications for the allocation of millions of euros of EU funds for political and socio-economic development under IPA-II;

Political criteria

14.  Is concerned that legislative activities have continued to be hampered by political positioning; calls for more political accountability of political leaders to the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

15.  Calls on all political parties represented in the BiH Parliamentary Assembly to urgently adopt the changes to the electoral law needed to enable the October 2014 general elections to be held; reiterates that the decisions of the BiH Constitutional Court are final and binding and must therefore be implemented;

16.  Is seriously concerned at the inefficiency of the judicial system and the growing inability to implement court rulings; urges that political attacks on the judiciary be prevented and that the issue of fragmentation of budgetary responsibilities in the judiciary be addressed;

17.  Commends the Structured Dialogue on Justice, which has delivered concrete results, with a number of recommendations implemented; welcomes the progress made in reducing the backlog of court cases; reiterates, in line with the recommendations of the Structured Dialogue, the call to undertake structural and institutional reforms of the judicial system, addressing, inter alia, the issues relating to the harmonisation of the four different legal systems in BiH, including the establishment of a Supreme Court at state level, in accordance with the recommendations included in the relevant opinion of the Venice Commission;

18.  Is satisfied that the backlog of war crimes cases has also been reduced and that the prosecution of war crimes cases involving sexual violence has improved; welcomes the appointment of 13 new prosecutors to the State Prosecution Office, who will mainly be dealing with the prosecution of war crimes; calls for efforts to be stepped up as regards the investigation and prosecution of these crimes, including an adequate level of witness protection, the adoption of a state-level programme for improving the status of victims, including survivors of sexual violence and torture war crimes, and measures to enhance relevant resources at all levels;

19.  Takes note of the judgment by the ECHR in the case of ‘Maktouf and Damjanović vs Bosnia and Herzegovina’ and the implications thereof, which led to a change of jurisprudence as regards other appeals pending before the Constitutional Court of BiH, including for charges of genocide, with the consequence that 10 defendants sentenced to long prison terms were released; reiterates that justice for war crimes is a crucial endeavour, for the victims and their families, and that proper consideration should therefore be given before such releases take place; stresses the importance of the domestic authorities taking all necessary measures to secure, wherever required, the continued detention of those previously convicted who are awaiting a fresh examination of their case, provided that their detention is compatible with the rulings of the ECHR, or other security measures;

20.  Is concerned about the financial sustainability of the public administration, its fragmentation and politicisation and the lack of political will for its reform; welcomes the fact that some improvements have been made in intra-government coordination as regards bringing legislation into line with EU standards, but remains concerned about the possible impact of the complex distribution and allocation of competencies on the provision of public services; is concerned that the phytosanitary testing facilities needed for exporting agricultural products to the EU have not been sufficiently developed; urges the government to support the establishment of a state-level ministry of agriculture;

21.  Welcomes the fact that cooperation with civil society is improving, but calls for institutional mechanisms for cooperation between state institutions and civil society organisations to be established at state level and to become operational at entity and canton level as soon as possible; calls also for the involvement of civil society in the EU accession process to be enhanced in a regular and structured manner; encourages increased cooperation and synergy among NGOs;

22.  Underlines the fact that BiH has ratified the major labour rights conventions of the ILO; regrets that labour and trade union rights remain limited, and calls on the government to guarantee these rights;

23.  Expresses its concern at the high rates of corruption at all levels of public life and the complex connections between political actors, business and the media; calls for the implementation of the anti-corruption strategy to be speeded up and for steps to be taken to enhance the effective investigation, prosecution and conviction of corruption cases;

24.  Welcomes the intent of the Government of the Federation to submit to the parliamentary procedure a set of laws designed to tackle corruption and organised crime; stresses the importance of making the fight against corruption an absolute priority, and calls for an inclusive consultation process with all stakeholders and institutions concerned in order to update the legislative proposal in full compliance with the EU acquis and the recommendations resulting from the Structured Dialogue on Justice; welcomes in this respect technical support from the EU Delegation in BiH;

25.  Is concerned that organised crime, money laundering and trafficking in human beings, drugs and goods continue to take place in the absence of effective institutions; commends the cooperation with neighbouring countries and welcomes, in this connection, the agreement between BiH, Montenegro and Serbia on the establishment of a joint coordination centre to strengthen the fight against cross-border crime; calls for structural improvements in cooperation between border controls, the police and prosecution, and for more effective judicial follow‑up to be guaranteed; calls for the strengthening of systematic gathering, analysis and use of intelligence by law enforcement agencies; expects positive developments as a result of the entry into force of the recently adopted Witness Protection Programme Law, the technical harmonisation of which is pending;

26.  Is concerned that BiH continues to be a country of origin, transit and destination for trafficking of women; welcomes the adoption of a new strategy and action plan regarding trafficking in human beings for 2013-2015; underlines that a comprehensive, multidisciplinary and victim-oriented approach to trafficking needs to be established and identification of victims improved;

27.  Is concerned that only limited progress has been made regarding women’s rights and gender equality, even though the legal provisions are in place; calls for the full implementation of the relevant laws and policies, including in the context of the electoral law before the next general elections in 2014, and for concrete steps to be taken to increase participation of women in the workforce and in the political arena;

28.  Calls on the competent authorities to actively protect and promote the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups, to implement the anti-discrimination laws and policies, and to develop a state-wide anti-discrimination strategy; insists that political parties and civil society distance themselves from discrimination and foster an inclusive and tolerant society; is concerned about hate speech, threats, harassment and discrimination, particularly towards the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender/transsexual and intersex (LGBTI) community; is deeply shocked by the brutal attack on participants at the Merlinka Film Festival in Sarajevo on 1 February 2014; calls on the authorities, in this connection, to investigate the attack fully and to ensure that in the future similar events are afforded appropriate protection by the police; calls on the EU Delegation, the BiH authorities and political parties openly to support the victims of this attack and to condemn such actions;

29.  Calls for efforts to be made to guarantee and promote media pluralism; is concerned about the growing political and financial pressure on the media, and threats against journalists; stresses that a transparent and free media environment is essential for the exercise of freedom of expression; calls for actions to provide a safe working environment for journalists; urges the authorities to secure the political, institutional and financial independence of public service broadcasters in accordance with the relevant law, and to complete the digital switchover; calls for further efforts to ensure equal exposure to information in all official languages and to guarantee equal rights for all constitutive peoples in public‑service broadcasting;

30.  Calls on the authorities to allocate sufficient resources to early childhood education, to provide services to families of children with disabilities and to address violence against children;

31.  Urges the authorities throughout BiH at all levels to advance decisively with education reform with a view to improving educational standards, to promote an inclusive and non-discriminatory education system and to end ethnic segregation in the education sector (two schools under one roof); invites them to support the training of teachers for the purpose of equipping them with additional skills on how to encourage inter-ethnic mingling of students, and to assist with long-term capacity-building programmes; encourages the BiH media to promote integrated education; urges the Conference of Ministers of Education to create a more coherent legislative framework in the area of education throughout BiH, including increased convergence of curricula and standards as a necessary step for bringing the ethnic communities closer together; deplores the fact that there was no national agency in BiH to participate in any part of the EU’s Lifelong Learning Programme; urges the competent authorities to establish such an agency, which would enable the country to participate in the follow‑up Erasmus+ Programme;

32.  Calls on the authorities to ensure equality of access for Roma children to education services, to collaborate with the relevant NGOs in order to encourage Roma families to support their children’s access to education and to promote the effective inclusion of Roma children in education, inter alia through school readiness programmes;

33.  Welcomes the decision of the relevant Federation ministry to take over responsibility temporarily for financing cultural institutions such as the National Library and the Museum of History; calls on the BiH authorities to ensure that efforts are made to urgently solve the status of the seven national cultural institutions – the National Museum, the Arts Gallery, the History Museum, the Literature and Theatre Museum, the Film Archive, the National Library and the Library for Blind Persons – so that they have a proper legal and financial status; calls for a long-term solution to the financing of these institutions;

34.  Calls for a strengthening of coordination at local level, increased dialogue among donors, stakeholders and local authorities, and a focus on sustainable measures for returnees; calls for efforts to be made to ensure the return of refugees and internally displaced persons to all affected areas; calls on the country to address the unresolved humanitarian issue of the 7 886 cases of persons still missing from the war and to improve the working conditions of the Missing Persons Institute;

35.  Pays respect to the more than 430 men, women and children who were killed during the war and whose remains were found in September 2013 in the Tomasica mass grave, near Prijedor in Republika Srpska, and expresses its condolences to their families; calls for a full and comprehensive investigation into the atrocities; appeals to all those who have information about undiscovered mass grave sites to inform the authorities in the same way as was done in the case of the Tomasica grave;

Socio-economic issues

36.  Urges the competent authorities to strengthen domestic economic policy coordination for the purpose of enabling economic growth, to launch further structural reforms, to sustain fiscal discipline and to improve revenue performance; calls on them, furthermore, to improve the composition and efficiency of public spending and of the large ineffective public sector, with its multiple overlapping competences, and to safeguard financial sector stability by strengthening the legislative and regulatory framework; is concerned by the weak enforcement of the law and anti-corruption measures, which hampers the business environment, discourages foreign investment and contributes to a large informal sector; reiterates the need to establish a single economic area and to restart and accelerate the stalled privatisation process so as to improve the fiscal situation and increase competition; urges the authorities to enhance environmental protection in line with EU standards;

37.  Is concerned at the country’s inefficient social protection arrangements despite a high level of public expenditure; stresses the need to harmonise and reform the fragmented social protection systems in order to provide equal treatment for all citizens, including disabled people; urges the governments to improve the business environment and implement labour market reforms in order to tackle the very high unemployment rate, which undermines macroeconomic stability, by means of concrete economic measures; calls for further measures to facilitate the participation in the labour market of the country’s many young unemployed;

Regional cooperation

38.  Commends BiH for its constructive role in regional cooperation and calls on it to continue its efforts to resolve outstanding border and property issues with its neighbouring countries; encourages further development of relations with other countries involved in the European integration process;

39.  Strongly welcomes the commitments by BiH and Serbia to improve bilateral relations, including the signing of the extradition and readmission agreements as well as of a protocol on cooperation in the prosecution of perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide; welcomes the bilateral border agreements with Croatia; calls on BiH to continue to cooperate with the Commission regarding the adaptation of the Interim Agreement / Stabilisation and Association Agreement, especially in terms of cross-border trade in order to ensure that traditional trade flows between EU Member States and Central European Free Trade Agreement partners will continue; urges BiH to accept the travel documents of Kosovan citizens to enable them to enter the country;

40.  Reaffirms its support for the visa liberalisation regime for the Western Balkan countries as an important pillar of their European integration process; calls on EU Member States to shorten the asylum procedures for citizens of Western Balkan countries that enjoy visa-free travel within the Schengen zone as an effective means of reducing the number of unfounded asylum applications, while still giving the applicants the right to make their case in a full interview; welcomes, furthermore, the intention of the new coalition government in Germany, as expressed in its coalition agreement with reference to its national asylum legislation, to declare Bosnia and Herzegovina a ‘safe country of origin’ in order to expedite procedures to deal with those applications;

o
o   o

41.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice‑President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission, the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the governments and parliaments of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0225. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0453.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the 2013 progress report on the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (2013/2883(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0103 B7-0073/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the decision by the European Council of 16 December 2005 granting candidate country status for EU membership, and to the conclusions of the European Council of 13 December 2012, 27-28 June 2013 and 17 December 2013,

–  having regard to the Presidency conclusions of the Thessaloniki European Council of 19‑20 June 2003 concerning the prospect of the Western Balkan countries joining the European Union,

–  having regard to UN Security Council Resolutions 845 (1993) and 817 (1993), as well as to UN General Assembly resolution 47/225 and to the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995,

–  having regard to the judgment of the International Court of Justice on the application of the Interim Accord,

–  having regard to the Commission’s report of 16 April 2013 entitled ‘Implementation of reforms within the framework of the high-level accession dialogue and promotion of good neighbourly relations’ (COM(2013)0205), its 2013 Progress Report (SWD(2013)0413), and its communication of 16 October 2013 entitled ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2013-2014’ (COM(2013)0700),

–  having regard to the agreement between the political parties dated 1 March 2013, the final report of the Committee on Inquiry of 26 August 2013, and the Memorandum of Understanding of 16 September 2013,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on the country and its resolution of 22 November 2012 on ‘Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests’(1),

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the European Council has decided for the fifth consecutive year not to open the accession negotiations with the country in spite of the positive recommendation of the Commission in this respect; whereas this further postponement is adding to the growing frustration of public opinion in the country over the stalemate reached in the EU integration process and risks exacerbating domestic problems and internal tension; whereas bilateral issues should not represent an obstacle to the official opening of accession negotiations, although they should be solved before the end of the accession process;

B.  whereas the rule of law, freedom of the media, regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations are essential parts of the EU enlargement process;

C.  whereas bilateral issues should be addressed in a constructive spirit as early as possible, taking into account the principles and values of the UN and of the EU;

1.  Reiterates its call to the Council to set a date for the start of accession negotiations without further delay;

2.  Invites Greece to use its Presidency to inject momentum into the European integration process of the country, thereby reaffirming its commitment made in the 2003 Thessaloniki Agenda and creating a positive environment for settling bilateral differences in the spirit of European values and principles; calls on the Greek Presidency to use the positive dynamics of its leadership to develop new initiatives to overcome the current stalemate in the negotiations and work towards a solution;

3.  Encourages the country to consolidate reforms and reverse policies and practices which could still constitute obstacles for its European future, and to secure real progress on key areas as set out in the European Council conclusions, and more specifically the statements on the enlargement and stabilisation and association process; considers that starting negotiations with the EU represents a positive step towards resolving current disputes with the country’s neighbours, while also generating further reforms to improve the situation in the country;

4.  Regrets, given the positive recommendation of the Commission and its positive assessment of the results of the High Level Accession Dialogue while also warning of the risks of backsliding, the fact that the European Council chose not to repeat its December 2012 decision in which it concluded that it largely shared the Commission’s view, anticipated a possible decision to open accession negotiations during the following presidency, and noted that the Commission would undertake all the necessary preparatory work to enable this;

5.  Emphasises that continuing to delay the opening of accession negotiations entails an increasing and unpredictable cost for the country as well as for regional stability; calls on both the government and on the Commission to produce a quantitative analysis of the potential social and economic costs, as well as of the domestic and regional political impact and the risks arising from the Council’s failure to set a date for the start of the accession negotiations;

6.  Insists that all candidate and potential candidate countries should be treated on the basis of their merits;

7.  Agrees, notwithstanding the very significant challenges facing the country, with the Commission’s conclusion that it has a high level of alignment with the EU acquis vis‑à‑vis its stage in the accession process and that the Copenhagen criteria are sufficiently met for accession talks to begin; notes that under the EU’s procedures new members are admitted only when they have met all requirements; shares the view of the Commission that opening Chapters 23 and 24 on justice, democracy and human rights will enhance progress on the very issues which are of particular concern to some Member States;

8.  Calls on the European Council to endorse the opening of the screening process, especially for Chapters 23 and 24; believes that the screening will help build on the reform momentum and help the country better address the imminent challenges facing any candidate country such as further enhancing the effectiveness of the rule of law and reforming the judiciary and public administration, as well as strengthening interethnic cohesion;

9.  Welcomes the fulfilment of the country’s commitments under the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and its advanced stage of legislative alignment with the acquis; calls on the Council to adopt the Commission’s recommendations regarding moving to the second phase of implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA), in line with the relevant provisions of that agreement;

10.  Stresses that good neighbourly relations and regional cooperation are an essential pillar of the country’s EU accession process, including a negotiated and mutually acceptable solution to the name issue under UN auspices; bearing in mind the Albanian minority within the country and also the sensitive bilateral issues with other neighbouring countries, particularly Greece and Bulgaria, reiterates its position, sharing the view of the Commission in this regard, that bilateral issues should be addressed as early as possible in the accession process, in a constructive and neighbourly spirit and through an intensive and open dialogue in the spirit of the common European future, and preferably before the opening of accession negotiations; recalls that gestures, controversial actions and statements which could negatively impact on good neighbourly relations should be avoided; asks for more concrete results in terms of cooperation in order to establish good neighbourly relations between the three sides (Athens, Sofia and Skopje);

11.  Endorses the Commission’s finding that any continuing failure of the European Council to make progress in relation to the country’s EU accession will jeopardise the credibility of the EU enlargement process; adds that it will also undermine the climate needed to encourage EU-related reform measures; notes that the accession process builds by itself the impetus to complete the reforms;

12.  Believes that the failure of both parties to find a mutually acceptable, fair and just solution to resolving the name dispute over a period of nearly 20 years also calls into question the credibility of the framework for achieving this goal, for which it is vital to make efforts; notes that this is despite the best efforts of the UN mediator and the genuine political will of both parties to find a solution; reiterates, however, its view that bilateral issues should not be resorted to in order to hinder the European accession process;

13.  Welcomes, in this regard, the proposal for a composite name with a geographical qualifier put forward by UN Envoy Nimetz, and believes that this is a good basis for a compromise, provided that Macedonian nationality, identity, culture and language are not called into question;

14.  Invites Greece to use its Presidency of the EU, together with all interests in the Commission, the Council and Parliament, and in the country itself, to inject new political impetus into genuine and sincere efforts to find a mutually accepted solution to the name issue without further delay; notes the decision of 5 December 2011 of the International Court of Justice regarding the application of the interim accord of 13 September 1995; takes the view that the country’s leadership and the EU should consistently explain to the public the benefits of a solution once agreed ahead of the referendum on the issue; welcomes the meeting and talks between the Greek Foreign Minister Evangelos Venizelos and the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius regarding the country in hopes that this represents a sign of future greater positive developments regarding the possible resolution of the name issue;

15.  Welcomes the fact that five meetings have taken place in nine months in a good atmosphere between working groups from the country and Bulgaria; believes that the deeply felt historical, community and other common issues between the two countries are best addressed by dialogue in this spirit, including collaboration with the media and with the legal system and other authorities; calls for significant steps to be taken towards achieving a bilateral agreement in due time as a suitable framework in this regard;

16.  Reiterates its concern over the use of historical arguments in the current debate with neighbours, and reiterates its call for positive progress to be made in joint celebrations of common historical events and figures with neighbouring EU Member States, since this would contribute to a better understanding of history and good neighbourly relations; encourages the attempts to establish joint expert committees on history and education, with the aim of contributing to an objective interpretation of history, strengthening academic cooperation, and promoting positive attitudes in young people towards their neighbours; urges the authorities to introduce educational materials free of ideological interpretations of history and aimed at improving mutual understanding;

17.  Commends the country for maintaining its constructive role and positive contribution to regional cooperation, and welcomes its active participation in regional initiatives such as the Central European Initiative (CEI) and the Regional Initiative for Migration, Asylum and Refugees (MARRI); congratulates the country on its successful completion of its period as chair of the South-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) from June 2012 to June 2013), and welcomes, in this regard, the promotion of all-inclusiveness as a valuable contribution to the further strengthening of regional cooperation;

18.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to include the country in the new macroregional cooperation framework in south-east Europe, namely the Adriatic-Ionian macroregional strategy and transnational programme;

19.  Insists that the full implementation of the recommendations of the parliamentary committee of inquiry following the events of 24 December 2012 and compliance by all parties with the Memorandum of Understanding are both indispensable to returning the country to a Euro-Atlantic perspective; takes pride in the role undertaken by the Commissioner for Enlargement and Parliament itself in helping broker the 1 March 2013 agreement, but recognises that it is the responsibility of the political parties themselves to establish constructive mutual dialogue and cooperation and to reject the use of boycotts, in the interests of enabling full, independent legislative oversight of government and upholding European democratic norms; emphasises the importance of both government and political parties working towards improving relations in order to maintain political stability;

20.  Welcomes the conclusions of the OSCE/ODIHR Electoral Observation Mission to the effect that the spring municipal elections were efficiently administered; shares the concern expressed regarding balance of media coverage, blurring of state and party activities in relation to the use of administrative resources and reported irregularities concerning registration of voters from Pustec, Albania; endorses the Government’s commitment to comply with the OSCE/ODIHR recommendations for electoral reform in full; emphasises the need for further efforts to increase transparent financing and accountability of political parties; urges action to avoid the blurring of state and party activities during election campaigns and secure cross-party agreement for an audit of the voters’ register;

21.  Stresses the need to ensure the professionalism and independence of the public administration through policy improvements at all levels; notes that the law on public employees and the law on administrative servants were approved by the parliament at first reading on 8 January 2014; considers it important that a new legal framework enshrines the fundamental principles of transparency, merit and equitable representation; calls on the government to continue with the necessary reforms in this respect, as also in the fields of public expenditure and public procurement, since this will have positive effects on the quality of governance;

22.  Urges a deepening of democracy through further decisive steps towards budget decentralisation, regretting the reduction in the budget during the past year but looking forward to the survey report on the state of decentralisation and welcoming the increased share of revenue in the core budget of the municipalities through further actions to strengthen respect for local self-government, especially in cases where the parties in control at local level are not in power at national level;

23.  Welcomes the progress made in the EU integration process by the other countries in the region, but is concerned that further delay in the opening of accession talks could create an unreasonable disparity in the region, which could pose further risks to good interethnic relations and create a feeling among all Macedonian citizens of being left behind; condemns all forms of ultra-nationalism, in any country; calls for anti-discrimination policies and tolerance in society, regardless of religion, ethnicity or language;

24.  Endorses the Commission’s call for the review of the Ohrid Framework Agreement to be completed and for implementation of its recommendations to commence;

25.  Notes that further strengthening of a political dialogue with the Albanian population within the country represents an important contribution to regional stability and cooperation;

26.  Urges the government, the media, the academic community, civil society and all relevant stakeholders to send out clear signals to the public that discrimination on the basis of national identity is not tolerated in the country, including in relation to the justice system, the media, and employment and social opportunities; underlines the importance of doing so for the integration of the various ethnic communities, the country’s stability and the European integration;

27.  Regrets that more progress has not yet been achieved with regard to integrated education and that funds have not been allocated to implement the Strategy on Integrated Education; expresses its concern that fewer young people seem to be mastering each other’s languages; urges action on the matter, in order to avoid separation and potential conflict along ethnic lines among school-age children; stresses, at the same time, the importance of promoting inclusive bilingual education on a non-compulsory basis; remains concerned at the separation of Roma pupils in schools;

28.  Believes that the obstacles to proceeding with a census corresponding to best democratic standards might be partly overcome through the establishment of a civil registry, as a temporary solution;

29.  Regrets the deterioration of the country’s reputation in relation to media freedom; shares the Commission’s concern that the safeguarding of freedom of expression with diverse and pluralistic media free from political interference remains a vital challenge for the country; points out, in this regard, that the lack of media pluralism is partly a result of government advertising; stresses the need to ensure the independence and sustainability of the public service broadcaster, encouraging the authorities to adopt safeguards in media law in this respect; believes that the current media law should be the object of further consultation and dialogue, so that such important reforms are agreed only if there is broad support across the country’s journalistic community; points out that more efforts are needed in order to restore and rebuild trust between the government and the media community; supports the initiative of the country’s Media Institute, with EU support, to publish a ‘White Book’ on enhancing civil society-media relations; stresses the need for greater efforts to protect the rights and independence of media workers; emphasises the need for transparency regarding media ownership;

30.  Highlights the progress previously made by the Round Table between the government and the Association of Journalists, drawing on the expertise of the OSCE Special Representative on Free Media, and believes that reconvening the Round Table and fulfilment of its roadmap towards freedom of expression and ensuring a proper working environment for journalists continue to form the primary mechanism for making necessary progress; recognises that full freedom of expression can only be achieved in a society where there is an established right of public access to information and a public space that enables meaningful public debate;

31.  Believes, nevertheless, that the recent case of the imprisoned journalist Tomislav Kezarovski and other cases – whose outcomes should only be determined by an independent judiciary working within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights - raise concern over the possible exercise of selective justice in the country, which all relevant authorities should take effective measures to avoid;

32.  Notes the new Lustration Law, but also the concerns expressed by the Venice Commission and the Helsinki Committee regarding its constitutionality and potential misuse;

33.  Encourages the strengthening of the mandate of the Data Verification Commission by transferring all necessary documents from the intelligence and counter-intelligence services to that commission’s premises on a permanent basis;

34.  Reiterates the recommendations made in its previous resolution regarding civil society empowerment; urges the government to recognise the important role of civil society and its added value in the political debate, and calls on it to actively engage civil society organisations (CSOs) in the dialogue on policymaking; stresses the crucial role CSOs can play in making the EU integration process more transparent, accountable and inclusive; suggests that support should be offered to the civil society sector in support of its initiatives; welcomes the involvement of civil society in the Working Group on Chapter 23 established by the Ministry of Justice, and encourages all ministries to follow this example; encourages positive consideration of the proposal for selecting CSOs to take part in all working groups under the National Programme for the Acquis;

35.  Regrets the modest progress of, and expresses its concern regarding the severe delays in, implementation of the second government Strategy for Cooperation with Civil Society and its action plan; is concerned at the lack of commitment to it and the lack of transparency in budget support to civil society; believes that the Open Government Partnership to which the country has pledged can provide an appropriate framework for improving the situation; welcomes and encourages the use of indicators to assess civil society participation, as outlined in the Commission’s communication of 12 September 2012 on ‘The roots of democracy and sustainable development’ (COM(2012)0492);

36.  Reiterates its call on the Commission and the government to agree to devote a minimum quota of the next programming period of the Instrument for Pre-Accession to secure 15 % payments to non-state actors and ensure that technical assistance to civil society organisations is managed by civil society itself; also urges that the IPA II be further deployed to support efforts to help leverage a target of 9 % of the country’s own budget, to be delivered through decentralised regional and local government;

37.  Commends the country for the reforms previously undertaken which have brought the national legal framework into conformity with international standards; urges the country to increase the transparency of the Judicial Council in order to minimise perceptions that it works under influence and pressure; invites the Commission to consider and analyse respect for European Court of Human Rights judgments in relation to the country, in its future Progress Reports;

38.  Welcomes the activities aimed at improving the professionalism, independence and efficiency of the judiciary, namely the recruitment of graduates of the Academy for Judges and Prosecutors to those posts, the maintaining of the positive clearance rate of the courts in the first half of 2013, and the further reduction in the backlog; calls for the unification of jurisprudence in order to ensure a predictable judicial system and public trust;

39.  Calls in particular for the reinforcement of the State Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, the Anti-Corruption Unit of the Ministry of Interior, the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office for the fight against organised crime and corruption, and the State Audit Office in budgetary, material and human resources; emphasises further the need to focus on high-level corruption cases and to make greater use of orders for seizure and confiscation of assets, and urges continued efforts to establish a track record for convictions in high-level cases; calls on independent civil society organisations and media to expose corruption and champion independent and impartial investigations and trials; welcomes the continued UNDP-supported efforts of the State Commission for Prevention of Corruption to strengthen the preventive aspect of the fight against corruption by introducing comprehensive integrity systems in nine pilot municipalities; supports the national authorities’ intention to complete the amendment of the Law on Prevention of Corruption, expand the integrity system concept nationwide, and provide systematic institutional protection for whistleblowers;

40.  Notes that the activities aimed at making the National Intelligence Database (NID) operational are still ongoing, and encourages the country’s authorities to accelerate their efforts in this respect and to establish the National Coordination Centre for the fight against organised crime as soon as possible, in order to provide full support to the fight against organised crime, corruption, fraud, money laundering and other serious offences, including cross-border offences;

41.  Expresses its concern at the widespread and lengthy use of pre-trial detention and the conditions in which detainees are held; notes instances of disproportionate policing in relation to demonstrations; calls for efforts to maintain public order to be proportionate and to respect the right of free assembly;

42.  Welcomes the new Justice for Children Law, and calls for sufficient funding to implement it; continues to regret the absence of health and education services in juvenile detention centres;

43.  Welcomes the decrease in the number of children in institutional care, but remains concerned at the large numbers of children with disabilities who are still in institutions; calls for further reforms of the child protection system and the strengthening of the capacities of the Centres for Social Work in order to support disadvantaged families;

44.  Welcomes the formation of the National Youth Council and the efforts to ensure that it is broad-based and politically impartial and can fully participate as a member of the European Youth Forum; invites the country’s Agency for Youth and Sport to fully support and participate in its activities;

45.  Encourages the government to allocate sufficient human and financial resources to the Commission for Protection from Discrimination and to the anti-discrimination unit in the Department for Equal Opportunities; calls for measures to strengthen awareness-raising on equality and non-discrimination;

46.  Welcomes the reopening of the LGBTI Centre in Skopje, after five separate attacks on it in the last twelve months; welcomes, and calls for wider application of, the findings of the country’s Anti-Discrimination Commission condemning homophobia in school textbooks; calls, especially, for the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in employment; regrets that the Anti-Discrimination Law is still not in line with the EU acquis; reiterates its call for this law to be amended in order to fully comply with the acquis; condemns all violence against the LGBTI community and invites all political leaders and figures in the wider society to do the same; calls for the perpetrators of such violence to be brought to justice; reminds the government and the political parties of their responsibility in creating a culture of inclusion and tolerance;

47.  Urges the authorities to systematically collect data on excluded and marginalised groups, including street children, Roma children and persons with disabilities; regrets the failure to collect data on hate crimes; remains concerned at the number of Roma children in special needs schools, but welcomes the system of government bursaries designed to enable Roma children to complete secondary education;

48.  Remains concerned over the continued discrimination affecting Roma; in this regard, highlights that Roma women suffer double discrimination on the grounds of gender and ethnicity, which mostly goes hand in hand with poverty; is concerned that this long-recognised double discrimination is widespread, routine and pervasive; calls on the authorities to break this pattern, and strongly urges proactive implementation of the Strategy for Roma inclusion and action to ensure access to health, education, employment, housing and social welfare for Roma;

49.  Strongly urges the government to solve the problem of Roma without personal documents;

50.  Calls on the government to increase its efforts to improve the status of Roma and Ashkali refugees from Kosovo;

51.  Welcomes the increase in the number of female mayors from zero to four, out of 81 mayors in the country, and in the number of women in parliament, which is in accordance with the gender quota; is concerned, however, over persistent practices of voluntary withdrawal of women from political decision-making; welcomes the changes made to the labour law to afford better legal protection for women who are pregnant or have just given birth, but is concerned at the high unemployment rates among women; welcomes the adoption of the gender equality strategy, but notes that the public mechanisms for gender equality are still not functioning properly, and calls on the government to improve their functioning and increase their human and financial resources; calls on the authorities to ensure a gender perspective in all policy areas and to increase support for and initiatives aimed at increasing awareness of gender equality; regrets the fact that important amendments to the Law on Termination of Pregnancy were adopted by the parliament in a shortened procedure without a broader public debate;

52.  Commends the government for preserving macroeconomic stability, and welcomes the return to growth; notes, however, that income convergence has been slow and shares the concern existing as to whether the public deficit target of 2,6 % by 2016 will be met and how public finances will be consolidated; recommends that the Commission should award the country ‘functioning market economy status’;

53.  Welcomes the increase in GDP of 2,9 % in real terms in the first quarter of 2013 as compared with the same quarter in 2012; notes the trend of positive changes in the labour market, with the number of employed in the first quarter of 2013 being 3,9 % higher than that for the same quarter in 2012, while the annual unemployment rate fell by 4,2 %; welcomes the ranking of the country in the World Bank’s ‘Doing Business’ report as being among the top ten in the world showing the greatest progress in the business and regulatory environment;

54.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to launch a special dialogue on employment and social policy with this and other countries in the region; encourages measures to ensure a modernised labour law in full compliance with the ILO conventions; stresses that the country has ratified the ILO’s eight core labour rights conventions; calls for the strengthening of the capacity of the social partners and the guaranteeing of labour and trade union rights; shares the concern that high unemployment, in particular among vulnerable groups such as young people and women, remains one of the most pressing challenges for the government, and calls for enhanced action to combat poverty, high youth unemployment and discrimination;

55.  Notes the measures adopted by the authorities of the country as regards the recent cases of agricultural products with high levels of pesticides exported to EU countries; calls, in particular, on the competent authorities to step up controls and check more effectively the implementation in the country of EU phytosanitary standards;

56.  Regrets that the country does not yet have a comprehensive climate policy although it associates itself with EU positions in the international context; expects the Government to adopt the necessary measures so as to strengthen administrative capacity for implementing climate change legislation;

57.  Stresses the need for major efforts in the field of environment and in particular in the areas of water quality, nature protection, wildlife conservation, and industrial pollution control and risk management; encourages efforts to implement the legislation in those areas; underlines that no substantial progress can be achieved without a suitable strengthening of administrative capacity; calls on the government to take the necessary measures in this respect;

58.  Encourages the government to continue cooperation with the EU in the energy sector within the framework of the Energy Community;

59.  Points out that, as regards renewable energies, the potential of the country is underdeveloped, thanks also to cumbersome administrative procedures and the price of electricity; calls, in this connection, on the authorities to step up efforts in this field in order to meet the Energy Community obligation of full implementation of the renewable energy directive by the beginning of 2014;

60.  Reaffirms its support for the visa liberalisation regime for the Western Balkan countries as an important pillar of their European integration process; calls on the Member States to shorten their asylum procedures for citizens of Western Balkan countries who enjoy visa-free travel within the Schengen area, as an effective means of reducing the number of unfounded asylum applications while still allowing applicants the right to make their case in a full interview;

61.  Reiterates that a proper balance must be maintained between legitimate measures to combat illegal migration and the avoidance of ethnic profiling or other actions which are potentially discriminatory in relation to the right of free movement; commends regional cooperation with regard to migration and refugees; strongly urges that the current EU visa liberalisation regime for the country be maintained; believes the country should be declared a ‘safe country of origin’ in order to enable quicker procedures to deal with applications; calls on the government to maintain the existing liberal visa regime with neighbouring countries, and to step up efforts to improve the social and economic situation of minorities and prevent any discrimination or negative measures such as travel restrictions in respect of people who have had asylum applications rejected in the EU;

62.  Takes note of the government’s efforts to rebuild the local road infrastructure in the country with the aim of developing alternative tourism and improving citizens’ lives; in this regard, encourages the country to take a more dynamic approach in regional development projects under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) that will increase cross-border cooperation and links among the countries in the region, and to participate in the development of a modern and eco-efficient rail system connecting south-east Europe with the rest of the continent; calls for further progress on alignment transport policy and its alignment with the acquis;

63.  Takes note of the meeting between the transport ministers of the country and of Bulgaria held on 28 November 2013 in Sofia, and expresses the hope that the commitments to finalising the rail connection between the two countries, as confirmed at the meeting, will be fulfilled in the short term, since this will open up new economic perspectives for the region;

64.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the government and parliament of the country.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0453.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the 2013 progress report on Montenegro (2013/2882(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0104 B7-0072/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Montenegro, of the other part, of 29 March 2010(1),

–  having regard to the conclusions of the European Council of 19-20 June 2003 and to the annex thereto entitled ‘The Thessaloniki Agenda for the Western Balkans: moving towards European integration’,

–  having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 9 November 2010 on the Commission’s opinion on Montenegro’s application for membership of the European Union (COM(2010)0670),

–  having regard to the report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 22 May 2012 on Montenegro’s progress in the implementation of reforms (COM(2012)0222), and to the Council conclusions of 26 June 2012 deciding to open accession negotiations with Montenegro on 29 June 2012,

–  having regard to the General Affairs Council conclusions on the enlargement and stabilisation and association process of 11 December 2012,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2013-2014’ of 16 October 2013 (COM(2013)0700), accompanied by Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2013)0411 entitled ‘Montenegro 2013 Progress Report’,

–  having regard to the declaration and recommendations of the 6th Meeting of the European Union – Montenegro Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee (SAPC) of 29-30 April 2013,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Montenegro and its resolution of 22 November 2012 on Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 22 October 2013 on budgetary management of European Union pre‑accession funds in the areas of judicial systems and the fight against corruption in the candidate and potential candidate countries and its observations on Montenegro(3),

–  having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas EU accession should remain a major driving force for continued political, social and economic reforms;

B.  whereas the EU has put the rule of law at the core of its enlargement process;

C.  whereas Montenegro has made progress towards EU integration, with enthusiasm for the European project shared across the political spectrum and in society at large; whereas the country has managed to provisionally close Chapters 25 and 26;

D.  whereas the enforcement of the rule of law, notably through judicial reform, and the fight against corruption and organised crime are top priorities; whereas the screening process on all chapters has been concluded; whereas the negotiations on Chapters 23 and 24 were opened in December 2013 in line with the Commission’s ‘New Approach’ of tackling justice reforms and home affairs early in the accession process;

E.  whereas recent constitutional reforms, once fully enacted, will strengthen the independence and efficiency of the judiciary;

F.  whereas financial corruption and organised crime, including in institutions, as well as electoral malpractice, remain serious concerns; whereas Montenegro needs to tackle them and develop a solid track record in the field of the rule of law;

G.  whereas civil society has an important role in the process of reform and EU accession;

H.  whereas regional cooperation is highly important for political stability and for security and economic development in Montenegro and the entire region;

Accession negotiations

1.  Welcomes the opening of five new negotiation chapters in December 2013; encourages swift continuation of the accession negotiations, provided that reforms are pursued and implemented, and concrete results delivered;

2.  Welcomes the government’s action plans on Chapters 23 and 24, which set out a comprehensive reform agenda and constitute the benchmark for opening these chapters;

3.  Commends the inclusion of civil society representatives in the negotiation structures; notes, nevertheless, the call by civil society organisations for the government to demonstrate the maximum possible transparency throughout the negotiating and accession process, including by engaging a broader selection of organisations in the working groups and conducting extensive nationwide consultations;

4.  Underlines the responsibility of both the government and the parliament to improve communication with the public and to inform all interested stakeholders, civil society organisations and the general public in a timely and transparent manner about developments in the accession negotiations and to facilitate their broad participation in this process;

Political criteria

5.  Urges all political forces, in government and opposition alike, as well as key social and economic actors, to remain focused, through sustainable dialogue and constructive cooperation, on the country’s EU integration agenda;

6.  Welcomes the enhancing of the Montenegrin Parliament’s oversight role, including through control and consultative hearings; calls, however, for reinforced follow-up of hearing conclusions, stronger oversight of the implementation of adopted legislation, and more active parliamentary involvement in the negotiations; welcomes the resolution on the method, quality and dynamics of the integration process of Montenegro into the EU, adopted by the Parliament of Montenegro on 27 December 2013; believes that the integration process needs to fully involve the Parliament and civil society organisations and to enjoy broad democratic support;

7.  Regrets the fact that, following this year’s notorious ‘Audio Recording Affair’, a committee of inquiry formed to investigate alleged misuse of public funds for party‑political purposes failed to draw political conclusions in its final report, and that judicial follow-up remains incomplete in this regard; underlines the importance of ensuring that there is a thorough investigation and appropriate action if necessary; encourages the responsible Montenegrin authorities, therefore, to bring a swift, free and fair conclusion to the judicial process, with the cooperation of all relevant parties, addressing any offences carefully, objectively and in full accordance with the law; welcomes, moreover, the recently announced inquiry into the video-recording affair in Cetinje, in which anyone found to have breached electoral law faces appropriate sanctions under due process;

8.  Stresses the need to improve public confidence in the electoral system and democratic structures and calls on the Parliament to speed up the electoral reform by amending the set of laws regulating elections and political party financing, including the draft law on a single voter list and the draft amendments to the law on personal identity cards; underlines the need for the single voter registry to be fully transparent and accountable; insists that these reforms need to be undertaken in line with the long-standing OSCE/ODIHR recommendations and in full transparency, involving civil society; supports the Commission’s call for a clear, broadly accepted delineation between public and party interests to be established; calls on the Government to publish proactively information on state aid for individuals and companies, employment in the public service sector and other expenditures that might affect voting behaviour; notes that the perception of corruption can be as damaging as corruption itself;

9.  Stresses the importance of public administration reform for applying the acquis; considers it essential to strengthen the coordination and monitoring mechanism for the implementation of the public administration strategy and to take further measures to create a transparent, professional, effective and merit-based public administration; calls on the authorities to take care, in the recruitment and dismissal of public officials, not to appear to be further politicising the civil service; calls also for the independence and capacities of the Ombudsman’s office to be strengthened;

10.  Welcomes the constitutional amendments aimed at strengthening the independence of the judiciary by reducing political influence on the appointment of prosecutors and judicial officials at all levels through more transparent and merit-based procedures, and specifically by electing the Supreme State Prosecutor; takes note, however, of the Ombudsman’s initiative for assessing the constitutionality of these amendments and of the provisions of the law on the Constitutional Court concerning the election of Constitutional Court Judges; calls on the competent authorities to establish a solid track record of disciplinary proceedings and to ensure timely justice, together with the unification of jurisprudence; calls for further legislative and other measures to be taken and implemented in order to diminish the politicisation of the judiciary in practice, including through objective evaluation of judicial performance, clear demonstration of judicial accountability in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission, and the guaranteeing of merit-based promotions; underlines also the need to ensure the independence of misdemeanour courts from the executive branch;

11.  Welcomes steps taken to streamline the court system, to promote judicial efficiency and to further decrease the backlog of cases; expresses concern, however, at the length of court procedures, the poor infrastructure at many courts, the weak enforcement of civil and administrative decisions and the insufficient budget for the judiciary and the prosecution; calls for capacities at judicial and prosecutorial councils to be enhanced and for accountability and integrity safeguards in the judicial system to be reinforced; calls, moreover, for measures to ensure access for citizens to civil justice and compensation in line with European standards; urges courts to be more transparent and accountable in fighting corruption and organised crime;

12.  Calls for due follow-up of outstanding war crime reports in order to tackle impunity, with more rigorous, efficient and transparent investigation and prosecution of war crimes; stresses the need to take further action in combating not just impunity, but also the appearance of it; to this extent, encourages the authorities to review sentencing guidelines and examine the seemingly disproportionate number of acquittals in the case of the most serious crimes;

13.  Commends the government for its 2007-2012 Judicial Reform Strategy, but expresses concern over its slow implementation; notes that the 2013-2018 strategy is at an advanced stage of preparation; calls, therefore, for a general governmental focus in Montenegro on implementing existing strategies, with comprehensive and publicly debated evaluations, rather than simply replacing the strategies without the requisite assessment; encourages monitoring bodies for strategies and action plans to become the norm;

14.  Stresses that additional efforts are needed in the fight against corruption, and calls for fulfilment of the GRECO recommendations;

15.  Expresses concern that education, healthcare, the election process, land administration, spatial planning and the construction industry, privatisation and public procurement continue to be vulnerable to corruption; expects that the opening of negotiations on Chapter 5 (Public procurement) will speed up the necessary reforms in this area; welcomes the setting up of the new parliamentary Anti-Corruption Committee; urges the authorities to enhance the capacity of supervisory institutions, to improve auditing, to increase the transparency of party funding, and to strengthen capacity at all levels in order to reduce irregularities in the implementation of the laws on public procurement and the other areas mentioned above;

16.  Expresses concern about the increasing restrictions on public access to information on companies and land registries; notes that public access to this kind of information is of great importance for journalists and civil society actors with a view to disclosing corruption cases and shedding light on links between organised crime and state institutions; urges the authorities to restore a high degree of transparency with regard to the relevant registries;

17.  Stresses the need to enforce reforms in the fight against corruption and organised crime, and to develop a solid track record of investigations, prosecutions and convictions at all levels; calls for increased cooperation and coordination between law enforcement agencies and the judiciary in combating organised crime and corruption at all levels, and for the performance of the judiciary in high-level cases to be improved; expresses serious concern about the annulment of first-instance verdicts in organised crime cases; insists that impunity for criminals convicted of corruption or organised crime offences is not acceptable; calls on the authorities to ensure that the public authorities and institutions implement all relevant measures and that they are held accountable if they fail to do so;

18.  Invites Montenegro to continue engaging in international and regional cooperation when fighting corruption and organised crime; calls for greater efforts towards effective border surveillance with a view to fighting organised crime and smuggling operations on the ‘Balkan route’; stresses the need to increase supervision and employ measures to tackle money laundering conducted by local and international criminal groups;

19.  Stresses the need for the Montenegrin Government to continue and reinforce consultations, and improve interaction and dialogue with civil society, as well as with the opposition, in order to achieve more transparency in policy and law-making, particularly with regard to the implementation of laws and the fight against corruption and organised crime; this being the case, commends the government’s efforts to increase the public transparency of its work, while acknowledging that much remains to be done; welcomes the extensive participation of civil society in the working groups on the EU negotiating chapters, but notes the concerns of some civil society representatives about the nature and quality of that participation; regrets the recent deterioration in the relationship between certain sections of the government and civil society, with fears expressed on both sides that mutual hostility risks trumping the shared desire to advance EU integration; encourages, therefore, a productive and balanced dialogue among all sides, in which the government objectively assists and facilitates the work of civil society, and fully includes representatives in the political process, and civil society organisations critique policy and hold the government to account fairly and constructively;

20.  Notes with satisfaction that IPA assistance works well in Montenegro; encourages both the government and the Commission to simplify the administration procedure for IPA funding, with the aim of making it more accessible to smaller and non-centralised civil organisations, trade unions and other beneficiaries;

21.  Emphasises that Montenegro has ratified the eight core ILO labour rights conventions and the revised European Social Charter; underscores the fact that, although basic labour and trade union rights are generally respected, they need to be further strengthened; underlines the important role of social dialogue and calls on the government to strengthen the Social Council;

22.  Underlines the importance of free, independent and unbiased media in a functioning democracy; expresses grave concern about the increase in verbal and physical intimidation of journalists but also increased pressure through financial shortages and legal proceedings; is deeply shocked by the fact that since August 2013 at least two bomb attacks and around half a dozen physical attacks have been carried out against journalists; deeply deplores the fact that Montenegro is now ranked 113th in the Reporters Without Borders media freedom index; recalls the importance of fostering responsible media, editorial independence and diversity of media ownership in line with European standards; stresses the responsibility of all those in politics and the media to nurture a climate of tolerance for different opinions; considers it essential to help protect journalists and press freedom; calls for all threats and attacks against journalists to be adequately investigated and prosecuted, including unresolved previous offences; welcomes the decision to set up a special body to monitor official efforts to solve cases of murder and assaults on journalists, which may help to establish deeper confidence between the state and the media;

23.  Highlights the special role of independent and sustainable public service media in strengthening media freedom and democracy, and calls on the authorities to fully respect the Law on Radio Television Montenegro (RTCG), including legal safeguards guaranteeing the financial sustainability of public service media, thereby enabling them to fulfil their social remit;

24.  Calls for improvements in the area of witness protection and for the adoption of a law on protecting whistleblowers;

25.  Stresses the responsibility of all political forces to create a climate of tolerance and inclusion for all minorities; welcomes the government’s policy on minorities, which has promoted deeper integration of the country’s Albanian community in particular; calls for the situation of socially vulnerable groups to be improved, including access for people with disabilities to education and medical facilities, and physical access to public buildings; welcomes the government’s recent Roma Action Plan, but calls for further facilitation of education and employment for Roma and other minorities, who still face discrimination, particularly as regards the limited educational access for Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian children;

26.  Notes that women remain underrepresented in many areas of Montenegrin society, including in the parliament, in decision-making positions and on the labour market; calls on the government to strengthen its efforts to enhance gender equality, increase the relevant financial and human resources, ensure implementation of the gender equality action plan, introduce the principle of equal pay for equal work, and to encourage wider participation by women, particularly in the political arena;

27.  Expresses concern about the high level of intolerance of homosexuality in Montenegro, with frequent violence and threats of violence, as well as hate speech against gay rights activists; regrets the fact that the most prominent LGBTI activist, following security concerns, sought asylum abroad; welcomes, however, the government’s new strategy for enhancing the quality of life of LGBTI people, but stresses the focus on its implementation; underlines, in particular, the need to educate and inform the public in order to help change attitudes; particularly commends the government and the police for their support and facilitation of this year’s unprecedented Pride marches in Budva and Podgorica; stresses that the anti-gay violence during the marches should be fully investigated, and the perpetrators brought to justice; encourages the authorities to further promote tolerance towards LGBTI people and to prosecute criminal offences in a timely manner; stresses the need to enhance societal acceptance and end anti-gay discrimination;

28.  Expresses concern about the ongoing problems of violence against women and children, with fears that many consider it socially acceptable; regrets the slow progress in developing family- and community-based services; calls on the government to increase public awareness of family violence and violence against women, and of the right of the child to be protected from any form of abuse, neglect or exploitation; welcomes the government’s new measures to tackle domestic violence, improve children’s rights and develop professional training, but encourages further measures to implement effectively the Law on Protection from Family Violence, particularly regarding protection and support of, and access to justice for, victims, development and coordination of prevention programmes, and stronger accountability for offenders;

Socio-economic issues

29.  Invites the government to focus on increasing economic growth to combat poverty and improve living standards of all citizens, including by examining social welfare reform wherever possible, and to reduce regional disparities; calls for enhanced efforts to tackle the large informal sector, to improve protection of intellectual property rights and the overall legal system in order to systematically fight corruption and improve the business environment, and to implement structural reforms with a view to attracting and sustaining foreign direct investment, which is crucial to diversifying the economy;

30.  Emphasises the need for commercial dispute resolution processes to be transparent, free from political interference and based on the rule of law in order to further improve the business climate; encourages a swift resolution of the KAP aluminium plant dispute; stresses that privatisations should take place in a fair, careful, transparent and orderly manner; points to concerns about state aid, and calls for transparency and sustainability where it is applied, in compliance with the acquis and the Stabilisation and Association Agreement; welcomes the government’s efforts in addressing the issue of rising public debt and large structural fiscal deficits; calls for further activities to ensure future implementation of the IPA rural development programme and to develop water quality legislation in line with the acquis;

31.  Notes that the new Law on Public Procurement entered into force in January 2012 but that in practice its implementation lacks efficiency, particularly in the health sector; calls on the Montenegrin authorities to introduce greater transparency in all procurement procedures and to establish action plans with clear objectives, procedures and timeframes to effectively enforce its new law on public procurement, and to align its legislation on concessions, utilities and defence procurement with the European acquis;

32.  Commends the implementation of the Small Business Act; calls for an increase in public sector support for SMEs as one of the drivers of economic growth; calls for unification of fragmented strategies that impede the effectiveness of enterprise- and industry-related instruments;

33.  Expresses concerns regarding the unchanged labour market situation and therefore calls for resolute measures to tackle high unemployment, in particular among first-time job seekers, and to improve the poorly performing labour market; calls on the government to ensure that the implementation of labour laws is in line with ILO standards, including by improving inspections; stresses the need to confront the grey economy; calls for tri‑partite social dialogue to be strengthened;

34.  Encourages Montenegro to undertake further efforts in the areas of environment and climate change by strengthening administrative capacity to implement relevant EU policies and legislation in order to ensure alignment with the environment and climate change acquis;

35.  Notes that illegal constructions, especially in tourist areas, are a significant problem in Montenegro; calls for the Montenegrin authorities to decisively promote sustainable development in the country; stresses the importance of tourism development being in line with environmental protection;

Regional cooperation

36.  Welcomes Montenegro’s proactive participation in initiatives including those on regional reconciliation and the ‘Western Balkans Six’ project, and its government’s desire to take the lead in regional cooperation initiatives; calls on Montenegro to enhance its cultural and economic cooperation with neighbouring EU Member States; commends the government for maintaining good bilateral relations with all its neighbours, including Kosovo, but stresses the need to swiftly settle its dispute with Croatia on land and maritime borders, particularly in the light of preliminary offshore oil exploration; encourages the final delimitation of borders with Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo in order to eliminate potential sources of tension; welcomes progress on the Sarajevo Declaration Process, including the implementation of the Regional Housing Programme; encourages further cooperation with neighbouring countries by sharing experiences of the accession negotiations;

37.  Welcomes the recent visits of Prime Minister Dačić to Podgorica and Prime Minister Đukanović to Belgrade, the first such visits since Montenegro’s independence; commends these events as a strong sign of reconciliation and of increased engagement and openness on both sides, which can only bode well for further regional and European integration;

38.  Stresses that the good neighbourhood relations which Montenegro has with the countries in the region form a basis for successful negotiations with the EU, and that the country itself represents an example of cooperation and commitment to the peace and stability of a region of the Western Balkans;

39.  Welcomes the government’s recent efforts to register internally displaced persons (IDPs) and clarify their status, but appreciates the difficulty of this task, including in the elimination of administrative burdens; calls on the EU, as well as other Balkan partners, to assist the Montenegrin Government to resolve this issue as soon as possible, and help close a painful chapter in the region’s history;

40.  Welcomes the Montenegrin Government’s commitment to joining NATO, but notes the strong divergence of opinion among parliamentarians and in society at large; expresses confidence that Montenegro’s efforts to attain NATO membership will benefit its aspirations towards EU membership, as well as improving regional cooperation and security; commends in particular Montenegro’s contribution, despite its limited defence resources, to UN and CSDP missions, including in Afghanistan, Liberia and Mali; welcomes this clear signal of Montenegro’s commitment to working with international partners in promoting global peace and stability;

o
o   o

41.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Government and Parliament of Montenegro.

(1) OJ L 108, 29.4.2010, p. 3. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0453. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0434.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation’ (2014/2511(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0105 B7-0091/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation’ (COM(2013)0833),

–  having regard to the report by the European Institute for Gender Equality entitled ‘Female genital mutilation in the European Union and Croatia’,

–  having regard to UN General Assembly resolution 67/146 on intensifying global efforts for the elimination of female genital mutilations,

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2012 on ending female genital mutilation(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 5 April 2011 on priorities and outline of a new EU policy framework to fight violence against women(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2009 on combating female genital mutilation in the EU(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 16 January 2008 entitled ‘Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child’(4),

–  having regard to Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA(5),

–  having regard to the Commission’s Strategy for Equality between Women and Men 2010-2015, which was presented on 21 September 2010,

–  having regard to the ‘Stockholm Programme – An Open and Secure Europe Serving and Protecting Citizens’(6),

–  having regard to the Council of Europe Convention of 12 April 2011 on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention),

–  having regard to Articles 6 and 7 of the EU Treaty on respect for human rights (general principles) and Articles 12 and 13 of the EC Treaty (non-discrimination),

–  having regard to General Recommendation No 14 of 1990 of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women on female circumcision,

–  having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas violence against women is defined by Parliament in its resolution of 5 April 2011 on priorities and outline of a new EU policy framework to fight violence against women as ‘any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life(7)‘;

B.  whereas female genital mutilation (FGM) is a form of violence against women and girls, which constitutes a violation of their fundamental rights and is in breach of the principles laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and whereas it is absolutely necessary to embed the fight against FGM in a general and coherent approach to combating violence against women;

C.  whereas FGM was defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2008 as all procedures that involve partial of total removal of the external female sexual organs for non-medical reasons, including sunna circumcision or clitoridectomy (partial or total removal of the clitoris along with the prepuce), excision (partial or total removal of the clitoris and the outside labia, ‘the lips’) and the most extreme practice of FGM, infibulation (narrowing the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal);

D.  whereas, according to the WHO, approximately 140 million children, young girls and women are believed to have experienced this cruel form of gender-based violence globally; whereas, according to the WHO, most cases of FGM have been carried out in childhood on young girls between infancy and the age of 15; whereas this cruel practice has been reported in 28 African countries, Yemen, northern Iraq and Indonesia;

E.  whereas FGM is a brutal practice which does not occur only in third countries but also affects women and girls living in the EU, who undergo FGM either on its territory or in their home countries before moving to, or whilst travelling outside, the EU(8); whereas, according to the UNHCR, around 20 000 women and girls from FGM-practising countries seek asylum in the EU on a yearly basis, of whom 9 000 may be already mutilated(9) and estimates of the number of women who have undergone FGM or are at risk within Europe run up to 500 000(10), whilst prosecutions of the crime are still rare;

F.  whereas FGM is frequently performed at home in mediocre, unhygienic conditions and often without anaesthetic or medical knowledge, and has multiple very serious and often irreparable or fatal consequences for the health, both physical and psychological, of women and girls and is harmful to their sexual and reproductive health;

G.  whereas FGM clearly goes against the European founding value of equality between women and men and maintains traditional values according to which women are seen as the objects and properties of men; whereas cultural and traditional values should under no circumstances be used as an excuse to practice FGM on children, young girls or women;

H.  whereas the protection of the rights of the child is entrenched in numerous Member States and in European and international agreements and legislation, and whereas no violence against women in general, including against young girls, can be justified on grounds of respect for cultural traditions or various kinds of initiation ceremonies;

I.  whereas the prevention of FGM is an international human rights obligation for every Member State under General Recommendation No 14 of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women on Female Circumcision and Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, which recognises FGM as a form of gender-based violence regarding which, amongst other things, minimum standards for protection should be established;

1.  Welcomes the Commission’s communication ‘Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation’, in which it undertakes to use EU funding to prevent FGM and improve support for victims, including protection for women at risk under EU asylum rules, and, together with the European External Action Service (EEAS), to strengthen international dialogue and encourage research with a view to clearly identifying women and girls at risk;

2.  Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to facilitating the exchange of experience and good practices on FGM issues between Member States, NGOs and experts, and emphasises the need to continue to closely involve civil society, including that of third countries, not only in awareness-raising campaigns but also in the development of educational material and training;

3.  Points out that international, European and Member State institutions play a vital role in the prevention of FGM, the protection of women and girls and the identification of victims and in taking measures to ban gender-based violence including FGM, and welcomes the EU’s commitment to continue to take action to promote the abandonment of the FGM in countries where it is practised;

4.  Reiterates its call on the Commission to submit, without delay, a proposal for an EU legislative act to establish prevention measures against all forms of violence against women (including FGM) and, as indicated in the Stockholm Programme, a comprehensive EU strategy on the issue, including further structured joint action plans to end FGM in the EU;

5.  Emphasises the need for the Commission and the EEAS to take a firm stance on third countries which do not condemn FGM;

6.  Calls on the Commission to use a harmonised approach to gathering data on FGM, and calls for the European Institute for Gender Equality to involve demographers and statisticians in the development of a common methodology and for indications to be drawn up by them in accordance with the communication, in order to guarantee the feasibility of comparison between individual Member States;

7.  Reiterates its call on the Member States to use existing mechanisms, in particular Directive 2012/29/EU, including training for professionals to protect women and girls, and to pursue, prosecute and punish any resident who has committed the crime of FGM, even if the offence was committed outside the borders of the Member State concerned, and calls, therefore, for the principle of extraterritoriality to be included in the criminal law provisions of all Member States so that the offence is punishable to the same extent in all 28 Member States;

8.  Calls on the EU and those Member States which have not yet ratified the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women to do so without delay so that the EU’s commitment complies with international standards promoting a holistic and integrated approach to violence against women and to FGM;

9.  Calls on the Commission to designate 2016 as the European Year to End Violence against Women and Girls;

10.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Council of Europe, the UN Secretary-General and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 332 E, 15.11.2013, p. 87. (2) OJ C 296 E, 2.10.2012, p. 26. (3) OJ C 117 E, 6.5.2010, p. 52. (4) OJ C 41 E, 19.2.2009, p. 24. (5) OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57. (6) OJ C 115, 4.5.2010, p. 1. (7) Article 1 of the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women of 20 December 1993 (A/RES/48/104); point 113 of the United Nations 1995 Beijing Platform for Action. (8) EIGE, Female genital mutilation in the European Union and Croatia, 2013. (9) UNHCR’s Contribution to the European Commission’s consultation on female genital mutilation in the EU, 2013. (10) Waris, D. and Milborn, C., Desert Children, Virago, UK, 2005.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on NAIADES II: An action programme to support inland waterway transport (2013/3002(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0106 B7-0094/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Question for Oral Answer to the Commission on NAIADES II – An action programme to support inland waterway transport (O-000016/2014 – B7‑0104/2014),

–  having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2006 on ‘the promotion of inland waterway transport: NAIADES, an integrated European Action Programme for inland waterway transport’(1),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 10 September 2013 entitled ‘Towards quality inland waterway transport – NAIADES II’ (COM(2013)0623),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2011 on ‘the Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system’(2),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 17 January 2006 on the promotion of inland waterway transport – ‘NAIADES – An Integrated Action Programme for Inland Waterway Transport’ (COM(2006)0006),

–  having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document of 10 September 2013 entitled ‘Greening the fleet: reducing pollutant emissions in inland waterway transport’ (SWD(2013)0324),

–  having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the inland waterway transport sector makes a considerable contribution to the EU transport system by transporting goods between the EU’s ports and the hinterland;

B.  whereas inland navigation transport is energy-efficient and contributes to the goals of the low-carbon economy set out in the EU’s Transport Policy White Paper;

C.  whereas by exploiting the full potential of inland navigation transport the inland waterway sector could be a key link in Europe in terms of solving the congestion and environmental problems generated by goods imported through maritime ports;

D.  whereas modernisation of the inland waterway fleet and its adaptation to reflect technical progress would be needed in order to further improve the environmental performance of the vessels, developing inter alia River Adapted Ships for Sustainable Inland Navigation (RASSIN), and thereby ensuring the competitive advantage of inland waterway transport;

E.  whereas the weak economic situation in Europe has also impacted on the inland navigation sector, and whereas the inland shipping industry is in a difficult economic situation;

F.  whereas the current overcapacity is having a devastating impact on the inland shipping industry;

G.  whereas the inland waterway transport sector’s structure is largely based on SMEs, i.e. owner-operators who work and live with their families on the vessels, and whereas these SMEs are particularly vulnerable to the crisis;

H.  whereas social standards, such as working time, as well as education, are of crucial importance for this sector;

I.  whereas limited financial means are dedicated to the inland waterway sector, and whereas access to finance is increasingly difficult;

1.  Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to update and renew the NAIADES programme by 2020;

2.  Supports the specific actions defined in the NAIADES II action programme 2014-2020;

3.  Regrets the fact that the Commission did not accompany the NAIADES II proposal with adequate and dedicated funding to achieve the goals of the action programme and therefore calls for a well-structured policy with achievable short- and mid-term goals and a concrete roadmap that describes inter alia the resources for implementation;

4.  Calls on the Commission to provide as soon as for possible concrete actions that take into account the specificities of a sector largely based on SMEs;

5.  Underlines the importance of high‑quality infrastructure as a condition for developing and integrating inland waterway transport and inland ports into the trans-European transport network, calls upon the Commission and the Member States to integrate all important bottlenecks into the corridor implementation plans to be adopted, and highlights the fact that the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) gives funding priority to the development of infrastructure for the greener modes of transport, such as inland waterways;

6.  Welcomes the fact that inland waterways have been embedded in six of the nine core network corridors of the TEN-T and hopes that bottlenecks and missing links will be suitably addressed, given that the CEF will prioritise spending on removing bottlenecks, bridging missing links and, in particular, improving cross-border sections of the core network; recalls that the CEF will also make it a priority to fund telematic application systems functioning as River Information Services (RIS);

7.  Urges the Commission and the Member States to pay particular attention to free-flowing rivers which are close to their natural state and which can therefore be the subject of specific measures; underlines the need to respect EU environmental legislation, as indicated in Articles 16 and 36 of Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T);

8.  Emphasises, in addition to the Member States’ obligations to complete the core network, the responsibility of providing adequate and reliable infrastructure by regular maintenance so as to preserve good navigation status with a view to ensuring the role of inland waterway transport as a reliable and cost-effective mode of transport;

9.  Asks the Commission to speed up the integration of RIS, inland waterway transport market observation data and TEN-T corridor tools in order to support integrated multimodal transport governance; supports the expansion and integration of RIS data exchange into information streams of other transport modes in order to facilitate the integration of inland waterway transport with other transport modes, and calls upon the Commission to swiftly develop orientations to enable this integration to take place;

10.  Calls on the Commission to support the uptake of best practice on integrating inland waterway transport services into multimodal logistics chains;

11.  Stresses the importance of providing appropriate funding for new technology, innovation and sustainable freight transport services under the existing EU programmes such as the Connecting Europe Facility, Horizon 2020 and the Cohesion Fund in order to stimulate the uptake of innovation and increase the environmental performance of inland waterway transport, and asks the Commission to elaborate concrete funding programmes to realise this goal;

12.  Urges the Commission to come forward with options on how to leverage the reserve funds by using them in conjunction with financial instruments available under existing Union funds such as the CEF and from the European Investment Bank;

13.  Invites the Member States to further develop national strategies to stimulate inland waterway transport, taking into account the European Action Programme, and to encourage regional, local and port authorities to do likewise;

14.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 313 E, 20.12.2006, p. 443. (2) OJ C 168 E, 14.6.2013, p.72.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on the situation in Thailand (2014/2551(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0107 RC-B7-0122/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Thailand of 5 February 2009(1), 20 May 2010(2) and 17 February 2011(3),

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to the Universal Periodic Review of Thailand before the UN Human Rights Council, and its recommendations, of 5 October 2011,

–  having regard to the statements by the Spokesperson of EU High Representative Catherine Ashton, of 26 November 2013 on the political situation in Thailand, of 13 December 2013 and of 23 January 2014 on the recent events in Thailand, and of 30 January 2014 on the coming elections,

–  having regard to the statement issued by the Delegation of the European Union in agreement with the EU Heads of Mission in Thailand on 2 December 2013,

–  having regard to the press briefings by the Spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 26 December 2013 and 14 January 2014,

–  having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966,

–  having regard to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials of 1990,

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas demonstrations started in November 2013, after the Thai Parliament’s Lower House adopted an amnesty bill introduced by the ruling Pheu Thai Party (PTP) for various crimes committed since 2004 by political leaders and government officials, including Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s brother, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra; whereas the former prime minister has been in self-imposed exile since 2008 to avoid a two-year jail term following a conviction in a corruption-related case;

B.  whereas in protest against the proposed amnesty bill, peaceful demonstrations began in Bangkok on 11 November 2013, spearheaded by former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, leader of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC), an anti-government group; whereas street protests continued despite the rejection of the amnesty bill by the Thai Senate;

C.  whereas on 20 November 2013, the Constitutional Court rejected a proposed amendment to the Constitution transforming the Senate into a fully elected body and also rejected an opposition petition to dissolve the Pheu Thai Party, which increased anti-government protests;

D.  whereas Deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban accused the government of being illegitimate and proposed that the parliament should be replaced by an unelected ‘People’s Council’ to carry out political and institutional reforms;

E.  whereas during the unrest, which has lasted for months, several people have been killed and hundreds have been injured, among them Kwanchai Praipana, a leader of Thailand’s pro-government faction, who was shot and wounded on 22 January 2014, and Suthin Tharatin, a Thai anti-government movement leader, who was shot dead on 26 January 2014;

F.  whereas on 21 January 2014, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra declared a 60-day state of emergency in the capital, Bangkok, and the surrounding provinces, banning public gatherings of more than five people, allowing people suspected of violence to be held in custody for up to thirty days, authorising censorship of news inciting violence and granting immunity from criminal prosecution to government agencies and officials involved in the enforcement of the decree;

G.  whereas the Constitutional Court ruled on 24 January 2014 that elections could be postponed due to the unrest, but the government decided to go ahead with advance votes starting on 26 January 2014;

H.  whereas general elections took place in Thailand on 2 February 2014 and voting started on 26 January 2014, despite the call by the Election Commission for the polls to be delayed because of the ongoing unrest;

I.  whereas the main opposition party, the Democrat Party, announced it was pulling out of the elections scheduled for 2 February 2014;

J.  whereas on 26 January 2014, voting was cancelled in 83 of the 375 constituencies nationwide because anti-government protesters cut off access to polling stations, blocked election officials and prevented voters from exercising their right to vote;

K.  whereas, despite the low turnout, following a meeting with the Election Commission on 28 January 2014 the Prime Minister confirmed that the 2 February 2014 election date would be maintained;

L.  whereas no voting took place in nine provinces, and protesters reportedly disrupted electoral registration and blocked voting in parts of Bangkok and the south of the country, with an estimated 69 of 375 districts of the country and 8.75 million voters affected by disruptions;

M.  whereas Thai law stipulates that the legislature cannot re-open unless at least 95 % (or 475 seats) of the 500 seats are filled; whereas by-elections will therefore have to be held in the affected areas;

N.  whereas the parliament will not be able to convene and a new government cannot be formed, threatening to create a political vacuum that is likely to prolong the crisis;

1.  Expresses deep concern over the degeneration of political and socioeconomic differences into violent clashes between government and opposition, and between demonstrators and security forces in Thailand, and expresses its solidarity with the Thai people who have suffered due to the unrest and all the families whose loved ones have been killed or injured during the past months;

2.  Calls on the Thai authorities to fully investigate the recent cases of violence that led to several deaths and injuries and to prosecute those responsible;

3.  Calls on all parties to respect the rule of law and to abide by democratic principles; stresses that elections must be free and fair and condemns the destructive actions of anti-government protestors who prevented voters from casting their ballots on 26 January 2014 and 2 February 2014;

4.  Calls on the Thai authorities to protect freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association; appeals to the authorities to immediately revoke the state of emergency as the existing laws are adequate to deal with the current situation;

5.  Calls on both government supporters and anti-government demonstrators to refrain from any political violence and move forward within Thailand’s democratic and constitutional framework;

6.  Calls on the leaders of the Democrat Party to allow the parliament, elected by the people of Thailand, to fulfil its mandate;

7.  Underlines the fact that the proposal of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee for an unelected ‘People’s Council’ to replace the government and rule the country for up to two years is undemocratic;

8.  Urges the government, the Electoral Commission and the opposition to engage immediately in a constructive dialogue and initiate an inclusive and time-bound process of institutional and political reforms, which could be approved through a national referendum and followed by inclusive, secure, free and fair elections;

9.  Welcomes the fact that the National Human Rights Commission has called a consultative meeting of intellectuals, representatives of social movements, religious leaders and the four former Prime Ministers, Anand Panyarachun, Banharn Silapa-acha, Chavalit Yongchaiyudh and Chuan Leekpai, to look for and put forward a solution to end this crisis;

10.  Urges the military to maintain their neutrality and play a positive role in order to ensure peaceful resolution of the ongoing crisis;

11.  Is concerned regarding the occupation of public office buildings and television broadcasting stations, the intimidation of the media and the charges of criminal defamation brought against two journalists based in Phuket;

12.  Recalls that the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials state that authorities must, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms and, whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, must use restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence;

13.  States its support for democracy in Thailand, while noting the excellent nature of EU-Thai relations and Thailand’s role as a source of prosperity and stability in the region; underlines the fact that negotiations for a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and Thailand have been concluded and engage the two parties to reaffirm their strong attachment to democratic principles and human rights;

14.  Urges the international community to put all its efforts into stopping the violence; urges the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to follow the political situation closely and coordinate actions with ASEAN and the United Nations in order to foster dialogue and strengthen democracy in the country;

15.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Government and Parliament of Thailand, the Secretary-General of ASEAN and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

(1) OJ C 67 E, 18.3.2010, p. 144. (2) OJ C 161 E, 31.5.2011, p. 152. (3) OJ C 188 E, 28.6.2012, p. 57.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on Transnistria (2014/2552(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0108 RC-B7-0128/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between Moldova and the European Union, which entered into force on 1 July 1998,

–  having regard to the Action Plan for the Republic of Moldova adopted by the seventh EU‑Moldova Cooperation Council meeting on 22 February 2005,

–  having regard to the Association Agreement initialled by the EU and Moldova on 29 November 2013 on the occasion of the Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius,

–  having regard to the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights of 19 October 2012 on the case of Catan and 27 Others v. Moldova and Russia (No 43370/04),

–  having regard to the declarations of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) at its 1999 summit in Istanbul and its 2002 Ministerial Council meeting in Oporto,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on the situation in the Republic of Moldova, particularly that of 15 September 2011 on the Association Agreement(1), and to its resolutions on the situation in the Transnistrian region,

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the pressure exerted by Russia on Eastern Partnership countries (in the context of the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius)(2) and its resolution of 12 December 2013 on the outcome of the Vilnius Summit and the future of the Eastern Partnership, in particular as regards Ukraine(3),

–  having regard to the judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Moldova of 5 December 2013 that the country`s official language is Romanian and to the fact that Romanian-language education remains restricted by the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria,

–  having regard to the recommendations of the meetings of the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, particularly those pertaining to the right to education in the Transnistrian region,

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the 1992 war in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova led to the establishment of a separatist, illegitimate and authoritarian regime in the region; whereas the situation of frozen conflict persists, and human rights violations continue to be gross and widespread, including in the area of education and the operation of schools;

B.  whereas any political interference with the educational process is unacceptable: whereas the parties involved in the settlement of the Transnistrian issue should ensure free and non‑discriminatory access to education in the region and the regular functioning of educational institutions and should accord the highest priority to the security of children and staff;

C.  whereas the local authorities in Gagauzia organised a regional referendum on 2 February 2014 concerning the direction of the foreign policy of the country; whereas this referendum was declared illegal by the central government and the competent judicial authorities;

D.  whereas negotiations concerning Transnistria have been ongoing since 1992, in the so-called ‘5+2’ format, but no sustainable solution based on full respect for the Republic of Moldova`s territorial integrity and sovereignty has been found, despite the abovementioned repeated international decisions; whereas Russian troops continue to be stationed there;

E.  whereas the 5+2 negotiations resumed again in 2011 and the Working Group on Education has met since then;

F.  whereas the tensions have been growing, as the negotiations are constantly undermined by the self-proclaimed Transnistrian authorities; whereas the new round of 5+2 negotiations has been provisionally agreed to take place on 27-28 February 2014 and constitutes a fresh opportunity to end the deadlock and achieve substantial progress;

G.  whereas according to a November 2012 OSCE report, there are eight Latin-script schools that are able to continue teaching with the help of the Ministry of Education, six of them on Transnistrian-controlled territory and two relocated to neighbouring Moldovan-controlled territory on the left bank, resulting in serious daily transport problems for the pupils; whereas the report highlighted that the situation of these schools remains urgent, issues of concern including rental contracts and conditions of premises, freedom of movement, transport of goods, health, safety and sanitary inspections, declining pupil numbers, pressure or intimidation towards parents and teachers, legal status, and the specific situations of the property in Rîbnița and the schools formerly located in Grigoriopol and Dubăsari;

H.  whereas in December 2013 the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria relaunched an aggressive campaign against the eight Romanian-language schools, with actions ranging from administrative pressures to declarations by the self-proclaimed authorities indicating that they will shut down those schools that refuse to recognise the authority of the separatist regime;

I.  whereas many of the teachers at the Lucian Blaga high school in Tiraspol have been subjected to illegal interrogation by the separatist militia and pressure to pay their taxes to the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria and not to the Moldovan state; whereas the school’s bank accounts were illegally blocked for several weeks in January 2014 by the self‑proclaimed authorities; whereas on 5 February 2014 the principal, the accountant and the driver of the "Lucian Blaga" high school were detained when they were transporting the salaries of the high school's staff;

J.  whereas the meeting of the Working Group on Education held in Chișinău on 27 January 2014 did not manage to successfully address the outstanding issues around the Romanian‑language schools; whereas a provisional agreement was reached to conduct joint inspection visits to those schools;

K.  whereas the OSCE Mission in Moldova has been monitoring the functioning of the Romanian-language schools since the 2004 crisis when the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria took action against eight schools in the region that are operated by the Moldovan central authorities and follow a Moldovan curriculum; whereas the OSCE mediates between the central and the Transnistrian education authorities to find solutions for outstanding issues and prevent the emergence of new crises; whereas the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria have been limiting the OSCE’s mission access to the region and have forbidden access to the head of mission as of 1 February 2014;

L.  whereas the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 19 October 2012 in the case of Catan and Others v. Moldova and Russia pointed to a violation by the Russian Federation of Article 2 of Protocol No 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

M.  whereas the Republic of Moldova has made great progress towards deepening its relations with the EU, and the Association Agreement is an opportunity for the entire country, including regions such as Transnistria or Gagauzia, to further deepen its relations with the EU and adopt European values and standards while improving its economic prospects;

N.  whereas education is an area where there is a great potential for future cooperation in spite of the sensitivities involved;

1.  Strongly deplores the lack of respect for human rights in the Transnistrian region, especially in the field of education;

2.  Condemns the politicisation of the education policy area, considers freedom of education to be a fundamental right, and calls for full respect for that right and the cessation of any form of pressure directed towards Romanian teaching institutions in the Transnistrian region;

3.  Regrets that the persistence of the above problems has significantly contributed to falling enrolment in the Romanian-language schools; strongly criticises the fact that those schools are charged higher rates for public utilities in Transnistria than other educational institutions and that the ambiguous situation of the premises and rental contracts leaves both the schools and their pupils in uncertainty;

4.  Condemns the increased administrative pressure being exercised by the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria, in particular higher rents prices, the abolition of free rental contracts (affecting the Gymnasiums in Corjova and Roghi), restrictions on bank account use and harassment of teachers (Lucian Blaga high school, January 2014) culminating with the detention of the principal, the accountant and the driver of the high school on 5 February 2014;

5.  Urges the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria to fully respect the fundamental right to mother-tongue education and to accord the highest priority to the security of children and staff;

6.  Calls on the authorities to ensure that children and parents are protected from the adverse consequences of the current political situation and to find solutions in the best interest of the children and parents directly concerned;

7.  Takes note of the agreement to conduct joint inspection visits to the Romanian-language schools over the period 10-20 March 2013;

8.  Condemns the lack of constructive participation by the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria in the 5+2 format negotiations, resulting in minimal progress since the resumption of talks;

9.  Emphasises the EU’s firm commitment to the territorial integrity of Moldova and calls for a greater involvement of the EU in solving this conflict in its immediate neighbourhood, including the enhancement of the EU’s status to that of a negotiating partner; expresses its support for dialogue as the only tool for resolving such sensitive and important matters and ensuring long-term solutions;

10.  Believes that the prosperity and stability of the Republic of Moldova, within its internationally recognised borders, and of the entire region can be fully achieved only through a peaceful solution to the Transnistrian conflict;

11.  Calls on the OSCE to continue its monitoring and negotiation facilitation activities and to defend the right to education of the students of the Romanian-language schools in Transnistria; further calls on the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria to cooperate with the OSCE mission to Moldova and allow it to access its territory;

12.  Calls on the High Representative to address the issue of the right to education during the next round of 5+2 negotiations scheduled for February 2014, to devote more attention to the 5+2 format negotiations, and to engage at all levels, including in its bilateral summits, with all the parties involved in order to achieve a faster comprehensive and peaceful solution to the Transnistrian conflict;

13.  Calls on the Russian Federation to implement fully the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights that ruled that Russia had violated the right to education in the cases of Moldovan schools using Romanian in the region of Transnistria;

14.  Notes that the presence of Russian troops leads to a climate that endangers respect for and promotion of human rights in the region; calls on the Russian Federation to immediately stop its support for the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria and fulfil the commitments made in 1996 in the Council of Europe and reflected in OSCE decisions (Istanbul, 1999 and Oporto, 2002) concerning the withdrawal of Russian troops and arms from the territory of Moldova; ; calls, further, for the replacement of these troops with a civilian peacekeeping mission;

15.  Calls for restraint on the part of local authorities, including those in Gagauzia, as well as for full respect for the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, the protection of minorities included; encourages dialogue with the Moldovan central authorities in order to avoid unilateral decisions;

16.  Calls on the Council and the Member States to adopt a speedy procedure leading to the adoption of the visa liberalisation with Moldova in the course of this summer, since this will have a positive impact on all citizens, including in the education field;

17.  Calls on the Commission to speed up the technical procedures leading to the signing and provisional application of the Association Agreement, including the Deep and Comprehensive Free trade Area Agreement;

18.  Believes that social progress, improvements in human rights and economic modernisation in Transnistria would also be advanced by the implementation of the provisions of the Association Agreements, including the DCFTA, by the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria;

19.  Calls on the Commission also to use instruments such as the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights to support the Transnistrian population directly, developing programmes to support civil society, access to information, education and free media, which have been denied by the self-proclaimed authorities in Transnistria;

20.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security, the Government and Parliament of Moldova, the Government of Romania, the Government of Ukraine, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Government of the USA, the Secretary-General of the OSCE and the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe.

(1) OJ C 51 E, 22.2.2013, p. 108. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0383. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0595.

European Parliament resolution of 6 February 2014 on Bahrain, in particular the cases of Nabeel Rajab, Abdulhadi al-Khawaja and Ibrahim Sharif (2014/2553(RSP))

P7_TA(2014)0109 RC-B7-0100/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Bahrain, and in particular those of 17 January 2013(1) and of 12 September 2013(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2011 on European Union relations with the Gulf Cooperation Council(3),

–  having regard to the statements made by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) on Bahrain, in particular her statements of 7 January, 11 February, 1 July and 25 November 2013, and of 16 January 2014,

–  having regard to the local EU statement on the latest developments in Bahrain of 19 September 2013,

–  having regard to the visit by a delegation of its Subcommittee on Human Rights to Bahrain on 19 and 20 December 2012, and to the press statement issued by that delegation, and to the Arab Peninsula delegation visit from 27 to 30 April 2013 and its press statement,

–  having regard to the statements made by the UN Secretary-General, and particularly that of 8 January 2013, and to the statement by the spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 6 August 2013,

–  having regard to the statement of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Joint Statement on the OHCHR and the human rights situation in Bahrain of 9 September 2013,

–  having regard to the EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting in Manama, Bahrain, on 30 June 2013,

–  having regard to the decision of the Arab League’s Ministerial Council, meeting in Cairo on 1 September 2013, to set up a pan-Arab court of human rights in Bahrain’s capital, Manama,

–  having regard to the report released by the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) in November 2011, and to its follow-up report of 21 November 2012,

–  having regard to Opinion A/HRC/WGAD/2013/12 of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of 25 July 2013,

–  having regard to the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy of 25 June 2012,

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2012 on a digital freedom strategy in EU foreign policy(4),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2013 on the freedom of the press and media in the world(5),

–  having regard to the 2004 EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, as updated in 2008,

–  having regard to the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the Arab Charter on Human Rights, to all of which Bahrain is a party,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to the 1949 Geneva Convention,

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas human rights violations in Bahrain remain of great concern; whereas many recent actions by the Bahraini authorities continue to violate and restrict the rights and freedoms of segments of the population, in particular the right of individuals to peaceful protest, freedom of expression and digital freedom; whereas human rights activists face ongoing systematic targeting, harassment and detention;

B.  whereas Nabeel Rajab, the President of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR) and Deputy Secretary General of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), was convicted to three years in prison in August 2012 on charges of calling for and participating in ‘illegal gatherings’ and ‘disturbing public order’ between February and March 2011; whereas his sentence was reduced to two years in prison on appeal; whereas before this imprisonment Mr Rajab was repeatedly detained for peacefully expressing criticism of the government during the pro-democracy protests that erupted Bahrain in 2011;

C.  whereas on Friday 29 November 2013 Nabeel Rajab had served three-quarters of his two-year sentence and had become legally eligible for release; whereas a third request for early release was submitted by Nabeel Rajab’s lawyers on 21 January 2014 to the Court, but was rejected;

D.  whereas the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has described the detention of Mr Nabeel Rajab as arbitrary;

E.  whereas on 22 June 2011, Abdulhadi-al-Khawaja, founder of the BCHR and regional coordinator of Front Line Defenders, who has Danish nationality, and Ibrahim Sharif, Secretary General of the National Democratic Action Society, were sentenced to life in prison by a special military court; whereas the legal process came to a conclusion after 3 years of appeals and the sentences were upheld;

F.  whereas on 27 January 2014, Zainab al-Khawaja, Abdulhadi-al-Khawaja’s daughter, was sentenced by the Lower Criminal Court in Manama to a further four months in prison on the charge of ‘destroying government property’;

G.  whereas, following the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) report, the Bahraini authorities committed themselves to undertaking reforms; whereas the government has failed to fully implement the Commission’s core recommendations, notably the release of protest leaders convicted for exercising their right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly;

H.  whereas on 2 September 2013 Bahrain announced that it would host the permanent headquarters of the Arab Human Rights Court following its approval at an Arab League meeting in Cairo;

I.  whereas on 15 January 2014 HRH Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, upon the request of HM King Hamad Bin Isa Al Khalifa, held wide-ranging talks with participants in the National Consensus Dialogue, including in particular with Sheikh Ali Salman, the Secretary-General of Alwefaq, for the first time since the events of February 2011;

1.  Condemns all human rights violations in Bahrain and urges the Bahraini government to implement all the recommendations in the BICI report and the Universal Periodic Review, to put an end to all human rights abuses and to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression, both online and offline, and the freedom of assembly, in line with Bahrain’s international human rights obligations;

2.  Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience, political activists, journalists, human rights defenders and peaceful protesters, including Nabeel Rajab, Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, Ibrahim Sharif, Naji Fateel, and Zainab Al-Khawaja;

3.  Expresses its grave concern regarding the Bahraini authorities’ treatment of Nabeel Rajab and other human rights activists, in addition to their refusal to grant him the early release for which he is eligible in accordance with the law;

4.  Calls for the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearance;

5.  Stresses the obligation to ensure that human rights defenders are protected and allowed to conduct their work without hindrance, intimidation or harassment;

6.  Opposes the creation and use of special courts or the use of military courts to try national security crimes;

7.  Urges the Bahraini authorities to respect the rights of juveniles, in accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Bahrain is a party;

8.  Welcomes Prince Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa’s decision to hold talks on 15 January 2014 with leaders of the five main opposition groupings in order to explore means of overcoming the challenges faced by the national dialogue which had been suspended by the government a few days before; welcomes the positive reaction of the opposition and looks forward to the resumption of the National Consensus Dialogue; notes that there is no solution other than a Bahraini one based on compromises and mutual trust; hopes that this step will foster a serious and inclusive national dialogue, setting the ground for profound and sustainable reforms towards the national reconciliation of Bahraini society;

9.  Is encouraged by the operational launch of the office of the Ministry of Interior’s Ombudsman and a Special Investigations Unit in the Public Prosecution Office and calls on these institutions to act independently and effectively; welcomes the increasingly active role assumed by the National Institution for Human Rights since its reform and the creation of the ‘Prisoners and Detainees’ Commission’, which will monitor places of detention in order to prevent torture and ill-treatment; calls on the Bahraini authorities to improve the conditions and treatment of prisoners and to allow relevant local and international organisations access to detention centres;

10.  Notes the Bahraini Government’s ongoing efforts to reform the penal code and legal procedures, and encourages the continuation of this process; calls on the Government of Bahrain to take all necessary steps to guarantee due process and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in Bahrain, and to ensure that it acts in full accordance with international human rights standards;

11.  Encourages the UN to organise a prompt visit by the three Special Rapporteurs on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, on torture and on the independence of judges and lawyers;

12.  Calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to work together to develop a clear strategy setting out how the EU will, both publicly and privately, actively push for the release of the imprisoned activists and prisoners of conscience; calls on the VP/HR to work with the Member States to ensure the adoption of the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions on the human rights situation in Bahrain, which should include a specific call for the immediate and unconditional release of the imprisoned activists;

13.  Welcomes the decision by the Arab League to set up an Arab Human Rights Court in Manama and expresses its hope that this may act as a catalyst for human rights across the region; urges the Government of Bahrain, as well as its partners in the Arab League, to ensure the integrity, impartiality, efficiency and credibility of this Court;

14.  Calls for the adoption by the Council of appropriate measures in the event of the reform process being discontinued or a deteriorating human rights situation;

15.  Encourages the establishment of an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty;

16.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the Government and Parliament of the Kingdom of Bahrain.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0032. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0390. (3) OJ C 247 E, 17.8.2012, p. 1. (4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0470. (5) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0274.