Index 
Texts adopted
Tuesday, 11 March 2014 - Strasbourg
Statistics of goods transport by inland waterways (delegated and implementing powers) ***I
 Statistics for the macroeconomic imbalances procedure ***I
 Extension of the EC-USA scientific and technological cooperation agreement ***
 Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources ***
 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/008 ES/Comunidad Valenciana textiles
 Production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material (plant reproductive material law) ***I
 Remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union (adjustment as of 1 July 2011) ***I
 Remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union (adjustment as of 1 July 2012) ***I
 EC-Serbia Stabilisation and Association Agreement ***II
 European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and European Securities and Markets Authority ***I
 Information accompanying transfers of funds ***I
 Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing ***I
 EU guarantee to EIB against losses under financing operations supporting investment projects outside the Union ***I
 Genetic Resources ***I
 Roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers ***I
 Registration documents for vehicles ***I
 Roadworthiness of commercial vehicles ***I
 Rail transport statistics ***I
 Electronic invoicing in public procurement ***I
 Farm structure surveys and survey on agricultural production methods ***I
 Goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products ***I
 European Investment Bank annual report 2012
 European System of Financial Supervision review
 Public access to documents 2011-2013
 Activities of the Committee on Petitions 2013
 Horticulture
 Eradication of torture in the world
 Saudi Arabia

Statistics of goods transport by inland waterways (delegated and implementing powers) ***I
PDF 339kWORD 81k
Resolution
Consolidated text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 on statistics of goods transport by inland waterways as regards conferring delegated and implementing powers upon the Commission for the adoption of certain measures (COM(2013)0484 – C7-0205/2013 – 2013/0226(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0180A7-0003/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0484),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0205/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0003/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 on statistics of goods transport by inland waterways as regards conferring of delegated and implementing powers upon the Commission for the adoption of certain measures

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0226


(Text with EEA relevance)

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 338 (1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

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

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure(1),

Whereas:

(1)  As a consequence of the entry into force of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("the Treaty”), the powers conferred upon the Commission need to be aligned to Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty.

(2)  In connection with the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), the Commission has committed itself(3) to reviewing, in the light of the criteria laid down in the Treaty, legislative acts which were not adapted to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny before the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.

(3)  Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council(4) confers powers upon the Commission in order to implement some of the provisions of this Regulation.

(4)  In the context of the alignment of Regulation (EC) No1365/2006 to the new rules of the TFEU, implementing powers currently conferred upon the Commission should be provided for by powers to adopt delegated and implementing acts.

(5)  As regards Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006, in order to take account of economic and technical trends, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission concerning in respect of the adaptation of the threshold for statistical coverage of inland waterways transport, adaptation of the definitions and the adoption of additional definitions. In addition, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in order to adapt the data collection scope and, as well as adaptation of the content of the Annexes. [Am. 1]

(6)  The Commission should ensure that these delegated acts do not impose a significant additional administrative burden on the Member States or on the respondent units respondents. [Am. 2]

(7)  It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

(8)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006, implementing powers should be conferred upon on the Commission to adopt arrangements for transmitting data including data interchange standards, for the dissemination of results by the Commission (Eurostat) and also to develop and publish methodological requirements and criteria designed to ensure the quality of the data produced. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of those acts, given their general scope. [Am. 3]

(9)  In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, it is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objective of the alignment of the powers conferred upon on the Commission to with Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to lay down common rules on such alignment in the domain of transport statistics. This Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in accordance with Article 5(4) of the Treaty on the European Union. [Am. 4]

(10)  In order to ensure legal certainty, it is necessary that the procedures for the adoption of measures which have been initiated but not completed before the entry into force of this Regulation are not affected by this Regulation.

(11)  Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 is amended as follows:

(-1a) In Article 2(4), point (b) is deleted; [Am. 5]

(-1b) In Article 2(4), point (c) is deleted; [Am. 6]

(1)  In Article 2, the following paragraph 5 is added:"

'5. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, where necessary, in accordance with Article 9, taking account of economic and technical trends, concerning the adaptation of the threshold for statistical coverage of inland waterways transport.' [Am. 7]

"

(2)  In Article 3, the following subparagraph is added:"

'The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, where necessary, in accordance with Article 9, taking account of economic and technical trends, concerning the adaptation of the definitions and the adoption of additional definitions.' [Am. 8]

"

(3)  In Article 4, the following paragraph 4 is added:"

'4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, where necessary, in accordance with Article 9, taking account of economic and technical trends, concerning the adaptation of the data collection scope and the content of the Annexes.' [Am. 9]

"

(4)  In Article 5, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:"

'2. Arrangements for transmitting data to the Commission (Eurostat), including data interchange standards, shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10(2).'

"

(5)  In Article 6, the following subparagraph is added:"

'Arrangements for the dissemination of results shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10(2).'

"

(6)  In Article 7, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:"

'1. The Commission shall adopt the methodological requirements and criteria designed to ensure the quality of the data produced in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10(2).'

"

(6a)  In Article 7, the following paragraphs are added:"

'3a. For the purposes of this Regulation, the quality criteria to be applied to the data to be transmitted are those referred to in Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council*.

3b.  The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, specify the modalities, structure, periodicity and comparability elements for the quality reports. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred in Article 10(2).

––––––––––––––––––––

* Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p.164.)'. [Am. 10]

"

(6b)  In Article 8, the introductory wording of paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:"

'By …(5)and every three years thereafter, the Commission, after consulting the Statistical Programme Committee, shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of this Regulation. In particular, that report shall:'; [Am. 11]

"

(7)  Article 9 is replaced by the following:"

'Article 9

Exercise of delegated powers the delegation [Am. 12]

1.  The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred upon on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. [Am. 13]

2.  When exercising the powers delegated in Article 2(5), Article 3 and Article 4(4), the Commission shall ensure that the delegated acts do not impose a significant additional administrative burden on the Member States and on the respondents.

3.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 2(5), Article 3 and Article 4(4) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate a period of time five years from (Publication office : please insert the exact date of the entry into force of the amending Regulation)(6). The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period. [Am. 14]

4.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 2(5), Article 3 and Article 4(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council.

A decision to revoke 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.

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

6.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 2(5), Article 3 and Article 4(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two 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 two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.'

"

(8)  Article 10 is replaced by the following:"

'Article 10

Committee

1.  The Commission shall be assisted by the European Statistical System Committee established by Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics*. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of 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**.

2.  Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

2a.  Where the committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and the third subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. [Am. 15]

______________

* Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164.)

** 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 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).'

"

(8a)  In Annex B, Table B1 is replaced by the following:"

'Table B1. Passenger and goods transport by nationality of the vessel and the type of vessel (annual data)

Elements

Coding

Nomenclature

Unit

Table

2-Alpha

‘B1’

Reporting country

2-letter

NUTS0 (national code)

Year

4-digit

‘yyyy’

Country/region of loading

4-alpha

NUTS2 (*)

Country/region of unloading

4-alpha

NUTS2 (*)

Type of transport

1-digit

1= national

2 = international (except transit)

3= transit

Type of vessel

1-digit

1= self-propelled barge

2= barge not self-propelled

3= self-propelled tanker barge

4= tanker barge not self-propelled

5= other goods carrying vessel

6= seagoing vessel

7= cruise vessels transporting more than 100 passengers

8= ferries carrying passengers over more than 300 metres

Nationality of vessel

2-letter

NUTS0 (national code) (**)

Tonnes transported

tonnes

Tonnes-km

tonnes-km

Passengers transported

12-digit

Passenger

Passengers-km

12-digit

Passenger

Passenger seats available

12-digit

Passenger seat

(*) When the regional code is unknown or not available the following codification will be used:

—  ‘NUTS0 + ZZ’ when the NUTS code exists for the partner country.

—  ‘ISO code + ZZ’ when the NUTS code does not exist for the partner country.

—  ‘ZZZZ’ when the partner country is completely unknown.

(**) When a NUTS code does not exist for the country of registration of the vessel, the ISO national code will be reported. In case the nationality of the vessel is unknown, the code to use is ‘ZZ’.'

"

[Am. 16]

(9)  Annex G is deleted.

Article 2

This Regulation shall not affect the procedures for the adoption of measures provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 which have been initiated but not completed before the entry into force of this Regulation.

Article 3

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

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

Done at …,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

(1) Position of the European Parliament of 11 March 2014.
(2)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 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
(3)OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 19.
(4)Regulation (EC) No 1365/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on statistics of goods transport by inland waterways (OJ L 264, 25.9.2006, p.1).
(5) Three years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
(6) The date of entry into force of this amending Regulation.


Statistics for the macroeconomic imbalances procedure ***I
PDF 320kWORD 150k
Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision and quality of statistics for the macroeconomic imbalances procedure (COM(2013)0342 – C7-0162/2013 – 2013/0181(COD))(1)
P7_TA(2014)0181A7-0143/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances1 sets up an alert mechanism to facilitate the early identification and the monitoring of imbalances. Under this mechanism, the Commission is required to prepare an annual Alert Mechanism Report (AMR) containing a qualitative economic and financial assessment and identifying Member States that the Commission considers may be affected by, or may be at risk of being affected by, imbalances.
(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 (MIP) sets up an alert mechanism to facilitate the early identification and the monitoring of imbalances. Under this mechanism, the Commission is required to prepare an annual Alert Mechanism Report (AMR) containing a qualitative economic and financial assessment and identifying Member States that the Commission considers may be affected by, or may be at risk of being affected by, imbalances.
__________________
__________________
1 OJ L 306, 23.11.11, p.25.
1 Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25).
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3)  Reliable statistical data are the basis for effective surveillance of macroeconomic imbalances. To guarantee sound and independent statistics, Member States should ensure the professional independence of national statistical authorities, consistent with the European statistics code of practice laid down in Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics3.
(3)  Reliable, accurate and useful statistical data are essential for effective surveillance of macroeconomic imbalances. To guarantee sound and independent statistics, the independence of Eurostat should be strengthened in accordance with the European Parliament's proposals for the revision of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Councila and Member States should ensure the professional independence of national statistical authorities, consistent with the European statistics code of practice laid down in that Regulation.
__________________
___________________
3 OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164
1a Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164).
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a)  It is necessary that the Commission continue to address the need for reliable statistical information that enables Union policies to respond better to economic, social and territorial realities at regional level.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4)  The AMR, which is based on a scoreboard with a set of indicators the values of which are compared to their indicative thresholds, is an initial screening device whereby the Commission identifies Member States where it considers that developments warrant further in-depth analysis to determine whether imbalances exist or risk emerging. The AMR should include MIP relevant data. It is however in the following in-depth reviews that the driving forces behind the observed developments are analysed in detail with a view to determining the nature of the imbalances. The scoreboard and the thresholds are not interpreted mechanically, but are subject to economic reading. When carrying out in-depth reviews, the Commission will examine a broad range of economic variables and additional information taking due account of country specific circumstances. For these reasons, all the data that may be used for the purpose of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure cannot be listed in advance in an exhaustive manner, but should be defined by reference to the procedures set out in Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 for the detection of macroeconomic imbalances as well as the prevention and correction of excessive macroeconomic imbalances within the Union. In implementing the macroeconomic imbalances procedure, the Commission and the Council should give preference to statistics which are compiled and transmitted, by Member States, to the Commission (Eurostat). Other statistics, which are not compiled and transmitted this way, should only be used when the former statistics do not provide the required information, and taking due account of the quality of these other statistics.
(4)  The AMR, which is based on a scoreboard with a set of indicators the values of which are compared to their indicative thresholds, is an initial screening device whereby the Commission identifies Member States where it considers that developments warrant further in-depth analysis to determine whether imbalances exist or risk emerging. The AMR should include MIP relevant data. It is however in the following in-depth reviews that the driving forces behind the observed developments are analysed in detail with a view to determining the nature of the imbalances. The scoreboard and the thresholds should not be interpreted mechanically, but should be subject to economic reading. When carrying out in-depth reviews, the Commission will examine a broad range of economic variables and additional information taking due account of country specific circumstances. For these reasons, all the data that may be used for the purpose of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure cannot be listed in advance in an exhaustive manner, but should be defined by reference to the procedures set out in Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 for the detection of macroeconomic imbalances as well as the prevention and correction of excessive macroeconomic imbalances within the Union. In implementing, monitoring and assessing the macroeconomic imbalances procedure, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission should give preference to statistics which are compiled and transmitted, by Member States, to the Commission (Eurostat). Other statistics, which are not compiled and transmitted this way, should only be used when the former statistics do not provide the required information, and taking due account of the quality of these other statistics.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5)  A reliable procedure should be set up for the compilation, monitoring and release of the data relevant for the macroeconomic imbalances procedure (hereinafter referred to as “MIP relevant data”) as well as a continuous improvement of the underlying statistical information in line with the Commission’s quality management frameworks for European statistics4. The Group of Directors of Macroeconomic Statistics (DMES), established by the Commission, is an appropriate expert group to provide the Commission (Eurostat) with the required assistance for the application of a robust quality monitoring procedure for the MIP relevant data.
(5)  A reliable procedure should be set up for the collection, compilation, monitoring and release of the data relevant for the macroeconomic imbalances procedure (hereinafter referred to as “MIP relevant data”) as well as a continuous improvement of the underlying statistical information in line with the Commission’s quality management frameworks for European statistics4. The Group of Directors of Macroeconomic Statistics (DMES), established by the Commission, which includes experts from the European Statistical System Committee and the European System of Central Banks, is an appropriate expert group to provide the Commission (Eurostat) with the required assistance for the application of a robust quality monitoring procedure for the MIP relevant data.
__________________
__________________
4 COM(2005)217 final and COM(2011)211 final.
4 COM(2005)0217 final and COM(2011)0211 final.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6)  It is essential that the statistical production necessary for the performance of the activities of the Union should only be based on reliable data. In the production of MIP relevant data, which is an essential input for the detection of macroeconomic imbalances as well as the prevention and correction of excessive macroeconomic imbalances within the Union, unreliable data can have a significant impact on the interest of the Union. Additional measures to make the enforcement of the production, provision and quality monitoring of MIP relevant data more effective are necessary for the performance of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure. Those measures should enhance the credibility of the underlying statistical information as well as of the provision and quality monitoring of the MIP relevant data. In order to deter against misrepresentation, whether intentional or due to serious negligence, of MIP relevant data, a mechanism of financial sanctions should be established, which will also serve the purpose of ensuring due diligence in the production of MIP relevant data.
(6)  It is essential that the statistical production necessary for the performance of the activities of the Union is based on reliable data. It is appropriate to supplement the procedures set down in Regulations (EU) No 1176/2011 and (EU) No 1174/2011 with a corresponding formal framework for the compilation, quality monitoring and release of MIP-relevant data, in accordance with the common quality criteria set down in Regulation (EC) No 223/2009. Additional measures should make the enforcement of the production, provision and quality monitoring of MIP relevant data more effective and are necessary for the performance of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure. Those measures should enhance the credibility of the underlying statistical information as well as of the provision and quality monitoring of the MIP relevant data.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a)  In order to discourage misrepresentation of MIP-relevant data, whether intentional or seriously negligent, a corrective mechanism should be established, which will also serve the purpose of ensuring due diligence in the production of MIP-relevant data.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7)  To supplement the rules on calculating the fines for manipulation of statistics as well as the rules on the procedure to be followed by the Commission for the investigation of such actions, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘the Treaty’) should be delegated to the Commission in respect of detailed criteria for establishing the amount of the fine and for conducting the Commission's investigations. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. When preparing and drawing up delegated acts, the Commission should ensure the simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and the Council.
(7)  To supplement the rules on calculating the interest-bearing deposits and fines for manipulation of statistics as well as the rules on the procedure to be followed by the Commission for the investigations related to the manipulation of statistics, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘the Treaty’) should be delegated to the Commission in respect of detailed criteria for establishing the amount of the fine and for conducting the Commission's investigations. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. When preparing and drawing up delegated acts, the Commission should ensure the simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8)   Close cooperation and on-going dialogue should be established between the Commission and Member States’ statistical authorities in order to ensure the quality of the MIP relevant data reported by Member States and the underlying statistical information.
(8)  The ongoing cooperation and coordination between the Commission (Eurostat) and Member States’ statistical authorities is an important part of efficient coordination of statistical activities within the European Statistical System (ESS). That collaboration needs to be strengthened in order to ensure the quality of the MIP relevant data reported by Member States and the underlying statistical information; the institutional separation of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and the independence of central banks should be respected within the framework of developing, producing and disseminating MIP-relevant data under the respective governance structure and statistical work programmes of the ESS and the ESCB.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9)  Close cooperation between the European Statistical System and the European System of Central Banks should be ensured in relation to MIP relevant data, in line with Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009, in order to minimise the reporting burden, guarantee coherence, improve the underlying statistics and ensure comparability.
(9)  Since the ESS is responsible for producing a number of statistics underlying the MIP-relevant data and the ESCB is responsible for producing a number of other statistics underlying the MIP relevant data, close cooperation between the two systems should be ensured in relation to MIP relevant data, in line with Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009, in order to minimise the reporting burden, guarantee coherence, improve the underlying statistics and ensure comparability. Practical operational arrangements for the cooperation between the ESS and the ESCB on quality assurance for MIP-relevant data could be laid down in a memorandum of understanding. Given its longstanding experience in the areas of statistics covered by the MIP-relevant data, the Committee on monetary, financial and balance of payments statistics (CMFB) established by the Council Decision 2006/856/EC1a could provide advice on the practical operational arrangements for cooperation that could be reflected in such a memorandum of understanding.

_____________

1a.  OJ L 332, 30.11.2006, p. 21.
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a)  The provisions laid down in this Regulation should be considered within the frame of the reinforcement of European economic governance, which calls for greater democratic accountability at the national and Union levels. The improved statistical monitoring system of MIP-relevant data should include a closer and more timely involvement of the national parliaments and the European Parliament. While recognising that the counterparts of the European Parliament in the framework of the dialogue are the relevant institutions of the Union and their representatives, the competent committee of the European Parliament may extend invitations to representatives of the National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) to participate voluntarily in hearings.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 b (new)

(9b)  The strengthening of economic governance through an improved statistical monitoring system of MIP-relevant data should include a closer and more timely involvement of the national parliaments and the European Parliament.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)

(12a)  However, the suspension of funds due to be triggered by the macroeconomic imbalances procedure should be used as a last resort and take into account an in-depth analyses of the unemployment, poverty and GDP contraction indicators.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a.  Quality assurance procedures put in place in the framework of this Regulation shall take into consideration and build on best practices in existing quality assurance procedures. They shall not result in the duplication of quality assurance efforts or parallel data series.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2.  The deadlines for the transmission of the MIP relevant data shall be those laid down pursuant to the relevant basic acts or shall be communicated by the Commission in specific calendars taking into account the needs of the Union.
2.  The deadlines for the transmission of the MIP relevant data shall be those laid down pursuant to the relevant basic acts or shall be communicated by the Commission in specific calendars taking into account the European Semester framework and the needs of the Union.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3.  The Commission shall indicate to the Member States, each year, the timetable of the annual Alert Mechanism Report established by Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. Based on this timetable and on the deadlines and calendars referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission shall also decide on and communicate, to the Member States, a cut-off date for their transmission of all the most up-to-date MIP relevant data.
3.  The Commission shall indicate to the Member States, each year, the timetable of the annual Alert Mechanism Report established by Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. Based on this timetable and on the deadlines and calendars referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission shall also decide on and communicate, to the Member States, a cut-off date for the extraction by the Commission (Eurostat) of the MIP relevant data to compute for each Member State the MIP scoreboard indicators and set up a reference database on MIP relevant data.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall provide each Member State with access to the reference database with the extracted MIP relevant data no later than five working days after the cut-off date for checking purposes. Member States shall check the data and shall confirm, or provide amendments to, the data during the seven working days following that five-day period.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1.  When transmitting the MIP relevant data referred to in Article 1, Member States shall send, to the Commission (Eurostat), information showing how these data are calculated, including any changes in the sources and methods, in the form of a quality report.
1.  When transmitting the MIP relevant data referred to in Article 1, Member States shall submit, to the Commission (Eurostat), information indicating how these data are calculated, including any changes in the sources and methods, in the form of a quality report.
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a.  Member States shall transmit the quality report within seven days in accordance with Article 2(3a).
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3.  The Commission shall adopt implementing acts with a view to defining the modalities, structure and periodicity of the quality reports. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 14(2).
3.  The Commission shall adopt delegated acts with a view to defining the modalities, structure and periodicity of the quality reports referred to in paragraph 1. Those delegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 12.
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2.  Member States shall establish the inventories and send them to the Commission (Eurostat) at the latest on […][nine months after the adoption of this Regulation]. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts with a view to defining the structure and the modalities for the updating of these inventories by […][within six months after the adoption of this Regulation]. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 14(2).
2.  Member States shall establish the inventories and send them to the Commission (Eurostat) at the latest on […][nine months after the entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts with a view to defining the structure and the modalities for the updating of these inventories by […][within six months after the entry into force of this Regulation]. Those delegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 12.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter VI – title
MISSIONS TO MEMBER STATES
DIALOGUE MISSIONS TO MEMBER STATES
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1.  Where the Commission (Eurostat) identifies problems, in particular in the context of the quality assessment under Article 5, it may decide to carry out missions to the Member State concerned.
1.  Where the Commission (Eurostat) identifies a need to deepen its assessment of the quality of statistics, in particular in the context of the quality assessment under Article 5, it may decide to carry out dialogue missions to the Member State concerned.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2.  The aim of such missions shall be to investigate in depth the quality of the MIP relevant data concerned. The missions shall concentrate on methodological issues, the sources and methods described in the inventories, the data and supporting statistical processes with a view to assessing their compliance with the relevant accounting and statistical rules.
2.  The aim of the dialogue missions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be to investigate in depth the quality of the MIP relevant data concerned. The dialogue missions shall concentrate on methodological issues, the sources and methods described in the inventories, the data and supporting statistical processes with a view to assessing their compliance with the relevant accounting and statistical rules.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a.  When organising the dialogue missions, the Commission (Eurostat) shall transmit its provisional findings to the Member State concerned for comments.
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall report to the Economic Policy Committee set up by Council Decision 74/122/EEC7 on the findings of these missions, including any comments on these findings made by the Member State concerned. After having been transmitted to the Economic Policy Committee, these reports, along with any comments made by the Member State concerned, shall be made public, without prejudice to the provisions concerning statistical confidentiality in Regulation (EC) No 223/2009.
3.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall report to the European Parliament and to the Economic Policy Committee set up by Council Decision 74/122/EEC7 on the findings of these dialogue missions, including any comments on these findings made by the Member State concerned. After having been transmitted to the European Parliament and to the Economic Policy Committee, these reports, along with any comments made by the Member State concerned, shall be made public, without prejudice to the provisions concerning statistical confidentiality in Regulation (EC) No 223/2009.
____________
____________
7.   OJ L 63, 5.3.1974, p.21
7.   OJ L 63, 5.3.1974, p. 21
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4.  Member States shall, at the request of the Commission (Eurostat), provide the assistance from experts on statistical issues related to the macroeconomic imbalances procedure, including for the preparation and carrying-out of the missions. In the exercise of their duties, these experts shall provide independent expertise. A list of those experts shall be constituted by (date to be fixed) on the basis of proposals sent to the Commission (Eurostat) by the national authorities responsible for the MIP relevant data.
4.  Member States shall, at the request of the Commission (Eurostat), provide the assistance from experts on statistical issues related to the macroeconomic imbalances procedure, including for the preparation and carrying-out of the dialogue missions. In the exercise of their duties, these experts shall provide independent expertise. A list of those experts shall be constituted by [Six months after entry into force of this Regulation] on the basis of proposals sent to the Commission (Eurostat) by the national authorities responsible for the MIP relevant data.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall lay down the rules and procedures related to the selection of the experts, taking into account an appropriate distribution of experts across Member States and an appropriate rotation of experts between Member States, their working arrangements and the financial details. The Commission (Eurostat) shall share with the Member States the full cost incurred by the Member States for the assistance from their national experts.
5.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall lay down the rules and procedures related to the selection of the experts taking into account an appropriate distribution of experts across Member States and an appropriate and timely rotation of experts between Member States, their working arrangements and the financial details. The Commission (Eurostat) shall share with the Member States the full cost incurred by the Member States for the assistance from their national experts.
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a.  This Article shall not apply in cases where sectoral legislation already provides for Commission visits to Member States.
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall provide the MIP relevant data used for the purposes of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure including by means of news releases and/or other channels as it considers appropriate.
1.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall make public the MIP relevant data used for the purposes of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure including by means of news releases and/or other channels as it considers appropriate.
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall not delay the provision of the MIP relevant data of Member States where a Member State has not transmitted its own data.
2.  The Commission (Eurostat) shall determine the publication date for the news release and communicate it to Member States within ten working days after the cut-off date referred to in Article 2. It shall not delay the provision of the MIP relevant data of Member States where a Member State has not transmitted its own data.
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3.  The Commission (Eurostat) may express a reservation on the quality of a Member State's MIP relevant data. No later than three working days before the planned publication date, the Commission (Eurostat) shall communicate to the Member State concerned and to the President of the Economic Policy Committee the reservation it intends to express and make public. Where the issue is resolved after publication of the data and the reservation, withdrawal of the reservation shall be made public immediately thereafter.
3.  The Commission (Eurostat) may express a reservation on the quality of a Member State's MIP relevant data. The Member State concerned shall be given the opportunity to defend its position. No later than ten working days before the planned publication date, the Commission (Eurostat) shall communicate to the Member State concerned and to the President of the Economic Policy Committee the reservation it intends to express and make public. Where the issue is resolved after publication of the data and the reservation, withdrawal of the reservation shall be made public immediately thereafter.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4.  The Commission (Eurostat) may amend data transmitted by Member States and provide the amended data and a justification of the amendment where there is evidence that the data reported by Member States do not comply with the requirements of Article 3(2). No later than three working days before the planned publication date, the Commission (Eurostat) shall communicate to the Member State concerned and to the President of the Economic Policy Committee the amended data and the justification for the amendment.
4.  The Commission (Eurostat) may amend data transmitted by Member States and make public the amended data and a justification of the amendment where there is evidence that the data reported by Member States do not comply with the requirements of Article 3(2) as well as with the applicable methodological standards and the requirements of completeness, reliability, timeliness and consistency of statistical data. No later than three working days before the planned publication date, the Commission (Eurostat) shall communicate to the Member State concerned and to the President of the Economic Policy Committee the amended data and the justification for the amendment.
Amendment 34
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1.  The Council, acting on a proposal by the Commission, may decide to impose a fine on a Member State that intentionally or by serious negligence misrepresents the MIP relevant data.
1.  The Council, acting on recommendations by the Commission, may decide in a two step procedure to impose an interest-bearing deposit and subsequently if the Commission assesses that the Member State has not complied with the corrective actions referred to in paragraph 1a and, as a last resort, a fine on a Member State that has acted intentionally to misrepresent the MIP relevant data or by way of serious negligence that has resulted in the misrepresentation of the MIP relevant data, which as a consequence has impacted on the ability of the Commission to make a true and fair assessment.
Amendment 35
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a.  The Member State shall report to the Commission within a specified deadline on the corrective actions necessary to address and remedy the misrepresentation or the serious negligence referred to in paragraph 1 and prevent similar circumstances to arise in future. The report shall be made public.
Amendment 36
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2.  The fine referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective, dissuasive and proportionate to the nature, seriousness and duration of the misrepresentation. The amount of the fine shall not exceed 0.05% of the GDP of the Member State concerned.
2.  The interest-bearing deposit referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective, dissuasive and proportionate to the nature, seriousness and duration of the misrepresentation. The amount of the interest bearing shall not exceed 0,05% of the GDP in the preceding year of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 37
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 –paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3.  The Commission may conduct all investigations necessary to establish the existence of the misrepresentations referred to in paragraph 1. It may decide to initiate an investigation when it finds that there are serious indications of the existence of facts liable to constitute such a misrepresentation. In investigating the putative misrepresentations, the Commission shall take into account any comments submitted by the Member State concerned. In order to carry out its tasks, the Commission may request the Member State to provide information, and may conduct on-site inspections and access the underlying statistical information and documents related to the MIP relevant data. If the law of the Member State concerned requires prior judicial authorisation for on-site inspections, the Commission shall make the necessary applications.
3.  The Commission may, in accordance with the Treaties and specific sectoral legislation, initiate and conduct all investigations necessary to establish the existence of the misrepresentations referred to in paragraph 1. It may decide to initiate an investigation when it finds that there are serious indications of the existence of facts liable to constitute such a misrepresentation. In investigating the putative misrepresentations, the Commission shall take into account any comments submitted by the Member State concerned. In order to carry out its tasks, the Commission may request the Member State under investigation to provide information, and may conduct on-site inspections and access the underlying statistical information and documents related to the MIP relevant data. If required by the law of the Member State under investigation, authorisation by the judicial authority shall be obtained before an on-site inspection.
Amendment 38
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Upon completion of its investigation, and before submitting any proposal to the Council, the Commission shall give the Member State concerned the opportunity of being heard in relation to the matters under investigation. The Commission shall base any proposal to the Council only on facts on which the Member State concerned has had the opportunity to comment.
Upon completion of its investigation, and before submitting any recommendation to the Council, the Commission shall give the Member State under investigation the opportunity of being heard on the matters being investigated. The Commission shall base any recommendation to the Council only on facts on which the Member State concerned has had the opportunity to comment.
Amendment 39
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

The Commission shall inform the competent Committee of the European Parliament of any investigation or recommendation made pursuant to this paragraph. The competent committee of the European Parliament may offer a Member State which is the subject of a Commission recommendation an opportunity to participate in an exchange of views.
Amendment 40
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a.  The Commission may, following a reasoned request by the Member State concerned addressed to the Commission recommend that the Council reduce or cancel the amount of the interest-bearing deposit.

The interest-bearing deposit shall bear an interest rate reflecting the Commission's credit risk and the relevant investment period.
Amendment 41
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5.  The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Council imposing fines under paragraph 1. It may annul, reduce or increase the fine so imposed.
5.  The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Council imposing interest-bearing deposits under paragraph 1. It may annul, reduce or increase the interest-bearing deposit so imposed.
Amendment 42
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter IX – Title
NATURE AND BUDGET DISTRIBUTION OF THE SANCTIONS
NATURE AND BUDGET ALLOCATION OF THE FINES
Amendment 43
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9(4) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of three years starting after one month following the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that 3-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
2.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(3), Article 6(2) and Article 9(4) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of two years starting after one month following the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission shall, after consultating the relevant actors including the ECB in accordance with Article 127 TFEU, draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that 3-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 44
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 9(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke 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.
3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 3(3), Article 6(2) and Article 9(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke 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.
Amendment 45
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 9(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two 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 two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3(3), Article 6(2) and Article 9(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 of the Council.
Amendment 46
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13
For the measures referred to in Article 9 the Council shall act without taking into account the vote of the member of the Council representing the Member State concerned.
For the measures referred to in Article 9 the Council shall act without taking into account the vote of the member of the Council representing the Member State concerned. The decision referred to in Article 9(1) shall be deemed to be adopted by the Council unless the Council decides, by a qualified majority, to reject the recommendation within 10 days of its adoption by the Commission.
Amendment 47
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

A qualified majority of the members of the Council referred to in Article 9(1) shall be defined in accordance with point (a) of Article 238(3) TFEU.
Amendment 48
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15
In line with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009, the national statistical institutes of the Member States (the NSI) shall ensure the required coordination on the MIP relevant data at national level. All other national authorities shall report to the NSI for this purpose. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the application of this provision.
In line with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009, the national statistical institutes of the Member States (the NSIs) shall ensure the required coordination on the MIP relevant data at national level. National central banks, in their capacity as ESCB members producing MIP relevant data, and where appropriate, other relevant national authorities shall cooperate with the NSIs for this purpose. National authorities producing data shall be held responsible for that data. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the application of this provision.
Amendment 49
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
The Commission (Eurostat) shall report regularly to the European Parliament and to the Council on the activities carried out by the Commission (Eurostat) for the purpose of implementing this Regulation.
The Commission (Eurostat) shall report at least annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the activities carried out by the Commission (Eurostat) for the purpose of implementing this Regulation in the context of the European Semester as referred to in Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a.

________________

1a Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 12).
Amendment 50
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1.  By 14 December 2014 and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall review the application of this Regulation and report its findings to the European Parliament and the Council.
1.  By 14 December 2014 and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall review, and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on, the application of this Regulation. Where appropriate, that report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal.
Amendment 51
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b)  the effectiveness of this Regulation and the applied monitoring process.
(b)  the effectiveness and proportionality of this Regulation and the applied monitoring process.

(1) The matter was referred back to the committee responsible for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 57(2), second subparagraph (A7- 0143/2014).


Extension of the EC-USA scientific and technological cooperation agreement ***
PDF 193kWORD 33k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the draft Council decision concerning the extension of the Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Community and the Government of the United States of America (15854/2013 – C7-0462/2013 – 2013/0351(NLE))
P7_TA(2014)0182A7-0126/2014

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (15854/2013),

–  having regard to Council Decision 98/591/EC of 13 October 1998 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Community and the Government of the United States of America,

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 186 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0462/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 81(1), subparagraphs 1 and 3,  and Rules 81(2), 90(7) and 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0126/2014),

1.  Consents to the extension of the Agreement;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the United States of America.


Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources ***
PDF 194kWORD 34k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity (06852/2013 – C7-0005/2014 – 2012/0279(NLE))
P7_TA(2014)0183A7-0061/2014

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council Decision (06852/2013),

–  having regard to the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity, attached to the above-mentioned draft Council decision,

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 192(1) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0005/2014),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0061/2014),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the Protocol;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.


European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/008 ES/Comunidad Valenciana textiles
PDF 222kWORD 43k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 13 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (application EGF/2013/008, ES/Comunidad Valenciana textiles from Spain) (COM(2014)0045 – C7-0019/2014 – 2014/2013(BUD))
P7_TA(2014)0184A7-0158/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0045 – C7‑0019/2014),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund(1) (EGF Regulation),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management(3) (IIA of 2 December 2013), and in particular point 13 thereof,

–  having regard to trilogue procedure provided for in point 13 of the IIA of 2 December 2013,

–  having regard to the letter of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0158/2014),

A.  whereas the European Union has set up legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,

B.  whereas the Union’s financial assistance to workers made redundant should be dynamic and made available as quickly and efficiently as possible, in accordance with the Joint Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission adopted during the conciliation meeting on 17 July 2008, and having due regard for the IIA of 2 December 2013 in respect of the adoption of decisions to mobilise the EGF,

C.  whereas Spain submitted application EGF/2013/008 ES/Comunidad Valenciana textiles for a financial contribution from the EGF, following 560 redundancies in 198 enterprises operating in the NACE Revision 2 Division 13 (Manufacture of textiles)(4) in the NUTS II region of Comunidad Valenciana (ES52) with 300 workers targeted for EFG co-funded measures, during the reference period from 1 November 2012 to 1 August 2013,

D.  whereas the application fulfils the eligibility criteria set up by the EGF Regulation,

1.  Agrees with the Commission that the conditions set out in Article 2(b) of the EGF Regulation are met and that, therefore, Spain is entitled to a financial contribution under that Regulation;

2.  Notes that the Spanish authorities submitted the application for EGF financial contribution on 8 October 2013, and that its assessment was made available by the Commission on 28 January 2014; welcomes the speedy evaluation of four months;

3.  Considers that the redundancies in Comunidad Valenciana textile enterprises are linked to major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation, referring to the closure of the WTO’s Transitional Agreement on Textiles and Clothing at the end of 2004 and a greater exposure to the global competition particularly from China and other Far Eastern countries leading to a substantial increase of textiles imports into the Union and a loss of Union's market share in world textiles markets;

4.  Notes that Comunidad Valenciana has been severely affected by globalisation with unemployment reaching 29,19 % in the first quarter of 2013; welcomes the fact that the region avails itself yet again of EGF aid to alleviate high unemployment by addressing for the second time lay-offs in textile sector;

5.  Congratulates Comunidad Valenciana on the capacity to apply for and use EGF to address problems of its labour market characterised by a high percentage of SMEs; in this context recalls that Comunidad Valenciana region has already applied for the EGF support for textile, ceramic and natural stone as well as construction sector;

6.  Underlines the capacity of EGF to help address fragile employment situation in the regions dependant on traditional sectors such as textiles or construction sectors; stresses that this capacity depends on the readiness and effectiveness of national and local authorities to apply for EGF support;

7.  Notes that to date, the manufacture of textiles sector has been the subject of 11 EGF applications(5), all of them based on trade related globalisation while Comunidad Valenciana region submitted already six EGF applications: in September 2009(6) (ceramics), March 2010(7) (natural stone), March 2010(8) (textiles), July(9) and December 2011(10) (construction and footwear, respectively) and 2013(11) (building materials);

8.  Welcomes the fact that, in order to provide workers with speedy assistance, the Spanish authorities decided to initiate the implementation of the personalised services to the affected workers on 1 January 2014, well ahead of the final decision on granting the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package;

9.  Notes that the coordinated package of personalised services to be co-funded includes measures for the reintegration of 300 redundant workers into employment such as profiling, occupational guidance, counselling, trainings (training in transversal skills, vocational training, on-the-job training, training towards entrepreneurship), support towards entrepreneurship, intensive job-search assistance, incentives (job-search incentive, support for setting up a business, outplacement incentives, contribution to commuting expenses and contribution for carers of dependent persons);

10.  Welcomes the fact that the social partners, including trade unions (UGT-PV, CCOO-PV), were consulted during the preparation of EGF application and agreed on contributing 10 % of the total national co-funding of total costs of the applied measures, and that a policy of equality of women and men as well as the principle non-discrimination will be applied during the various stages of the implementation of and in access to the EGF;

11.  Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and the recognition of skills and competences gained throughout a worker's professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the needs of the dismissed workers but also to the actual business environment;

12.  Welcomes the fact that the coordinated package includes vocational training focusing on sectors where opportunities exist or are likely to arise as well as contains on-the-job training which will match the identified needs of local enterprises;

13.  Regrets that the Commission proposal does not outline the educational structure of the dismissed labour force;

14.  Notes that the coordinated package foresees financial incentives for job-search (lump sum of EUR 300), mobility allowance, outplacement incentive (up to EUR 350) as well as contribution for carers of dependent persons; welcomes the fact that the overall amount of financial incentives is relatively limited leaving the majority of the contribution to be spent on training, counselling, job search assistance and support of entrepreneurship;

15.  Notes that the case at hand typically reflects the social and economic landscape of a region with local economy characterised by a high percentage of SMEs;

16.  Notes that the information provided on the coordinated package of personalised services to be funded from the EGF includes information on complementarity with actions funded by the Structural Funds; stresses that the Spanish authorities confirm that the eligible actions do not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments; reiterates its call to the Commission to present a comparative evaluation of those data in its annual reports in order to ensure full respect of the existing regulations and that no duplication of Union-funded services can occur;

17.  Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for the accelerated release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; underlines that further improvements in the procedure have been integrated in the new Regulation on European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020)(12) and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;

18.  Stresses that, in accordance with Article 6 of the EGF Regulation, it shall be ensured that the EGF supports the reintegration of individual redundant workers into stable employment; stresses, furthermore, that EGF assistance can co-finance only active labour market measures which lead to durable, long-term employment; reiterates that assistance from the EGF must not replace actions which are the responsibility of companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements nor measures restructuring companies or sectors;

19.  Welcomes the agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council regarding the new EGF Regulation, for the period 2014-2020, to reintroduce the crisis mobilisation criterion, to increase Union financial contribution to 60% of the total estimated cost of proposed measures, to increase efficiency for the treatment of EGF applications in the Commission and by the European Parliament and the Council by shortening time for assessment and approval, to widen eligible actions and beneficiaries by introducing self-employed persons and young people and to finance incentives for setting up own businesses;

20.  Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

21.  Instructs its President to sign the decision with the President of the Council and arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

22.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution, including its annex, to the Council and the Commission.

ANNEX

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 13 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (application EGF/2013/008 ES/Comunidad Valenciana textiles from Spain)

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision 2014/167/EU.)

(1) OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.
(3) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
(4)Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 establishing the statistical classification of economic activities NACE Revision 2 and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3037/90 as well as certain EC regulations on specific statistical domains (OJ L 393, 30.12.2006, p. 1).
(5)EGF/2007/005 IT Sardegna (COM(2008)0609); EGF/2007/006 IT Piemonte (COM(2008)0609); EGF/2007/007 IT Lombardia (COM(2008)0609); EGF/2008/001 IT Toscana (COM(2008)0609); EGF/2008/003 LT Alytaus Textile (COM(2008)0547); EGF/2008/005 ES Cataluña (COM(2009)0371); EGF/2009/001 PT Norte-Centro (COM(2009)0371); EGF/2009/004 BE Oost en West Vlaanderen Textiel (COM(2009)0515); EGF/2009/005 BE Limburg Textiel (COM(2009)0515); EGF/2010/009 ES Comunidad Valenciana (COM(2010)0613) and EGF/2013/008 ES Comunidad Valenciana (the current case).
(6)EGF/2009/014 ES Comunidad Valenciana ceramics (COM(2010)0216).
(7)EGF/2010/005 ES Comunidad Valenciana cutting, shaping and finishing of stone (COM (2010)0617).
(8)EGF/2010/009 ES Comunidad Valenciana (COM(2010)0613).
(9)EGF/2011/006 ES Comunidad Valenciana construction (COM(2012)0053).
(10)EGF/2011/020 ES Comunidad Valenciana footwear (COM(2012)0204).
(11)EGF/2013/004 ES Comunidad Valenciana building materials (COM(2013)0635).
(12) Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 855).


Production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material (plant reproductive material law) ***I
PDF 192kWORD 33k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material (plant reproductive material law) (COM(2013)0262 – C7-0121/2013 – 2013/0137(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0185A7-0112/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0262),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0121/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Austrian Federal Council and the Netherlands House of Representatives, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0112/2014),

1.  Rejects the Commission proposal;

2.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its proposal and submit a new one;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.


Remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union (adjustment as of 1 July 2011) ***I
PDF 198kWORD 29k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (COM(2013)0895 – C7-0459/2013 – 2013/0438(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0186A7-0165/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0895),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and in particular Article 10 of Annex XI thereto and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0459/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 4 March 2014(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Auditors of 3 March 2014(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 7 March 2014 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0165/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0438


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 422/2014.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) Not yet published in the Official Journal.


Remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union (adjustment as of 1 July 2012) ***I
PDF 197kWORD 29k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2012 the remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (COM(2013)0896 – C7-0460/2013 – 2013/0439(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0187A7-0164/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0896),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and in particular Article 10 of Annex XI thereto and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0460/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 4 March 2014(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Auditors of 3 March 2014(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 7 March 2014 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0164/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council adjusting with effect from 1 July 2012 the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0439


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 423/2014.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) Not yet published in the Official Journal.


EC-Serbia Stabilisation and Association Agreement ***II
PDF 193kWORD 34k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain procedures for applying the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other part (17930/1/2013 – C7-0028/2014 – 2011/0465(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0188A7-0116/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (17930/1/2013 – C7‑0028/2014),

–  having regard to its position at first reading(1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0938),

–  having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 72 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0116/2014),

1.  Approves the Council position at first reading;

2.  Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;

3.  Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

4.  Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

5.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

(1) Texts adopted of 25.10.2012, P7_TA(2012)0389.


European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and European Securities and Markets Authority ***I
PDF 197kWORD 30k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2003/71/EC and 2009/138/EC in respect of the powers of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority (COM(2011)0008 – C7-0027/2011 – 2011/0006(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0189A7-0077/2012

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0008),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 50, 53, 62 and 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0027/2011),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 4 May 2011(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 5 May 2011(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 27 November 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0077/2012),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2003/71/EC and 2009/138/EC and Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 in respect of the powers of the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority)

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0006


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/51/EU.)

(1) OJ C 159, 18.5.2011, p. 10.
(2) OJ C 218, 23.7.2011, p. 82.


Information accompanying transfers of funds ***I
PDF 515kWORD 147k
Resolution
Consolidated text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on information accompanying transfers of funds (COM(2013)0044 – C7-0034/2013 – 2013/0024(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0190A7-0140/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0044),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0034/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 17 May 2013(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 November 2013(2),

–  having regard to Rules 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs under Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0140/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on information accompanying transfers of funds

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0024


(Text with EEA relevance)

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)  Flows of dirty illicit money through transfers of funds can damage the structure, stability and reputation of the financial sector and threaten the internal market as well as international development, and directly or indirectly undermine the confidence of citizens in the rule of law. The funding of terrorism and organised crime remains a significant problem which should be addressed at Union level. Terrorism shakes and organised crime damage the democratic institutions and shake the very foundations of our society. Crucial facilitators of illicit money flows are secretive corporate structures operating in and through secrecy jurisdiction, often also referred to as tax havens. The soundness, integrity and stability of the system of transfers of funds and confidence in the financial system as a whole could be is being seriously jeopardised by the efforts of criminals and their associates either to disguise the origin of criminal proceeds or to transfer funds for criminal activities or terrorist purposes. [Am. 1]

(2)  In order to facilitate their criminal activities, money launderers and terrorist financers could try to take are taking advantage of the freedom of capital movements entailed by the integrated financial area, unless certain coordinating measures are adopted at Union and international level. International cooperation within the framework of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the global implementation of its recommendations aim to prevent regulatory arbitrage and the distortion of competition. By its scale, Union action should ensure that FATF Recommendation 16 on wire transfers of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), adopted in February 2012 is transposed uniformly throughout the Union, and, in particular, that there is no discrimination or discrepancy between national payments within a Member State and cross-border payments between Member States. Uncoordinated action by Member States alone in the field of cross border transfers of funds could have a significant impact on the smooth functioning of payment systems at Union level and therefore damage the internal market in the field of financial services. [Am. 2]

(2a)  The implementation and enforcement of this Regulation, including FATF Recommendation 16, should not result in unjustified or disproportionate costs for payment service providers or citizens who use their services, and the free movement of legal capital should be fully guaranteed throughout the Union. [Am. 3]

(3)  It has been pointed out in the Union’s revised Strategy on Terrorist Financing of 17 July 2008 that efforts have to be maintained to prevent terrorist financing and the use by suspected terrorists of their own financial resources. It is recognised that FATF is constantly seeking to improve its Recommendations and working towards a common understanding of how these should be implemented. It is noted in the Union's revised Strategy that implementation of those Recommendations by all FATF members and members of FATF-style regional bodies is assessed on a regular basis and that from this point of view a common approach to implementation by Member States is important.

(4)  In order to prevent terrorist funding, measures aimed at the freezing of funds and economic resources of certain persons, groups and entities have been taken, including Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001(6), and Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002(7). To that same end, measures aimed at protecting the financial system against the channelling of funds and economic resources for terrorist purposes have been taken. Directive …/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(8)(9) contains a number of such measures. Those measures do not, however, fully prevent terrorists and other criminals from having access to payment systems for moving their funds.

(5)  In order to foster a coherent approach in the international context in the field of combating and increase the efficiency of the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, further Union action should take account of developments at that level, namely the International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and Proliferation adopted in 2012 by FATF, and in particular Recommendation 16 and the revised interpretative note for its implementation. [Am. 4]

(5a)  Particular attention should be paid to the Union obligations set out in Article 208 TFEU in order to stem the increasing trend of money-laundering activities being moved from developed countries with stringent anti-money-laundering rules to developing countries where rules may be less stringent. [Am. 5]

(6)  The full traceability of transfers of funds can be a particularly important and valuable tool in the prevention, investigation and detection of money laundering or terrorist financing. It is therefore appropriate, in order to ensure the transmission of information throughout the payment chain, to provide for a system imposing the obligation on payment service providers to have transfers of funds accompanied by information on the payer and the payee which should be accurate and up to date. In that regard, it is essential for financial institutions to report adequate, accurate and up-to-date information with respect to transfers of funds carried out for their clients to enable the competent authorities to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing more effectively. [Am. 6]

(7)  The provisions of this Regulation apply without prejudice to national legislation transposing 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(10). For example, personal data collected for the purpose of complying with this Regulation should not be further processed in a way inconsistent with Directive 95/46/EC. In particular, further processing for commercial purposes should be strictly prohibited. The fight against money laundering and terrorist financing is recognised as an important public interest ground by all Member States. Hence, in the application of this Regulation, the transfer of personal data to a third country which does not ensure an adequate level of protection in the meaning of Article 25 of Directive 95/46/EC should be permitted in accordance with Article 26(d) of that Directive. It is important that payment service providers operating in multiple jurisdictions with branches or subsidiaries located outside the Union are not unreasonably prevented from sharing information about suspicious transactions within the same organisation. This is without prejudice to international agreements between the Union and third countries which aim to combat money laundering including appropriate safeguards for citizens ensuring an equivalent or adequate level of protection. [Am. 7]

(8)  Persons who merely convert paper documents into electronic data and are acting under a contract with a payment service provider do not fall within the scope of this Regulation; the same applies to any natural or legal person who provides payment service providers solely with messaging or other support systems for transmitting funds or with clearing and settlement systems.

(9)  It is appropriate to exclude from the scope of this Regulation transfers of funds that represent a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Such exclusions should cover credit or debit cards, mobile telephones or other digital or information technology (IT) devices, automated teller machine withdrawals, payments of taxes, fines or other levies, and transfers of funds where both the payer and the payee are payment service providers acting on their own behalf. In addition, in order to reflect the special characteristics of national payment systems, Member States may exempt electronic giro payments, provided that it is always possible to trace the transfer of funds back to the payer, as well as transfers of funds carried out through cheque image exchanges or bills of exchange. However, there must be no exemption when a debit or credit card, a mobile telephone or other digital or IT prepaid or postpaid device is used in order to effect a person-to-person transfer. Taking into account the dynamically evolving technological progress, consideration should be given to extend the scope of the Regulation to e-money and other new payment methods. [Am. 8]

(10)  Payment service providers should ensure that the information on the payer and the payee is not missing or incomplete. In order not to impair the efficiency of payment systems, the verification requirements for transfers of funds made from an account should be separate from those for transfers of funds not made from an account. In order to balance the risk of driving transactions underground by imposing overly strict identification requirements against the potential terrorist threat posed by small transfers of funds, the obligation to check whether the information on the payer is accurate should, in the case of transfers of funds not made from an account, be imposed only in respect of restricted to the name of the payer for individual transfers of funds that exceed of up to EUR 1 000. For transfers of funds made from an account, payment service providers should not be required to verify information on the payer accompanying each transfer of funds where the obligations under Directive …/…/EU(11) have been met. [Am. 9]

(11)  Against the background of the Union payment legislative acts – Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council(12), Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(13) and Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(14) – it is sufficient to provide for simplified information on the payer to accompany transfers of funds within the Union.

(12)  In order to allow the authorities responsible for combating money laundering or terrorist financing in third countries to trace the source of funds used for those purposes, transfers of funds from the Union to outside the Union should carry complete information on the payer and the payee. Those authorities should be granted access to complete information on the payer only for the purposes of preventing, investigating and detecting money laundering or terrorist financing.

(12a)  The authorities responsible for combating money laundering and terrorist financing, and relevant judicial and law enforcement agencies in the Member States, should intensify cooperation with each other and with relevant third-country authorities, including those in developing countries, in order further to strengthen transparency, the sharing of information and best practices. The Union should support capacity-building programmes in developing countries to facilitate such cooperation. Systems for collecting evidence and making available data and information relevant to the investigation of offences should be improved without in any way infringing the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality, or fundamental rights, in the Union. [Am. 10]

(12b)  The payment service providers of the payer, the payee and the intermediary service providers should have in place appropriate technical and organisational measures to protect personal data against accidental loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure or access. [Am. 11]

(13)  For transfers of funds from a single payer to several payees to be sent in an inexpensive way in batch files containing individual transfers from the Union to outside the Union, provision should be made for such individual transfers to carry only the account number of the payer or the payer’s unique transaction identifier provided that complete information on the payer and the payee is contained in the batch file.

(14)  In order to check whether the required information on the payer and the payee accompanies transfers of funds, and to help to identify suspicious transactions, the payment service provider of the payee and the intermediary payment service provider should have effective procedures in place in order to detect whether information on the payer and the payee is missing or incomplete, in particular if numerous payment services are involved to improve the traceability of transfers of funds. Effective checks that the information is available and complete, in particular where several payment service providers are involved, can help make investigation procedures less time consuming and more effective, which, in turn, improves the traceability of transfers of funds. Competent authorities in the Member States should thus ensure that payment service providers include the required transaction information with the wire transfer or related message throughout the payment chain. [Am. 12]

(15)  Owing to the potential terrorist financing threat posed by anonymous transfers, it is appropriate to require payment service providers to request information on the payer and the payee. In line with the risk-based approach developed by FATF, it is appropriate to identify areas of higher and lower risk with a view to better targeting money laundering and terrorist financing risks. Accordingly, the payment service provider of the payee and the intermediary service provider should establish effective risk-based procedures and assess and weigh risks so that resources can be explicitly steered towards high-risk areas of money laundering. Such effective risk-based procedures for cases where a transfer of funds lacks the required payer and payee information, in order to will help payment service providers to decide more effectively whether to execute, reject or suspend that transfer and what appropriate follow-up action to take. Where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the territory of the Union, enhanced customer due diligence should be applied, in accordance with Directive …/…/EU(15), in respect of cross-border correspondent banking relationships with that payment service provider. [Am. 13]

(16)  The payment service provider of the payee and the intermediary payment service provider should exercise special vigilance, assessing the risks, when it becomes aware that information on the payer and the payee is missing or incomplete and should report suspicious transactions to the competent authorities, in accordance with the reporting obligations set out in Directive …/…/EU(16) and national transposition measures.

(17)  The provisions on transfers of funds where information on the payer or the payee is missing or incomplete apply without prejudice to any obligations on payment service providers and the intermediary payment service providers to suspend or reject transfers of funds which violate provisions of civil, administrative or criminal law. The need for identity information on payer or the payee of individuals, legal persons, trusts, foundations, mutual societies, holdings and similar existing or future legal arrangements is a key factor in tracing criminals who might otherwise hide their identity behind corporate structure. [Am. 14]

(18)  Until technical limitations that may prevent intermediary payment service providers from satisfying the obligation to transmit all the information they receive on the payer are removed, those intermediary payment service providers should keep records of that information. Such technical limitations should be removed as soon as payment systems are upgraded. In order to overcome technical limitations, the use of the SEPA credit transfer scheme could be encouraged in interbank transfers between Member States and third countries. [Am. 15]

(19)  Since in criminal investigations it may not be possible to identify the data required or the individuals involved until many months, or even years, after the original transfer of funds and in order to be able to have access to essential evidence in the context of investigations, it is appropriate to require payment service providers to keep records of information on the payer and the payee for the purposes of preventing, investigating and detecting money laundering or terrorist financing. This period should be limited to five years, after which all personal data should be deleted, unless national law provides otherwise. Further retention should be permitted only if necessary for the prevention, detection or investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing and should not exceed ten years. Payment service providers should ensure that data retained under this Regulation is used only for the purposes described herein. [Am. 16]

(20)  To enable prompt action to be taken in the fight against terrorism, payment service providers should respond promptly to requests for information on the payer from the authorities responsible for combating money laundering or terrorist financing in the Member State where they are established.

(21)  The number of working days in the Member State of the payment service provider of the payer determines the number of days to respond to requests for information on the payer.

(22)  In order to improve compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and in accordance with the Commission Communication of 9 December 2010 entitled 'Reinforcing sanctioning regimes in the financial services sector', the power to adopt supervisory measures and the sanctioning powers of competent authorities should be enhanced. Administrative sanctions should be provided for and, given the importance of the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, Member States should lay down sanctions that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States should notify the Commission thereof, as well as the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (‘EBA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17), the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) (‘EIOPA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(18), and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority) (‘ESMA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(19).

(23)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Articles XXX Chapter V of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with 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(20). [Am. 17]

(24)  A number of countries and territories which do not form part of the territory of the Union share a monetary union with a Member State, form part of the currency area of a Member State or have signed a monetary convention with the Union represented by a Member State, and have payment service providers that participate directly or indirectly in the payment and settlement systems of that Member State. In order to avoid the application of this Regulation to transfers of funds between the Member States concerned and those countries or territories having a significant negative effect on the economies of those countries or territories, it is appropriate to provide for the possibility for such transfers of funds to be treated as transfers of funds within the Member States concerned.

(25)  In view of the amendments that would need to be made to Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 on information on the payer accompanying transfers of funds(21), that regulation should be repealed for reasons of clarity.

(26)  Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. 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.

(27)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognized by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the right to the protection of personal data (Article 8) and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47) and the principle of ne bis in idem.

(28)  In order to ensure a smooth introduction of the new anti-money laundering and terrorist financing framework, it is appropriate to coincide the application date of this Regulation with the transposition deadline for Directive …/…/EU(22).

(28a)  The European Data Protection Supervisor delivered an opinion on 4 July 2013(23),

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

CHAPTER I

SUBJECT MATTER, DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE

Article 1

Subject matter

This Regulation lays down rules on the information on the payer and the payee accompanying transfers of funds for the purposes of prevention, detection and investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing, when transferring funds.

Article 2

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:

(1)  ‘terrorist financing’ means terrorist financing as defined in Article 1(4) of Directive …/…/EU(24);

(2)  ‘money laundering’ means the money laundering activities referred to in Article 1(2) or (3) of Directive …/…/EU*;

(3)  ‘payer’ means a natural or legal person who either carries out a transfer of funds from his or her own account or who places an order for a transfer of funds payer as defined in Article 4(7) of Directive 2007/64/EC;[Am. 18]

(4)  ‘payee’ means a natural or legal person who is the intended recipient of transferred funds payee as defined in Article 4(8) of Directive 2007/64/EC; [Am. 19]

(5)  ‘payment service provider’ means a natural or legal person who provides the payment service of transferring funds in his or her professional capacity provider as defined in Article 4(9) of Directive 2007/64/EC; [Am. 20]

(6)  ‘intermediary payment service provider’ means a payment service provider, neither of the payer nor of the payee, who receives and transmits a fund transfer on behalf of the payment service provider of the payer or of the payee or of another intermediary payment service provider;

(7)  ‘transfer of funds’ means any transaction carried out by electronic means on behalf of a payer through a payment service provider, with a view to making funds available to a payee through a payment service provider, in particular ‘money remittance services’ and ‘direct debit’ within the meaning of Directive 2007/64/EC, irrespective of whether the payer and the payee are the same person; [Am. 21]

(8)  ‘batch file transfer’ means a bundle of several individual transfers of funds put together for transmission;

(9)  ‘unique transaction identifier’ means a combination of letters or symbols determined by the payment service provider, in accordance with the protocols of the payment and settlement systems or messaging systems used for the fund transfer, which permits traceability of the transaction back to the payer and the payee;

(10)  ‘person-to-person’ transfer of funds means a transaction between two natural persons, who, as consumers, act for purposes other than their trade, business or profession. [Am. 22]

Article 3

Scope

1.  This Regulation shall apply to transfers of funds, in any currency, which are sent or received by a payment service provider established in the Union.

2.  This Regulation shall not apply to transfers of funds carried out using a credit, or debit carddebit or prepaid card or voucher, or a mobile telephone, e-money, or any other digital or information technology (IT) device defined in Directive 2014/.../EU [PSD], where the following conditions are fulfilled: [Am. 23]

(a)  the card or device is used to pay goods and services to a company within professional trade or business; [Am. 24]

(b)  the number of the card or device accompanies all transfers flowing from the transaction.

However, this Regulation shall apply when a credit, or debit or prepaid card, or a mobile telephone, e-money or any other digital or ITdevice is used in order to effect a person-to-person transfer of funds. [Am. 25]

3.  This Regulation shall not apply to natural or legal persons that have no activity other than to convert paper documents into electronic data and who act under a contract with a payment service provider or to those who have no activity other than to provide payment service providers with messaging or other support systems for transmitting funds or with clearing and settlement systems. [Am. 26]

This Regulation shall not apply to transfers of funds:

(a)  where the transfer of funds entails the payer withdrawing cash from his or her own account;

(b)  where funds are transferred to public authorities as payment for taxes, fines or other levies within a Member State;

(c)  where both the payer and the payee are payment service providers acting on their own behalf.

CHAPTER II

OBLIGATIONS ON PAYMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS

Section 1

Obligations on the payment service provider of the payer

Article 4

Information accompanying transfers of funds

1.  The payment service provider of the payer shall ensure that the transfer of funds is accompanied by the following information on the payer:

(a)  the name of the payer;

(b)  the payer's account number, where such an account is used to process the transfer of funds, or a unique transaction identifier where no such account is used for that purpose;

(c)  the payer’s address, national identity number, or customer identification number, or date and place of birth. [Am. 27]

2.  The payment service provider of the payer shall ensure that transfers of funds are accompanied by the following information on the payee:

(a)  the name of the payee; and

(b)  the payee's account number, where such an account is used to process the transaction, or a unique transaction identifier where no such account is used for that purpose.

3.  Before transferring the funds, the payment service provider of the payer shall apply customer due diligence measures in accordance with Directive …/…/EU(25) and shall verify the accuracy and completeness of the information referred to in paragraph 1 on the basis of documents, data or information obtained from a reliable and independent source. [Am. 28]

4.  Where funds are transferred from the payer's account, the verification referred to in paragraph 3 shall be deemed to have taken place in the following cases:

(a)  where a payer’s identity has been verified in connection with the opening of the account in accordance with Article 11 of Directive …/…/EU(26) and the information obtained by that verification has been stored in accordance with Article 39 of that Directive; or

(b)  where Article 12(5) of Directive …/…/EU* applies to the payer.

5.  However, by way of derogation from paragraph 3, in the case of transfers of funds not made from an account, the payment service provider of the payer shall shall not verify the information referred to in paragraph 1 if the amount does not exceed at least the name of the payer for transfers of funds of up to EUR 1 000 and it does not appear to be linked to other transfers of funds which, together with the transfer in question, and the complete information relating to the payer and the payee referred to in paragraph 1 where the transaction is carried out in several operations that appear to be linked or where they exceed EUR 1 000. [Am. 29]

Article 5

Transfers of funds within the Union

1.  By way of derogation from Article 4(1) and (2), where the payment service provider(s) of both the payer and the payee are established in the Union, only the full name and the account number of the payer and the payee or his the unique transaction identifier shall be provided at the time of the transfer of funds, without prejudice to the information requirements laid down in Article 5(2)(b) and (3)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012. [Am. 30]

2.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the payment service provider of the payer shall, in the case of an identified higher risk as referred to in the Article 16(2) or (3) of, or in Annex III to, Directive …/…/EU(27), require the complete information relating to the payer and to the payee or, upon request from the payment service provider of the payee or the intermediary payment service provider, make available the information on the payer or the payee in accordance with Article 4, within three working days of receiving that request. [Am. 31]

Article 6

Transfers of funds to outside the Union

1.  In the case of batch file transfers from a single payer where the payment service providers of the payees are established outside the Union, Article 4(1) and (2) shall not apply to the individual transfers bundled together therein, provided that the batch file contains the information referred to in that Article and that the individual transfers carry the account number of the payer or his unique transaction identifier.

2.  By way of derogation from Article 4(1) and (2), where the payment service provider of the payee is established outside the Union, transfers of funds amounting to EUR 1 000 or less shall be accompanied only by: [Am. 32]

(a)  the name of the payer;

(b)  the name of the payee;

(c)  the account number of both the payer and the payee or the unique transaction identifier.

This information need not be verified for accuracy, unless there is a suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Section 2

Obligations on the payment service provider of the payee

Article 7

Detection of missing information on the payer and the payee

1.  The payment service provider of the payee shall detect whether the fields relating to the information on the payer and the payee in the messaging system or the payment and settlement system used to effect the transfer of funds, have been filled in using the characters or inputs admissible to the internal risk-based established anti-abuse procedures within the conventions of that messaging or payment and settlement system. [Am. 33]

2.  The payment service provider of the payee shall have effective procedures in place in order to detect whether the following information on the payer and the payee is missing:

(a)  for transfers of funds where the payment service provider of the payer is established in the Union, the information required under Article 5;

(b)  for transfers of funds where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union, the information on the payer and the payee referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) and, where applicable, the information required under Article 14; and

(c)  for batch file transfers where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union the information referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) in respect of the batch file transfer.

3.  For transfers of funds amounting to more than EUR 1 000, where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union, the payment service provider of the payee shall verify the identity of the payee if his or her identity has not already been verified.

4.  For transfers amounting to EUR 1 000 or less, where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union, the payment service provider of the payee need not verify the information pertaining to the payee, unless there is a suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Member States may reduce or waive the threshold where the national risk assessment has advised that checks of transfers of funds not made from an account be intensified. Member States making use of this derogation shall inform the Commission thereof. [Am. 34]

4a.  Where the payment service provider of the payer is established in a third country which presents an increased level of risk, enhanced customer due diligence shall be applied, in accordance with Directive …/…/EU(28), in respect of cross-border correspondent banking relationships with that payment service provider. [Am. 35]

Article 8

Transfers of funds with missing or incomplete information on the payer and the payee

1.  The payment service provider of the payee shall establish effective risk-based procedures, based on the identified risks in Article 16(2) of, and Annex III to, Directive …/…/EU(29), for determining when to execute, reject or suspend a transfer of funds lacking the required complete payer and payee information and the appropriate follow-up action. [Am. 36]

In any event, the payment service provider of the payer and the payment service provider of the payee shall comply with any applicable law or administrative provisions relating to money laundering and terrorist financing, in particular Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001, Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 and Directive …/…/EU*. [Am. 37]

If the payment service provider of the payee becomes aware, when receiving transfers of funds, that information on the payer and the payee required under Article 4(1) and (2), Article 5(1) and Article 6 is missing or incomplete or has not been completed using the characters or inputs admissible within the conventions of the messaging or payment and settlement system, it shall either reject the transfer or suspend it and ask for complete information on the payer and the payee before executing the payment transaction. [Am. 38]

2.  Where a payment service provider regularly fails to supply the required complete information on the payer, the payment service provider of the payee shall take steps, which may initially include the issuing of warnings and setting of deadlines, before either rejecting any future transfers of funds from that payment service provider or deciding whether or not to restrict or terminate its business relationship with that payment service provider. [Am. 39]

The payment service provider of the payee shall report that fact to the authorities responsible for combating money laundering or terrorist financing.

Article 9

Assessment and Reporting

The payment service provider of the payee shall, in accordance with the payment service provider’s risk-based procedures, consider missing or incomplete information on the payer and the payee to be a factor one of the factors in assessing whether the transfer of funds, or any related transaction, is suspicious, and whether it must be reported to the Financial Intelligence Unit. The payment service provider shall, in its effective risk-based procedures, also focus on, and take appropriate measures regarding, other risk factors as identified in Article 16(3) of, and Annex III to, Directive …/…/EU(30). [Am. 40]

Section 3

Obligations on intermediary payment service providers

Article 10

Keeping information on the payer and the payee with the transfer

Intermediary payment service providers shall ensure that all the information received on the payer and the payee that accompanies a transfer of funds is kept with the transfer.

Article 11

Detection of missing information on the payer and the payee

1.  The intermediary payment service provider shall detect whether the fields relating to the information on the payer and the payee in the messaging system or the payment and settlement system used to effect the transfer of funds, have been filled in using the characters or inputs admissible within the conventions of that system.

2.  The intermediary payment service provider shall have effective procedures in place in order to detect whether the following information on the payer and the payee is missing or incomplete: [Am. 41]

(a)  for transfers of funds where the payment service provider of the payer is established in the Union, the information required under Article 5;

(b)  for transfers of funds where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union, the information on the payer and the payee referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) or, where applicable, the information required under Article 14; and

(c)  for batch file transfers, where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union, the information referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) in respect of the batch file transfer.

Article 12

Transfers of funds with missing or incomplete information on the payer and the payee

1.  The intermediary payment service provider shall establish effective risk-based procedures for determining when to execute, reject or suspend a transfer of funds lacking the required payer and payee information and the whether the information received on the payer and the payee is missing or incomplete and shall undertake appropriate follow up action. [Am. 42]

If the intermediary payment service provider becomes aware, when receiving transfers of funds, that information on the payer and the payee required under Article 4(1) and (2), Article 5(1) and Article 6 is missing or incomplete or has not been completed using the characters or inputs admissible in accordance with the conventions of the messaging or payment and settlement system, it shall either reject or suspend the transfer or and ask for complete information on the payer and the payee before executing the payment transaction. [Am. 43]

2.  Where a payment service provider regularly fails to supply the required information on the payer, the intermediary payment service provider shall take steps, which may initially include the issuing of warnings and setting of deadlines, before either rejecting any future transfers of funds from that payment service provider or deciding whether or not to restrict or terminate its business relationship with that payment service provider.

The intermediary payment service provider shall report that fact to the authorities responsible for combating money laundering or terrorist financing.

Article 13

Assessment and Reporting

The intermediary payment service provider shall consider missing or incomplete information on the payer and the payee to be a factor in assessing whether the transfer of funds, or any related transaction, is suspicious, and whether it must be reported to the Financial Intelligence Unit.

Article 14

Technical limitations

1.  This Article shall apply where the payment service provider of the payer is established outside the Union and the intermediary payment service provider is situated within the Union.

2.  Unless the intermediary payment service provider becomes aware, when receiving a transfer of funds, that information on the payer required under this Regulation is missing or incomplete, it may use a payment system with technical limitations which prevents information on the payer from accompanying the transfer of funds to send transfers of funds to the payment service provider of the payee.

3.  Where the intermediary payment service provider becomes aware, when receiving a transfer of funds, that information on the payer required under this Regulation is missing or incomplete, it shall only use a payment system with technical limitations if it is able to inform the payment service provider of the payee thereof, either within a messaging or payment system that provides for communication of this fact or through another procedure, provided that the manner of communication is accepted by, or agreed between, both payment service providers.

4.  Where the intermediary payment service provider uses a payment system with technical limitations, the intermediary payment service provider shall, upon request from the payment service provider of the payee, make available to that payment service provider all the information on the payer which it has received, irrespective of whether it is complete or not, within three working days of receiving that request.

CHAPTER III

COOPERATION AND RECORD KEEPING

Article 15

Cooperation obligations and equivalence [Am. 44]

1.   Payment service providers and intermediary payment service providers shall respond fully and without delay, in accordance with the procedural requirements established in the national law of the Member State in which they are established, to enquiries exclusively from the authorities responsible for combating money laundering or terrorist financing of that Member State concerning the information required under this Regulation. Specific safeguards shall be put in place in order to ensure that such exchanges of information comply with data protection requirements. No other external authorities or parties shall have access to the data stored by the payment service providers. [Am. 45]

1a.   Because a great proportion of illicit financial flows ends up in tax havens, the Union should increase its pressure on those countries to cooperate in order to combat such illicit financial flows and improve transparency. [Am. 46]

1b.  Payment service providers established in the Union shall apply this Regulation with regard to their subsidiaries and branches operating in third countries that are not deemed to be equivalent.

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 22a concerning the recognition of the legal and supervisory framework of jurisdictions outside the Union as equivalent to the requirements of this Regulation. [Am. 47]

Article 15a

Data Protection

1.  With regard to the processing of personal data within the framework of this Regulation, payment service providers shall carry out their tasks for the purposes of this Regulation in accordance with national law transposing Directive 95/46/EC.

2.  Payment service providers shall ensure that data retained under this Regulation is used only for the purposes described herein and that it is in no case used for commercial purposes.

3.  Data protection authorities shall have powers, including the indirect access powers, to investigate, either on an ex-officio basis or on the basis of a complaint, any claims as regards problems with personal data processing. This should include, in particular, access to the data file at the payment service provider and competent national authorities. [Am. 48]

Article 15b

Transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations

The transfer of personal data to a third country or to an international organisation which does not ensure an adequate level of protection within the meaning of Article 25 of Directive 95/46/EC, may take place only if:

(a)  appropriate data protection measures and safeguards are put in place; and

(b)  the supervisory authority has, after assessing those measure and safeguards, given prior authorisation for the transfer. [Am. 49]

Article 16

Record keeping

Information on the payer and the payee shall not be kept any longer than strictly necessary. The payment service provider of the payer and the payment service provider of the payee shall keep records of the information referred to in Articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 for a maximum of five years. In the cases referred to in Article 14(2) and (3), the intermediary payment service provider shall keep records of all information received for five years. Upon expiry of that period, personal data shall be deleted, unless otherwise provided for by national law, which shall determine under which circumstances payment service providers may or shall. Member States may allow or require further retention for a longer retain data. period only in exceptional circumstances, where justified and where reasons have been given, and only if necessary for the prevention, detection or investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing. The maximum retention period following carrying-out of the transfer of funds shall not exceed ten years and the storage of personal data shall comply with national law transposing Directive 95/46/EC. [Am. 50]

The payment service providers of the payer, the payee and the intermediary service providers, shall have in place appropriate technical and organisational measures to protect personal data against accidental or unlawful destruction or accidental loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure or access. [Am. 51]

The information collected on the payer or the payee by the payment service providers of the payer, the payee and the intermediary payment service providers shall be deleted following expiry of the retention period. [Am. 52]

Article 16a

Access to information and confidentiality

1.  Payment service providers shall ensure that the information collected for the purposes of this Regulation is accessible only to designated persons or limited to persons strictly necessary for the completion of the undertaken risk.

2.  Payment service providers shall ensure that the confidentiality of the data processed is respected.

3.  Individuals who have access to and who are dealing with personal data of the payer or the payee, shall respect the confidentiality of the data processes as well as the data protection requirements.

4.  Competent authorities shall ensure that specific data protection training is provided to persons who regularly collect or process personal data. [Am. 53]

CHAPTER IV

SANCTIONS AND MONITORING

Article 17

Sanctions

1.  Member States shall lay down the rules on administrative measures and sanctions applicable to breaches of the provisions of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The sanctions provided for must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

2.  Member States shall ensure that where obligations apply to payment services providers, in the case of a breach sanctions may be applied to the members of the management body and to any other individuals who under national law are responsible for the breach.

3.  By …(31)Member States shall notify the rules referred to in paragraph 1 to the Commission and to the Joint Committee of EBA, EIOPA and ESMA. They shall notify the Commission and the Joint Committee of the EBA, EIOPA and ESMA without delay of any subsequent amendment thereto.

4.  Competent authorities shall have all investigatory powers that are necessary for the exercise of their functions. In the exercise of their sanctioning powers, competent authorities shall cooperate closely to ensure that sanctions or measures produce the desired results and coordinate their action when dealing with cross border cases.

Article 18

Specific provisions

1.  This Article shall apply to the following breaches:

(a)  repeated non-inclusion of required information on the payer and payee by a payment service provider, in breach of Articles 4, 5 and 6; [Am. 54]

(b)  serious failure of payment service providers to ensure record keeping in conformity with Article 16;

(c)  failure of the payment service provider to put in place effective risk-based policies and procedures required under Articles 8 and 12.

(ca)   serious failure by intermediary payment service providers to comply with Articles 11 and 12. [Am. 55]

2.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, administrative measures and sanctions that can be applied include at least the following:

(a)  a public statement which indicates the natural or legal person and the nature of the breach;

(b)  an order requiring the natural or legal person to cease the conduct and to desist from a repetition of that conduct;

(c)  in the case of a payment service provider, withdrawal of the authorisation of the provider;

(d)  a temporary ban against any member of the payment service provider's management body or any other natural person, who is held responsible, to exercise functions with the payment service provider;

(e)  in the case of a legal person, administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to 10 % of the total annual turnover of that legal person in the preceding business year; where the legal person is a subsidiary of a parent undertaking, the relevant total annual turnover shall be the total annual turnover resulting from the consolidated account of the ultimate parent undertaking in the preceding business year;

(f)  in the case of a natural person, administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to EUR 5 000 000, or in the Member States whose currency is not the euro, the corresponding value in the national currency on …(32);

(g)  administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to twice the amount of the profits gained or losses avoided because of the breach where those can be determined.

Article 19

Publication of sanctions

The competent authorities shall publish administrative sanctions and measures imposed in the cases referred to in Article 17 and Article 18(1) shall be published without undue delay including information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of persons responsible for it, unless such publication would seriously jeopardise the stability of financial markets if necessary and proportionate after a case-by-case evaluation. [Am. 56]

Where publication would cause a disproportionate damage to the parties involved, competent authorities shall publish the sanctions on an anonymous basis.

Where the competent authority of a Member State imposes or applies an administrative penalty or other measure in accordance with Articles 17 and 18, it shall notify EBA of that penalty or measure and of the circumstances under which it was imposed or applied. EBA shall include such notification in the central database of administrative penalties established in accordance with Article 69 of Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(33) and shall apply to it the same procedures as for all other published penalties. [Am. 57]

Article 20

Application of sanctions by the competent authorities

When determining the type of administrative sanctions or measures and the level of administrative pecuniary sanctions, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant circumstances, including:

(a)  the gravity and the duration of the breach;

(b)  the degree of responsibility of the responsible natural or legal person;

(c)  the financial strength of the responsible natural or legal person, as indicated by the total turnover of the responsible legal person or the annual income of the responsible natural person;

(d)  the importance of profits gained or losses avoided by the responsible natural or legal person, insofar as they can be determined;

(e)  the losses for third parties caused by the breach, insofar as they can be determined;

(f)  the level of cooperation of the responsible natural or legal person with the competent authority;

(g)  previous breaches by the natural or legal person responsible.

Article 21

Reporting of breaches

1.  Member States shall establish effective mechanisms to encourage reporting of breaches of the provisions of this Regulation to competent authorities. Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be implemented to protect data against accidental or unlawful destruction, accidental loss, alteration, or unlawful disclosure. [Am. 58]

2.  The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least:

(a)  specific procedures for the receipt of reports on breaches and their follow-up;

(b)  appropriate protection for whistleblowers and persons who report potential or actual breaches; [Am. 59]

(c)  protection of personal data concerning both the person who reports the breaches and the natural person who is allegedly responsible for a breach, in compliance with the principles laid down in Directive 95/46/EC.

3.  The payment service providers in cooperation with the competent authorities shall establish internal appropriate procedures for their employees to report breaches internally through a specific secure, independent and anonymous channel. [Am. 60]

Article 22

Monitoring

1.   Member States shall require competent authorities to effectively monitor, and take necessary measures with a view to ensuring, compliance with the requirements of this Regulation. EBA may issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, on the processes for implementing this Regulation, taking into account the best practices of Member States. [Am. 61]

1a.  The Commission shall coordinate and carefully monitor the application of this Regulation with regard to payment service providers outside the Union and shall strengthen cooperation, where appropriate, with third-country authorities responsible for investigating and penalising breaches under Article 18. [Am. 62]

1b.  By 1 January 2017, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of Chapter IV, with particular regard to cross-border cases, third-country payment service providers and their national competent authorities’ execution of investigatory and penalising powers. Should there be a risk of a breach relating to the storage of data, the Commission shall take appropriate and effective action, including submitting a proposal to amend this Regulation. [Am. 63]

Article 22a

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 power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 15(1a) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from (34).

3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 15(1a) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of that 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 15(1a) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two 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 two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council. [Am. 64]

CHAPTER V

IMPLEMENTING POWERS

Article 23

Committee procedure

1.  The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee on the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (‘the Committee’). The Committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2.  Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply, provided that implementing provisions adopted under the procedure set out therein do not alter the basic provisions of this Regulation. [Am. 65]

CHAPTER VI

DEROGATIONS

Article 24

Agreements with territories or countries not referred to in Article 355 of the Treaty[Am. 66]

1.  Without prejudice to Article 15(1a), the Commission may, in cases in which equivalence has been substantiated, authorise any Member State to conclude agreements with a country or territory which does not form part of the territory of the Union referred to in Article 355 of the Treaty, which contain derogations from this Regulation, in order to allow for transfers of funds between that country or territory and the Member State concerned to be treated as transfers of funds within that Member State. [Am. 67]

Such agreements may be authorised only if all of the following conditions are met:

(a)  the country or territory concerned shares a monetary union with the Member State concerned, forms part of the currency area of that Member State or has signed a Monetary Convention with the Union represented by a Member State;

(b)  payment service providers in the country or territory concerned participate directly or indirectly in payment and settlement systems in that Member State;

and

(c)  the country or territory concerned requires payment service providers under its jurisdiction to apply the same rules as those established under this Regulation.

2.  Any Member State wishing to conclude an agreement as referred to in paragraph 1 shall send an application to the Commission and provide it with all the necessary information.

Upon receipt by the Commission of an application from a Member State, transfers of funds between that Member State and the country or territory concerned shall be provisionally treated as transfers of funds within that Member State, until a decision is reached in accordance with the procedure set out in this Article.

If the Commission considers that it does not have all the necessary information, it shall contact the Member State concerned within two months of receipt of the application and specify the additional information required.

Once the Commission has all the information it considers to be necessary for appraisal of the request, it shall notify the requesting Member State accordingly within one month and shall transmit the request to the other Member States.

3.  Within three months of the notification referred to in the fourth subparagraph of paragraph 2, the Commission shall decide, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 23(2) whether to authorise the Member State concerned to conclude the agreement referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.

In any event, a decision as referred to in the first subparagraph shall be adopted within 18 months of receipt of the application by the Commission.

3a.  For authorised decisions relating to dependent or associated territories already in place, uninterrupted continuation shall be ensured, namely Commission Implementing Decision 2012/43/EU(35), Commission Decision 2010/259/EU(36), and Commission Decision 2008/982/EC(37). [Am. 68]

CHAPTER VII

FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 25

Repeal

Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 is repealed.

References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with the correlation table in the Annex.

Article 26

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.

It shall apply from …(38).

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

Done at …,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

ANNEX

Correlation table referred to in Article 25.

Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006

This Regulation

Article 1

Article 1

Article 2

Article 2

Article 3

Article 3

Article 4

Article 4(1)

Article 5

Article 4

Article 6

Article 5

Article 7

Article 7

Article 8

Article 7

Article 9

Article 8

Article 10

Article 9

Article 11

Article 16

Article 12

Article 10

Article 11

Article 12

Article 13

Article 13

Article 14

Article 14

Article 15

Article 15

Articles 17 to 22

Article 16

Article 23

Article 17

Article 24

Article 18

-

Article 19

-

Article 25

Article 20

Article 26

(1) OJ C 166, 12.6.2013, p. 2.
(2) OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 31.
(3)OJ C 166, 12.6.2013, p. 2.
(4)OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 31.
(5)Position of the European Parliament of 11 March 2014.
(6)Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 70).
(7)Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan (OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 9).
(8)Directive …/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of... on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L , , p. ).
(9) Number, date and OJ reference of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(10)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).
(11)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(12)Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on cross-border payments in the Community and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001(OJ L 266, 9.10.2009, p. 11).
(13)Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 (OJ L 94, 30.3.2012, p. 22).
(14)Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal market amending Directives 97/7/EC, 2002/65/EC, 2005/60/EC and 2006/48/EC and repealing Directive 97/5/EC (OJ L 319, 5.12.2007, p. 1).
(15)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(16)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(17) Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 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).
(18) Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48).
(19) Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/77/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 84).
(20)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 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
(21) OJ L 345, 8.12.2006, p. 1.
(22)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(23) OJ C 32, 4.2.2014, p. 9.
(24)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(25)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(26)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(27)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(28)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(29)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(30)Number of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.
(31) Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(32) The date of the entry into force of this Regulation.
(33)Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 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).
(34) Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(35)Commission Implementing Decision 2012/43/EU of 25 January 2012 authorising the Kingdom of Denmark to conclude agreements with Greenland and the Faeroe Islands for transfers of funds between Denmark and each of these territories to be treated as transfers of funds within Denmark, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 24, 27.1.2012, p. 12).
(36)Commission Decision 2010/259/EU of 4 May 2010 authorising the French Republic to conclude an agreement with the Principality of Monaco for transfers of funds between the French Republic and the Principality of Monaco to be treated as transfers of funds within the French Republic, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 112, 5.5.2010, p. 23).
(37)Commission Decision 2008/982/EC of 8 December 2008 authorising the United Kingdom to conclude an agreement with the Bailwick of Jersey, the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Isle of Man for transfers of funds between the United Kingdom, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 352, 31.12.2008, p. 34).
(38) The date of transposition of the directive adopted on the basis of COD 2013/0025.


Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing ***I
PDF 645kWORD 315k
Resolution
Consolidated text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (COM(2013)0045 – C7-0032/2013 – 2013/0025(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0191A7-0150/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0045),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0032/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 17 May 2013(1)

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 23 May 2013(2),

–  having regard to commitments made at the G8 Summit of June 2013 in Northern Ireland;

–  having regard to the Commission's recommendations of 6 December 2012 on aggressive tax planning;

–  having regard to the OECD Secretary General Progress Report to the G20 on 5 September 2013;

–  having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee of 9 December 2013 on the proposal for a directive amending Council Directive 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC as regards disclosure and non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies as groups;

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs under Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0150/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0025


(Text with EEA relevance)

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)  Massive flows of dirty illicit money can damage the stability and reputation of the financial sector and threaten the internal market, and terrorism international development. Terrorism shakes the very foundations of our society. The key facilitators of illicit money flows are secretive corporate structures operating in and through secrecy jurisdiction, often also referred to as tax havens. In addition to further developing the criminal law approach, a preventive effort at Union level, prevention via the financial system is indispensable and can produce complementary results. However, the preventive approach should be targeted and proportional, and should not result in the establishment of a comprehensive system for controlling the entire population. [Am. 1]

(2)  The soundness, integrity and stability of credit and financial institutions and confidence in the financial system as a whole could be seriously jeopardised by the efforts of criminals and their associates either to disguise the origin of criminal proceeds or to channel lawful or unlawful money for terrorist purposes. In order to facilitate their criminal activities, money launderers and terrorist financers could try to take advantage of the freedom of capital movements and the freedom to supply financial services which the integrated financial area entails, if. Therefore, certain coordinating measures are not adopted necessary at Union level. At the same time, the objectives of protection of society from criminals and protection of the stability and integrity of the European financial system should be balanced against the need to create a regulatory environment that allows companies to grow their businesses without incurring disproportionate compliance costs. Any requirement imposed on obliged entities to fight money laundering and terrorist financing should therefore be justified and proportionate. [Am. 2]

(3)  The current proposal is the fourth directive to deal with the threat of money laundering. Council Directive 91/308/EEC(6) defined money laundering in terms of drugs offences and imposed obligations solely on the financial sector. Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(7) extended the scope both in terms of the crimes covered and the range of professions and activities covered. In June 2003 the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) revised its Recommendations to cover terrorist financing, and provided more detailed requirements in relation to customer identification and verification, the situations where a higher risk of money laundering may justify enhanced measures and also situations where a reduced risk may justify less rigorous controls.

Those changes were reflected in Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(8) and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC(9). In implementing the FATF Recommendations, the Union should fully respect its data protection law, as well as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Charter) and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. [Am. 3]

(4)  Money laundering and terrorist financing are frequently carried out in an international context. Measures adopted solely at national or even Union level, without taking account of international coordination and cooperation, would have very limited effects. The measures adopted by the Union in that field should therefore be consistent with compatible with, and at least as stringent as, other action undertaken in other the international fora. Avoiding tax and mechanisms of non-disclosure and concealment can be used as strategies employed in money laundering and terrorist financing in order to avoid detection. Union action should continue to take particular account of the FATF Recommendations, which constitutes the foremost and the recommendations of other international body bodies active in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. With a view to reinforce the efficacy of the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, Directives 2005/60/EC and 2006/70/EC should, where appropriate, be aligned with the new FATF Recommendations adopted and expanded in February 2012. However, it is essential for such an alignment with the non-binding FATF Recommendations to be carried out in full compliance with Union law, especially as regards Union data protection law and the protection of fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter. [Am. 4]

(4a)  Particular attention should be paid to the fulfilment of the obligations set out in Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which requires coherence in development cooperation policy in order to stem the increasing trend of money laundering activities being moved from developed countries to developing countries with less stringent anti-money laundering law. [Am. 5]

(4b)  In view of the fact that illicit financial flows, and in particular money laundering, represent between 6 and 8,7 % of the GDP of developing countries(10), which is an amount 10 times larger than the assistance by the Union and its Member States to the developing world, the measures taken to combat money laundering and terrorist financing need to be coordinated and to take into account the Union's and the Member States' development strategy and policies which aim to fight against capital flight. [Am. 6]

(5)  Furthermore, the misuse of the financial system to channel criminal or even clean money to terrorist purposes poses a clear risk to the integrity, proper functioning, reputation and stability of the financial system. Accordingly, the preventive measures of this Directive should cover not only the manipulation of money derived from serious crime but also and the collection of money or property for terrorist purposes. [Am. 7]

(5a)  Irrespective of the penalties provided for in the Member States, the primary objective of all measures taken under this Directive should be to combat all practices which result in substantial illegal profits being generated. It should do so by taking all possible steps to prevent the financial system from being used to launder those profits. [Am. 8]

(6)  The use of large cash payments is vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financing. In order to increase vigilance and mitigate the risks posed by cash payments natural and legal persons trading in goods should be covered by this Directive to the extent that they make or receive cash payments of EUR 7 500 or more. Member States should be able to decide to adopt stricter provisions including a lower threshold. [Am. 9]

(6a)  Electronic money products are increasingly used as a substitute for bank accounts. The issuers of such products should be under a strict obligation to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. However, it should be possible to exempt electronic money products from customer due diligence if certain cumulative conditions are met. The use of electronic money that is issued without performing customer due diligence should be allowed for the purchase of goods and services only from merchants and providers who are identified and whose identification is verified by the electronic money issuer. For person-to-person transfers, the use of electronic money without performing customer due diligence should not be allowed. The amount stored electronically should be sufficiently small in order to avoid loopholes and to make sure that a person cannot obtain an unlimited amount of anonymous electronic money products. [Am. 10]

(6b)  Estate agents are active in many different ways in the field of property transactions in the Member States. In order to reduce the risk of money laundering in the property sector estate agents should be included within the scope of this Directive where they are involved in financial transactions relating to property as part of their professional activities. [Am. 11]

(7)  Legal professionals, as defined by the Member States, should be subject to the provisions of this Directive when participating in financial or corporate transactions, including providing tax advice, where there is the greatest risk of the services of those legal professionals being misused for the purpose of laundering the proceeds of criminal activity or for the purpose of terrorist financing. There should, however, be exemptions from any obligation to report information obtained either before, during or after judicial proceedings, or in the course of ascertaining the legal position of a client. Thus, legal advice should remain subject to the obligation of professional secrecy unless the legal counsellor is taking part in money laundering or terrorist financing, the legal advice is provided for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes or the lawyer knows that the client is seeking legal advice for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes.

(8)  Directly comparable services should be treated in the same manner when provided by any of the professionals covered by this Directive. In order to ensure respect for the rights guaranteed by the Charter, in the case of auditors, external accountants and tax advisors, who, in some Member States, may defend or represent a client in the context of judicial proceedings or ascertain a client's legal position, the information they obtain in the performance of those tasks should not be subject to the reporting obligations in accordance with this Directive.

(9)  It is important to highlight expressly that ‘tax crimes’ relating to direct and indirect taxes are included in the broad definition of ‘criminal activity’ under this Directive in line with the revised FATF Recommendations. The European Council of 23 May 2013 stated the need to deal with tax evasion and fraud and to fight money laundering in a comprehensive manner, both within the internal market and vis-à-vis non-cooperative third countries and jurisdictions. Agreeing on a definition of tax crimes is an important step in detecting those crimes, as too is public the disclosure of certain financial information by large companies operating in the Union on a country-by-country basis. It is also important to ensure that obliged entities and legal professionals, as defined by Member States, do not seek to frustrate the intent of this Directive or to facilitate or to engage in aggressive tax planning. [Am. 12]

(9a)  Member States should introduce General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) on tax matters with a view to curbing aggressive tax planning and avoidance in accordance with the European Commission's recommendations on Aggressive Tax Planning on 12 December 2012 and the OECD Progress Report to the G20 on 5 September 2013. [Am. 13]

(9b)  When they are performing or facilitating commercial or private transactions, entities which have a specific role in the financial system, such as the European Investment Bank (EIB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the central banks of the Member States and central settlement systems should, as far as possible, observe the rules applicable to other obliged entities adopted pursuant to this Directive. [Am. 14]

(10)  There is a need to identify any natural person who exercises ownership or control over a legal person. While finding a specific percentage shareholding will not automatically result in finding the beneficial owner, it is an evidential one factor to be taken into account among others for the identification of the beneficial owner. Identification and verification of beneficial owners should, where relevant, extend to legal entities that own other legal entities, and should follow the chain of ownership until the natural person who exercises ownership or control of the legal person that is the customer is found. [Am. 15]

(11)  It is important to ensure, and to enhance, the traceability of payments. The need for existence of accurate and up-to-date information on the beneficial owner of any legal entity, such as legal persons, trusts, foundations, holdings and all other similar existing or future legal arrangements is a key factor in tracing criminals who might otherwise hide their identity behind a corporate structure. Member States should therefore ensure that companies retain information on their beneficial ownership and make this adequate, accurate and up-to-date information available to competent authorities and obliged entities through central public registers, accessible on-line and in an open and secure data format, in accordance with Union data protection rules and the right to privacy as enshrined in the Charter. Access to such registers should be granted to competent authorities, in particular FIUs and obliged entities, as well as to the public subject to prior identification of the person wishing to access the information and to the possible payment of a fee. In addition, trustees should declare their status to obliged entities. [Am. 16]

(11a)  The establishment of beneficial ownership registers by Member States would significantly improve the fight against money laundering, terrorist financing, corruption, tax crimes, fraud and other financial crimes. This could be achieved by improving the operations of the existing business registers in the Member States. It is vital that registers are interconnected if effective use is to be made of the information contained therein, due to the cross-border nature of business transactions. The interconnection of business registers across the Union is already required by Directive 2012/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(11) and should be further developed. [Am. 17]

(11b)  Technological progress has provided tools which enable obliged entities to verify the identity of their customers when certain transactions occur. Such technological improvements provide time-effective and cost-effective solutions to businesses and to customers and should therefore be taken into account when evaluating risk. The competent authorities of Member States and obliged entities should be proactive in combating new and innovative ways of money laundering, while respecting fundamental rights, including the right to privacy and data protection. [Am. 18]

(12)  This Directive should also apply to those activities of the obliged entities covered by this Directive which are performed on the internet.

(12a)  The representatives of the Union in the governing bodies of the EBRD should encourage the EBRD to implement the provisions of this Directive and to publish on its website an anti-money laundering policy, containing detailed procedures that would give effect to this Directive. [Am. 19]

(13)  The use of the gambling sector to launder the proceeds of criminal activity is of concern. In order to mitigate the risks related to the sector and to provide parity amongst the providers of gambling services, an obligation for all providers of gambling services to conduct customer due diligence for single transactions of EUR 2 000 or more should be laid down. When carrying out that due diligence a risk based approach should be adopted that reflects the different risks for different types of gambling services and whether they represent a high or low risk for money laundering. The special characteristics of different types of gambling should also be taken into account, by, for example, differentiating between casinos, on-line gambling or other providers of gambling services. Member States should consider applying that threshold to the collection of winnings as well as wagering a stake. Providers of gambling services with physical premises (e.g. casinos and gaming houses) should ensure that customer due diligence, if it is taken at the point of entry to the premises, can be linked to the transactions conducted by the customer on those premises. [Am. 20]

(13a)  Money laundering is becoming increasingly sophisticated and also includes illegal, and sometimes legal, betting, in particular in relation to sporting events. New forms of lucrative organised crime like match-fixing have arisen and have developed into a profitable form of criminal activity related to money laundering. [Am. 21]

(14)  The risk of money laundering and terrorist financing is not the same in every case. Accordingly, a holistic risk-based approach based on minimum standards should be used. The risk-based approach is not an unduly permissive option for Member States and obliged entities. It involves the use of evidence-based decision making to better target the money laundering and terrorist financing risks facing the Union and those operating within it. [Am. 22]

(15)  Underpinning the risk-based approach is a need for Member States and the Union to identify, understand and mitigate the money laundering and terrorist financing risks it faces. The importance of a supra-national approach to risk identification has been recognised at international level, and the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (‘EBA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(12); the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) (‘EIOPA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(13); and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority) (‘ESMA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council(14), should be tasked with issuing an opinion on the risks affecting the financial sector and, in cooperation with Member States, should develop minimum standards for risk assessments carried out by the competent national authorities. That process should, as far as possible, involve relevant stakeholders through public consultations. [Am. 23]

(16)  The results of risk assessments at Member State level should, where appropriate, be made available in a timely manner to obliged entities to enable them to identify, understand and mitigate their own risks. [Am. 24]

(17)  In order to better understand and mitigate risks at Union level, a supranational risk analysis should be carried out so that the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing to which the internal market is exposed can be identified effectively. The Commission should require the Member States to deal with scenarios considered to be high risk in an effective way. Furthermore, Member States should share the results of their risk assessments with each other and with the Commission, EBA, EIOPA and, ESMA (together referred to as the ‘ESAs’), and Europol, where appropriate. [Am. 25]

(18)  When applying the provisions of this Directive, it is appropriate to take account of the characteristics and needs of small obliged entities which fall under its scope, and to ensure a treatment which is appropriate to the specific needs of small obliged entities, and the nature of the business.

(19)  Risk itself is variable in nature, and the variables, either on their own or in combination, may increase or decrease the potential risk posed, thus having an impact on the appropriate level of preventative measures, such as customer due diligence measures. Thus, there are circumstances in which enhanced due diligence should be applied and others in which simplified due diligence may be appropriate.

(20)  It should be recognised that certain situations present a greater risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Although the identity and business profile of all customers should be established, there are cases where particularly rigorous customer identification and verification procedures are required.

(21)  This is particularly true of business relationships with individuals who hold or have held important public positions, particularly those from countries where corruption is widespread, within the Union and internationally. Such relationships may expose the financial sector in particular to significant reputational and legal risks. The international effort to combat corruption also justifies the need to pay special attention to such cases and to apply appropriate enhanced customer due diligence measures in respect of persons who hold or have held prominent functions domestically or abroad and senior figures in international organisations. [Am. 26]

(21a)  The need for enhanced customer due diligence measures in respect of persons who hold or have held prominent functions, whether domestically or abroad, and senior figures in international organisations should not, however, lead to a situation in which lists containing information on such persons are traded for commercial purposes. Member States should take appropriate measures to prohibit such activity. [Am. 27]

(22)  Obtaining approval from senior management for establishing business relationships need not, in all cases, imply obtaining approval from the board of directors. Granting of such approval should be possible by someone with sufficient knowledge of the institution's money laundering and terrorist financing risk exposure and sufficient seniority to make decisions affecting its risk exposure.

(22a)  It is essential for the Union to develop a common approach and a common policy to deal with non-cooperative jurisdictions that perform poorly in combating money laundering and terrorist financing. To that end, the Member States should act on and apply directly any lists of countries published by the FATF in their national systems to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Furthermore, the Member States and the Commission should identify other non-cooperative jurisdictions on the basis of all information available. The Commission should develop a common approach to measures to be used to protect the integrity of the internal market against those non-cooperative jurisdictions. [Am. 28]

(23)  In order to avoid repeated customer identification procedures, leading to delays and inefficiency in business, it is appropriate, subject to suitable safeguards, to allow customers whose identification has been carried out elsewhere to be introduced to the obliged entities. Where an obliged entity relies on a third party, the ultimate responsibility for the customer due diligence procedure remains with the obliged entity to whom the customer is introduced. The third party, or the person that has introduced the customer, should also retain his own responsibility for compliance with the requirements in this Directive, including the requirement to report suspicious transactions and maintain records, to the extent that he has a relationship with the customer that is covered by this Directive.

(24)  In the case of agency or outsourcing relationships on a contractual basis between obliged entities and external natural or legal persons not covered by this Directive, any anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing obligations for those agents or outsourcing service providers as part of the obliged entities, may arise only from contract and not from this Directive. The responsibility for complying with this Directive should remain primarily with the obliged entity covered hereby. In addition, Member States should ensure that any such third parties may be held liable for breaches of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. [Am. 29]

(25)  All Member States have, or should, set up operationally independent and autonomous financial intelligence units (FIUs) to collect and analyse the information which they receive with the aim of establishing links between suspicious transactions and underlying criminal activity in order to prevent and combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Suspicious transactions should be reported to the FIUs, which should serve as a national centre for receiving, analysing and disseminating to the competent authorities suspicious transaction reports and other information regarding potential money laundering or terrorist financing. This should not compel Member States to change their existing reporting systems where the reporting is done through a public prosecutor or other law enforcement authorities, as long as the information is forwarded promptly and unfiltered to FIUs, allowing them to perform their tasks properly, including international cooperation with other FIUs. It is important that Member States provide FIUs with the necessary resources to ensure that they have full operational capacity to deal with the current challenges posed by money laundering and terrorist financing while respecting fundamental rights, including the right to privacy and data protection. [Am. 30]

(26)  By way of derogation from the general prohibition on executing suspicious transactions, obliged entities may execute suspicious transactions before informing the competent authorities, where refraining from the execution thereof is impossible or likely to frustrate efforts to pursue the beneficiaries of a suspected money laundering or terrorist financing operation. This, however, should be without prejudice to the international obligations accepted by the Member States to freeze without delay funds or other assets of terrorists, terrorist organisations or those who finance terrorism, in accordance with the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.

(26a)  Since a huge proportion of illicit financial flows ends up in tax havens, the Union should increase the pressure it brings to bear on those countries to cooperate, in order to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. [Am. 31]

(27)  Member States should have the possibility to designate an appropriate self-regulatory body of the professions referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a),(b), and (d) as the authority to be informed in the first instance in place of the FIU. In line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, a system of first instance reporting to a self-regulatory body constitutes an important safeguard to uphold the protection of fundamental rights as concerns the reporting obligations applicable to lawyers.

(28)  Where a Member State decides to make use of the exemptions provided for in Article 33(2), it may allow or require the self-regulatory body representing the persons referred to therein not to transmit to the FIU any information obtained from those persons in the circumstances referred to in that Article.

(29)  There have been a number of cases of individuals, including employees and representatives who report their suspicions of money laundering being subject to threats or hostile action. Although this Directive cannot interfere with Member States' judicial procedures, this is a crucial issue for the effectiveness of the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing system. Member States should be aware of this problem and should do whatever they can to protect individuals, including employees and representatives from such threats or hostile action, as well as from other adverse treatment or adverse consequences, making it easier for them to report suspicions, thereby strengthening the fight against money laundering. [Am. 32]

(30)  Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(15), as transposed into national law, is applicable to the processing of personal data for the purposes of this Directive.

(30a)  Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council(16) is applicable to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions and bodies for the purposes of this Directive. [Am. 33]

(31)  Certain aspects of the implementation of this Directive involve the collection, analysis, storage and sharing of data. The processing of personal data should be permitted in order to comply with the obligations laid down in this Directive, including carrying out customer due diligence, ongoing monitoring, investigation and reporting of unusual and suspicious transactions, identification of the beneficial owner of a legal person or legal arrangement, identification of a politically exposed person, sharing of information by competent authorities and sharing of information by financial institutions and obliged entities. The personal data collected should be limited to what is strictly necessary for the purpose of complying with the requirements of this Directive and not further processed in a way inconsistent with Directive 95/46/EC. In particular, further processing of personal data for commercial purposes should be strictly prohibited. [Am. 34]

(32)  The fight against money laundering and terrorist financing is recognised as an important public interest ground by all Member States. The eradication of such phenomena requires a resolute political will and cooperation at all levels. [Am. 35]

(32a)  It is of the utmost importance that investment that is co-financed by the Union budget fulfils the highest standards in order to prevent financial crimes including corruption and tax evasion. In 2008, the EIB therefore adopted an internal guideline entitled "Policy on preventing and deterring prohibited conduct in European Investment Bank activities" with Article 325 TFEU, Article 18 of the EIB Statute and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(17) as its legal basis. Following adoption of the policy, the EIB is to report on suspicions or alleged cases of money laundering affecting EIB supported projects, operations and transactions to the Luxembourg FIU. [Am. 36]

(33)  This Directive is without prejudice to the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including the provisions of Framework decision 2008/977/JHA. [Am. 37]

(34)  The rights of access of the data subject are applicable to the personal data processed for the purpose of this Directive. However, access by the data subject to information contained in a suspicious transaction report would seriously undermine the effectiveness of the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. Limitations on that right in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 95/46/EC may therefore be justified. However, such limitations have to be counterbalanced by the effective powers granted to the data protection authorities, including indirect access powers, laid down in Directive 95/46/EC, enabling them to investigate, on an ex officio basis or on the basis of a complaint, any claims concerning problems with personal data processing. This should in particular include access to the data file at the obliged entity. [Am. 38]

(35)  Persons who merely convert paper documents into electronic data and act under a contract with a credit institution or a financial institution do not fall within the scope of this Directive, nor does any natural or legal person that provides credit or financial institutions solely with a message or other support systems for transmitting funds or with clearing and settlement systems.

(36)  Money laundering and terrorist financing are international problems and the effort to combat them should be global. Where Union credit or financial institutions have branches or subsidiaries located in third countries where the law in that area is deficient, they should, in order to avoid the application of very different standards within the institution or group of institutions, apply Union standards or notify the competent authorities of the home Member State if application of such standards is impossible.

(37)  Feedback should, where practicable where possible, be made available to obliged entities on the usefulness and follow-up of the suspicious transactions reports they present. To make this possible, and to be able to review the effectiveness of their systems to combat money laundering and terrorist financing Member States should keep and improve the relevant statistics. To further enhance the quality and consistency of the statistical data collected at Union level, the Commission should keep track of the Union-wide situation with respect to the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing and publish regular overviews, including an evaluation of national risk assessments. The Commission should carry out the first such overview within one year from the date of entry into force of this Directive. [Am. 39]

(37a)  Member States should not only ensure that obliged entities comply with the relevant rules and guidelines, but should also have systems in place that actually minimise the risks of money laundering within those entities. [Am. 40]

(37b)  In order to be able to review the effectiveness of their systems to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, Member States should keep and improve the relevant statistics. In order further to enhance the quality and consistency of the statistical data collected at Union level, the Commission should keep track of the Union-wide situation with respect to the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing and should publish regular overviews. [Am. 41]

(38)  Competent authorities should ensure that, in regard to currency exchange offices, trust and company service providers or gambling service providers, the persons who effectively direct the business of such entities and the beneficial owners of such entities are fit and proper persons. The criteria for determining whether or not a person is fit and proper should, as a minimum, reflect the need to protect such entities from being misused by their managers or beneficial owners for criminal purposes.

(39)  Taking into account the transnational character of money laundering and terrorist financing, coordination and cooperation between EU FIUs are extremely important. Such cooperation has so far been addressed only by Council Decision 2000/642/JHA(18). In order to ensure better coordination and cooperation between FUIs, and in particular to ensure that suspicious transactions reports reach the FIU of the Member State where the report would be of most use, more detailed, further going and up-dated rules should be included in this Directive.

(40)  Improving the exchange of information between FIUs within the Union is of particular importance to face the transnational character of money laundering and terrorist financing. The use of secure facilities for the exchange of information, especially the decentralised computer network FIU.net and the techniques offered by that network such facilities should be encouraged by Member States. [Am. 42]

(41)  The importance of combating money laundering and terrorist financing should lead Member States to lay down effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions in national law for failure to respect the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. Member States currently have a diverse range of administrative measures and sanctions for breaches of the key preventative measures. This diversity could be detrimental to the efforts put into combating money laundering and terrorist financing and the Union's response is at risk of being fragmented. This Directive should therefore include a range of administrative measures and sanctions that Member States shall have available for systematic breaches of the requirements relating to customer due diligence measures, record keeping, reporting of suspicious transactions and internal controls of obliged entities. That range should be sufficiently broad to allow Member States and competent authorities to take account of the differences between obliged entities, in particular between financial institutions and other obliged entities, as regards their size, characteristics, level of risk and areas of activity. In the application of this Directive, Member States should ensure that the imposition of administrative measures and sanctions in accordance with this Directive and of criminal sanctions in accordance with national law does not breach the principle of ne bis in idem. [Am. 43]

(42)  Technical standards in financial services should ensure consistent harmonisation and adequate protection of depositors, investors and consumers across the Union. As bodies with highly specialised expertise, it would be efficient and appropriate to entrust the ESAs with the elaboration of draft regulatory technical standards which do not involve policy choices, for submission to the Commission.

(42a)  To allow competent authorities and obliged entities to better evaluate the risks arising from certain transactions, the Commission should draw up a list of the jurisdictions outside the Union that have implemented rules and regulations similar to those laid down in this Directive. [Am. 44]

(43)  The Commission should adopt the draft regulatory technical standards developed by the ESAs pursuant to Article 42 of this Directive by means of delegated acts pursuant to Article 290 TFEU and in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.

(44)  In view of the very substantial amendments that would need to be made to Directives 2005/60/EC and 2006/70/EC, they should be merged and replaced for reasons of clarity and consistency.

(45)  Since the objective of this Directive, namely the protection of the financial system by means of prevention, investigation and detection of money laundering and terrorist financing, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, as individual measures adopted by Member States to protect their financial systems could be inconsistent with the functioning of the internal market and with the prescriptions of the rule of law and Union public policy but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at 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 Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(46)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter, in particular, the respect for private and family life, the presumption of innocence, the right to protection of personal data, the freedom to conduct a business, the prohibition of discrimination, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, and the right of defence. [Am. 45]

(47)  In line with Article 21 of the Charterprohibiting any discrimination based on any ground, Member States have to ensure that this Directive is implemented, as regards risk assessments in the context of customer due diligence, without discrimination.

(48)  In accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of Member States and the Commission of 28 September 2011 on explanatory documents, Member States have undertaken to accompany, in justified cases, the notification of their transposition measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition instruments. With regard to this Directive, the legislator considers the transmission of such documents to be justified.

(48a)  Member States and obliged entities, when applying this Directive or national law transposing this Directive, are bound by Council Directive 2000/43/EC(19). [Am. 46]

(48b)  The European Data Protection Supervisor delivered an opinion on 4 July 2013(20),

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

CHAPTER I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section 1

Subject-matter, scope and definitions

Article 1

1.  Member States shall ensure that money laundering and terrorist financing are prohibited.

2.  For the purposes of this Directive, the following conduct, when committed intentionally, shall be regarded as money laundering:

(a)  the conversion or transfer of property, knowing that such property is derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such activity, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of avoiding freezing or confiscation orders or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of such activity to evade the legal consequences of that person’s action; [Am. 47]

(b)  the concealment or disguise of the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement, rights with respect to, or ownership of property, knowing that such property is derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such activity;

(c)  the acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing, at the time of receipt, that such property was derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such activity;

(d)  participation in, association to commit, attempts to commit and aiding, abetting, facilitating and counselling the commission of any of the actions referred to in points (a), (b) and (c).

3.  Money laundering shall be regarded as such even where the activities which generated the property to be laundered were carried out in the territory of another Member State or in that of a third country.

4.  For the purposes of this Directive, ‘terrorist financing’ means the provision or collection of funds, by any means, directly or indirectly, with the intention that they should be used or in the knowledge that they are to be used, in full or in part, in order to carry out any of the offences within the meaning of Articles 1 to 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA(21), as amended by Council Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA(22).

5.  Knowledge, intent or purpose required as an element of the activities referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4 may be inferred from objective factual circumstances.

Article 2

1.  This Directive shall apply to the following obliged entities:

(1)  credit institutions;

(2)  financial institutions;

(3)  the following natural or legal persons acting in the exercise of their professional activities:

(a)  auditors, external accountants and tax advisors;

(b)  notaries and other independent legal professionals, when they participate, whether by acting on behalf of and for their client in any financial or immovable property transaction, or by assisting in the planning or execution of transactions for their client concerning the:

(i)  buying and selling of real property or business entities;

(ii)  managing of client money, securities or other assets;

(iii)  opening or management of bank, savings or securities accounts;

(iv)  organisation of contributions necessary for the creation, operation or management of companies;

(v)  creation, operation or management of trusts, foundations, mutuals, companies or similar structures; [Am. 48]

(c)  trust or company service providers not already covered under point (a) or (b);

(d)  estate agents, including letting agents, in so far as they are involved in financial transactions; [Am. 49]

(e)  other natural or legal persons trading in goods or services, only to the extent that payments are made or received in cash in an amount of EUR 7 500 or more, whether the transaction is executed in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked; [Am. 50]

(f)  providers of gambling services.

With the exception of casinos, Member States may decide to exempt in full or in part certain gambling services, as referred to in point (3)(f) of the first subparagraph,from national provisions transposing this Directive on the basis of the low risk posed by the nature of the services on the basis of risk assessments. Before applying any such an exemption, the Member State concerned shall seek the approval of the Commission. [Am. 153]

2.  Member States may decide that natural or legal persons that engage in a financial activity on an occasional or very limited basis where there is little risk of money laundering or terrorist financing occurring, do not fall within the scope of this Directive provided that the natural or legal person fulfils all of the following criteria:

(a)  the financial activity is limited in absolute terms;

(b)  the financial activity is limited on a transaction basis;

(c)  the financial activity is not the main activity;

(d)  the financial activity is ancillary and directly related to the main activity;

(e)  the main activity is not an activity referred to in paragraph 1, with the exception of the activity referred to in point (3)(e) of paragraph 1;

(f)  the financial activity is provided only to the customers of the main activity and is not generally offered to the public.

The firstsubparagraph shall not apply to natural or legall persons engaged in the activity of money remittance within the meaning of Article 4(13) of Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(23).

3.  For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 2, Member States shall require that the total turnover of the financial activity does not exceed a threshold, which must be sufficiently low. That threshold shall be established at national level, depending on the type of financial activity.

4.  For the purposes of point (b) of paragraph 2, Member States shall apply a maximum threshold per customer and single transaction, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked. That threshold shall be established at national level, depending on the type of financial activity. It shall be sufficiently low in order to ensure that the types of transactions in question are an impractical and inefficient method for laundering money or for terrorist financing, and shall not exceed EUR 1 000.

5.  For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 2, Member States shall require that the turnover of the financial activity does not exceed 5 % of the total turnover of the natural or legal person concerned.

6.  In assessing the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing occurring for the purposes of this Article, Member States shall pay special attention to any financial activity which is regarded as particularly likely, by its nature, to be used or abused for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes.

7.  Any decision pursuant to this Article shall state the reasons on which it is based. Member States shall provide for the possibility of withdrawing that decision should circumstances change.

8.  Member States shall establish risk-based monitoring activities or take any other adequate measures to ensure that the exemption granted by decisions pursuant to this Article is not abused.

Article 3

For the purposes of this Directive the following definitions shall apply:

(1)  "credit institution" means a credit institution as defined in point 1 of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(24), including branches thereof, as defined in point 17 of Article 4(1) of that Regulation, located in the Union, whether its head office is situated within the Union or in a third country;

(2)  "financial institution" means:

(a)  an undertaking other than a credit institution the principal activity of which is to pursue one or more of the activities listed in points (2) to (12) and points (14) and (15) of Annex I to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(25), including the activities of currency exchange offices (bureaux de change);

(b)  an insurance company duly authorised in accordance with Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(26), insofar as it carries out activities covered by that Directive;

(c)  an investment firm as defined in point (1) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(27);

(d)  a collective investment undertaking marketing its units or shares;

(e)  an insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(5) of Directive 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(28), with the exception of intermediaries as referred to in Article 2(7) of that Directive, when they act in respect of life insurance and other investment related services;

(f)  branches of financial institutions as referred to in points (a) to (e) that are located in the Union, whether its head office is situated in the Union or in a third country;

(3)  "property" means assets of any kind, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, and legal documents or instruments in any form including electronic or digital, evidencing title to or an interest in such assets;

(4)  "criminal activity" means any kind of criminal involvement in the commission of the following serious crimes:

(a)  acts as defined in Articles 1 to 4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA, as amended by Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA;

(b)  any of the offences referred in Article 3(1)(a) of the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances;

(c)  the activities of criminal organisations as defined in Article 1 of Council Joint Action 98/733/JHA(29);

(d)  fraud affecting the Union's financial interests, at least serious, as defined in Article 1(1) and Article 2 of the Convention on the Protection of the European Communities' Financial Interests(30);

(e)  corruption;

(f)  all offences, including tax crimes offences related to direct taxes and indirect taxes, which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards those States which have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months; [Am. 52; Am. does not concern all languages]

(4a)  "self-regulatory body" means a body that has the power, recognised by national law, to establish the obligations and rules governing a certain profession or a certain field of economic activity, which must be complied with by natural or legal persons in that profession or field; [Am. 53]

(5)  "beneficial owner" means any natural person who ultimately owns or controls the customer and/or the natural person on whose behalf a transaction or activity is being conducted and includes at least:

(a)  in the case of corporate entities:

(i)  the natural person who ultimately owns or controls a legal entity through direct or indirect ownership or control over a sufficient percentage of the shares or voting rights in that legal entity, including through bearer share holdings, other than a company listed on a regulated market that is subject to disclosure requirements consistent with Union law or subject to equivalent international standards.

A percentage In any event, a shareholding of 25 % plus one share shall be by a natural person is evidence of ownership or control through shareholding and applies to every level of direct and indirect ownership; a shareholding of 25 % plus one share in the customer, held by a corporate entity, which is under the control of a natural person, or by multiple corporate entities, which are under the control of the same natural person, shall be an indication of indirect ownership; the notion of control shall be determined, inter alia, in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 22(1) to (5) of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(31); however, this applies without prejudice to the right for Member States to decide that a lower percentage may be evidence of ownership or control;

(ii)  if there is any doubt that the person identified in point (i) is the beneficial owner or if after taking all the necessary measures no person can be identified in point (i), the natural person who exercises control over the management of a legal entity through other means, which may include the senior management;

(iia)  where no natural person is identified under point (i) or (ii), the natural person who holds the position of senior managing official, in which case, the obliged entities shall keep records of the actions taken in order to identify the beneficial ownership under points (i) and (ii) in order to prove the inability to identify such persons;

(b)  in the case of legal entities, such as foundations, and legal arrangements, such as trusts or mutuals, which administer and distribute funds:

(i)  the natural person who exercises control over 25 % or more of the property of a legal arrangement or entity; and

(ii)  where the future beneficiaries have already been determined, the natural person who is the beneficiary of 25 % or more of the property of a legal arrangement or entity; or

(iii)  where the individuals that benefit from the legal arrangement or entity have yet to be determined, the class of persons in whose main interest the legal arrangement or entity is set up or operates. For beneficiaries of trusts that are designated by characteristics or by class, obliged entities shall obtain sufficient information concerning the beneficiary to satisfy itself that it will be able to establish the identity of the beneficiary at the time of the payout or when the beneficiary intends to exercise vested rights;

(iiia)  for trusts, the identity of the settlor, trustee, the protector (if any), the beneficiary or class of beneficiaries and any other natural person exercising ultimate effective control over the trust (including through a chain of control or ownership); [Am. 54]

(6)  "trust or company service provider" means any natural or legal person which by way of business provides any of the following services to third parties:

(a)  forming companies or other legal persons;

(b)  acting as or arranging for another person to act as a director or secretary of a company, a partner of a partnership, or a similar position in relation to other legal persons;

(c)  providing a registered office, business address, correspondence or administrative address and other related services for a company, a partnership or any other legal person or arrangement;

(d)  acting as or arranging for another person to act as a trustee of an express trust or a similar legal arrangement;

(e)  acting as or arranging for another person to act as a nominee shareholder for another person other than a company listed on a regulated market that is subject to disclosure requirements in conformity with Union law or subject to equivalent international standards;

(7)  (a) "foreign politically exposed persons" means natural persons who are or have been entrusted with a prominent public function by a third country;

(b)  "domestic politically exposed persons" means natural persons who are or who have been entrusted by a the Member State with a prominent public function; [Am. 55; Am. does not concern all languages]

(c)  "persons who are or who have been entrusted with a prominent function by an international organisation" means directors, deputy directors and members of the board or equivalent function of an international organisation;

(d)  "natural persons who are or have been entrusted with a prominent public function" include the following:

(i)  heads of State, heads of government, ministers and deputy or assistant ministers;

(ii)  members of parliaments or similar legislative bodies; [Am. 56]

(iii)  members of supreme courts, of constitutional courts or of other high-level judicial bodies whose decisions are not subject to further appeal, except in exceptional circumstances;

(iv)  members of courts of auditors or of the boards of central banks;

(v)  ambassadors, chargés d'affaires and high-ranking officers in the armed forces;

(vi)  senior members of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of State owned enterprises. [Am. 57]

None of the categories set out in points (i) to (vi) shall be understood as covering middle-ranking or more junior officials;

(e)  "family members" means:

(i)  the spouse;

(ii)  any partner considered to be equivalent to the spouse;

(iii)  the children and their spouses or partners; [Am. 58]

(iv)  the parents; [Am. 59]

(f)  "persons known to be close associates" means: [Am. 87]

(i)  any natural person who is known to have joint beneficial ownership of legal entities or legal arrangements, or any other close business relations, with a person referred to in points (7)(a) to (d);

(ii)  any natural person who has sole beneficial ownership of a legal entity or legal arrangement which is known to have been set up for the benefit de facto of the person referred to in points (7)(a) to (d); [Am. 60]

(8)  "senior management" means an officer or employee with sufficient knowledge of the institution's money laundering and terrorist financing risk exposure and sufficient seniority to make decisions affecting its risk exposure. It need not, in all cases, involve a member of the board of directors;

(9)  "business relationship" means a business, professional or commercial relationship which is connected with the professional activities of the obliged entities and which is expected, at the time when the contact is established, to have an element of duration;

(10)  "gambling services" means any service which involves wagering a stake with monetary value in games of chance including those with an element of skill such as lotteries, casino games, poker games and betting transactions that are provided at a physical location, or by any means at a distance, by electronic means or any other technology for facilitating communication, and at the individual request of a recipient of services;

(10a)  "betting transaction" means all the stages in the commercial relationship between, on the one hand, the gambling service provider and, on the other, the customer and the beneficiary of the registration of the bet and the stake until the payout of any winnings; [Am. 61]

(11)  "group" means group as defined in Article 2(12) of Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(32);

(11a)  "non-face-to-face", means concluding a contract or carrying out a transaction, where the contractor or intermediary and the consumer are not simultaneously physically present, by exclusive means of the internet, telemarketing or other electronic means of communication up to and including the time at which the contract is concluded or the transaction is carried out. [Am. 62]

Article 4

1.  Member States shall, in accordance with the risk-based approach, ensure that the provisions of this Directive are extended in whole or in part to professions and to categories of undertakings, other than the obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1), which engage in activities which are particularly likely to be used for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes. [Am. 63]

2.  Where a Member State decides to extend the provisions of this Directive to professions and to categories of undertakings other than those referred to in Article 2(1), it shall inform the Commission thereof.

Article 5

The Member States may adopt or retain in force stricter provisions in the field covered by this Directive to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, provided that such provisions are in full compliance with Union law, especially as regards Union data protection rules and the protection of fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter. Such provisions shall not unduly prevent consumers from accessing financial services and shall not constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market. [Am. 64]

Section 2

Risk assessment

Article 6

1.  The Commission shall conduct an assessment on the money laundering and terrorist financing risks affecting the internal market, with particular reference to cross-border activities. To that end, the Commission shall consult the Member States, the ESAsshall provide a joint opinion on the money laundering and terrorist financing risks affecting the internal market, the European Data Protection Supervisor, the Article 29 Working Party, Europol and other relevant authorities.

The risk assessment referred to in the first subparagraph shall cover at least the following:

(a)  the overall extent of money laundering and the areas of the internal market that are at greater risk;

(b)  the risks associated with each relevant sector, in particular the non-financial sectors and the gambling sector;

(c)  the most widespread means used by criminals to launder illicit proceeds;

(d)  the recommendations to the competent authorities on the effective deployment of resources;

(e)  the role of EUR banknotes in criminal activities and money laundering.

The risk assessment shall also include proposals for minimum standards for risk assessments to be conducted by competent national authorities. Those minimum standards shall be developed in cooperation with Member States and shall involve the industry and other relevant stakeholders through public consultations and private stakeholders meetings as appropriate.

The Commission shall issue theopinion risk assessment by …(33) and shall update it a biannual basis or more frequently if appropriate.

2.  The Commission shall make the opinion risk assessment available to assist Member States and obliged entities to identify, manage and mitigate the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, and to allow other stakeholders, including national legislators, the European Parliament, the ESAs, Europol and the Committee of Union FIUs, to better understand the risks. A summary of the assessment shall be publicly available. That summary shall not contain classified information.

2a.   The Commission shall submit an annual report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the findings resulting from the regular risk assessments and the action taken based on those findings. [Am. 65]

Article 6a

1.  Without prejudice to the infringement proceedings provided for in the TFEU, the Commission shall ensure that national law to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, adopted by Member States pursuant to this Directive is implemented effectively and is consistent with the European framework.

2.  For the application of paragraph 1, the Commission shall be assisted, where appropriate, by the ESAs, Europol, the Committee of Union FIUs, and any other competent European authority.

3.  Assessments of national law combat money laundering and terrorist financing provided for in paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to those conducted by the Financial Action Task Force or Moneyval. [Am. 66]

Article 7

1.  Each Member State shall take appropriate steps to identify, assess, understand and mitigate the money laundering and terrorist financing risks affecting it, as well as any data protection concerns in that regard, and keep the assessment up-to-date.

2.  Each Member State shall designate an authority to coordinate the national response to the risks referred to in paragraph 1. The identity of that authority shall be notified to the Commission, the ESAs, Europol and other Member States.

3.  In carrying out the assessments referred to in paragraph 1, Member States may shall make use of the opinion risk assessment referred to in Article 6(1).

4.  Each Member State shall carry out the assessment referred to in paragraph 1 and:

(a)  use the assessment(s) to improve its anti-money laundering and combating terrorist financing regime, in particular by identifying any areas where obliged entities shall apply enhanced measures and, where appropriate, specifying the measures to be taken;

(aa)  identify, where appropriate, sectors or areas of negligible, lower or greater risk of money laundering and terrorist financing;

(b)  use the assessment(s) to assist it in the allocation and prioritisation of resources to combat money laundering and terrorist financing;

(ba)  use the assessment(s) to ensure that appropriate rules are drawn up for each sector or area, in accordance with the risk of money laundering;

(c)  make appropriate information available in a timely manner to obliged entities to enable them to carry outout their own money laundering and terrorist financing risk assessments.

5.  Member States shall make the results of their risk assessments available to the other Member States, the Commission, and the ESAs upon request. A summary of the assessment shall be made publicly available. That summary shall not contain classified information. [Am. 67]

Article 8

1.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities take appropriate steps to identify and assess their money laundering and terrorist financing risks taking into account risk factors including customers, countries or geographic areas, products, services, transactions or delivery channels. Those steps shall be proportionate to the nature and size of the obliged entities.

2.  The assessments referred to in paragraph 1 shall be documented, kept up to date and be made available upon request to competent authorities and self-regulatory bodies. [Am. 68]

3.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities have policies, controls and procedures to mitigate and manage effectively the money laundering and terrorist financing risks identified at Union level, Member State level, and at the level of obliged entities. Policies, controls and procedures should be proportionate to the nature and size of those obliged entities and the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing and should respect data protection rules. [Am. 69]

4.  The policies and procedures referred to in paragraph 3 shall at least include:

(a)  the development of internal policies, procedures and controls, including model risk management practices, customer due diligence, reporting, record keeping, internal control, compliance management (including, when appropriate to the size and nature of the business, the appointment of a compliance officer at management level) and employee screening. Those measures shall not allow the obliged entities to ask consumers to provide more personal data than necessary; [Am. 70]

(b)  when appropriate with regard to the size and nature of the business, an independent audit function to test internal policies, procedures and controls referred to in point (a).

5.  Member States shall require obliged entities to obtain approval from senior management for the policies and procedures they put in place, and shall monitor and enhance the measures taken, where appropriate.

Article 8a

1.  In order to develop a common approach and common policies against non-cooperative jurisdictions with deficiencies in the field of combating money laundering, Member States shall periodically endorse and adopt the lists of countries published by the FATF.

2.  The Commission shall coordinate preparatory work at the Union level on the identification of third countries with grave strategic deficiencies in their money laundering systems that pose significant risks to the financial system of the Union, taking into account the criteria set out in point (3) of Annex III.

3.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in order to establish a list of countries as defined in paragraph 2.

4.  The Commission shall monitor on a regular basis the evolution of the situation in the countries defined in paragraph 2 of this Article on the basis of criteria set out in point (3) of Annex III and, where appropriate, shall review the list referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article. [Am. 71]

CHAPTER II

CUSTOMER DUE DILIGENCE

Section 1

General provisions

Article 9

Member States shall prohibit their credit and financial institutions from keeping anonymous accounts or, anonymous passbooks or from issuing anonymous electronic payment cards which do not meet the conditions laid down in Article 10a. Member States shall in all cases require that the owners and beneficiaries of existing anonymous accounts or, anonymous passbooks or anonymous payment cards be made the subject of customer due diligence measures as soon as possible and in any event before such accounts or passbooks are used in any way. [Am. 72]

Article 10

Member States shall ensure that obliged entities apply customer due diligence measures in the following cases:

(a)  when establishing a business relationship;

(b)  when carrying out occasional transactions amounting to EUR 15 000 or more, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked;

(c)  for natural or legal persons trading in goods, when carrying out occasional transactions in cash amounting to EUR 7 500 or more, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked;

(d)  for providers of gambling services casinos, when carrying out occasional transactions amounting to EUR 2 000 or more, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked;

(da)  for on-line gambling when establishing the business relationship;

(db)  for other providers of gambling services, when paying out winnings of EUR 2 000 or more; [Am. 73]

(e)  when there is a suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing, regardless of any derogation, exemption or threshold;

(f)  when there are doubts about the veracity or adequacy of previously obtained customer identification data;

(fa)  when a company is established. [Am. 74]

Article 10a

1.  Member States may, on the basis of proven low risk, apply exemptions to obliged entities from customer due diligence with respect to electronic money as defined in Article 2(2) of Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (34), if the following conditions are met:

(a)  the payment instrument is not reloadable;

(b)  the maximum amount stored electronically does not exceed EUR 250; Member States may increase this limit up to EUR 500 for payment instruments that can only be used in that one particular Member State;

(c)  the payment instrument is used exclusively to purchase goods or services;

(d)  the payment instrument cannot be funded with electronic money;

(e)  redemption in cash and cash withdrawal are forbidden unless identification and verification of the identity of the holder, adequate and appropriate policies and procedures on redemption in cash and cash withdrawal, and record keeping obligations are performed.

2.  Member States shall ensure that customer due diligence measures are always applied before redemption of the monetary value of the electronic money exceeding EUR 250.

3.  This Article shall not prevent Member States from allowing obliged entities to apply simplified customer due diligence measures in respect of electronic money in accordance with Article 13 of this Directive if the conditions laid down in this Article are not met. [Am. 75]

Article 11

1.  Customer due diligence measures shall comprise:

(a)  identifying the customer and verifying the customer's identity on the basis of documents, data or information obtained from a reliable and independent source;

(b)  identifying in addition to the identification of the beneficial owner and listed in a register pursuant to Article 29, taking reasonable measures to verify the beneficial owner’s identity to the satisfaction of the institution or person covered by this Directive, including, as regards legal persons, trusts, foundations, mutuals, holdings and all other similar existing or future legal arrangements, taking reasonable all necessary measures to understand the ownership and control structure of the customer, assessing and, as appropriate, obtaining information on the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship;

(c)  assessing and, as appropriate, obtaining information on the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship;

(d)  conducting ongoing monitoring of the business relationship including scrutiny of transactions undertaken throughout the course of that relationship to ensure that the transactions being conducted are consistent with the institution's or person's knowledge of the customer, the business and risk profile, including, where necessary, the source of funds and ensuring that the documents, data or information held are kept up to date. [Am. 76]

1a.  When performing the measures referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, obliged entities shall also be required to verify that any person purporting to act on behalf of the customer is so authorised to do so and shall be required to identify and verify the identity of that person. [Am. 77]

2.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities apply each of the customer due diligence requirements set out in paragraph 1, but may determine the extent of such measures on a risk-sensitive basis.

3.  When assessing money laundering and terrorist financing risks, Member States shall require obliged entities to take into account at least the variables set out in Annex I.

4.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities are able to demonstrate to competent authorities or self-regulatory bodies that the measures are appropriate in view of the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing that have been identified.

5.  For life or other investment-related insurance business, Member States shall ensure that financial institutions shall, in addition to the customer due diligence measures required for the customer and the beneficial owner, conduct the following customer due diligence measures on the beneficiaries of life insurance and other investment related insurance policies, as soon as the beneficiaries are identified or designated:

(a)  for beneficiaries that are identified as specifically named natural or legal persons or legal arrangements, taking the name of the person;

(b)  for beneficiaries that are designated by characteristics or by class or by other means, obtaining sufficient information concerning those beneficiaries to satisfy the financial institution that it will be able to establish the identity of the beneficiary at the time of the payout.

For both the cases referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph, the verification of the identity of the beneficiaries shall occur at the time of the payout. In the case of assignment, in whole or in part, of the life or other investment related insurance to a third party, financial institutions aware of the assignment shall identify the beneficial owner at the time of the assignment to the natural or legal person or legal arrangement receiving for own benefit the value of the policy assigned.

Article 12

1.  Member States shall require that the verification of the identity of the customer and the beneficial owner takes place before the establishment of a business relationship or the carrying out of the transaction.

2.  By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States may allow the verification of the identity of the customer and the beneficial owner to be completed during the establishment of a business relationship or during the execution of the transaction for entities subject to the obligations referred to in Article 2(1) and, in any event, at the time when any winnings are paid out, if this is necessary not to interrupt the normal conduct of business and where there is little risk of money laundering or terrorist financing occurring. In such situations those procedures shall be completed as soon as practicable after the initial contact. [Am. 78]

3.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States may allow the opening of a bank account provided that there are adequate safeguards in place to ensure that transactions are not carried out by the customer or on its behalf until full compliance with paragraphs 1 and 2 is obtained.

4.  Member States shall require that, where the institution or person concerned is unable to comply with points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 11(1), it shall not carry out a transaction through a bank account, establish a business relationship or carry out the transaction, and shall consider terminating the business relationship and making a suspicious transaction report to the FIU in accordance with Article 32 in relation to the customer.

Member States shall not apply the previous subparagraph to, notaries, other independent legal professionals, auditors, external accountants and tax advisors only to the strict extent that such an exemption relates to ascertaining the legal position for their client or performing their task of defending or representing that client in, or concerning judicial proceedings, including advice on instituting or avoiding proceedings.

5.  Member States shall require that obliged entities apply the customer due diligence procedures not only to all new customers but also at appropriate times to existing customers on a risk-sensitive basis, including at times when the relevant circumstances of a customer change.

Section 2

Simplified customer due diligence

Article 13

1.  Where a Member State or an obliged entity identifies areas of lower risk, that Member State may allow obliged entities to apply simplified customer due diligence measures.

2.  Before applying simplified customer due diligence measures obliged entities shall ascertain that the customer relationship or transaction presents a lower degree of risk.

3.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities carry out sufficient monitoring of the transaction transactions or business relationship relationships to enable the detection of unusual or suspicious transactions. [Am. 79]

Article 14

When assessing the money laundering and terrorist financing risks relating to types of customers, countries or geographic areas, and particular products, services, transactions or delivery channels, Member States and obliged entities shall take into account at least the factors of relating to customer and product, service, transaction or delivery channel as potentially lower risk situations set out in Annex II. [Am. 80]

Article 15

The ESAs shall, by …(35), issue guidelines addressed to competent authorities and the obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1)(1) and (2) in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, on the risk factors to be taken into consideration and/or the measures to be taken in situations where simplified due diligence measures are appropriate. Specific account should be taken of the nature and size of the business, and where appropriate and proportionate, specific measures should be laid down. [Am. 81]

Section 3

Enhanced customer due diligence

Article 16

1.  In cases identified in Articles 17 to 23 of this Directive and in other cases of higher risk that are identified by Member States or obliged entities, Member States shall require obliged entities to apply enhanced customer due diligence measures to manage and mitigate those risks appropriately.

2.  Member States shall require obliged entities to examine, as far as reasonably possible, the background and purpose of all complex, unusual large transactions, and all unusual patterns of transactions, which have no apparent economic or lawful purpose, or which constitute tax offences within the meaning of Article 3(4)(f). In particular, they shall increase the degree and nature of monitoring of the business relationship, in order to determine whether those transactions or activities appear unusual or suspicious. Where an obliged entity determines such an unusual or suspicious transaction or activity, it shall, without delay, inform the FIUs of all Member States that might be concerned. [Am. 82]

3.  When assessing the money laundering and terrorist financing risks, Member States and obliged entities shall take into account at least the factors of relating to customer and product, service, transaction or delivery channel as potentially higher-risk situations set out in Annex III. [Am. 83]

4.  The ESAs shall, by …(36), issue guidelines addressed to competent authorities and the obliged entities referred to Article 2(1)(1) and (2) in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 on the risk factors to be taken into consideration and/or the measures to be taken in situations where enhanced due diligence measures need to be applied. [Am. 84]

Article 17

In respect of cross-border correspondent banking relationships with respondent institutions from third countries, Member States shall, in addition to the customer due diligence measures as set out in Article 11, require their credit institutions to:

(a)  gather sufficient information about a respondent institution to understand fully the nature of the respondent's business and to determine from publicly available information the reputation of the institution and the quality of supervision;

(b)  assess the respondent institution's anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing controls;

(c)  obtain approval from senior management before establishing new correspondent banking relationships;

(d)  document the respective responsibilities of each institution;

(e)  with respect to payable-through accounts, be satisfied that the respondent credit institution has verified the identity of and performed ongoing due diligence on the customers having direct access to accounts of the correspondent and that it is able to provide relevant customer due diligence data to the correspondent institution, upon request.

Article 18

In respect of transactions or business relationships with foreign politically exposed persons, Member States shall, in addition to the customer due diligence measures set out in Article 11, require obliged entities to:

(a)  have appropriate risk-based procedures to determine whether the customer or the beneficial owner of the customer is such a person;

(b)  obtain senior management approval for establishing or continuing business relationships with such customers;

(c)  take adequate measures to establish the source of wealth and source of funds that are involved in the business relationship or transaction;

(d)  conduct enhanced ongoing monitoring of the business relationship.

Article 19

In respect of transactions or business relationships with domestic politically exposed persons or persons who are or who have been entrusted with a prominent function by an international organisation, Member States shall, in addition to the customer due diligence measures set out in Article 11, require obliged entities:

(a)  to have appropriate risk-based procedures to determine whether the customer or the beneficial owner of the customer is such a person;

(b)  in cases of higher risk business relationships with such persons, to apply the measures referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 18.

Article 19a

The Commission, in cooperation with Member States and international organisations, shall draw a list of domestic politically exposed persons and persons resident in a Member State who are or who have been entrusted with a prominent function by an international organisation. The list shall be accessible by competent authorities and by obliged entities.

The Commission shall notify the persons concerned that they have been placed on or removed from the list.

The requirements in this Article shall not exempt obliged entities from their customer due diligence obligations, and obliged entities shall not rely exclusively on that information as sufficient to fulfil those obligations.

Member States shall take all appropriate measures to prevent the trade of information for commercial purposes on foreign politically exposed persons, domestic politically exposed persons, or persons who are or who have been entrusted with a prominent function by an international organisation. [Am. 85]

Article 20

Obliged entities shall take reasonable measures, in accordance with the risk-based approach, to determine whether the beneficiaries of a life or other investment related insurance policy and/or, where required, the beneficial owner of the beneficiary are politically exposed persons. Those measures shall be taken at the latest at the time of the payout or at the time of the assignment, in whole or in part, of the policy. Where there are higher risks identified, in addition to taking normal customer due diligence measures, Member States shall require obliged entities to: [Am. 86]

(a)  inform senior management before the payout of the policy proceeds;

(b)  conduct enhanced scrutiny on the whole business relationship with the policyholder.

Article 21

The measures referred to in Articles 18, 19 and 20, but not those referred to in Article 19a, shall also apply to family members or persons known to be who, as indicated by evidence, are close associates of such foreign or domestic politically exposed persons. [Am. 87]

Article 22

Where a person referred to in Articles 18, 19 and 20 has ceased to be a foreign politically exposed person, a domestic politically exposed person or a peson who is or who has been entrusted with a prominent function by an international organisation, obliged entities shall be required to consider the continuing risk posed by that person and to apply such appropriate and risk-sensitive measures until such time as that person is deemed to pose no further risk. That period of time shall not be less than 18 12 months. [Am. 88]

Article 23

1.  Member States shall prohibit credit institutions from entering into or continuing a correspondent banking relationship with a shell bank and shall require that credit institutions take appropriate measures to ensure that they do not engage in or continue correspondent banking relationships with a bank that is known to permit its accounts to be used by a shell bank.

2.  For the purposes of paragraph 1, "shell bank" shall mean a credit institution, or an institution engaged in equivalent activities, incorporated in a jurisdiction in which it has no physical presence, involving meaningful mind and management, and which is unaffiliated with a regulated financial group.

Section 4

Performance by third parties

Article 24

Member States may permit the obliged entities to rely on third parties to meet the requirements laid down in Article 11(1)(a), (b) and (c). However, the ultimate responsibility for meeting those requirements shall remain with the obliged entity which relies on the third party. In addition, Member States shall ensure that any such third parties may also be held liable for breaches of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. [Am. 89]

Article 25

1.  For the purposes of this Section, "third parties" shall mean:

(a)   obliged entities who are listed in Article 2; or

(b)   other institutions and persons situated in Member States or a third country, who apply customer due diligence requirements and record keeping requirements equivalent to those laid down in this Directive and their compliance with the requirements of this Directive is supervised in accordance with Section 2 of Chapter VI.

2.  The Member States Commission shall consider information available on the level of geographical risk when deciding if a third country meets the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 and shall inform each other, the Commission Member States, the obliged entities and the ESAs to the extent relevant for the purposes of this Directive and in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, of cases where they consider that a third country meets such conditions.

2a.  The Commission shall provide a list of jurisdictions having anti-money laundering measures equivalent to provisions of this Directive and other related rules and regulations of the Union.

2b.  The list referred to in paragraph 2a shall be regularly reviewed and updated according to the information received from Member States pursuant to paragraph 2. [Am. 90]

Article 26

1.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities obtain from the third party being relied upon the necessary information concerning the requirements laid down in Article 11(1)(a), (b) and (c).

2.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities to which the customer is being referred take adequate steps to ensure that relevant copies of identification and verification data and other relevant documentation on the identity of the customer or the beneficial owner are immediately forwarded, on request, by the third party.

Article 27

1.  Member States shall ensure that the home competent authority (for group-wide policies and controls) and the host competent authority (for branches and subsidiaries) may consider that an obliged entity applies the measures contained in Article 25(1) and Article 26 through its group programme, where the following conditions are met:

(a)  an obliged entity relies on information provided by a third party that is part of the same group;

(b)  that group applies customer due diligence measures, rules on record keeping and programmes against money laundering and terrorist financing in accordance with this Directive or equivalent rules;

(c)  the effective implementation of requirements referred to in point (b) is supervised at group level by a home competent authority in cooperation with host competent authorities. [Am. 91]

1a.  The ESAs shall, by …(37), issue guidelines on the implementation of the supervisory regime by the competent authorities in the relevant Member States for group entities to ensure coherent and effective group level supervision. [Am. 92]

Article 28

This Section shall not apply to outsourcing or agency relationships where, on the basis of a contractual arrangement, the outsourcing service provider or agent is to be regarded as part of the obliged entity.

CHAPTER III

BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP INFORMATION

Article 29

1.  Member States shall ensure that corporate or companies and other entities having legal personality, including trusts or entities with a similar structure or function to trusts, foundations, holdings and all other similar, in terms of structure or function, existing or future legal arrangements established or incorporated within their territory, or governed under their law obtain and, hold and transmit to a public central register, commercial register or companies register within their territory adequate, accurate and, current and up-to-date information on them and on their beneficial ownership, at the moment of establishment as well as any changes thereof.

1a.  The register shall contain the minimum information to clearly identify the company and its beneficial owner, namely the name, number, legal form and status of the entity, proof of incorporation, address of the registered office (and of the principal place of business if different from the registered office), the basic regulatory powers (such as those contained in the Memorandum and Articles of Association), the list of directors (including their nationality and date of birth) and shareholder/beneficial owner information, such as the names, dates of birth, nationality or jurisdiction of incorporation, contact details, number of shares, categories of shares (including the nature of the associated voting rights) and proportion of shareholding or control, if applicable.

The requirements stipulated in this Article shall not exempt obliged entities from their customer due diligence obligations, and obliged entities shall not rely exclusively on that information as sufficient to fulfil those obligations.

1b.  Regarding trusts or other types of legal entities and arrangements, existing or future, with a similar structure or function, the information shall include the identity of the settlor, of the trustee(s), of the protector (if relevant), of the beneficiaries or class of beneficiaries, and of any other natural person exercising effective control over the trust. Member States shall ensure that trustees disclose their status to obliged entities when, as a trustee, the trustee forms a business relationship or carries out an occasional transaction above the threshold set out in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 10. The information held should include the date of birth and nationality of all individuals. Member States shall follow the risk-based approach when publishing the trust deed and letter of wishes and shall ensure where applicable and while respecting the protection of personal information that information is disclosed to competent authorities, in particular to FIUs, and to obliged entities.

2.  Member States shall ensure that The information referred to in paragraph paragraphs 1, 1a and 1b can be accessed shall be accessible by competent authorities, in particular by FIUs, and by obliged entities of all Member States in a timely manner by competent authorities and by obliged entities. Member States shall make the registers referred to in paragraph 1 publicly available following prior identification of the person wishing to access the information through basic online registration. The information shall be available online to all persons in an open and secure data format, in line with data protection rules, in particular as regards the effective protection of the rights of the data subject to access personal data and the rectification or deletion of inaccurate data. The fees charged for obtaining the information shall not exceed the administrative costs thereof. Any changes to the information displayed shall be clearly indicated in the register without delay and in any event within 30 days.

The company registers referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be interconnected by means of the European platform, the portal and optional access points established by the Member States pursuant to Directive 2012/17/EU. Member States, with the support of the Commission, shall ensure that their registers are interoperable within the system of register networking through the European platform.

2a.  The Commission, in cooperation with Member States, shall rapidly, constructively and effectively seek cooperation with third countries to encourage that equivalent central registers containing beneficial ownership information are established and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article in their countries is made publically accessible.

Priority shall be given to third countries that host a significant number of corporate or legal entities, including trusts, foundations, holdings and all other bodies that are similar in terms of structure or function and that hold shares indicating direct ownership pursuant to Article 3(5) in corporate or legal entities established in the Union.

2b.  Member States shall lay down the rules on effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties for natural or legal persons applicable to infringements of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Article and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that such penalties are applied. For the purposes of this Article, Member States shall establish effective anti-abuse measures with view to preventing misuse based on bearer shares and bearer share warrants.

2c.  The Commission shall, by …(38), submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the application and mode of functioning of the requirements pursuant to this Article, if appropriate, accompanied, where appropriate by a legislative proposal. [Am. 93]

Article 30

1.  Member States shall ensure that trustees of any express trust governed under their law obtain and hold adequate, accurate and current information on beneficial ownership regarding the trust. This information shall include the identity of the settlor, of the trustee(s), of the protector (if relevant), of the beneficiaries or class of beneficiaries, and of any other natural person exercising effective control over the trust.

2.  Member States shall ensure that trustees disclose their status to obliged entities when, as a trustee, the trustee forms a business relationship or carries out an occasional transaction above the threshold set out in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 10.

3.  Member States shall ensure that the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article can be accessed in a timely manner by competent authorities and by obliged entities.

4.  Member States shall ensure that measures corresponding to those in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 apply to other types of legal entity and arrangement with a similar structure and function to trusts. [Am. 94]

CHAPTER IV

REPORTING OBLIGATIONS

Section 1

General provisions

Article 31

1.  Each Member State shall establish an FIU in order to prevent, detect and investigate money laundering and terrorist financing.

1a.  The persons referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a), (b), and (d), shall inform the FIU and/or the appropriate self-regulatory body of the profession concerned, as referred to in Article 33(1), if they suspect, or have reasonable grounds to suspect that their services are being misused for the purpose of criminal activity. [Am. 95]

2.  Member States shall notify the Commission in writing of the name and address of the respective FIUs.

3.  The FIU shall be established as a an operationally independent and autonomous central national unit. It shall be responsible for receiving (and to the extent permitted, requesting), analysing and suspicious transaction reports and other information relevant to potential money laundering, associated predicate offences or potential terrorist financing. The FIU shall be responsible for disseminating the results of its analysis to the all competent authorities disclosures of information which concern potential where there are grounds to suspect money laundering or associated predicate offences, potential or terrorist financing or are required by national legislation or regulation. It shall be able to obtain relevant additional information from obliged entities for those purposes. The FIU shall be provided with adequate financial, technical and human resources in order to fulfil its tasks. Member States shall ensure that the FIU is free from undue interference. [Am. 96]

4.  Member States shall ensure that the FIU has access, directly or indirectly, on a timely basis, to the financial, administrative and law enforcement information that it requires to properly fulfil its tasks. In addition, FIUs shall respond to requests for information by law enforcement authorities in their Member State unless there are factual reasons to assume that the provision of such information would have a negative impact on ongoing investigations or analyses, or, in exceptional circumstances, where disclosure of the information would be clearly disproportionate to the legitimate interests of a natural or legal person or irrelevant with regard to the purposes for which it has been requested. When the FIU receives such a request, the decision to conduct analysis or dissemination of information to the requesting law enforcement authority should remain within the FIU. Member States shall require law enforcement authorities to provide feedback to the FIU about the use made of the information provided. [Am. 97]

5.  Member States shall ensure that the FIU is empowered to take urgent action, either directly or indirectly, when there is a suspicion that a transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, to suspend or withhold consent to a transaction going ahead in order to analyse the transaction and confirm the suspicion.

6.  The FIU’s analysis function shall consist of an operational analysis which focusses on individual cases and specific targets and a strategic analysis addressing money laundering and terrorist financing trends and patterns.

Article 32

1.  Member States shall require obliged entities, and where applicable their directors and employees, to cooperate fully by promptly:

(a)  informing the FIU, on their own initiative, where the institution or person covered by this Directive knows, suspects or has reasonable grounds to suspect that funds are the proceeds of criminal activity or are related to terrorist financing and by promptly responding to requests by the FIU for additional information in such cases;

(b)  providing the FIU, at its request, with all necessary information, in accordance with the procedures established by the applicable law.

2.  The information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be forwarded to the FIU of the Member State in whose territory the institution or person forwarding the information is situated and to the FIU of the Member State where the obliged entity is established. The person or persons designated in accordance with Article 8(4) shall forward the information. [Am. 98]

Article 33

1.  By way of derogation from Article 32(1), Member States may, in the case of the persons referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a), (b), and (d) and (e) and those professions and categories of undertaking referred to in Article 4, designate an appropriate self-regulatory body of the profession concerned as the authority to receive the information referred to in Article 32(1).

In all circumstances, Member States shall provide for the means and manner by which to achieve the protection of professional secrecy, confidentiality and privacy. [Am. 99]

Without prejudice to paragraph 2, the designated self-regulatory body shall in cases referred to in the first subparagraph forward the information to the FIU promptly and unfiltered.

2.  Member States shall not apply the obligations laid down in Article 32(1) to notaries, other independent legal professionals, auditors, external accountants and tax advisors only to the strict extent that such an exemption relates to information they receive from or obtain on one of their clients, in the course of ascertaining the legal position for their client or performing their task of defending or representing that client in, or concerning judicial proceedings, including advice on instituting or avoiding proceedings, whether such information is received or obtained before, during or after such proceedings.

Article 34

1.  Member States shall require obliged entities to refrain from carrying out transactions which they know or suspect to be related to money laundering or terrorist financing until they have completed the necessary action in accordance with Article 32(1)(a).

In accordance with national law, instructions may be given not to carry out the transaction.

2.  Where such a transaction is suspected of giving rise to money laundering or terrorist financing and where to refrain in such a manner is impossible or is likely to frustrate efforts to pursue the beneficiaries of a suspected money laundering or terrorist financing operation, the obliged entities concerned shall inform the FIU immediately afterwards.

Article 35

1.  Member States shall ensure that if, in the course of inspections carried out in the obliged entities by the competent authorities referred to in Article 45, or in any other way, those authorities discover facts that could be related to money laundering or terrorist financing, they shall promptly inform the FIU.

2.  Member States shall ensure that supervisory bodies empowered by law or regulation to oversee the stock, foreign exchange and financial derivatives markets inform the FIU if they discover facts that could be related to money laundering or terrorist financing.

Article 36

Disclosure of information in good faith by an obliged entity or by an employee or director of such an obliged entity in accordance with Articles 32 and 33 shall not constitute a breach of any restriction on disclosure of information imposed by contract or by any legislative, regulatory or administrative provision, and shall not involve the obliged entity or its directors or employees in liability of any kind.

Article 37

Member States shall take all appropriate measures in order to protect employees ensure that individuals, including employees and representatives of the obliged entity who report suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing either internally or to the FIU are duly protected from being exposed to threats or hostile action, adverse treatment and adverse consequences, and in particular from adverse or discriminatory employment actions. Member States shall guarantee legal aid free of charge for such persons and shall provide secure communication channels for persons to report their suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing. Such channels shall ensure that the identity of persons providing information is known only to the ESAs or to the FIU. Member States shall ensure that there are adequate witness protection programmes. [Am. 100]

Section 2

Prohibition of disclosure

Article 38

1.  Obliged entities and their directors and employees shall not disclose to the customer concerned or to other third persons the fact that information has been transmitted in accordance with Articles 32 and 33 or that a money laundering or terrorist financing investigation is being or may be carried out.

2.  The prohibition laid down in paragraph 1 shall not include disclosure to the competent authorities of Member States, including the self-regulatory bodies, data protection authorities or disclosure for law enforcement purposes. [Am. 101]

3.  The prohibition laid down in paragraph 1 shall not prevent disclosure between institutions from Member States, or from third countries which impose requirements equivalent to those laid down in this Directive provided that they belong to the same group.

4.  The prohibition laid down in paragraph 1 shall not prevent disclosure between persons referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a) and (b) from Member States, or from third countries which impose requirements equivalent to those laid down in this Directive, who perform their professional activities, whether as employees or not, within the same legal person or a network.

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, a "network" shall mean the larger structure to which the person belongs and which shares common ownership, management, standards, methods or compliance control. [Am. 102]

5.  For entities or persons referred to in Article 2(1)(1), (2) and (3)(a) and (b) in cases related to the same customer and the same transaction involving two or more institutions or persons, the prohibition laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article shall not prevent disclosure between the relevant institutions or persons provided that they are situated in a Member State, or in a third country which imposes requirements equivalent to those laid down in this Directive, and that they are from the same professional category and are subject to obligations as regards professional secrecy and personal data protection.

5a.  For the purposes of this Article, third-country requirements equivalent to those laid down in this Directive shall include data protection rules. [Am. 103]

6.  Where the persons referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a) and (b) seek to dissuade a client from engaging in illegal activity, this shall not constitute disclosure within the meaning of paragraph 1.

CHAPTER V

DATA PROTECTION, RECORD KEEPING AND STATISTICAL DATA [Am. 104]

Article 39

1.  Member States shall require obliged entities to store the following documents and information in accordance with national law for the purpose of the prevention, detection and investigation of possible money laundering or terrorist financing by the FIU or by other competent authorities:

(a)  in the case of the customer due diligence, a copy or the references of the evidence required, for a period of five years after the business relationship with their customer has ended or after the date of the occasional transaction. Upon expiration of that retention period, personal data shall be deleted unless otherwise provided for by national law, which shall determine under which circumstances obliged entities may or shall further retain data. Member States may allow or require further retention only if necessary for the prevention, detection or investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing and if the extension of the data retention period is justified on a case-by-case basis. The maximum extension of the retention period after the business relationship has ended shall not exceed ten is five additional years;

(b)  in the case of business relationships and transactions, the supporting evidence and records, consisting of the original documents or copies admissible in court proceedings under the applicable national law for a period of five years following either the carrying-out of the transactions or the end of the business relationship, whichever period is the shorter. Upon expiry of that retentionperiod, personal data shall be deleted, unless otherwise provided for by national law, which shall determine under which circumstances obliged entities may or shall further retain data. Member States may allow or require further retention only if necessary for the prevention, detection or investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing and if the extension of the data retention period is justified on a case by case basis. The maximum extension of the retention period following either the carrying-out of the transactions or the end of the business relationship, whichever period ends first, shall not exceed ten is five additional years.

2.   Any personal data retained shall not be used for any purpose other than the purpose for which it has been retained, and under no circumstances shall it be used for commercial purposes. [Am. 105]

Article 39a

1.  With regard to the processing of personal data carried out by Member States within the framework of this Directive, the provisions of Directive 95/46/EC apply. With regard to the processing of personal data by the ESAs, the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 apply. The collection, processing and transfer of information for anti-money laundering purposes shall be considered as a public interest under those legal acts.

2.  Personal data shall be processed on the basis of this Directive for the sole purpose of the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. Obliged entities shall inform new clients of the possible use of the personal data for money laundering prevention purposes before establishing a business relationship. Processing sensitive categories of data shall be done in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC.

3.  The processing of data collected on the basis of this Directive for commercial purposes shall be prohibited.

4.  The affected person to whom disclosure of information on processing his or her data is denied by an obliged entity or competent authority, shall have the right to request through his or her data protection authority any verifications of, access and corrections to or erasure of his or her personal data, as well as the right to lodge a judicial procedure.

5.  Access by the person concerned to information contained in a suspicious transaction report shall be prohibited. The prohibition laid down in this paragraph shall not include disclosure to the data protection authorities.

6.  Member States shall require the obliged entities and competent authorities to recognise and comply with the effective powers of data protection authorities in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC as regards the security of the processing and accuracy of personal data, on an ex officio basis or on the basis of a complaint by the person concerned. [Am. 106]

Article 40

-1.  Member States shall have national centralised mechanisms enabling them to identify, in a timely manner, whether natural or legal persons hold or control bank accounts kept by financial institutions on their territory.

-1a.  Member States shall also have mechanisms providing the competent authorities with a means of identifying property without giving prior notice to the owner.

1.  Member States shall require that their obliged entities have systems in place that enable them to respond fully and rapidly to enquiries from the FIU, or from other authorities, in accordance with their national law, as to whether they maintain or have maintained during the previous five years a business relationship with specified natural or legal persons and on the nature of that relationship, through secure channels and in a manner that ensures full confidentiality of the enquiries. [Am. 107]

Article 40a

The collection, processing and transfer of information for anti-money laundering purposes shall be considered to be a matter of public interest under Directive 95/46/EC. [Am. 108]

Article 41

1.  Member States shall, for the purposes of the preparation of national risk assessments pursuant to Article 7, ensure that they are able to review the effectiveness of their systems to combat money laundering or terrorist financing by maintaining comprehensive statistics on matters relevant to the effectiveness of such systems.

2.  Statistics referred to in paragraph 1 shall include:

(a)  data measuring the size and importance of the different sectors which fall under the scope of this Directive, including the number of entities and persons and the economic importance of each sector;

(b)  data measuring the reporting, investigation and judicial phases of the national anti-money laundering and terrorist financing regime, including the number of suspicious transaction reports made to the FIU, the follow-up given to those reports and, on an annual basis, the number of cases investigated, the number of persons prosecuted, the number of persons convicted for money laundering or terrorist financing offences and the value in euro of property that has been frozen, seized or confiscated;

(ba)  data identifying the number and percentage of reports resulting in further investigation, with annual report to obliged institutions detailing the usefulness and follow-up of the reports they presented; [Am. 109]

(bb)  data regarding the number of cross-border requests for information that were made, received, refused and partially or fully answered by the FIU. [Am. 110]

3.  Member States shall ensure that a consolidated review of their statistical reports is published and shall transmit to the Commission the statistics referred to in paragraph 2.

CHAPTER VI

POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND SUPERVISION

Section 1

Internal procedures, training and feedback

Article 42

1.  Member States shall require obliged entities that are part of a group to implement group-wide policies and procedures, including data protection policies and policies and procedures for sharing information within the group for anti-money laundering and combating terrorist financing purposes. Those policies and procedures shall be implemented effectively at the level of branches and majority-owned subsidiaries in Member States and third countries.

2.  Member States shall ensure that where obliged entities have branches or majority-owned subsidiaries located in third countries where the minimum anti-money laundering and combating terrorist financing requirements are less strict than those of the Member State, their branches and majority-owned subsidiaries located in the third country implement the requirements of the Member State, including data protection, to the extent that the third country's laws and regulations so allow.

3.  The Member States and the ESAs shall inform each other of cases where the third-country law does not permit application of the measures required under paragraph 1 and coordinated action could be taken to pursue a solution.

4.  Member States shall require that, where third-country law does not permit application of the measures required under the first subparagraph of paragraph 1, obliged entities take additional measures to effectively handle the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, and inform their home supervisors. If the additional measures are not sufficient, competent authorities in the home country shall consider additional supervisory actions, including, as appropriate, requesting the financial group to close down its operations in the host country.

5.  The ESAs shall develop draft regulatory technical standards specifying the type of additional measures referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article and the minimum action to be taken by obliged entities referred to Article 2(1)(1) and (2) where third-country law does not permit application of the measures required under paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by …(39). [Am. 111]

6.  Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 5 in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.

7.  Member States shall ensure that sharing of information within the group is allowed provided that it does not prejudice investigation into, or analysis of, possible money laundering or terrorist financing by the FIU or by other competent authorities in accordance with national law.

8.  Member States may require electronic money issuers as defined in Article 2(3) of Directive 2009/110/EC and payment providers as defined in Article 4(9) of Directive 2007/64/EC established on their territory, and whose head office is situated in another Member State or outside the Union, to appoint a central contact point in their territory to oversee the compliance with anti-money laundering and terrorist financing rules.

9.  The ESAs shall develop draft regulatory technical standards on the criteria for determining the circumstances when the appointment of a central contact point pursuant to paragraph 8 is appropriate, and what the functions of the central contact points should be.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by …(40).

10.  Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 9 in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.

Article 43

1.  Member States shall require that obliged entities take measures proportionate to their risks, nature and size so that their relevant employees are aware of the provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive, including relevant data protection requirements.

Those measures shall include participation of their relevant employees in special ongoing training programmes to help them recognise operations which may be related to money laundering or terrorist financing and to instruct them as to how to proceed in such cases.

Where a natural person falling within any of the categories listed in Article 2(1)(3) performs professional activities as an employee of a legal person, the obligations in this Section shall apply to that legal person rather than to the natural person.

2.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities have access to up-to-date information on the practices of money launderers and terrorist financers and on indications leading to the recognition of suspicious transactions.

3.  Member States shall ensure that, where practicable, timely feedback on the effectiveness of and follow-up to reports of suspected money laundering or terrorist financing is provided to obliged entities. [Am. 112]

3a.  Member States shall require that obliged entities appoint the member(s) of the management board who are responsible for the implementation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. [Am. 113]

Section 2

Supervision

Article 44

1.  Member States shall provide that currency exchange offices and trust or company service providers be licensed or registered and providers of gambling services be authorised.

2.  In respect of the entities referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall require competent authorities to ensure that the persons who effectively direct or will direct the business of such entities or the beneficial owners of such entities are fit and proper persons.

3.  In respect of the obliged entities referred to in point (3)(a), (b), (d) and (e) of Article 2(1), Member States shall ensure that competent authorities and self-regulatory bodies take the necessary measures to prevent convicted criminals in those areas or their associates from holding or being the beneficial owner of a significant or controlling interest, or holding a management function in those obliged entities. [Am. 114]

Article 45

1.  Member States shall require the competent authorities to effectively monitor and to take the necessary measures with a view to ensure compliance with the requirements of this Directive.

2.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities have adequate powers, including the power to compel the production of any information that is relevant to monitoring compliance and perform checks, and have adequate financial, human and technical resources to perform their functions. Member States shall ensure that staff of those authorities maintain high professional standards, including standards of confidentiality and data protection, they shall be of high integrity and be appropriately skilled.

3.  In the case of credit and financial institutions and providers of gambling services, competent authorities shall have enhanced supervisory powers, notably the possibility to conduct on-site inspections. Competent authorities in charge of supervising credit and financial institutions shall monitor the adequacy of the legal advice they receive with a view to reducing legal and regulatory arbitrage in the case of aggressive tax planning and avoidance. [Am. 115]

4.  Member States shall ensure require that obliged entities that operate branches or subsidiaries in other Member States respect the national provisions of that other Member State pertaining to this Directive. [Am. 116]

5.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities of the Member State in which the branch or subsidiary is established shall cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member State in which the obliged entity has its head office, to ensure effective supervision of the requirements of this Directive.

6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities that apply a risk-sensitive when applying a risk-based approach to supervision, competent authorities: [Am. 117]

(a)  have a clear understanding of the money laundering and terrorist financing risks present in their country;

(b)  have on-site and off-site access to all relevant information on the specific domestic and international risks associated with customers, products and services of the obliged entities; and

(c)  base the frequency and intensity of on-site and off-site supervision on the risk profile of the obliged entity, and on the money laundering and terrorist financing risks present in the country.

7.  The assessment of the money laundering and terrorist financing risk profile of obliged entities, including the risks of non-compliance, shall be reviewed both periodically and when there are major events or developments in the management and operations of the obliged entity.

8.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities take into account the degree of discretion allowed to the obliged entity, and appropriately review the risk assessments underlying this discretion, and the adequacy and implementation of its policies, internal controls and procedures.

9.  In the case of the obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1)(3)(a), (b) and (d) Member States may allow the functions referred to in paragraph 1 to be performed by self-regulatory bodies, provided that they comply with paragraph 2 of this Article.

10.  The ESAs shall, by …(41), issue guidelines addressed to competent authorities in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 on the factors to be applied when conducting supervision on a risk-sensitive basis. Specific account should be taken of the nature and size of the business, and where appropriate and proportionate, specific measures should be laid down.

Section 3

Cooperation

Subsection I

National cooperation

Article 46

Member States shall ensure that policy makers, the FIU, law enforcement authorities, supervisors, data protection authorities and other competent authorities involved in anti-money laundering and combating terrorist financing have effective mechanisms to enable them to cooperate and coordinate domestically concerning the development and implementation of policies and activities to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. [Am. 118]

Subsection II

Cooperation with the ESAs

Article 47

Without prejudice to data protection rules, the competent authorities shall provide the ESAs with all the relevant information necessary to carry out their duties under this Directive. [Am. 119]

Subsection III

Cooperation between the Commission and the FIUs

Article 48

The Commission may shall lend such assistance as may be needed to facilitate coordination, including the exchange of information between Member State FIUs within the Union. It may shall regularly convene meetings with of the EU FIUs' Platform composed of representatives from Member States FIUs and, where appropriate, meetings of the EU FIUs' Platform with EBA, EIOPA or ESMA. The EU FIUs' Platform has been set up to formulate guidance on implementation issues relevant for FIUs and reporting entities, to facilitate co-operation and to exchange views on co-operation related issues the FIUs' activities, particularly those concerning international cooperation and joint analysis, to share information on trends and risk factors in the internal market, and to ensure the participation of the FIUs in the governance of the FIU.net system. [Am. 120]

Article 49

Member States shall ensure that their FIUs cooperate with each other and with third-country FIUs to the greatest extent possible irrespective of whether they are administrative, law enforcement or judicial or hybrid authorities, without prejudice to Union data protection rules. [Am. 121]

Article 50

1.  Member States shall ensure that FIUs exchange, spontaneously with other Member State FIUs and with third-country FIUs, automatically or upon request, any information that may be relevant for the processing or analysis of information or investigation by the FIU regarding financial transactions related to money laundering or terrorist financing and the natural or legal person involved. A request shall contain the relevant facts, background information, reasons for the request and how the information sought will be used. [Am. 122]

2.  Member States shall ensure that the FIU to which the request is made is required to use the whole range of its powers which it has domestically available for receiving and analysing information when it replies to a request for information referred to in paragraph 1 from another FIU based in the Union. The FIU to whom the request is made shall respond in a timely manner and both the requesting and requested FIU shall use secure digital means to exchange information, where possible. [Am. 123]

In particular, when a Member State FIU seeks to obtain additional information from an obliged entity of another Member State which operates on its territory, the request shall be addressed to the FIU of the Member State in whose territory the obliged entity is situated. That FIU shall transfer requests and answers promptly and without any filter. [Am. 124]

3.  An FIU may refuse to disclose information which could lead to impairment of a criminal investigation being conducted in the requested Member State or, in exceptional circumstances, where disclosure of the information would be clearly disproportionate to the legitimate interests of a natural or legal person or the Member State or irrelevant to the purposes for which it has been collected. Any such refusal shall be appropriately justified to the FIU requesting the information.

Article 51

Information and documents received pursuant to Articles 49 and 50 shall be used for the accomplishment of the FIU’s tasks as laid down in this Directive. When transmitting information and documents pursuant to Articles 49 and 50, the transmitting FIU may impose restrictions and conditions for the use of that information. The receiving FIU shall comply with those restrictions and conditions. This does not affect the use for criminal investigations and prosecutions linked to the FIU’s tasks to prevent, detect and investigate money laundering and terrorist financing.

Article 52

Member States shall ensure that FIUs undertake all necessary measures, including security measures, to ensure that information submitted pursuant to Articles 49 and 50 is not accessible by any other authority, agency or department, unless prior approval is given by the FIU providing the information.

Article 53

1.  Member States shall encourage require their FIUs to use protected channels of communication between FIUs and to use the decentralised computer network FIU.net themselves. [Am. 125]

2.  Member States shall ensure that, in order to fulfil their tasks as laid down in this Directive, their FIUs cooperate among themselves and, within its mandate, with Europol, to apply sophisticated technologies. Those technologies shall allow FIUs to match their data with other FIUs in an anonymous way by ensuring full protection of personal data with the aim to detect subjects of the FIU's interests in other Member States and identify their proceeds and funds. [Am. 126]

Article 54

Member States shall ensure that encourage their FIUs to cooperate with Europol regarding analyses of ongoing cases carried out having a cross-border dimension concerning at least two Member States. [Am. 127]

Article 54a

The Commission should increase the pressure that it brings to bear on the tax havens to improve their cooperation and exchange of information in order to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. [Am. 128]

Section 4

Sanctions

Article 55

1.  Member States shall ensure that obliged entities can be held liable for breaches of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. The penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. [Am. 129]

2.  Without prejudice to the right of Member States to impose criminal penalties, Member States shall ensure that competent authorities may take appropriate administrative measures and impose administrative sanctions where obliged entities breach the national provisions, adopted in the implementation of this Directive, and shall ensure that they are applied. Those measures and sanctions shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

3.  Member States shall ensure that where obligations apply to legal persons, sanctions can be applied to the members of the management body or to any other individuals who under national law are responsible for the breach.

4.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities have all the investigatory powers that are necessary for the exercise of their functions. In the exercise of their sanctioning powers, competent authorities shall cooperate closely to ensure that administrative measures or sanctions produce the desired results and coordinate their action when dealing with cross border cases.

Article 56

1.  This Article shall at least apply to situations where obliged entities demonstrate systematic failings in relation to the requirements laid down in:

(a)  Articles 9 to 23 (customer due diligence);

(b)  Articles 32, 33 and 34 (suspicious transaction reporting);

(c)  Article 39 (record keeping); and

(d)  Articles 42 and 43 (internal controls).

2.  Member States shall ensure that in the cases referred to in paragraph 1, the administrative measures and sanctions that can be applied include at least the following:

(a)  a public statement which indicates the natural or legal person and the nature of the breach, if necessary and proportionate after a case-by-case evaluation; [Am. 130]

(b)  an order requiring the natural or legal person to cease the conduct and to desist from a repetition of that conduct;

(c)  in the case of an obliged entity subject to an authorisation, withdrawal of the authorisation;

(d)  a temporary ban against any member of the obliged entity's management body, who is held responsible, to exercise functions in institutions;

(e)  in the case of a legal person, administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to 10% of the total annual turnover of that legal person in the preceding business year;

(f)  in the case of a natural person, administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to EUR 5 000 000, or in the Member States where the euro is not the official currency, the corresponding value in the national currency on …(42);

(g)  administrative pecuniary sanctions of up to twice the amount of the profits gained or losses avoided because of the breach where those can be determined.

For the purpose of point (e) of the first subparagraph, where the legal person is a subsidiary of a parent undertaking, the relevant total annual turnover shall be the total annual turnover resulting from the consolidated account of the ultimate parent undertaking in the preceding business year subsidiary. [Am. 131]

Article 57

1.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities publish any sanction or measure imposed for breach of the national provisions adopted in the implementation of this Directive, if necessary and proportionate after a case-by-case evaluation, without undue delay including information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of persons responsible for it, unless such publication would seriously jeopardise the stability of financial markets. Where publication would cause a disproportionate damage to the parties involved, competent authorities shall may publish the sanctions on an anonymous basis. [Am. 132]

2.  Member States shall ensure that when determining the type of administrative sanctions or measures and the level of administrative pecuniary sanctions, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant circumstances, including:

(a)  the gravity and the duration of the breach;

(b)  the degree of responsibility of the natural or legal person responsible;

(c)  the financial strength of the natural or legal person responsible as indicated by the total turnover of that person or the annual income of that person;

(d)  the importance of profits gained or losses avoided by thenatural or legal person responsible, insofar as they can be determined;

(e)  the losses to third parties caused by the breach, insofar as they can be determined;

(f)  the level of cooperation of the natural or legal person responsiblewith the competent authority;

(g)  previous breaches by the natural or legal person responsible.

3.  In order to ensure their consistent application and dissuasive effect across the Union, the ESAs shall, by …(43), issue guidelines addressed to competent authorities in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 on types of administrative measures and sanctions and level of administrative pecuniary sanctions applicable to obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1)(1) and (2). [Am. 133]

4.  In the case of legal persons, Member States shall ensure that they may be held liable for infringements referred to in Article 56(1) which are committed for their benefit by any person, acting either individually or as part of an organ of the legal person, who has a leading position within the legal person, based on any of the following:

(a)  a power of representation of the legal person;

(b)  an authority to take decisions on behalf of the legal person; or

(c)  an authority to exercise control within the legal person.

5.  In addition to the cases referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article, Member States shall ensure that legal persons can be held liable where the lack of supervision or control by a person referred to in that paragraph has made possible the commission of the infringements referred to in Article 56(1) for the benefit of a legal person by a person under its authority.

Article 58

1.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities establish effective mechanisms to encourage reporting of breaches of the national provisions implementing this Directive to competent authorities.

2.  The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least:

(a)  specific procedures for the receipt of reports on breaches and their follow-up;

(b)  appropriate protection for employees of institutions who report breaches committed within the institution;

(ba)  appropriate protection for the accused person; [Am. 134]

(c)  protection of personal data concerning both the person who reports the breaches and the natural person who is allegedly responsible for a breach, in compliance with the principles laid down in Directive 95/46/EC.

3.  Member States shall require obliged entities to have in place appropriate procedures for their employees to report breaches internally through a specific, independent and anonymous channel.

CHAPTER VII

FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 59

By …(44), the Commission shall draw up a report on the implementation of this Directive and submit it to the European Parliament and to the Council.

By …(45)*, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the provisions concerning serious tax offences and punishments in the Member States, on the cross-border significance of tax offences and on the possible need for a coordinated approach in the Union, accompanied if appropriate by a legislative proposal. [Am. 135]

Article 60

Directives 2005/60/EC and 2006/70/EC are repealed with effect from …(46).

References to the repealed directives shall be construed as being made to this Directive and should be read in accordance with the correlation table set out in Annex IV.

Article 61

1.  Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by …*. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those measures.

When Member States adopt those measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

2.  Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

Article 62

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

Article 63

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

ANNEX I

The following is a non-exhaustive list of risk variables that obliged entities shall consider when determining to what extent to apply customer due diligence measures in accordance with Article 11(3):

(i)  The purpose of an account or relationship;

(ii)  The level of assets to be deposited by a customer or the size of transactions undertaken;

(iii)  The regularity or duration of the business relationship.

ANNEX II

The following is a non-exhaustive list of factors and types of evidence of potentially lower risk referred to in Article 14:

(1)  Customer risk factors:

(a)  public companies listed on a stock exchange and subject to disclosure requirements (either by stock exchange rules or through law or enforceable means), which impose requirements to ensure adequate transparency of beneficial ownership;

(b)  public administrations or enterprises;

(c)  customers resident in lower risk geographical areas as set out in point (3);

(ca)  beneficial owners of pooled accounts held by notaries and other independent legal professionals from the Member States, or from third countries provided that they are subject to requirements to combat money laundering or terrorist financing consistent with international standards and are supervised for compliance with those requirements, and provided that the information on the identity of the beneficial owner is available, on request, to the institutions that act as depository institutions for the pooled accounts; [Am. 136]

(cb)  obliged entities where they are subject to requirements to combat money laundering and terrorist financing under this Directive and have effectively implemented those requirements. [Am. 137]

(2)  Product, service, transaction or delivery channel risk factors:

(a)  life insurance policies where the premium is low;

(b)  insurance policies for pension schemes if there is no early surrender option and the policy cannot be used as collateral;

(c)  a pension, superannuation or similar scheme that provides retirement benefits to employees, where contributions are made by way of deduction from wages, and the scheme rules do not permit the assignment of a member’s interest under the scheme;

(d)  financial products or services that provide appropriately defined and limited services to certain types of customers, so as to increase access for financial inclusion purposes;

(e)  products where the risk of money laundering/terrorist financing are managed by other factors such as purse limits or transparency of ownership (e.g. certain types of electronic money as defined in Article 2(2) of Directive 2009/110/EC);

(ea)  long-term purpose-orientated savings agreements, serving for instance as a safeguard for retirement provisions or for the acquisition of self-used immovable property and where the incoming payments originate from a payment account which is identified in accordance with Articles 11 and 12 of this Directive; [Am. 138]

(eb)  financial products low in value where repayment is conducted through a bank account in the name of the customer; [Am. 139]

(ec)  financial products which relate to financial physical assets in the form of leasing agreements or of low value consumer credit, provided the transactions are carried out through bank accounts; [Am. 140]

(ed)  non-face-to-face business relationships or transactions where the identity is capable of being verified electronically; [Am. 141]

(ee)  such products, services and transactions identified as low risk by the competent authorities of the home Member State of the obliged entities. [Am. 142]

(3)  Geographical risk factors:

(a)  other Member States; [Am. 143]

(b)  third countries identified, by credible sources, such as by FATF public statements, mutual evaluation or detailed assessment reports or published follow-up reports, as having effective anti-money laundering/combating terrorist financing systems; [Am. 144]

(c)  third countries identified by credible sources as having a low level of corruption or other criminal activity;

(d)  third countries which are subject to requirements to combat money laundering and terrorist financing consistent with the FATF Recommendations, have effectively implemented those requirements, and are effectively supervised or monitored in accordance with the Recommendations to ensure compliance with those requirements;

(da)  jurisdictions identified by the Commission having anti-money laundering measures equivalent to those laid down by this Directive and other related rules and regulations of the Union. [Am. 145]

ANNEX III

The following is a non-exhaustive list of factors and types of evidence of potentially higher risk referred to in Article 16(3):

(1)  Customer risk factors:

(a)  the business relationship is conducted in unusual circumstances;

(b)  customers resident in countries set out in point (3);

(c)  legal persons or arrangements that are personal asset-holding vehicles;

(d)  companies that have nominee shareholders or shares in bearer form;

(e)  businesses that are cash intensive;

(f)  the ownership structure of the company appears unusual or excessively complex given the nature of the company’s business.

(2)  Product, service, transaction or delivery channel risk factors:

(a)  private banking;

(b)  products or transactions that that allow for or that might favour anonymity; [Am. 146]

(c)  non-face-to-face business relationships or transactions, without certain safeguards, e.g. electronic signatures; [Am. 147]

(d)  payment received from unknown or unassociated third parties.

(e)  new products and new business practices, including new delivery mechanism, and the use of new or developing technologies for both new and pre-existing products. [Am. 148]

(3)  Geographical risk factors:

(a)  countries identified by credible sources, such as by FATF public statements, mutual evaluation or detailed assessment reports or published follow-up reports, as not having effective anti-money laundering/combating terrorist financing systems;

(b)  countries identified by credible sources as having significant levels of corruption or other criminal activity;

(c)  countries subject to sanctions, embargos or similar measures issued by, for example, the Union or the United Nations; [Am. 149]

(d)  countries providing funding or support for terrorist activities, or that have designated terrorist organisations operating within their country.

Annex IIIa

The following are types of enhanced due diligence measures that Member States should as a minimum implement for the application of Article 16:

–  Obtaining additional information on the customer (e.g. occupation, volume of assets, information available through public databases, internet, etc.), and updating more regularly the identification data of customer and beneficial owner;

–  Obtaining additional information on the intended nature of the business relationship;

–  Obtaining information on the customer’s source of funds or source of wealth of the customer;

–  Obtaining information on the reasons for intended or performed transactions;

–  Obtaining the approval of senior management to commence or continue the business relationship;

–  Conducting enhanced monitoring of the business relationship, by increasing the number and timing of controls applied, and selecting patterns of transactions that need further examination;

–  Requiring the first payment to be carried out through an account opened in the customer's name with a bank subject to similar CDD standards. [Am. 150]

ANNEX IV

Correlation table referred to in Article 60

Directive 2005/60/EC

This Directive

Article 1

Article 1

Article 2

Article 2

Article 3

Article 3

Article 4

Article 4

Article 5

Article 5

 

Articles 6 to 8

Article 6

Article 9

Article 7

Article 10

Article 8

Article 11

Article 9

Article 12

Article 10(1)

Article 10(d)

Article 10(2)

-

Article 11

Articles 13, 14 and 15

Article 12

-

Article 13

Articles 16 to 23

Article 14

Article 24

Article 15

-

Article 16

Article 25

Article 17

-

Article 18

Article 26

 

Article 27

Article 19

Article 28

 

Article 29

 

Article 30

Article 20

-

Article 21

Article 31

Article 22

Article 32

Article 23

Article 33

Article 24

Article 34

Article 25

Article 35

Article 26

Article 36

Article 27

Article 37

Article 28

Article 38

Article 29

-

Article 30

Article 39

Article 31

Article 42

Article 32

Article 40

Article 33

Article 41

Article 34

Article 42

Article 35

Article 43

Article 36

Article 44

Article 37

Article 45

 

Article 46

Article 37a

Article 47

Article 38

Article 48

 

Articles 49 to 54

Article 39

Articles 55 to 58

Article 40

-

Article 41

-

Article 41a

-

Article 41b

-

Article 42

Article 59

Article 43

-

Article 44

Article 60

Article 45

Article 61

Article 46

Article 62

Article 47

Article 63

Directive 2006/70/EC

This Directive

Article 1

-

Article 2(1), (2) and (3)

Article 3(7)(d), (e) and (f)

Article 2(4)

-

Article 3

-

Article 4

Article 2(2) to (8)

Article 5

-

Article 6

-

Article 7

-

(1) OJ C 166, 12.6.2013, p. 2.
(2) OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 31.
(3)OJ C 166, 12.6.2013, p. 2.
(4)OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 31.
(5) Position of the European Parliament of 11 March 2014.
(6)Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering (OJ L 166, 28.6.1991, p. 77).
(7)Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2001 amending Council Directive 91/308/EEC on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering (OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 76).
(8) Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L 309, 25.11.2005, p. 15).
(9)Commission Directive 2006/70/EC of 1 August 2006 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition of politically exposed person and the technical criteria for simplified customer due diligence procedures and for exemption on grounds of a financial activity conducted on an occasional or very limited basis (OJ L 214, 4.8.2006, p. 29).
(10) Sources: "Tax havens and development. Status, analyses and measures", NOU, Official Norwegian Reports, 2009.
(11) Directive 2012/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2012 amending Council Directive 89/666/EEC and Directives 2005/56/EC and 2009/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the interconnection of central, commercial and companies register (OJ L 156, 16.6.2012, p. 1).
(12)Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 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).
(13)Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48).
(14)Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/77/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 84).
(15)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).
(16) 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).
(17) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1).
(18)Council Decision 2000/642/JHA of 17 October 2000 concerning arrangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units of the Member States in respect of exchanging information (OJ L 271, 24.10.2000, p. 4).
(19) Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22).
(20) OJ C 32, 4.2.2014, p. 9.
(21)Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).
(22)Council Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA of 28 November 2008 amending Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism (OJ L 330, 9.12.2008, p. 21).
(23)Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal market amending Directives 97/7/EC, 2002/65/EC, 2005/60/EC and 2006/48/EC and repealing Directive 97/5/EC (OJ L 319, 5.12.2007, p. 1).
(24)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).
(25) Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 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).
(26)Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1).
(27)Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349).
(28)Directive 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 December 2002 on insurance mediation (OJ L 9, 15.1.2003, p. 3).
(29)Council Joint Action 98/733/JHA of 21 December 1998 on making it a criminal offence to participate in a criminal organisation in the Member States of the European Union (OJ L 351, 29.12.1998, p. 1).
(30)OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 49.
(31) Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).
(32)Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the supplementary supervision of credit institutions, insurance undertakings and investment firms in a financial conglomerate and amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC, 79/267/EEC, 92/49/EEC, 92/96/EEC, 93/6/EEC and 93/22/EEC, and Directives 98/78/EC and 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 35, 11.2.2003, p. 1).
(33) 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(34) Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on the taking up, pursuit and prudential supervision of the business of electronic money institutions amending Directives 2005/60/EC and 2006/48/EC and repealing Directive 2000/46/EC (OJ L 267, 10.10.2009, p. 7).
(35) 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(36) 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(37) 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(38) 3 years after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(39) 18 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(40) Two years after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(41) 2 years after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(42) Date of entry into force of this Directive.
(43) 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(44) Four years after the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(45)* One year after the entry into force of this Directive.
(46) Two years after the entry into force of this Directive.


EU guarantee to EIB against losses under financing operations supporting investment projects outside the Union ***I
PDF 194kWORD 28k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on granting an EU guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under financing operations supporting investment projects outside the Union (COM(2013)0293 – C7-0145/2013 – 2013/0152(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0192A7-0392/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0293),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 209 and 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0145/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 20 December 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and the related statement attached to the Coreper minutes, notified to Parliament by letter of the same date,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0392/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council granting an EU guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under financing operations supporting investment projects outside the Union

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0152


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 466/2014/EU.)


Genetic Resources ***I
PDF 199kWORD 30k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization in the Union (COM(2012)0576 – C7-0322/2012 – 2012/0278(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0193A7-0263/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0576),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0322/2012),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinion submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the French Senate, the Italian Senate and the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 20 March 2013(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 11 December 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0263/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(2);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization in the Union

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0278


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 511/2014.)

(1) OJ C 161, 6.6.2013, p. 73.
(2) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 12 September 2013 (Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0373).


Roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers ***I
PDF 196kWORD 29k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers and repealing Directive 2009/40/EC (COM(2012)0380 – C7-0186/2012 – 2012/0184(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0194A7-0210/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0380),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 91 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0186/2012),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the French Senate, the Cypriot House of Representatives, the Netherlands House of Representatives, the Netherlands Senate and the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 12 December 2012(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 19 December 2013 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0210/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(2);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers and repealing Directive 2009/40/EC

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0184


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/45/EU.)

(1) OJ C 44, 15.2.2013, p. 128.
(2) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 2 July 2013 (Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0297).


Registration documents for vehicles ***I
PDF 195kWORD 29k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 1999/37/EC on the registration documents for vehicles (COM(2012)0381 – C7-0187/2012 – 2012/0185(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0195A7-0199/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0381),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 91 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0187/2012),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Cypriot Parliament and by the Netherlands House of Representatives and the Netherlands Senate, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 12 December 2012(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 19 December 2013 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0199/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(2);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 1999/37/EC on the registration documents for vehicles

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0185


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/46/EU.)

(1) OJ C 44, 15.2.2013, p. 128.
(2) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 2 July 2013 (Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0295).


Roadworthiness of commercial vehicles ***I
PDF 196kWORD 30k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the Union and repealing Directive 2000/30/EC (COM(2012)0382 – C7-0188/2012– 2012/0186(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0196A7-0207/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0382),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 91 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0188/2012),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Cypriot Parliament, the Netherlands House of Representatives and the Netherlands Senate, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 12 December 2012(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of Regions,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 19 December 2013 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0207/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(2);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the Union and repealing Directive 2000/30/EC

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0186


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/47/EU.)

(1) OJ C 44, 15.2.2012, p. 128.
(2) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 2 July 2013 (Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0296).


Rail transport statistics ***I
PDF 349kWORD 81k
Resolution
Consolidated text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on rail transport statistics, as regards the collection of data on goods, passengers and accidents (COM(2013)0611 – C7-0249/2013 – 2013/0297(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0197A7-0002/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0611),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0249/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0002/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 on rail transport statistics, as regards the collection of data on goods, passengers and accidents

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0297


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 338(1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

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

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure(1),

Whereas:

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2) establishes a common framework for producing, transmitting, evaluating and disseminating comparable rail transport statistics in the Union.

(2)  Statistics on the transport of goods and passengers by rail are necessary to enable the Commission to monitor and develop the common transport policy, and the transport elements of policies on the regions and on trans-European networks.

(3)  Statistics on rail safety are also necessary to enable the Commission to prepare and monitor Union action in the field of transport safety. The European Rail Agency collects data on accidents under the Statistical Annex to Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(3) as regards common safety indicators and common methods of calculating accident costs.

(3a)  Eurostat should closely cooperate with the European Railway Agency in the collection of rail accident data in order to ensure that the data obtained are consistent and fully comparable. The role of the European Railway Agency in the field of rail safety should be continuously enhanced. [Am. 1]

(4)  Most Member States transmitting passenger data to the Commission (Eurostat) under Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 have regularly provided the same data for both the provisional and final datasets.

(5)  There should be a balance between the needs of the users and the burden on respondents when producing European statistics.

(6)  Eurostat has conducted a technical analysis of the existing data on rail statistics collected under the Union legislation and of the dissemination policy, within its Working Group and Task Force on rail transport statistics, to simplify as much as possible the various activities necessary for producing statistics, while keeping the final output in line with present and future user needs.

(7)  In its report to the European Parliament and the Council on the experience acquired in the application of the Regulation (EC) No 91/2003, the Commission mentions that long term developments will probably mean the suppression or simplification of the data already collected under the Regulation, and that the intention is to reduce the data transmission period for annual data on rail passengers. The Commission should continue to provide reports at regular intervals on the way in which this Regulation is implemented. [Am. 2]

(8)  Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 confers powers on the Commission to implement some of the provisions of this Regulation. As a consequence of the entry into force of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘the Treaty’), the powers conferred on the Commission under this Regulation need to be aligned with Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty.

(9)  In order to reflect new developments in the Member States but at the same time to maintain harmonised rail data collection across the Union and with a view to maintaining the high quality of the data transmitted by the Member States, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission, with a view to adapting the definitions and thresholds for reporting and the contents of the Annexes, and to specifying the information to be supplied.

(10)  It is particularly important that the Commission carry out the appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that it take into account the position of the rail sector. The Commission should, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, ensure simultaneous, timely and appropriate submission of the relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council. [Am. 3]

(11)  The Commission should ensure that these delegated acts do not impose a significant additional administrative burden on the Member States and on the respondents.

(12)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for implementation of Regulation (EC) No 91/2003, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission as regards the specification of information to be supplied for the reports on the quality and comparability of the results, and on arrangements for the dissemination of results by the Commission (Eurostat). These powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council(4). The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of those acts, given their general scope. [Am. 4]

(13)  The European Statistical System Committee has been consulted.

(14)  Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 is amended as follows:

(1)  Article 3 is amended as follows:

(a)  In paragraph 1 points 24-30 are deleted. [Am. 5]

(b)  Paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:"

‘2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 10, delegated acts to adapt the technical definitions referred to in paragraph 1 and to provide additional definitions when needed to take into account new developments which require a certain level of technical detail to be defined in order to ensure harmonisation of statistics.’

"

(2)  Article 4 is amended as follows:

(a)  In paragraph 1, points b d and h and d are deleted. [Am. 6]

(aa)  In paragraph 1, the following point is inserted:"

'(ga) statistics on rail infrastructure (Annex Ga);’ [Am. 7]

"

(ab)  In paragraph 1, the following point is inserted:"

‘1a. Eurostat shall closely cooperate with the European Railway Agency (ERA) in the collection of accident data, including data qualifications, in order to ensure that the rail accident data collected by ERA under the Annex to Commission Directive 2009/149/EC* on railway safety is fully comparable to the accident data collected by Eurostat on other transport modes.

____________

* Commission Directive 2009/149/EC of 27 November 2009 amending Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards Common Safety Indicators and common methods to calculate accident costs (OJ L 313, 28.11.2009, p. 65).’ [Am. 8]

"

(b)  Paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:"

‘2. Under Annexes A and C, Member States shall report data for undertakings:

(a)  whose total volume of goods transport is at least 200 million tonne-km or at least 500 000 tonnes;

(b)  whose total volume of passenger transport is at least 100 million passenger-km;

(c)  reporting in Annex A and Annex C is optional below these thresholds.’

"

(c)  Paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:"

‘3. Under Annex L, Member States shall provide the total data for undertakings below the threshold referred to in paragraph 2 if these data are not reported under Annexes A and C, as specified in Annex L.’

"

(d)  Paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:"

‘5. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, where necessary in accordance with Article 10, concerning the adaptation of the contents of the Annexes and the thresholds for reporting as referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3, in order to take account of economic and technical developments.’ [Am. 9]

"

(e)  The following paragraph is added:"

‘6. When exercising its power pursuant to this paragraph, the Commission shall ensure that the delegated acts adopted do not impose a significant additional administrative burden on the Member States and on the respondents.’

"

(3)  In Article 5(2) point b is replaced by the following:"

‘(b) administrative data, including data collected by regulatory authorities, in particular the rail freight waybill if available’.

"

(4)  Article 7 is replaced by the following:"

‘Article 7

Dissemination

Statistics based on the data specified in Annexes A, C, E, F, G, GA, H and L shall be disseminated by the Commission (Eurostat) no later than 12 months after the end of the period to which the results relate.

The arrangements for the dissemination of results shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 11(2).’ [Am. 10]

"

(4a)  In Article 8, the following paragraph is inserted:"

'1a. Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure the quality of the data transmitted.' [Am. 11]

"

(5)  In Article 8, paragraphs are added:"

‘3. For the purposes of this Regulation, the quality criteria to be applied to the data to be transmitted are those referred to in Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council*.

4.  The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, specify the modalities, structure, periodicity and comparability elements for the standard quality reports. These implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 11.

__________________

* Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164).’

"

(6)  Article 9 is deleted. replaced by the following:"

‘Article 9

Report

By ...(5) and every three years thereafter, the Commission, after consulting the Statistical Programme Committee, shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of this Regulation. In particular, that report shall:

(a)  assess the benefits accruing to the Union, the Member States and the providers and users of statistical information of the statistics produced, in relation to their costs;

(b)  assess the quality of the statistics produced, especially with regards to data losses, resulting from the deletion of simplified reporting;

(c)  identify areas for potential improvement and any amendments considered necessary in the light of the results obtained.’. [Am. 12]

"

(7)  Article 10 is replaced by the following:"

‘Article 10

Exercise of the delegation

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

2.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 3(2) and 4(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate a period of time five years from …(6). The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power no later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension no later than three months before the end of each period. [Am. 13]

3.  The delegation of power referred to in Articles 3(2) and 4(5) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke 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 Articles 3(2) and 4(5) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two 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 two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.’

"

(8)  Article 11 is replaced by the following:"

‘Article 11

Committee

1.  The Commission shall be assisted by the European Statistical System Committee, established by Regulation (EC) No 223/2009. That Committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council*.

2.  Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

_________

* Regulation (EU) No182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).’

"

(9)  Article 12 is deleted.

(10)  Annexes B, D, H and I are deleted. [Am. 15]

(11)  Annex C is replaced as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

(11a)  Annex F is amended as follows:

(a)  In column 2, row 1, paragraph 1 the following indent is added:"

'– tonne-km'.

"

(b)  In column 2, row 1, paragraph 2 the following indent is added:"

'– passenger-km'. [Am. 16]

"

(c)  In column 2, row 1 the following paragraph is inserted:"

‘– distance-based rail freight modal shares based on tonne-km according to the following distance breakdown:

–  d ≤ 50 km

–  50 km < d ≤ 150 km

–  150 km < d ≤ 300 km

–  300 km < d ≤ 500 km

–  500 km < d ≤ 750 km

–  750 km < d ≤ 1 000 km

–  d > 1 000 km’. [Am. 17]

"

(d)  In column 2, row 3 is amended as follows:"

‘– For ‘tonnes’ and ‘tonne-km’: Every year;

–  For ‘number of passengers’ and 'passenger-km': Every five years’. [Am. 18]

"

(11b)  The following Annex is inserted:"

‘Annex Ga

Rail infrastructure data

1.  Number of kilometres of rail infrastructure, equipped with ERTMS;

2.  Length in kilometres of the rail network continuously equipped with ERTMS (in the Member State);

3.  Number of cross-border rail infrastructure points, used more frequently for passenger transport than every hour, than every two hours and less frequently than every two hours;

4.  Number of cross-border rail points, abandoned for use of passengers or freight transport or dismantled rail infrastructure;

5.  Number of stations, barrier-free, accessible for persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) and disabled persons.’. [Am. 23]

"

(11c)  Annex H is amended as follows:

(a)  In column 2, row 1 the following indent is added:"

'– number of incidents (Table H2)';

"

(b)  In column 2, row 4, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:"

'Table H2: number of accidents and incidents involving the transport of dangerous goods';

"

(c)  In column 2, row 7, paragraph 1, the third indent is replaced by the following:"

'– accidents involving level crossings and those not caused by trains';

"

(d)  In column 2, row 7, paragraph 2, the first indent is replaced by the following:"

'– total number of accidents and incidents involving at least one railway vehicle transporting dangerous goods, as defined by the list of goods covered by Annex K';

"

(e)  In column 2, row 7, paragraph 2, the second indent is replaced by the following:"

'– number of such accidents and incidents in which dangerous goods are released'. [Am. 19]

"

(12)  Annex L is added as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall be consolidated with Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 within three months of its publication. [Am. 21]

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

Done at …

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

ANNEX

‘Annex C

ANNUAL STATISTICS ON PASSENGER TRANSPORT — DETAILED REPORTING

List of variables and units of measurement

Passengers transported in:

–  number of passengers

–  passenger-km

Passenger train movements in:

–  train-km

Locomotives equipped with ERTMS in:

–  number [Am. 22]

Reference period

Year

Frequency

Every year

List of tables with the breakdown for each table

Table C3: passengers transported, by type of transport

Table C4: international passengers transported, by country of embarkation and by country of disembarkation

Table C5: passenger train movements

Deadline for transmission of data

Eight months after end of reference period

First reference period

2012

Notes

1.  Type of transport is broken down as follows:

–  national

–  international

2.  For Tables C3 and C4, Member States shall report data including information from ticket sales outside the reporting country. This information may be obtained either directly from the national authorities of other countries or through international compensation arrangements for tickets’

‘Annex L

Table L.1

LEVEL OF TRANSPORT ACTIVITY IN GOODS TRANSPORT

List of variables and units of measurement

Goods transported in:

– total tonnes

– total tonne-km

Goods train movements in:

– total train-km

Reference period

One year

Frequency

Every year

Deadline for transmission of data

Five months after end of reference period

First reference period

201X

Notes

Only for undertakings with a total volume of freight transport of less than 200 million tonne-km and less than 500 000 tonnes and not reporting under Annex A (detailed reporting)

Table L.2

LEVEL OF TRANSPORT ACTIVITY IN PASSENGER TRANSPORT

List of variables and units of measurement

Passengers transported in:

– total passengers

– total passenger-km

Passenger train movements in:

– total train-km

Reference period

One year

Frequency

Every year

Deadline for transmission of data

Eight months after end of reference period

First reference period

201X

Notes

Only for undertakings with a total volume of passenger transport of less than 100 million passenger-km and not reporting under Annex C (detailed reporting)’

(1) Position of the European Parliament of 11 March 2014.
(2)Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on rail transport statistics (OJ L 14, 21.1.2003, p. 1).
(3) Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community's railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive) (OJ L 164, 30.4.2004, p. 44).
(4)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 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
(5) Three years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
(6) The exact date of the entry into force of the amending Regulation.


Electronic invoicing in public procurement ***I
PDF 194kWORD 28k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic invoicing in public procurement (COM(2013)0449 – C7-0208/2013 – 2013/0213(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0198A7-0004/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0449),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0208/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 16 October 2013(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 28 November 2013(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 24 January 2014 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0004/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic invoicing in public procurement

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0213


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/55/EU.)

(1) OJ C 79, 6.3.2014, p. 67.
(2) Not yet published in the Official Journal.


Farm structure surveys and survey on agricultural production methods ***I
PDF 192kWORD 28k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008 on farm structure surveys and the survey on agricultural production methods, as regards the financial framework for the period 2014-2018 (COM(2013)0757 – C7-0390/2013 – 2013/0367(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0199A7-0111/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0757),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0390/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0111/2014),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008 as regards the financial framework for the period 2014-2018

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0367


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 378/2014.)


Goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products ***I
PDF 198kWORD 30k
Resolution
Text
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products (COM(2013)0106 – C7-0048/2013 – 2013/0063(COD))
P7_TA(2014)0200A7-0260/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0106),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 43(2) and 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0048/2013),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 July 2013(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 December 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0260/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 March 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 1216/2009 and (EC) No 614/2009

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0063


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 510/2014.)

Annex to the legislative resolution

Commission statement on delegated acts

In the context of this Regulation, the Commission recalls the commitment it has taken in paragraph 15 of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission to provide to the Parliament full information and documentation on its meetings with national experts within the framework of its work on the presentation of delegated acts.

(1) OJ C 327, 12.11.2013, p. 90.


European Investment Bank annual report 2012
PDF 331kWORD 85k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on the European Investment Bank (EIB) – Annual Report 2012 (2013/2131(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0201A7-0137/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the 2012 Annual Report of the European Investment Bank (EIB),

–  having regard to Articles 15, 126, 175, 208, 209, 271, 308 and 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to Protocol No 5 thereto on the Statute of the EIB,

–  having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2012 on innovative financial instruments in the context of the next Multiannual Financial Framework(1),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on regional Development on risk sharing instruments for Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability, its position thereon of 19 April 2012(2) and in particular the opinion of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs,

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 February 2013 on the 2011 Annual Report of the European Investment Bank(3),

–  having regard to the report by the President of the European Council of 26 June 2012, entitled ‘Towards a genuine economic and monetary union’,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 28 and 29 June 2012, which, notably, foresee an increase in EIB capital of EUR 10 billion,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 27 and 28 June 2013, which call for the creation of a new investment plan to support SMEs and boost the financing of the economy,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 22 May 2013, which set out the objective of mobilising all EU policies in support of competitiveness, jobs and growth,

–  having regard to the Commission’s communications on innovative financial instruments: ‘A framework for the next generation of innovative financial instruments’ (COM(2011)0662) and ‘A pilot phase for the Europe 2020 project bond initiative’ (COM(2011)0660),

–  having regard to the capital increase of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), notably in relation to the question of relations between the EIB and the EBRD,

–  having regard to the decision on extending the scope of the EBRD to the Mediterranean area,

–  having regard to the new Memorandum of Understanding between the EIB and the EBRD signed on 29 November 2012,

–  having regard to Decision No 1080/2011/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(4) on the EIB External Mandate 2007-2013,

–  having regard to Rules 48 and 119(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0137/2014),

A.  whereas the EIB was set up by the Treaty of Rome and, under Article 309 TFEU, its task is to contribute, by having recourse to the capital market and utilising its own resources, to the balanced and steady development of the internal market with the aim of helping to realise the Union’s priorities by selecting economically viable projects for investment by the EU;

B.  whereas in these particularly difficult social and economic circumstances, marked by public budgetary restrictions, all EU resources and policies, including those of the EIB, need to be mobilised in efforts to sustain economic recovery and identify new sources of growth;

C.  whereas the EIB also acts as the financing arm of, and complement to, other sources of investment by substituting or correcting market gaps;

D.  whereas the EIB is helping the EU to maintain and reinforce its competitive edge on a global scale;

E.  whereas the EIB will continue to be the cornerstone for, and catalyst of the development of, EU policies, providing for the continued presence of the public sector, and offering investment capacities, while ensuring the best possible integration and implementation of the EU 2020 flagship initiatives;

F.  whereas the EIB, as a core stability instrument, will focus on playing a counter-cyclical role, acting as a reliable partner for sound projects throughout the EU and beyond;

G.  whereas the EIB is supporting the key drivers of the growth and jobs objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, such as growth-driving infrastructure, cutting-edge innovation and competitiveness;

H.  whereas there is a crucial need to ensure that the EIB keeps its triple A credit rating, in order to preserve its access to international capital markets under best funding conditions, with subsequent positive impacts on project life and for stakeholders;

I.  whereas in June 2012 the European Council launched a Compact for Growth and Jobs comprising a range of policies aimed at stimulating smart, sustainable, inclusive, resource-efficient and job-creating growth;

J.  whereas the use of innovative financial instruments is seen as one way of extending the scope of existing tools, such as grants, and of improving the overall effectiveness of the EU budget;

K.  whereas it is crucial to restore normal lending to the economy and to facilitate the financing of investment;

L.  whereas international financial instruments provide a new space for collaboration opportunities among all the institutional players and offer real economies of scale;

M.  whereas the EIB’s operations outside the EU are undertaken in support of the Union’s external action policies and should be in line with, and promote, EU objectives, in accordance with Articles 208 and 209 TFEU;

N.  whereas the EIB’s activities are complemented by specific instruments provided by the European Investment Fund (EIF) that focus on providing both risk finance, for the benefit of SMEs and start-ups, and micro-finance;

O.  whereas the capital increase has strengthened the EIB balance sheet, allowing for ambitious operational lending targets;

P.  whereas specific effort has been made to undertake more joint interventions (combining EIF guarantees with EIB loans for SMEs);

Policy framework and guiding principles for EIB intervention

1.  Welcomes the EIB Annual Report 2012 and the attainment of the agreed operational plan to finance some 400 projects in over 60 countries for an amount of EUR 52 billion;

2.  Welcomes the EIB Board of Governors’ approval of a EUR 10 billion capital increase, facilitating an additional EUR 60 billion (amounting to a 49 % expansion of lending targets) for long-term lending for projects in the EU in the period 2013-2015;

3.  Asks the EIB to keep the anticipated targets in relation to its additional activity and to unlock EUR 180 billion in extra investments across the EU for the aforementioned period;

4.  Recalls that for projects in the EU, prospects are particularly interesting for a number of priority thematic areas under the ‘Europe 2020’ strategy: innovation and skills, including low carbon infrastructure, investment in SMEs, cohesion, resource and energy efficiency (including the shift to low-carbon economy) ‘packages’; notes that these focal areas have been duly identified in the EIB Groups’ Operational Plan for 2013-2015, and welcomes the allotment of an additional EUR 60 billion in lending capacity in order to finance their implementation;

5.  Strongly believes, however, that within these broad priorities greater focus should be placed on investing in long-term growth and job creation and on generating a durable and visible impact in the real economy, and calls, therefore, for a comprehensive evaluation providing viable figures on the long-term employment created through, and the impact on the economy as a result of, EIB lending, in all areas, following the financial crisis;

6.  Welcomes the launch of the Growth and Employment Facility (GEF), which will enable the EIB to monitor in greater depth the employment and growth impact of the projects it finances;

7.  Calls on the EIB to continue to support the EU’s long-term priorities for economic and social cohesion, growth and employment, environmental sustainability, climate action and resource efficiency, through further development of new financial and non-financial instruments designed to address both short-term market inefficiencies and the more long-term structural gaps of the EU economy;

8.  Encourages the EIB to negotiate and conclude memorandums of understanding (MoUs) with regional development banks active in its regions of operation in order to foster synergies, share risks and costs, and ensure sufficient lending to the real economy;

9.  Regards the Compact for Growth and Jobs as an important but not sufficient response to the challenges facing the EU, noting that the EIB capital increase and an enhanced recourse to joint Commission-EIB risk sharing instruments, coupled with synergies between EIB and EIF specialised activities, are key elements for its success;

10.  Asks the EIB to prioritise its financing on projects that contribute strongly to economic growth;

11.  Recalls that the Commission presented, together with the EIB, a report on the opportunities and targeted priorities to be identified through the implementation of the Pact for Growth and Employment, especially with regard to infrastructure, energy efficiency and efficient use of resources, the digital economy, research and innovation and SMEs; calls, on the basis of this report, for a political debate in Parliament to be attended by the Presidents of the European Council, the Commission and the European Investment Bank;

12.  Is particularly concerned that finance in Programme Countries (Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Cyprus) remained low in the course of 2012, representing roughly +/- 5 % of overall EIB investment; notes that the EIB’s targets of investment in Programme Countries for 2013 represent up to EUR 5 billion, out of an overall EU target of EUR 62 billion;

13.  Is concerned that the EIB has maintained a somewhat risk-averse policy in its lending, thus limiting the scope of potential borrowers to meet EIB’s lending requirements and, subsequently, hindering the value-added of loans;

14.  Demands that the EIB increase its internal risk-taking capacity by ensuring that its risk-management systems are adapted to the current environment;

15.  Acknowledges that it is fundamental for the EIB to maintain its triple A rating in order to preserve its financial strength and capacity to inject money in the real economy; urges, however, the EIB together with the EIF to consider increasing its engagement in more risk-related activities, in order to safeguard a reasonable cost-benefit perspective;

16.  Notes the increase in the EIB’s higher-risk special activity targets to EUR 6 billion in 2013, the increase in funding for risk-sharing and credit enhancement initiatives to EUR 2,3 billion, and the recent launch of the Growth Financing Initiative (GFI) easing access to finance for innovative mid-cap companies;

17.  Calls on EIB to increase its activity under the Risk Capital Mandate (RCM) and the Mezzanine for Growth (MFG) mandate provided by the EIB to the EIF;

18.  Welcomes the EIF’s increase of its EIB-funded risk capital resources mandate with EUR 1 billion, with particular focus on higher-risk mezzanine financing as part of the joint EIB-EIF actions to tackle financing constraints for new innovation and growth plans of European mid-sized businesses;

19.  Invites the EIB to be more proactive in providing its technical expertise in all key areas of activities with high growth potential throughout all Member States; recalls that technical and financial advice is an efficient means of helping project delivery and speeding up disbursements and real investment; believes, therefore, that EIB expertise should be augmented and made available at early stages in projects co-financed by the EU and the EIB, and in ex-ante appraisal of large scale projects, including through the Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions (JASPERS) instrument;

20.  Urges the EIB, in the current context of critically low absorption rates in many Member States, to enhance efforts to support Member States’ absorption capacity of EU resources, including Structural Funds, by further developing additional joint risk-sharing instruments and by adapting the existing ones already funded by the EU budget;

21.  Calls on the Member States, where appropriate, to work with the Commission in using part of their Structural Fund allocations in order to share the EIB loan risk and provide loan guarantees for knowledge and skills, resource and energy efficiency, strategic infrastructure and access to finance for SMEs;

22.  Appreciates that unused structural funds can now be used as a special guarantee fund for EIB lending, especially in Greece;

23.  Notes that in 2012 the Bank signed Structural Programme Loans (SPL) to a value of EUR 2,2 billion, enabling support for numerous small and medium-sized schemes in line with the priorities of the Cohesion Policy in various sectors;

24.  Calls on the EIB, in light of the different economic and financial conditions that prevail within the EU, to develop, in close cooperation with the Member States, result-driven investment plans that are properly adjusted to national, regional and local growth priorities, taking into due account the horizontal priorities of the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey and the European Semester for economic governance;

25.  Encourages the Bank to explore possibilities of expanding its involvement by pro-actively participating in partnership agreements between the Commission and Member States;

26.  Notes the decreasing trend in the number of public-private partnerships (PPPs) during and following the crisis, and recalls, at the same time, the particularly important role they play in investment, especially in transport networks and in research and innovation; notes that while the EU PPP market has grown in value, it has recorded significantly fewer transactions;

27.  Believes State guarantees (SGs) to be valuable instruments in addressing market imperfections that may hold up the delivery of PPP programmes and projects; drawing on EIB’s expertise in this field, calls for the increase of its participation in the loan guarantees provided to the PPPs via the SGs;

28.  Believes, moreover, that the EIB advisory capacity, based on expertise gathered in the European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC), could be used to provide targeted technical and specialised assistance at government level and where appropriate also at regional level, in order to facilitate proper assessments regarding the benefits of involving a SG in a PPP programme;

29.  Recalls the launch in 2012, by the EIB and the Commission and with the support of Member States, of the pilot phase of the Project Bond Initiative, which aims at boosting the funding for key-infrastructure projects by attracting institutional investors;

30.  Welcomes the Projects Bonds Pilot Phase first six-monthly report indicating the approval of nine projects in six countries; calls for the continued and increased use of such bonds and for a regular review of their efficiency in order to boost viable investment in debt instruments that channel private capital into the transport, energy and ICT infrastructure projects that are needed, especially those with a cross-border dimension; believes, however, that the EIB should conduct better evaluations as to the projects in which it wishes to invest, including evaluations of the safety and risk profiles thereof; recalls that the EU budget is providing EUR 230 million in support of EIB credit enhancement activity for infrastructure investment in the transport, energy and communications sectors;

31.  Demands that it be informed about the selected projects in an appropriate manner and in due time;

32.  Notes with concern that key challenges (e.g. turning interest into commitments, limited experience with bond solution from procuring authorities, hesitation to engage from institutional investors, concern over costs from sponsors) remain; invites the Bank to assess properly the possibility of co-investing in early bond deals in order to reassure investors and sponsors; calls on the EIB to ensure that the Project Bond Initiative is consistent with the EU long-term climate target, i.e. that it focuses on low-carbon infrastructures;

33.  Is concerned about the poor project performance in relation to the Castor Project; demands that the Bank provide details on the soundness of its due diligence and to deliver information on whether the geological studies carried out indicate the possibility of a seismic risk or not, what the percentage was and how it was addressed;

34.  Awaits the final evaluation report concerning the PBI Pilot Phase, expected in 2015;

35.  Welcomes the EIB’s new energy policy, introducing new energy lending criteria that reflect the EU’s energy and climate policies as well as current investment trends; demands that EIB energy investments be made public and be analysed on an annual basis, showing what energy sources are supported by the EIB; wishes to emphasise, however, that the EIB’s investment policy ought to focus even further on sustainable projects; recalls, nevertheless, the need to present a comprehensive phase-out plan for lending for non-renewable energy;

36.  Welcomes the introduction by the EIB of a new Emissions Performance Standard, to be applied to all fossil fuel generation projects in order to screen out investments with projected carbon emissions exceeding a threshold level; calls on the Board of the EIB to keep the Emissions Performance Standard under review and to consider more restrictive commitments in the future;

37.  Urges the Bank, in view of the 2030 climate package, including its decarbonisation priorities, to step up its low-carbon investment efforts and to work on policies leading to more ambitious climate targets; requests that the EIB perform a climate assessment and review of all its activities in 2014, leading to a renewed climate protection policy, e.g. through project assessment and an integrated approach to smartly combine sector-specific policies for key sectors; calls on the EIB to annex this review to its next annual report;

38.  Recalls the important role played by the EIB in financing public and private sector investment in energy infrastructure and in supporting projects that contribute to achieving EU climate and energy policy goals; recalls its 2007 resolution calling for an end to public funding for fossil fuel projects and a shift to energy efficiency and renewable energies; believes that the EIB, in cooperation with the Commission, should, in line with Union and international climate change objectives and the best international standards, update its climate change strategy as regards its financing operations before the end of 2015;

39.  Calls for the EIB’s resources and expertise to be boosted in order to provide for climate change adaptation;

40.   Demands that the EIB enforce the best international standards regarding hydropower, namely the World Commission on Dams guiding principles and the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol (HSAP), which means investing only where countries have put in place a legal framework establishing energy planning mechanisms (including ‘no go’ areas), that negative impacts on ecosystems and local communities must be properly assessed, avoided, mitigated and monitored, and that the projects may not be located in or near protected areas or on river stretches with good ecological status;

41.  Calls on the EIB to carefully factor into its projects the vision and targets of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 ‘Our life insurance, our natural capital’;

Strengthening the range of support for SMEs and mid-cap companies

42.  Recalls that SMEs are considered the backbone of the EU’s economy and the main driver of European growth and employment, accounting for more than 80 % of employment in the private sector;

43.  Welcomes the particular focus (in the context of increasing the lending activity in the EU) on helping to improve access to finance for SMEs, and welcomes, subsequently, the EIB Group’s target for 2013 of more than EUR 19 billion in SME lending to be signed within the EU;

44.  Calls on the Council also, in this connection, to agree swiftly on the joint Commission-EIB initiatives and to blend EU budget resources intended for SMEs, as well as to take more resolute action in implementing cooperation with the ECB so as to reduce the financing constraints placed upon SMEs; points out that the main problem in several Member States is that the fragmentation of financial markets results in a lack of funding and in higher funding costs, especially for SMEs; calls for the EIB’s efforts to be redirected towards defragmentation in order to promote funding for SMEs, entrepreneurship, exports and innovation, which are vital for economic recovery;

45.  Welcomes the enhanced bank lending to SMEs through the revitalisation of the SME securitisation market by means of the EIB Group’s new ABS initiative; invites the EIB to provide for a market analysis with a view to better calibrating this EIB offer to stakeholders needs; welcomes the enhancement of the credit capacity of the EIF through a capital increase and mandate, and invites the EIB and the Commission to finalise the process by early next year;

46.  Supports the initiatives of the EIB Group on innovative financings for SMEs and mid-cap companies through the launching of Horizon 2020 and COSME financial instruments and the Risk Sharing Instruments (RSI) in order to encourage banks to provide financial resources by means of loans and guarantees, and to ensure the provision of long-term risk capitals;

47.  Supports the Commission-EIB joint SME Initiative under the new MFF, blending EU funds available under the COSME and Horizon 2020 programmes, with up to EUR 8,5 billion of resources dedicated to the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), in view of generating additional lending to SMEs;

48.  Calls on the Member States to participate actively, by contributing to the Joint Instruments from their ESIF allocations, in order to support increased lending to SMEs in their territory, thus increasing the overall leverage effects;

49.  Encourages the EIB to expand the Trade Finance Initiative; considers that this guarantee mechanism for SMEs is of key importance and should be widened at EU scale, wherever it is deemed most needed; calls on the EIB to develop its own trade facilitation programme; calls on the EIB as a first step to establish measures to ensure the provision of the guarantees needed for companies to realise their full export potential;

50.  Supports the EIB’s focus on the regional and local dimension and calls on the Member States to make full use of financial engineering shared management instruments such as the JEREMIE programme and regional fund-to-fund schemes providing equity and debt finance to local SMEs;

51.  Welcomes the ex post evaluation of EIB intermediated lending to SMEs in the EU for the period 2005-2011; acknowledges that in this area, over the period 2005-2012, the EIB signed EUR 64 billion in loans to around 370 financial institutions within the EU 27; notes that by the end of 2012, EUR 53 billion of this money had been disbursed to those financial institutions which, in turn, had lent nearly EUR 48 billion to SMEs through around 300 000 sub-loans;

52.  Notes that the evaluation shows EIB-SME intermediate lending (via the L4SME product) to be consistent with EU objectives; calls, nonetheless, for a better assessment of complementarity between the EIB product and the national policy mixes, in order to improve further the operations’ relevance; asks the EIB to bring forward proposals for enhancing the effect of the L4SME product so that it can be mobilised to fill specific gaps, instead of funding a broad spectrum of SMEs, thereby optimising EIB’s contribution to growth and employment;

53.  Notes with concern that during the period under review the EIB loans had ‘some’ impact on growth and employment, but with great variations across countries (only 1/3 of SMEs attributed the growth of turnover to the EIB funding); is concerned that there is only limited evidence that the EIB loans helped maintain employment; notes that the relative impact on growth and employment was found to be higher in the new Member States; acknowledges, however, that the period under review included the financial and economic crisis and that the relatively modest level of job creation was achieved despite a background of falling employment levels;

54.  Is concerned that EIB funding, for a majority of operations, seems to have been used in support of SME ‘champions’, not as ‘gap funding’; notes, however, that more than 80 % of the SMEs reached were companies with less than 50 employees, which proves that the EIB reaches out to the smaller segment of the SME universe;

55.  Demands that the EIB make full use of the eligibility criteria in order to influence the targeting of financial beneficiaries in a more effective way;

56.  Invites the EIB to identify and select higher-value-added and higher-risk projects, notably by identifying start-ups, micro-enterprises, cooperatives, clusters of enterprises, SMEs and mid-cap companies undertaking research, development and innovation projects in priority technologies area;

57.  Emphasises the need to increase the level of awareness and understanding among potential investors and beneficiaries of the existence of innovative financial tools; encourages the setting up of a communication policy to promote the visibility of various actions carried out by the EU, through these new financial instruments, via the EIB; stresses, furthermore, that extensive and systematic access to project information, as well as greater involvement on the part of project beneficiaries and local civil society – which could be improved through EIB-financed investments – should be ensured;

58.  Calls on the EIB to establish an action plan to simplify access to information and funding for SMEs, focusing in particular on the administrative formalities for access to funding;

59.  Recalls that intermediate lending represents over 20 % of the total annual lending of the EIB;

60.  Reiterates with concern that a considerable number of outstanding issues remain unresolved in this area, notably the lack of transparency (especially concerning information about the final beneficiaries), the difficulty in assessing the economic and social impact of the loans (resulting in a flawed targeted approach) and the reliance, via outsourcing of responsibilities, on financial intermediaries for carrying out the due diligence; urges the Bank to provide details on its approach to accelerate measures addressing these issues and asks for a stringent list of criteria for selection of these financial intermediaries to be established by the EIB jointly with the Commission and be made publicly available;

61.  Urges the EIB to make an up-to-date and comprehensive evaluation of how the financial crisis has affected the final recipients of EIB funding, and to provide a thorough assessment of the effects and impact of the financial crisis on the current status of financial intermediaries used by the Bank, both within and outside of the EU;

62.  Demands that the EIB ensure that its goal of generating employment for around a half a million people, through lending to infrastructure, resource efficiency and knowledge economy projects in 2013 alone, is accomplished;

63.  Notes that, due to the difficult economic environment and tighter credit markets, the funding constraints on companies and the public sector continue to hold back the employment of young people and to limit the scope for improving vocational training;

64.  Believes the EIB’s Youth Employment programme (with a lending volume of EUR 6 billion), comprising the Jobs for Youth and Investing in Skills components, to be of utmost importance in addressing these issues; welcomes the interim implementation report showing important achievements in this sector, such as the EUR 4,9 billion provided in loans through the Investing in Skills sub-programme, complemented by the EUR 2,7 billion provided under the Jobs for Youth pillar; acknowledges the early accomplishment of its objectives;

65.  Supports the Bank’s objective of further maximising its lending targeting to SMEs in order to establish a clear link between EIB lending and the creation of new jobs for young people;

66.  Invites the Bank to widen its scope of action and to make use of additional instruments in order to provide viable incentives for generating youth employment, especially in Member States with notoriously high rates of youth unemployment;

The EIB’s contribution to EU external policies

67.  Asks the EIB, in line with the review of EIB’s mandate for operations outside the European Union, to support the European Union’s foreign policy objectives as conceived by the Commission and the European External Action Service;

68.  Welcomes the EU Guarantee for external lending, provided to the EIB by the EU budget, of a size similar to the current one, set at a maximum ceiling of EUR 30 billion (split into a General Mandate of EUR 27 billion and an optional EUR 3 billion subject to the Mid-Term Review) for the next financial period by using reflows from unused FEMIP (Facility for Euro-Mediterranean Investment and Partnership) operations dating back to before 2007;

69.  Asks the European Court of Auditors (ECA) to carry out a special report on the performance and alignment with EU policies of EIB external lending activities before the mid-term review of the EIB’s external mandate and to compare their added value with regard to the own resources used by the EIB; asks the ECA furthermore to differentiate in its analysis between the guarantees granted by the EU budget, the investment facility guaranteed by the EDF, the various forms of blending used in the EU-Africa infrastructural trust fund, the Caribbean investment fund and the investment facility for the Pacific and the usage of reflows for these investments;

70.  Welcomes the increased flexibility provisions provided under the new external lending mandate of the EIB; calls on the EIB to maximise its support of EU policies and objectives;

71.  Asks the EIB to make additional flexible use of the Guarantee Fund, and to focus more on own-risk lending, by extending its area of reach for bankable projects; insists that the EIB ensure a high level of visibility to the final beneficiaries of the projects of the European financial support it provides;

72.  Notes that the pre-accession countries and the eastern and southern neighbourhood are at the top of the EIB’s priority areas; emphasises, in particular, the need to maintain support to democratic and economic transitions following the Arab Spring, with specific focus on support for civil society’s components, job creation and economic recovery in the Southern countries and Eastern partner countries; notes with satisfaction the focus on SMEs and access to finance;

73.  Supports, in the context of the EU’s external policies, the progressive development of new financial products with the Commission and the Member States, such as products blending EU grants, loans and risk sharing instruments in order to reach new categories of firms; demands that best practices and well-defined eligibility criteria be defined for the use of those instruments, accompanied by structured reporting, monitoring and control conditions; calls for the finalisation of allocation policy;

74.  Expects, therefore, the governance report on the implementation of the platform for cooperation with international financial instruments on blending to include detailed and consistent information in this regard and to ensure an adequate role for the EIB; calls on the Commission to provide a full-fledged report on the impact and results of the implementation of financial facilities in the context of the platform for cooperation on blending;

75.  Welcomes the EIB’s support for projects, across several energy sectors, targeting growth and jobs; recalls the need to maintain consistency with the new developments in the EU’s energy and climate policies; encourages the EIB, in the context of its renewed energy policy, to continue to support, both within and outside of the EU, projects dedicated to energy efficiency and sustainable renewable energies, and thereby pave the way towards a low carbon economy;

The EIB’s cooperation with other international financial institutions

76.  Recalls that structured cooperation between EU bodies (the Commission and the EIB) and other financial institutions is the only efficient means to prevent overlapping activities;

77.  Welcomes the updated Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the EIB and the EBRD reflecting the willingness on the part of the EU to intensify the level of coordination and cooperation between these two major international financial institutions; encourages the EIB also to negotiate and conclude Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with regional development banks active in its regions of operation in order to foster synergies, share risks and costs, and ensure sufficient lending to the real economy;

78.  Calls on both institutions to engage in the best possible operational coordination in terms of complementarity and division of labour, in order to research systematically the best opportunities and synergies, and to find optimal leverages in the support and implementation of EU policy objectives while respecting their respective comparative advantages and specificities;

79.  Encourages the EIB and EBRD to strengthen, at the earliest possible stage (ex-ante evaluation or identification phases of action), their expertise, their strategic and programming approaches in the various fields of intervention and, in particular, their cooperation on risk management instruments (financial, operational or country risks), in order to enhance the supervision of risk;

80.  Welcomes the new Joint Action Plan agreed in November 2012 between the EIB, the EBRD and the World Bank Group, aimed at supporting economic recovery and growth in Central and South Eastern Europe, noting that the action plan sets out more than EUR 30 billion in joint commitments for the period 2013-2014; calls on the EIB to commit a minimum of EUR 20 billion, as agreed;

81.  Reiterates its proposal for the European Union to become a member of the EIB;

The EIB’s governance, compliance and control framework

82.  Calls on the EIB and other associated partners and stakeholders to further improve their governance mechanisms through, inter alia, the development of exhaustive and sound monitoring, reporting and control systems;

83.  Welcomes the EIB’s reinforcement of its commitment to transparency by joining the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI);

84.  Demands that the Bank ensure the full independence and viable functionality of its complaints mechanism;

85.   Calls on the EIB to comply with the provisions of the Aarhus Convention by setting up a public Register of documents, in order to guarantee the right of access to documents as enshrined in the EU Treaties; asks the Bank to keep its commitment and to make the Register public as of 2014;

86.  Demands that the next annual report be complemented with a set of cross-cutting performance indicators on the impact of the financing operations for the main domains of EIB interventions, the expected multiplier effect when appropriate and the transfer of financial advantages in the programmes funded;

87.  Reiterates and accentuates the Bank’s responsibility in enhancing the level of transparency in the selection of financial intermediaries and partners for co-financed projects and as regards the final beneficiaries;

88.  Stresses that the EIB should reduce bureaucracy in order to allocate funding more effectively and swiftly;

89.  Calls on the EIB to further enhance transparency in its lending through financial intermediaries by reporting annually on its lending to SMEs, providing aggregated data on the level of disbursements made to SMEs, the number of SMEs targeted, average loan size and supported sectors, including an evaluation of the accessibility of the loans for SMEs and the effectiveness thereof;

90.  Calls on the EIB to refrain from cooperation with financial intermediaries with a negative track record in terms of transparency, fraud, corruption and environmental and social impacts; encourages the EIB to form partnerships with transparent and accountable financial intermediaries with established links to the local economy in each country of operation; calls on the EIB, in this connection, to ensure greater transparency, especially in the intermediated loans business, as well as to exercise enhanced due diligence in preventing the use of tax havens, transfer pricing, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance or planning; calls for the establishment of a stringent, publicly available list of criteria for the selection of financial intermediaries; calls on the EIB to strengthen its cooperation with national public credit institutions in order to maximise the positive impact of its funding programmes for SMEs;

91.  Calls on the EIB immediately to engage in an inclusive revision process of its Non-Cooperative Jurisdictions policy, duly taking into account recent developments in this respect at EU and international level; Calls for the EIB, therefore, to ensure that all companies and financial institutions involved in its projects publicly disclose the beneficial ownership of any legal structure directly or indirectly related to the company, including trusts, foundations and bank accounts;

92.  Asks also for a public exclusion list for financial intermediaries to be developed jointly with the Commission, based on their track record in terms of transparency, fraud, links to offshore jurisdictions and social and environmental impacts;

93.  Considers it to be fundamental that the EIB maintains its triple A rating, which enabled it to borrow EUR 71 billion on the international capital markets in 2012 at favourable rates; encourages the EIB, however, to strengthen its capacity to prioritise higher-value-added projects with higher risk;

94.  Recalls and stresses, as in previous years, the need for prudential banking supervision of the EIB and calls for a legal study into ways of finding a possible solution to this issue;

95.  Proposes that this regulatory supervision be:

   (i) exercised by the ECB on the basis of Article 127(6) TFEU or
   (ii) exercised in the context of the future Banking Union envisaged in the Commission’s communication of 12 September 2012 or
   (iii) failing that, and on the basis of a voluntary approach by the EIB, carried out by the European Banking Authority, with or without the participation of one or more national supervisors, or else by an independent auditor;

regrets that the Commission has proposed no action in this regard, despite Parliament’s requests dating back to 2007;

96.  Welcomes the new internal developments within the EIB related to the overall compliance with best banking practices; demands that the EIB’s banking partners also comply with best banking practices which are compatible with Union law on financial services and with financial market stability, in the context of its operations both within and outside the EU; requests that the EIB, in its annual work plan, include an audit of one activity area in order to give assurance that best banking practices are part of the Bank’s internal written procedures;

97.  Calls on the EIB to increase further the transparency and accessibility of its activities, evaluations and outcomes through better access to information, both internally to EIB staff, by incorporating participation at relevant internal EIB meetings, and externally, for example on its website;

98.  Welcomes the fact that the EIB has taken measures in the area of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism, and has reinforced the resources of its compliance function through the appointment of a new Group Chief Compliance Officer; requests that Parliament be updated regularly on the results presented in the Group Chief Compliance Officer’s report;

99.  Calls on the EIB to follow the country-by-country reporting in order to combat the financing of illegal activities; considers that, in order to be eligible for EIB financing, all beneficiaries, whether corporations or financial intermediaries, that are incorporated in different jurisdictions must be obliged to disclose country-level information about their sales, assets, employees, profits and tax payments in each country in which they operate in their audited annual reports; considers also that beneficiaries must make contracts with host governments public and, in particular, disclose the fiscal regime in each country in which they operate;

100.  Requests that the control environment be adapted to accommodate future increase in the volume of funding requests generated as a result of the EIB capital increase and within other financial partnerships, notably for risk management functions;

The EIB’s follow-up of Parliament resolutions

101.  Calls on the EIB to report on the state of play and status of previous recommendations issued by Parliament in each annual report, especially as regards the impact of its lending activities in its various regions of operation on growth and job creation therein and in the EU, and on economic integration between the EU and candidate and neighbourhood countries;

o
o   o

102.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Investment Bank and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0404.
(2) OJ C 258 E, 7.9.2013, p. 131.
(3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0057.
(4) OJ L 280, 27.10.2011, p. 1.


European System of Financial Supervision review
PDF 259kWORD 90k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 with recommendations to the Commission on the European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS) Review (2013/2166(INL))
P7_TA(2014)0202A7-0133/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 225 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on European Union macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board(1),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority)(2),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority)(3),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority)(4),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1096/2010 of 17 November 2010 conferring specific tasks upon the European Central Bank concerning the functioning of the European Systemic Risk Board(5),

–  having regard to Directive 2010/78/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 amending Directives 98/26/EC, 2002/87/EC, 2003/6/EC, 2003/41/EC, 2003/71/EC, 2004/39/EC, 2004/109/EC, 2005/60/EC, 2006/48/EC, 2006/49/EC and 2009/65/EC in respect of the powers of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority)(6),

–  having regard to its position of 12 September 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) as regards its interaction with Council Regulation (EU) No .../... conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions(7),

–  having regard to its position of 12 September 2013, with a view to the adoption of Council regulation (EU) No .../2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions(8),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 3 June 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Banking Authority(9) and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(10),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 3 June 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority(11) and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(12),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 3 June 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Securities and Markets Authority(13) and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(14),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 18 May 2010 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 98/26/EC, 2002/87/EC, 2003/6/EC, 2003/41/EC, 2003/71/EC, 2004/39/EC, 2004/109/EC, 2005/60/EC, 2006/48/EC, 2006/49/EC and 2009/65/EC in respect of the powers of the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets(15) and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(16),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 25 May 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community macro prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board(17)and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(18),

–  having regard to the report of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 25 May 2010 on the proposal for a Council regulation entrusting the European Central Bank with specific tasks concerning the functioning of the European Systemic Risk Board(19) and to its position of 22 September 2010 on that proposal(20),

–  having regard to the opinion of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 1 March 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Banking Authority for the financial year 2011,

–  having regard to the opinion of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 1 March 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority for the financial year 2011,

–  having regard to the opinion of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 1 March 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Securities and Markets Authority for the financial year 2011,

–  having regard to the opinion of its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 5 September 2013 on the General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2014 all sections,

–  having regard to the Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision endorsed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision on 13 to 14 September 2012(21),

–  having regard to the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions of Financial Stability Board published in October 2011,

–  having regard to the Good practice principles on supervisory colleges issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in October 2010(22),

–  having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 22 January 2014 in Case C-270/12 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Council of the European Union and European Parliament,

–  having regard to Rules 42 and 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0133/2014),

A.  whereas the financial crisis has demonstrated that inadequate risk management and inefficient, uneven and fragmented supervision of financial markets have contributed to financial instability and a lack of consumer protection in financial services;

B.  whereas the European Parliament was strongly in favour of the creation of the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs), has provided for more powers in coordination and direct supervision for the ESAs, and believes that they are key actors in the creation of more stable and safer financial markets and that the Union needs stronger and better coordinated supervision at Union level;

C.  whereas the establishment of the European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS) has enhanced the quality and consistency of financial supervision in the internal market; whereas this is an evolutionary process in which Members of the Supervisory Board should focus on Union values and interests;

D.  whereas, since the establishment of the ESFS, micro-prudential supervision in the Union has developed at a faster pace than macro-prudential surveillance;

E.  whereas powers for micro-and macro-economic supervision are concentrated in the hands of the European Central Bank (ECB) that has to take appropriate measures to avoid conflicts of interest due to the ECB's tasks in monetary policy;

F.  whereas the ESAs should prevent fragmentation of financial markets in the Union;

G.  whereas the ESAs are tasked, inter alia, with convergence and with assisting raising the quality of day-to-day supervision, and there is a need to develop performance indicators that focus on the regulatory outcomes achieved in day to day supervision;

H.  whereas the ESAs have largely fulfilled their mandate to contribute to legislative procedures and to propose technical standards;

I.  whereas, although the regulations establishing the ESAs are almost identical, their scope has evolved very differently;

J.  whereas in respect of regulatory technical standards (RTS) and implementing technical standards (ITS) the Commission has the responsibility to adopt, with or without amendment, the drafts proposed by the ESA, and should provide detailed reasons for departing from those drafts;

K.  whereas direct supervision of credit rating agencies by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) may enhance the quality of supervision in this area;

L.  whereas RTSs are adopted as delegated acts and guarantee the involvement of the ESAs in areas for which they have greater technical expertise for drafting lower levels of legislation;

M.  whereas paragraph 2 of the Common Understanding between Parliament, the Council and the Commission on delegated acts states that the three institutions shall cooperate throughout the procedure leading to the adoption of delegated acts with a view to a smooth exercise of delegated power and an effective control of this power by Parliament and the Council;

N.  whereas the establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) was an important next step towards coherent supervision of banks in the euro area and in the other participating Member States;

O.  whereas the creation of the SSM has very important implications for the institutional setting up of micro- and macro-prudential supervision in the Union given the powers attributed to the ECB in those fields;

P.  whereas the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) has provided useful macroeconomic recommendations for the legislative process which were in the areas of money market funds, capital requirements, the mortgage credit directive or symmetrical long-term guarantee measures in Solvency II(23) only partly taken into account by the Commission and the co-legislators;

Q.  whereas the ESRB does not have a mandatory role in legislation, even where macro-economic issues are concerned;

R.  whereas the Advisory Scientific Committee has played an important and constructive role driving the ESRB's agenda, in particular by encouraging the ESRB to focus on controversial and fundamental issues;

S.  whereas some of the ESRB proposals might have been taken into account by the co-legislators or the Commission, if they were issued at an earlier stage of the legislative process;

T.  whereas in the course of the financial crisis the ESRB was established to prevent further crisis and to preserve financial stability;

U.  whereas the systemic risk posed by very low interest rates kept for an excessively long period has never been mentioned by a statement issued by the ESRB;

V.  whereas monetary policy can have significant influence on credit and asset price bubbles and therefore a conflict of interests between the monetary policy of the ECB and the ESRB's activity might arise;

W.  whereas the ESRB following the first proposals of the Commission was supposed to have more than twice as many members of staff than it actually has and the fluctuation of qualified staff is detrimental to its work;

X.  whereas the statements by the ESRB on the EMIR regulation have not been taken into account by ESMA;

Y.  whereas the establishment of the ESRB outside the ECB would, due to Article 130 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), not allow the ESRB to address the ECB in opinions, recommendations or warnings;

Z.  whereas the structure of the ESRB and the size of its decision-making body hinder a swift decision-making process;

AA.  whereas the ESRB Recommendation 2011/3 states that central banks should have a leading role in macro-prudential supervision and, accordingly, representatives of central banks should necessarily be members of the ESRB decision-making bodies;

AB.  whereas the membership of the ESRB is strongly based around central banks which have an important role but also have similar perspectives;

AC.  whereas major parts of the sectoral legislation conferring specific competences to the ESAs did not yet enter into force, thereby making it impossible for the ESAs to fulfil their tasks equally;

AD.  whereas legislation relating to financial markets, financial services and financial products is highly fragmented and the multitude of legal texts causes loopholes, duplication of reporting obligations, institutional divergence and regulatory overlap and can cause unintended consequences and negative impacts on the real economy;

AE.  whereas the United States of America created a federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with a strong mandate;

AF.  whereas transparency and independence are an important ingredient of good governance and it is important to increase the transparency of the work of the ESAs and their independence;

AG.  whereas even though the ESAs generally operate in a transparent way through information on their websites, there is a need for increased transparency regarding their work and progress on advice and proposals as well as more information regarding issues such as task forces and working groups;

AH.  whereas the Commission is involved formally and informally in the operations of the ESAs, its involvement is not yet be on a transparent basis, and its role should be aligned with that of the Parliament and the Council, so that the independence of the ESAs is not called into question;

AI.  whereas the benefit of stakeholder groups contributions to the work of the ESAs seems to have been limited;

AJ.  whereas increased transparency is of utmost importance for the Stakeholder groups for creating well considered and workable rules for the financial markets and cooperation with market participants would work much better if those groups were more transparent regarding the composition of the group and the detailed duties assigned to the group;

AK.  whereas the ESAs should support the Commission by making their expertise in financial services available in a transparent way;

AL.  whereas the ESAs should assist the Commission and the co-legislators by assessing the extent to which legislation is meeting its regulatory objectives, and in the interests of transparency should make that assessment public. The ESAs should provide formal opinions on proposed Union legislation and assess the strength of the evidence and analysis contained in impact assessments of legislative proposal;

AM.  whereas in Case C-270/12, the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union indicated a potentially enhanced scope for activities of the European System of Financial Supervisors under Article 114 TFEU in comparison to the prevailing interpretation of the judgment in Case C-9/56 Meroni(24) at the time when the ESFS was created and therefore the Commission should asses its potential implications in the forthcoming review of the ESFS;

AN.  whereas supervision by the ECB of financial conglomerates active in banking and insurance business is limited by the legal basis for the SSM;

AO.  whereas the creation of the SSM modifies the underlying supervisory scheme of the ESFS and creates a certain degree of asymmetry between the different authorities and their scopes of supervision;

AP.  whereas after the entry into force of the SSM it is particularly important to avoid regulatory arbitrage, guarantee a level-playing field, ensure the good functioning of the internal market, prevent distortions and preserve fundamental freedoms;

AQ.  whereas the ECB and the ESAs use different reporting standards and intervals and the creation of the SSM might pose a serious risk of duplication of reporting requirements, if national authorities do not cooperate sufficiently with the SSM and ESAs;

AR.  whereas the right of investigation against possible breaches of Union law and the possibility of binding mediation has seldom been used and the ESAs have only very limited possibilities to initiate investigations into alleged breaches of law by national competent authorities;

AS.  whereas concerning possible breaches of Union law the decisions affecting national supervisory authorities are taken by national supervisors within the ESA's Boards of Supervisors;

AT.  whereas under the influence of the binding mediation powers of the ESAs many useful solutions were found between national supervisory authorities;

AU.  whereas it has been difficult for national representatives to separate their role of head of a national competent authority and European decision-making challenging their ability to genuinely adhere to the requirement to act independently and objectively in the sole interest of the Union as a whole in accordance with Article 42 of the ESA regulations;

AV.  whereas peer pressure has not worked as envisaged during the original design of the ESAs and is necessary to enable the ESAs to stimulate its development;

AW.  whereas some ESAs are still struggling to collect the information necessary for their work in the necessary format and whereas EBA had to carry out stress tests, but in some cases neither had the necessary legal power to collect the data required for the tests nor the legal powers to verify data which appeared to be imprecise;

AX.  whereas the ESAs may refrain from certain necessary requests for information in anticipation of a rejection in their Boards of Supervisors;

AY.  whereas recently agreed legislation has enhanced the powers of the ESAs to investigate alleged breaches or non-application of Union law obliging competent authorities to provide the relevant ESA with all information which is considered necessary, including how the legislation is applied in accordance with Union law;

AZ.  whereas in course of the establishment of the SSM some progress was made in giving EBA the necessary powers to collect directly information but such capacity needs to be given to the other ESAs;

BA.  whereas guidelines have proven to be a useful and necessary tool to fill gaps in regulation where no powers for the ESAs were provided for in the sectorial legislation;

BB.  whereas the ESAs do have the mandate to monitor the implementation of Union law in the Member States but lack the resources to assess the actual enforcement;

BC.  whereas MiFID I Directive(25) is implemented in all Member States, but some Member States refuse to apply and enforce the rules on consumer protection in practice;

BD.  whereas the participation of ESA representatives in colleges of supervisors has improved the functioning of colleges, but the colleges have only made limited progress in enhancing supervisory convergence;

BE.  whereas the voting rights in the Boards of Supervisors of the ESAs are not proportionate to the size of the relevant Member States, as is currently the case in the ECB and other European agencies;

BF.  whereas the changes in the original voting system of EBA which has proven to ensure a fair treatment of Member States and smooth working conditions for the ESAs were a concession to some Member States and made the decision making procedures in the Board of Supervisors more onerous and cumbersome;

BG.  whereas there should be no age or gender discrimination in the appointment of ESAs Chairpersons, a position that should be widely advertised across the Union;

BH.  whereas the Chair, Executive Director and the members of the Board of Supervisors and Management Boards should be in a position to act independently and only in the interest of the Union;

BI.  whereas some national supervisors from Member States have had difficulties to meet their compulsory contributions to the ESAs’ budgets;

BJ.  whereas compulsory contributions of Member States conflict with the independence of the ESAs;

BK.  whereas the ESAs stated having difficulties in employing staff members of a certain seniority and are limited in fulfilling their mandate by a lack of resources, staff and available resources do not reflect the tasks required to be carried out;

BL.  whereas the current financing of ESAs, with a mixed-financing arrangement, is inflexible, creates administrative burden, and poses a threat to the agencies' independence;

BM.  whereas the regulatory mandate to develop implementing and delegated acts has been a priority for the ESAs in their setting-up phase and has had a disproportionate weight in their workload compared to other responsibilities;

BN.  whereas the ESAs have been unable to devote sufficient resources to the core function of undertaking economic analyses of financial markets (as prescribed by Article 8(1)(g) of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010, and (EU) No 1095/2010), which is an essential foundation for drafting high quality rules;

BO.  whereas the common mandate to produce a consumer trends report requires that all Member States collect information about those trends;

BP.  whereas EBA still lacks a legal basis in payment services and in the consumer credit Directive(26) inter alia;

BQ.  whereas some requirements foreseen by the ESAs for all market participants were considered by some market participants to be onerous, inappropriate and not proportional to the size and business model of the addressees and sectoral legislation did not always provide sufficient flexibility for the application of Union law;

BR.  whereas the ECB has the right to participate in Council working groups while the ESAs are largely absent from the formal decision making process;

BS.  whereas in the field of consumer protection, the efforts, deployed resources and results of the ESAs differed and were considerably low with regard to EBA;

BT.  whereas a weak corporate governance and system of disclosure were significant contributing factors to the current crisis;

BU.  whereas the new Basel supervisory principles include two new principles on corporate governance and transparency and disclosure;

BV.  whereas misselling, unfair competition and rent seeking behaviour may harm consumers;

BW.  whereas the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) and EBA did not provide substantial consumer trend reports;

BX.  whereas the publication of the Financial Stability Report of the ESRB as promised by ECB’s President Mr Mario Draghi is still due;

BY.  whereas the need to take decisions on consumer protection issues requires an equivalent level of expertise among members of the ESAs even though some of them have not a parallel mandate in their home Member State;

BZ.  whereas the current safeguard clauses in Article 38(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 limit the possibilities for mediation pursuant to Articles 18 and 19 thereof, in particular in cases of cross-border group resolution under the bank recovery and resolution Directive because final decision making powers are left with the Member State which has fiscal responsibility for the institution in question;

1.  Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament, by 1 July 2014, legislative proposals for the revision of Regulations (EU) No 1092/2010, (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010, (EU) No 1095/2010 and (EU) No 1096/2010, following the detailed recommendations made in the Annex hereto, based on the experience gained since the ESAs were established and on an in-depth analysis of the legal basis and alternatives available to Article 114 TFEU, including recent case-law;

2.  Confirms that the recommendations respect fundamental rights and the principle of subsidiarity;

3.  Considers that the financial implications of the requested proposals should be covered by appropriate budgetary allocations from the Union budget, while taking into account the option for the ESAs to deduct fees from entities under their supervision;

4.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying detailed recommendations to the Commission and the Council.

ANNEX

DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO THE CONTENT OF THE PROPOSAL REQUESTED

The European Parliament considers the legislative act or the legislative acts to be adopted should provide for the following:

The European System of Financial Supervision should be further adapted to the SSM as follows:

–  Enhance the mandate for all ESAs for binding and non-binding mediation especially with regard to the ECB;

–  clarify the mandate of the ESAs to carry out binding mediation in areas involving the exercise of supervisory judgement;

–  Give the ESAs the possibility to trigger binding and non-binding mediation where provided for in sectorial legislation on the own initiative of the management board;

–  Enhance the powers of all ESAs to conduct stress tests to have at least the possibilities comparable to those given to EBA in the course of the establishment of the SSM;

–  Ensure that the ESAs, the ESRB, national supervisory authorities and the ECB in the case of those Member States participating in the SSM have access to the same supervisory information, which has to be provided where possible in the same frequency and a common electronic format which has to be determined by the ESAs, however, the common format does not entail any new requirement to supply data in accordance with international standards, such as IFRS, and in addition adequate transitional periods will be allowed for the compulsory introduction of the common format;

–  Make sure the ESRB may further develop as a strong network ensuring a permanent monitoring and analysis of systemic risks among decision makers, developing a culture of dialogue between micro-prudential supervision and macro-prudential oversight;

–  Provide for mechanisms enhancing the independence of the ESRB, while ensuring interaction with the ECB;

–  Ensure the necessary operational changes to the ESRB as a consequence of the establishment of the SSM, including the possibility for the ESRB to address warnings and recommendations to the ECB and the SSM;

–  Develop a single point of entry for any data collection, which will be responsible for the selection, validation and transmission of the supervisory and statistical data;

–  Enlarge the role of the scientific committee of the ESRB;

–  Appoint an executive Chairperson of the ESRB;

–  Assess and clarify the mandate and tasks of the ESRB in order to avoid conflicts of interest arising between micro-prudential supervision and supervisory tools and macro-economic oversight;

–  Strengthen the coordinating role of the Steering Committee of the ESRB and adjusting its composition;

–  Expand the list of possible addressees of warnings and recommendations issued by the ESRB to include the ECB (in its roles as defined in the SSM) and national macro-prudential authorities;

–  include the ESRB recommendations in the European Semester through country-specific recommendations and the recommendations to the Union as a whole;

Where experience has shown the necessity for revision, new legislative acts shall improve the functioning of the ESFS by:

Chairpersons

–  enhancing the powers of the chairpersons of all three ESAs to take technical and operational decisions or to request information from other supervisory authorities in line with the mandate of the respective ESA and facilitating the delegation of further competences from the Boards of Supervisors to the chairperson;

–  empowering the chairpersons to issue peer reviews pursuant to Article 30 of the ESA Regulations;

–  granting the chairpersons and the executive directors the right to vote in the Board of Supervisors;

–  ensuring that the chairpersons of ESAs will be empowered to appoint the chairpersons of internal committees and working groups pursuant to Article 41 of the ESA Regulations;

–  ensuring that the Chairpersons of the ESAs and the ESRB are formally invited to ECOFIN meetings at least twice per year to report on their activities and work programme;

–  ensuring that gender balance is actively pursued within the framework of the selection procedures of chairpersons and their deputies, the process is transparent and is planned in a way that allows Parliament to exercise its role in such proceedings;

–  ensuring not withstanding respect for the principle in the previous paragraph that ESA chairpersons are selected solely on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of financial institutions and markets, and of experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation;

Governance: organisation, decision making, independence and transparency

–  amending Article 45 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 and transforming the Management Boards of the three ESAs into independent bodies, staffed by three professionals with a European mandate, appointed by Parliament, the chairperson of the ESAs and the executive directors and granting the members of the Management Board the right to vote on the Board of Supervisors to ensure more independence from national interests. The Chairperson of the Management Board shall coincide with the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors and have a casting vote both in the Management Board and in the Board of Supervisors;

–  amending Article 40 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 and modifying the composition of the Board of Supervisors which should be composed of the head of the national competent authorities plus the members of the Management Board;

–  reallocating the tasks between the Management Board and the Board of Supervisors in a way that the Board of Supervisors will focus on giving strategic guidance to the ESAs work, adopting technical standards, general guidelines and recommendations and decisions on temporary interventions and other decisions are taken by the Management Board with, in certain cases a right for the Board of Supervisors to object to the Management Boards proposal;

–  granting the ESAs an independent budget line as for the European Data Protection Supervisor funded by the contributions from market participants and the Union budget;

–  enhancing the independence of the ESAs from the Commission, especially with regard to day-to-day operations;

–  establishing more streamlined decision making processes within the Boards of Supervisors for all three ESAs;

–  simplifying the voting mechanisms and reintroducing the same voting rules for all three ESAs, based on the current voting mechanisms of ESMA and EIOPA;

–  enhancing and safeguarding the independence of the ESAs from the European Commission by establishing formal procedures and disclosure obligations on communications, legal opinions and formal or informal oral advice provided by the Commission;

–  ensuring that on questions concerning consumer protection for members of the Board of Supervisors which do not have a mandate for consumer protection in their Member State are accompanied by a representative from the national authority in charge in the relevant board meetings;

–  develop quick and effective decision making procedures within the Joint Committee to allow swifter decisions and reduce the possibilities for objections;

–  enhancing the flexibility of the ESAs to employ specialised staff for specific tasks, also for limited periods;

–  enhancing transparency of stakeholder involvement and potential conflicts of interest and developing a stricter regime on cooling-off periods, in particular through a greater outreach to retail groups, efficient consultations and more transparent processes;

–  revising the system of the stakeholder groups including their structure, their composition and resources and rebalancing the composition of the stakeholder groups to ensure that input from consumers and non-industry stakeholders will be taken into account;

–  establish an Economic Analysis Unit to provide fully evidenced cost benefit analysis of ITS, RTS and guidelines proposed, as well as to provide input to the opinions given to the Commission, Parliament and the Council in preparing new legislation as well as in reviews of existing legislation;

Single rule book and single market

–  revising the scope of action and the list of sectorial legislation in Article 1(1) of the ESA Regulations;

–  requiring the Commission and, where relevant, the ESAs to provide a timely response to comments from Members of the European Parliament on draft RTS, in particular where the views expressed by Members of the European Parliament are not reflected in the regulatory technical standards adopted by the Commission;

–  requiring the Commission where it does not endorse the draft RTS or ITS proposed by the ESAs to publish its reasons and fully evidenced cost-benefit analysis to justify the decision;

–  establish a formal method of communication with the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition to ensure that financial services legislation supports fair and sustainable competition in the single market and avoids anticompetitive imbalances occurring as a result of legislation, both at the level of consumers access to retail services and how they differ across the Union as well as at the level of professional counterparties and the wholesale markets;

–  giving the ESAs the mandate to report to the Commission where national legislation or differences in national legislation hamper the functioning of the single market;

–  giving the ESAs the mandate and the powers to identify price differences across Member States and analyse particular markets where rent seeking behaviour may be evident;

–  enhancing the mandate of the ESAs for contributing to the dissemination of financial data and market discipline by requiring them to publish on their websites information concerning individual financial institutions which it considers is necessary to ensure the transparency of financial markets;

–  clarifying that guidelines to improve common standards for the whole internal market pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 can be issued only based on the respective empowerment in sectorial legislation and clarifying the relevant Recitals, which can secure democratic legitimacy;

–  clarifying that guidelines pursuant to Article 9(1) of the ESA regulations are identical with guidelines pursuant to Article 16 thereof;

–  ensuring a level playing field between all financial institutions within the Union and requiring the ESAs to respect the principal of proportionality especially with regard to small and medium-sized market participants when carrying out their tasks and developing their supervisory methods, practices and handbooks;

–  requiring the ESAs to carry out assessments on the impact of proposed measures on small businesses and barriers to entry to the financial sector;

–  enhancing the ESAs' investigatory powers with regard to possible breaches of Union law and the regulatory technical standards they have drafted;

–  giving the ESAs a clear mandate in the field of corporate governance, transparency and disclosure in order to increase the comparability of information across the Union and market discipline, allow all stakeholders to understand and compare the risk profile and practices and to promote public confidence;

–  ensuring that Parliament will have at least three months to consider a rejection of delegated or implementing acts;

–  providing for the mandatory early involvement of the ESAs and of the ESRB in the preparation of legislative processes concerning their fields of expertise;

–  ensure that Parliament have the possibility to benefit from the expertise of the ESAs and the ESRB including in the framing and timing of proposed technical standards and to ask questions;

Supervisory cooperation and convergence

–  enhancing the balance in the supervision of the three sectors by fostering the role of ESMA and EIOPA in the ESFS in order to avoid that banking-oriented regulation will be adapted and applied to other sectors inappropriately while maintaining a level playing field;

–  revising the ESAs peer review model and developing a more independent assessment model, such as that of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (FSAP);

–  establish an appropriate mechanism for, where deemed necessary, an assessment of supervisory practices in the Member States in dialogue with the competent authorities by means of onsite visits and, where appropriate, followed up by recommendations for improvements;

–  enhancing the responsibility of EBA to develop and update the supervisory handbook on the supervision of financial institutions and giving ESMA and EIOPA similar responsibilities in order to improve consistent supervision and a common supervisory culture in Europe;

–  ensuring that the consumer protection work of the ESAs is not hampered by differences between the legal bases of the ESAs, in their respective founding regulations and in the mandates assigned to them in the sectorial legislation;

–  clarifying that the ESAs ability to settle disagreements is a separate power from their ability to investigate potential breaches of Union law and can be used to promote the coordination of supervisory consistency and convergence of supervisory practices without additional empowerment in sectorial legislation;

–  expanding the mandate of supervisory colleges in supervision and improving the role of the ESAs as lead supervisor within the colleges;

–  ensure, in cases where the SSM is the assigned coordinator for the supplementary supervision of financial conglomerates, that the supervision of the insurance undertaking or group being part of the conglomerate provides for an at least equal involvement of the supervisory authorities responsible for the insurance undertaking or group;

–  requiring the ESAs to identify overlap in their mandates and to make recommendations for clustering revisions and reviews of legislation to enable stronger coherence and a streamlined approach towards cross-sector and cross-legislation consistency, in particular as regards consumer protection rules, in order to increase the coherence of the single rule-book;

–  enhancing the role of the ESAs and the ESRB in representing the EU within international organisations and granting them the same membership status as national supervisory authorities;

–  ensuring that ESAs, jointly within the joint committee, elaborate an structured policy and strategy, listing their priorities and defining their respective roles and its articulation with the NCAs, and issue annually a joint and horizontal report on consumer protection;

Enhanced powers

–  enhancing the investigatory powers of the ESAs and increasing their resources in order to directly monitor the appropriate implementation of rules derived from legal acts and the compliance with other decisions adopted under the Union legal framework;

–  introducing direct supervision, including stress tests, by the ESAs of highly integrated pan European entities or activities, giving ESMA and EIOPA the power, the mandate and the resources to perform these activities and to monitor the consistency of the relevant recovery and resolution planning;

–  giving EBA the power, the mandate and the resources to develop measures to identify new risks for consumers in the banking sector;

–  strengthening the legal basis for the ESAs work on consumer protection, by bringing legislation containing consumer protection measures into the ESAs’ scope of action; extending the definition of financial institutions to ensure that the same activities are subject to the same regulation and updating references to competent authorities for the purposes of ESAs regulations;

–  giving the ESAs a mandate and the power to set standards for national complaints handling and the collection of complaints data;

ESRB

–  ensuring that the ESRB will be represented in the meetings of the Economic and Financial Committee;

–  enabling the ESRB to issue EU-wide guidance to Members States on macro-prudential instruments as leverage, loan to value and debt to income ratios;

–  enabling the ESRB to address warnings and recommendations to the ECB in its role in monetary policy as well as in its function as single supervisor (SSM);

–  revising and simplifying Article 15 of the ESRB Regulation in order to facilitate data collection by the ESRB, establishing swifter and easier decision-making on data requests for the ESRB and ensuring that the ESRB will have access to real-time data;

–  revising the structure of the ESRB to allow swifter decision-making and stronger accountability;

–  strengthening the ESRBs contribution to international macro-prudential regulatory fora;

–  expanding the analytical resources available to the ESRB Secretariat and providing the Advisory Scientific Committee of the ESRB with more resources;

–  ensuring that the ESRB will be consulted where stress testing regimes are developed by competent authorities including the ECB or by the ESAs;

–  ensuring that representatives from the ESRB will be invited as observers to relevant meetings and discussions within the ECB, including the meetings of the Financial Stability Committee;

–  revising Article 18 of the ESRB Regulation on publication of warnings and recommendations in order to strengthen the ESRBs public profile and the follow up its warnings and recommendations;

Before the legislative act acts are adopted, the following questions should be assessed thoroughly, considering that even during the worst times of the financial crisis Member States were not willing to confer on the ESAs substantial supervisory power:

–  whether the current model of three separate supervisory authorities is the best solution for coherent supervision;

–  whether the European Commission has stepped beyond its role as observer on the ESAs’ Board of Supervisors;

–  whether in the light of the independence of the ESAs their strong dependence on the European Commission is hampering the development of the ESAs and whether transparency in this relationship should be enhanced;

–  which consequences implicit in the establishment of the SSM on the financial supervision in the Union as a whole;

–  whether, regarding banking supervision, the creation of the SSM requires a full revision of the tasks and the mandate of EBA;

–  whether the multitude and partial overlapping in Union legislation on financial regulation creates loopholes and differing definitions and whether this could be overcome by a comprehensive European Financial Code;

–  how reporting to the ESAs and national supervisors could be standardised, optimised and simplified for market participants;

–  how the emergency powers of the ESAs should be maintained;

–  whether the possibility for the ESAs to suspend temporarily the application of a particular rule could be useful to prevent unintended consequences due to extraordinary market developments;

–  whether merging responsibilities of the ESAs i.e. for consumer protection in standing committees under the responsibility of the Joint Committee could enhance efficiency and minimise duplication of tasks;

–  whether an Insurance Union following the model of the Banking Union is necessary and what roles the ESFS could take in an Insurance Union;

–  whether EBA and EIOPA should receive further resources to monitor and promote supervisory convergence with regard to internal models for capital requirements;

–  whether the recently created US financial consumer protection bureau's mandate, powers and resources could serve as a model for the ESFS;

–  whether further fees from financial industry could be an additional source of revenue for the ESAs for example when accepting fees from central counterparties (CCPs) from third countries;

–  whether the ESAs could contribute more efficiently to enhance financial literacy through the operation of a European financial Programme for International Assessment (PISA) in analogy to the OECD's PISA;

–  whether the three ESAs and ESRB should issue a common newsletter.

(1) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 12.
(3) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48.
(4) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 84.
(5) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 162.
(6) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 120.
(7) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0371.
(8) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0372.
(9) A7-0166/2010.
(10) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 214.
(11) A7-0170/2010.
(12) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 209.
(13) A7-0169/2010.
(14) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 217.
(15) A7-0163/2010.
(16) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 212.
(17) A7-0168/2010.
(18) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 210.
(19) A7-0167/2010.
(20) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 216.
(21) http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs230.pdf.
(22) http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs177.pdf.
(23) Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1).
(24) Case 9/56 Meroni v High Authority [1957 and 1958] ECR 133.
(25) Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC (OJ L 145, 30.4.2004, p. 1).
(26) Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ L 133, 22.5.2008, p. 66).


Public access to documents 2011-2013
PDF 324kWORD 69k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on public access to documents (Rule 104(7)) for the years 2011-2013 (2013/2155(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0203A7-0148/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Articles 1, 10 and 16 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and to Articles 15 and 298 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to Article 11 of the TEU and the obligation of the institutions to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and notably to its Articles 41 (right to good administration) and 42 (right of access to documents),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents(1),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 amending Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 September 2011 on public access to documents for the years 2009-2010(3),

–  having regard to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the General Court on access to documents, and notably to the judgments of the Court of Justice in the cases Access Info Europe (case C-280/11 P), Donau Chemie (C-536/11), IFAW v Commission (C-135/11)(4), My Travel (C-506/08 P), Turco (joined cases C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P), and to the judgments of the General Court in the cases of In ‘t Veld v Council (T-529/09), Germany v Commission (T-59/09), EnBW v Commission (T-344/08), Sviluppo Globale (T-6/10), Internationaler Hilfsfonds (T-300/10), European Dynamics (T-167/10), Jordana (T-161/04) and CDC (T-437/08),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 30 April 2008 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2008)0229),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 20 March 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2011)0137),

–  having regard to the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents of 2008,

–  having regard to the Annual Reports for 2011 and 2012 from the Council, the Commission and the European Parliament on access to documents, submitted pursuant to Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001,

–  having regard to the Framework Agreement on Relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission of 2010,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 November 2002 between the European Parliament and the Council concerning access by the European Parliament to sensitive information of the Council in the field of security and defence policy,

–  having regard to its resolutions of 12 September 2013 on the annual report of the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2012(5), and 17 December 2009 on improvements needed to the legal framework for access to documents following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty (Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001)(6),

–  having regard to the European Ombudsman’s Annual Report for 2012,

–  having regard to Rules 48 and 104(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0148/2014),

A.  whereas the Treaty of Lisbon has been in force for four years; whereas Article 15 TFEU establishes a constitutional framework for EU institutional transparency and lays down the fundamental right of access to documents of EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies for EU citizens and any natural or legal person residing in a Member State; whereas this right should be exercised in compliance with the general principles and limits laid down by the regulations adopted by Parliament and the Council;

B.  whereas Article 298 TFEU provides for an open, efficient and independent European administration;

C.  whereas it is a general rule that access to legislative documents should be fully provided, while exceptions regarding non-legislative documents should be narrowed;

D.  whereas transparency is essential to a democratic European Union of citizens in which they can fully participate in the democratic process and exercise public scrutiny; whereas transparent administration benefits the interests of citizens, the fight against corruption and the legitimacy of the Union’s political system and legislation;

E.  whereas broad public access to documents is a key element of a lively democracy;

F.  whereas in a healthy democracy citizens should not have to rely on whistleblowers in order to ensure transparency of their governments’ competences and activities;

G.  whereas citizens have a right to know how the decision-making process works and how their representatives act, to hold them accountable and to know how public money is allocated and spent;

H.  whereas the EU legislation on access to documents is still not being properly applied by the Union’s administration; whereas the exceptions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 are being applied routinely rather than exceptionally by the administration;

I.  whereas, according to case-law, if an institution decides to refuse access to a document which it has been asked to disclose, it must, in principle, explain how disclosure of that document could specifically and actually undermine the interest protected by the exception – among those provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (see In ‘t Veld v Council(7));

J.  whereas a specific and foreseeable threat to the interest in question may not be established by a mere fear of disclosing to EU citizens differences of opinion between the institutions regarding the legal basis for the international activity of the European Union and, thus, of creating doubts as to the lawfulness of that activity (see In ‘t Veld v Council(8));

K.  whereas six out of the ten European Ombudsman’s ‘star case’ investigations of 2012 concerned transparency;

L.  whereas the statistics for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 show a decrease in the number of initial requests in all three institutions;

M.  whereas the number of specified documents requested has decreased in Parliament (from 1 666 in 2011 to 777 in 2012); whereas, however, the percentage of requests for unspecified documents, e.g. ‘all documents relating to ...’, has increased in Parliament (from 35,5 % in 2011 to 53,5 % in 2012); whereas the number of Council documents requested has decreased (from 9 641 in 2011 to 6 166 in 2012)(9);

N.  whereas the quantitative data presented in the Annual Reports of 2012 indicate that both the Commission (from 12 % in 2011 to 17 % in 2012) and the Council (from 12 % in 2011 to 21 % in 2012) have increasingly fully refused access, while Parliament shows stable figures for full refusal of access (5 % in both 2011 and 2012);

O.  whereas the Commission shows a significant increase in confirmatory applications (from 165 in 2011 to 229 in 2012), resulting in a slight increase in fully revised decisions, a decrease in partially revised decisions and an increase in confirmed decisions, while both the Council and Parliament show relatively stable figures for confirmatory applications (Council: from 27 in 2011 to 23 in 2012; Parliament: from 4 in 2011 to 6 in 2012);

P.  whereas a number of applications have resulted in complaints being lodged with the European Ombudsman (Commission: from 10 in 2011 to 20 in 2012; Council: from 2 in 2011 to 4 in 2012; Parliament: 1 in both 2011 and 2012);

Q.  whereas the European Ombudsman closed a number of complaints in 2011 and 2012 with critical remarks or suggesting further action (Commission: from 10 out of 18 in 2011 to 8 out of 10 in 2012; Council: no information; Parliament: from 0 out of 0 in 2011 to 1 out of 1 in 2012);

R.  whereas a number of applications for access to documents have resulted in cases being lodged with the General Court or taken on appeal to the Court of Justice (Commission: from 15 cases and 3 appeals in 2011 to 14 cases and 1 appeal in 2012; Council: from 1 case and 2 appeals in 2011 to 1 appeal in 2012(10); Parliament: none in 2011 or 2012);

S.  whereas the General Court has largely ruled in favour of more transparency, or else has delivered clarification to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in a number of cases (Commission: 5 out of 6(11) in 2011 and 5 out of 5 in 2012(12); Council: 1 out of 1 in 2011 (Access Info Europe, T-233/09) and 1 out of 4 in 2012 (In ‘t Veld, T-529/09); Parliament: 1 out of 2 in 2011(13) (Toland, T-471/08) and 1 out of 1 in 2012 (Kathleen Egan and Margaret Hackett, T-190/10));

T.  whereas the Court of Justice has largely ruled in favour of more transparency in the following cases: Commission: 1 out of 1 in 2011 (My Travel, C-506/08) and 1 out of 3 in 2012 (IFAW, C-135/11 P)(14); Council and Parliament: no rulings in 2011 or 2012;

U.  whereas the annual reports of the Commission, the Council and Parliament do not provide comparable statistics; whereas the three institutions do not observe the same standards of completeness in presenting statistics;

V.  whereas the reason most often invoked for exception is ‘the protection of the decision- making process’, as used by the Commission and the Council following initial requests (Commission: 17 % in 2011 and 20 % in 2012; Council: 41 % in both 2011 and 2012); whereas ‘the protection of international relations’ was the second reason most often invoked by the Council; whereas in the case of Parliament, ‘the protection of privacy and integrity of the individual’ was the commonest exception;

W.  whereas the institutions have failed to implement Articles 15(2) and 15(3), subparagraph 5 of the TFEU, regarding the obligation for the European Parliament and the Council to meet in public when considering a draft legislative act, and to publish the documents relating to the legislative procedures under the terms laid down by the regulations referred to in Article 15(3), subparagraph 2;

X.  whereas Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 provides for an exception to transparency ‘if disclosure of the document would seriously undermine the institution’s decision-making process, unless there is an overriding public interest in disclosure’; whereas this provision predates the Treaty of Lisbon and needs to be brought in line with Article 15 TFEU;

Y.  whereas the ruling of the Court of Justice in the Access Info Europe case(15) has confirmed that publishing the names of Member States and their proposals is not harmful to the decision-making process; whereas the General Court had ruled in its earlier decision in this case that ‘if citizens are to be able to exercise their democratic rights, they must be in a position to follow in detail the decision-making process’;

Z.  whereas international agreements have binding effects and impact on EU legislation; whereas documents related to them should be public in principle, without prejudice to legitimate exceptions; whereas the application of the exception for the protection of international relations applies as stated in paragraph 19 of In ‘t Veld v Council (T-529/09);

AA.  whereas trilogues between the Commission, Parliament and the Council are defining for the formation of EU legislation; whereas trilogues are not public and documents regarding informal trilogues, including agendas and summary reports, are by default made available neither to the public nor to Parliament, which is in contradiction with Article 15 TFEU;

AB.  whereas documents produced or possessed by the Presidency of the Council in relation to its work in that role should be accessible according to EU transparency rules;

AC.  whereas the negotiations on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 have been in deadlock; whereas the new instrument will need to provide for significantly more transparency than the status quo;

AD.  whereas requests for in camera meetings in Parliament should, in principle, be considered along the lines of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; whereas such requests shall be evaluated by Parliament on a case-by-case basis, and shall not be granted automatically;

AE.  whereas the classification of documents into levels of confidentiality falling under the scope of the 2010 Framework Agreement on relations between Parliament and the Commission, or as ‘sensitive documents’ under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, should be made on the basis of careful and specific consideration; whereas overclassification leads to unnecessary and disproportionate secrecy of documents and to meetings being held in camera without proper justification;

AF.  whereas transparency remains the rule, including in relation to a cartel leniency programme; whereas an automatic ban on disclosure is a violation of the rule of transparency, as laid down in the Treaties; whereas secrecy is the exception, and must be justified on a case-by-case basis by national judges with regard to actions for damages;

AG.  whereas it is recommended that EU guidelines be drawn up as a helpful tool for judges; whereas such guidelines need to distinguish between company documents and cartel files held by the Commission;

Right of access to documents

1.  Recalls that transparency is the general rule and that the Treaty of Lisbon lays down the fundamental right of access to documents;

2.  Recalls that the widest possible public access to documents is needed to effectively allow citizens and civil society to comment on all aspects of EU activity;

3.  Recalls that transparency enhances public trust in the European institutions by allowing citizens to be informed and to participate in the Union’s decision-making process and, in this way, contribute to making the EU more democratic;

4.  Recalls that any decision denying access to documents must be based on clearly and strictly defined legal exceptions, accompanied by reasoned and specific justification, allowing the citizen to understand the denial of access and to make effective use of the legal remedies available;

5.  Recalls the need to establish an appropriate equilibrium between transparency and data protection, as made clear by the Bavarian Lager case-law, and stresses that data protection should not be ‘misused’, especially not for the purpose of covering conflicts of interest and undue influence in the context of EU administration and decision-making; points out that the judgment of the Court of Justice in the Bavarian Lager case is based on the current wording of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and does not prevent the wording from being changed, which is necessary and urgent, notably after the clear proclamation in the Treaties and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the right of access to documents;

6.  Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies to strictly apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, taking full account of the body of case-law relating thereto, and harmonising their existing internal rules to the letter and the spirit of the regulation, particularly with regard to deadlines to respond to requests for access to documents, while ensuring that this does not result in longer deadlines; calls on the Council to publish minutes of the meetings of Council working groups, including, in the light of the Access Info Europe case, the names of Member States and their proposals;

7.  Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies, when applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, to strictly assess the possibilities for partial disclosure of a document, table, graphic, paragraph or phrase;

8.  Calls on the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to develop further a more proactive approach on transparency by making publicly accessible on their internet websites as many categories of documents as possible, including internal administrative documents, and by including these in their public registries; considers that this approach helps ensure effective transparency as well as prevent unnecessary litigation that may cause unnecessary costs and burdens for both the institutions and the citizens;

9.  Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies to implement fully Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, and to put in place public document registers with clear and accessible structures, good search functionality, regularly updated information on new documents produced and registered, inclusion of references to non-public documents and, to assist public users, guidance on the types of documents held in a given registry;

10.  Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies to publish systematically and without delay in their document registers all documents previously not available to the public that have been disclosed via public access to documents requests;

11.  Calls on the administrations to provide full indication of all documents falling within the scope of a request for access to documents under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, following the initial application;

12.  Stresses that resort to the European Ombudsman represents a valuable option where denial of access to a document has been confirmed by the administration concerned; recalls, however, there is no means of enforcing the Ombudsman’s decisions;

13.  Stresses that litigation entails extremely lengthy processes, the risk of high, even prohibitive costs, and an uncertain outcome, putting an unreasonable burden on citizens who wish to challenge a decision to refuse (partial) access; emphasises that this means, in practice, that there is no effective legal remedy against a negative decision on a request for access to documents;

14.  Calls upon the EU institutions, bodies and agencies urgently to adopt faster, less cumbersome and more accessible procedures for handling complaints against refusals to grant access, so as to reduce the need for litigation and create a true culture of transparency;

15.  Stresses that the annual reports of the three institutions and of the bodies and agencies should present figures in a comparable format, which should include, for example, the number of documents requested, the number of applications, the number of documents to which (partial) access is granted, the number of applications granted before and after confirmatory application, and the figures for access granted by the Court, partial access granted by the Court and access denied;

16.  Calls on the EU institutions to refrain from calling for the opposing party having to bear the costs of court cases, and to ensure that citizens are not prevented from challenging decisions for want of means;

17.  Notes that Member States need to adapt to the new transparency framework established by the Treaty of Lisbon, as illustrated by the Germany v Commission case (T-59/09), in which Germany opposed the disclosure of documents relating to a formal notice to it, invoking the protection of the public interest in the context of ‘international relations’, while the General Court ruled that ‘international relations’ is to be considered a term of EU law and therefore not applicable to communications between the Commission and a Member State;

18.  Calls on the EU institutions to improve their timeliness of response to requests for access to documents and confirmatory applications;

19.  Resolves to examine how the deliberations in its Bureau and its Conference of Presidents can be made more transparent, such as by keeping detailed minutes and by disclosing these to the public;

Revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001

20.  Expresses its disappointment with the fact that since December 2011, when it adopted its first reading position on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, no progress has been made, as the Council and the Commission do not appear to have been ready to embark on substantive negotiations; calls, therefore, on the Council finally to move forward with the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; calls on the Council and Parliament to agree on a new instrument that provides significantly more transparency, including the effective implementation of Article 15 TFEU;

21.  Calls on all EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in a way that is coherent with the provisions of the Aarhus Convention; fully supports the policy of the European Medicine’s Agency to publish clinical trial reports of pharmaceuticals on the European market upon request, once the decision-making process for the medicine in question has been completed; stresses that any revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should fully respect the Aarhus Convention and should define any exemption in full compliance with it;

22.  Recommends that each EU institution or body appoint from within its management structures a Transparency Officer, to be responsible for compliance and for improving practices;

23.  Calls on all the institutions to evaluate and, where necessary, review their internal arrangements for reporting wrongdoing, and calls for the protection of whistleblowers; calls, in particular, on the Commission to report to Parliament on its experiences with the new rules on whistleblowing for EU staff adopted in 2012 and with their implementing measures; calls on the Commission to come forward with a proposal to protect whistleblowers, not only morally but also financially, in order to properly protect and support whistleblowers as part of the democratic system;

Reporting

24.  Calls on the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to harmonise their Annual Reports on access to documents, and to present similar statistics, in a compatible form and to the fullest and most inclusive extent possible (e.g. in tables in the Annex which allow for direct comparison);

25.  Calls on the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to adopt the recommendations put forward by Parliament in its previous resolution on public access to documents;

26.  Calls on the EU institutions to include in their annual transparency reports a reply to Parliament’s recommendations;

Legislative documents

27.  Calls on the Commission to enhance the transparency of expert groups and comitology groups, by holding their meetings in public and publishing the recruitment procedure for members, as well as information regarding membership, proceedings, documents considered, votes, decisions and minutes of meetings, all of which should be published online in a standard format; stresses that members of experts groups and comitology must declare in advance if they have a personal interest in the subjects discussed; calls on the Commission to improve and fully implement internal guidelines for all DGs for the recruitment procedure (concerning i.e. balanced composition, conflict of interest policy, public calls) and the rules for reimbursement, and to report on this matter not only in the annual access to documents report but also in the annual activity reports of DGs; calls on the Commission to report, in particular, on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Stakeholder Advisory Group;

28.  Calls on the Commission, the Council and Parliament to ensure the greater transparency of informal trilogues, by holding the meetings in public, publishing documentation including calendars, agendas, minutes, documents examined, amendments, decisions taken, information on Member State delegations and their positions and minutes, in a standardised and easy accessible online environment, by default and without prejudice to the exemptions listed in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;

29.  Recalls that Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on sensitive documents is a compromise that no longer reflects the new constitutional and legal obligations in place since the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force;

30.  Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies of the EU to maintain up-to-date public figures on the number of classified documents they hold, according to their classification;

Classification of documents

31.  Calls on the Commission to propose a regulation laying down clear rules and criteria for the classification of documents by the EU institutions, bodies and agencies;

32.  Calls on the institutions to assess and justify requests for in camera meetings in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;

33.  Calls on the Union institutions to set up an independent EU oversight authority for the classification of documents and the examination of requests for holding sessions in camera;

Financial information

34.  Calls on the institutions to make publicly available and accessible to citizens documents relating to the European Union budget, its implementation and the beneficiaries of Union funds and grants, and stresses that such documents shall also be accessible via a specific website and database, and on a database dealing with financial transparency in the Union;

International negotiations

35.  Expresses concern at the routine application of the exception for the protection of international relations as a justification for the classification of documents;

36.  Recalls that when an institution decides to refuse access to a document which it has been asked to disclose, it must, in principle, explain how disclosure of that document could specifically and actually undermine the public interest as to international relations;

37.  Emphasises that, regardless of these principles, this is still not implemented in practice, as shown by the General Court ruling in Case T-529/09 (In ‘t Veld v Council) regarding the refusal by the Council to provide access to an opinion of its legal service on the EU-US TFTP agreement;

Legal services’ opinions

38.  Emphasises that opinions of the institutions’ legal services must, in principle, be disclosed, as underlined by the Court’s ruling in Turco that ‘Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 seeks, as indicated in recital 4 of the preamble and Article 1, to give the public a right of access to documents of the institutions which is as wide as possible’(16);

39.  Recalls that, before assessing whether or not the exception of Article 4(2), second indent on the protection of legal advice applies, the institution concerned must satisfy itself that the document it is asked to disclose does indeed relate to legal advice and, if so, must decide which parts of it are actually concerned and may therefore be covered by the exception (Turco, paragraph 38);

40.  Calls on the institutions to abide by the Turco judgment on legal service opinions drafted in the framework of the legislative process, which ruled that ‘it is precisely openness in this regard that contributes to conferring greater legitimacy on the institutions in the eyes of European citizens and increasing their confidence in them by allowing divergences between various points of view to be openly debated’ and that ‘it is in fact rather a lack of information and debate which is capable of giving rise to doubts in the minds of citizens, not only as regards the lawfulness of an isolated act, but also as regards the legitimacy of the decision-making process as a whole’(17);

41.  Stresses that, as ruled in the In ‘t Veld v Council ­case (T-529/09)(18), a specific and foreseeable threat to the interest in question may not be established by a mere fear of disclosing to EU citizens differences of opinion between the institutions regarding the legal basis for the international activity of the European Union and, thus, of creating doubts as to the lawfulness of that activity;

Cartel leniency

42.  Stresses that the Court of Justice has ruled in Case C-536/11, paragraph 43 that ‘any request for access to the [cartel file] must be assessed on a case-by-case basis [by the national courts], taking into account all the relevant factors of the case’;

o
o   o

43.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the European Ombudsman, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Council of Europe.

(1) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.
(2) OJ L 243, 27.9.2003, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 51 E, 22.2.2013, p. 72.
(4) See IFAW v Commission (C-135/11 P), in whose paragraph 75 it is stated that, not having consulted the requested document, ‘the General Court was not in a position to assess in the specific case whether the document could validly be refused on the basis of the exceptions’.
(5) P7_TA(2013)0369.
(6) OJ C 286 E, 22.10.2010, p. 12.
(7) In ’t Veld v Council (T-529/09), paragraph 19.
(8) In ’t Veld v Council (T-529/09), paragraph 75.
(9) The Commission does not specify the number of documents requested. The numbers of initial applications for Commission documents are 6 447 in 2011 and 6 014 in 2012.
(10) Council v In 't Veld (intervention by European Parliament in support of In ‘t Veld).
(11) Cases Batchelor (T-362/08), IFAW II (T-250/08), Navigazione Libera del Golfo (T-109/05 and T-444/05), Jordana (T-161/04), CDC (T-437/08) and LPN (T-29/08).
(12) Germany v Commission (T-59/09), EnBW v Commission (T-344/08), Sviluppo Globale (T-6/10), Internationaler Hilfsfonds (T-300/10), European Dynamics (T-167/10).
(13) The other case is Dennekamp (T-82/08), in which the General Court confirmed Parliament's decision on grounds of protection of personal data.
(14) See the IFAW case concerning documents originating from a Member State and the obligation of the General Court to assess the documents concerned; and two other cases relating to merger control proceedings, Agrofert (C-477/10 P) and Éditions Odile Jacob (C-404/10 P). These three Court rulings are not described in the Commission’s annual report.
(15) Council v Access Info Europe, Case C-280/11 P.
(16) Joined cases Sweden and Turco v Council and Commission (C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P), paragraph 35.
(17) Joined cases Sweden and Turco v Council and Commission (C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P), paragraph 59.
(18) In ’t Veld v Council (T-529/09), paragraph 75.


Activities of the Committee on Petitions 2013
PDF 165kWORD 75k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2013 (2014/2008(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0204A7-0131/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the significance of the right of petition and the importance for parliamentary bodies to be immediately aware of the specific concerns and views of the European citizen or resident, as provided for in Articles 24 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and notably Article 44 on the right to petition the European Parliament,

–  having regard to the provisions of the of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which regard the infringement procedure, notably article 258 and 260,

–  having regard to Rules 48 and 202(8) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A7-0131/2014),

A.  bearing in mind the petitions received in the year 2013, which was ‘the Year of the European Citizen’ number 2,885, representing an increase of almost 45% on the year 2012; and noting that for the current legislature until now, almost 10,000 petitions have been registered;

B.  whereas even though such a figure remains modest by comparison with the population of the European Union, it nevertheless denotes a marked increase in the awareness of the right of petition and legitimate expectations regarding the usefulness of the petitions process as a means of securing the attention of the European Institutions and the Member States for the concerns of individual citizens, local communities, NGOs, voluntary associations and private businesses;

C.  whereas European citizens are directly represented by the only EU institution elected by them – the European Parliament; bearing in mind that the right to petition offers them the chance to address their representatives directly;

D.  bearing in mind that the right of petition enhances the responsiveness of the European Parliament towards the citizens and residents of the Union, while it may at the same time provide people with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for obtaining, where legitimate and justified, a non-judicial remedy for their complaints, notably when this relates to problems with the implementation of European legislation; whereas petitions provide valuable feedback to legislators and executive bodies both at EU and national level;

E.  whereas further irreparable losses in biodiversity must be averted, especially inside Natura 2000 designated sites; whereas Member States have undertaken to ensure the protection of special conservation areas under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC); whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important – particularly in relation to environmental matters – to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law, including implementation of the principle of precaution;

F.  whereas it is necessary to increase citizen participation in the EU decision-making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability; whereas the petitions process also constitutes a means to establish a reality check regarding the tensions which exist within European societies, particularly during times of economic crisis and social unrest, such as have resulted from the impact of the collapse of the world financial markets and banking systems on the people of Europe; recalling that the Committee on Petitions organised a public hearing involving petitioners on this subject in September 2013; whereas many petitions on financial malpractices and abuses towards consumer’ rights in the banking sector and particularly the dramatic consequences of household evictions for entire families as a result of abusive mortgage clauses have attracted the attention of the committee;

G.  whereas such petitions as have been addressed to the Committee on Petitions have often provided useful inputs to other committees of the European Parliament which have the responsibility of formulating legislation designed to establish a socioeconomically and environmentally more secure, sound, fair and prosperous basis for the future of all European citizens and residents;

H.  whereas each petition is assessed and treated on its merit, even when brought forth by only one EU citizen or resident, and each petitioner has a right to receive a reply in their own language;

I.  bearing in mind that, depending on the nature and complexity of a petition received, its processing and response time will vary, but that every effort is to be made to duly respond to the concerns of petitioners within a reasonable time-frame and in an appropriate manner, in terms not only of procedure but also of substance;

J.  whereas petitioners whose petitions are subsequently discussed during the regular meetings of the Committee on Petitions are able to participate fully, have the right to present their petition along with more detailed information, and thus actively contribute to the work of the Committee, providing additional and first-hand information to members of the Committee and to the European Commission as well as to the representatives of the Member States who may be present; and whereas in 2013, 185 petitioners attended and were actively involved in the Committee’s deliberations;

K.  bearing in mind that the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based entirely on the input and contributions received from petitioners, along with the results of its own investigations into each case as supplemented where necessary with additional expertise from the European Commission, Member States or other bodies; and that its agendas are prioritised and organised on the basis of decisions taken democratically by its members;

L.  bearing in mind that the criteria established for the admissibility of petitions, under the terms of the Treaty and Parliament’s rules, indicates that a petition must concern a matter which comes within the Union’s fields of activity and which affects the petitioner directly; and that as a result of this a proportion of petitions received are declared inadmissible because they do not correspond to such criteria;

M.  whereas the right of petition is a key tool for participation and democratic control by citizens, and its proper implementation must be ensured from the beginning to the end of the process; whereas this right must remain fully guaranteed, independently of governmental interests; whereas this principle must be upheld in an exemplary manner at EU level in the handling of petitions within this Parliament and by the Commission;

N.  whereas the above-mentioned criteria have been tested before the courts and that rulings of the European Court of Justice, for example in case T-308/07, have upheld the criteria related to the right to petition and the fact that declarations regarding inadmissible petitions must be well-founded and require justification by the Committee in its subsequent correspondence with the petitioner; and for example in case T-280/09 and T-160/10, in relation to petitions that may be considered as too imprecise in their content;

O.  whereas in addition to petitions received related to the impact of the crisis on European citizens and residents, other key issues of concern to petitioners relate to environmental law – notably issues concerning waste and water management, fundamental rights – notably regarding the rights of the child, the rights of the disabled and health-related issues, right to personal and real property, matters concerning free movement of persons, different forms of discrimination and in particular on ethnic, cultural or language grounds, visas, immigration and employment, and petitions on the application of justice, alleged corruption, delays in legal processes and many other areas of activity;

P.  bearing in mind that because many petitioners, especially among the younger sectors of the population, make great use of the social media as a channel for communication, the Committee on Petitions has developed its own network under the auspices of the European Parliament and is regularly followed by a growing number of persons on mainstream social media, which are especially active and found useful around the times of Committee meetings; and whereas it has also developed a significant number of regular subscribers, currently 1 500, to the Committee’s newsletter, the Péti Journal;

Q.  whereas, in this same context, the Committee on Petitions has been working in conjunction with the relevant services of the European Parliament to develop a new multi-lingual web-portal which replaces the former, more limited, electronic facility for petition submission contained on the Europarl web-site; whereas the new portal is designed to increase administrative efficiency while enhancing the transparency and interactivity of the petitions process for the benefit of petitioners and Members of the European Parliament as well as for the public at large;

R.  recalling, in this context, the position it upheld on the basis of the 2012 Annual Report which resolved to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent and impartial while preserving the participatory rights of the members of the Committee on Petitions so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at the procedural level;

S.  whereas the Committee on Petitions maintains an active interest in the way in which the Regulation concerning the European Citizens’ Initiative is being applied and is mindful of the many weaknesses and the rather cumbersome nature of the existing legal framework which does not fully translate the spirit of the Treaty provision in spite of the efforts of the AFCO and PETI Committees in its elaboration; and whereas the Parliament is to engage in discussions on the revision of this Regulation under the terms of the review clause after three years of its functioning;

T.  whereas the provisions of the ECI Regulation regarding the organisation of a public hearing for a successful Initiative on the premises of the European Parliament are soon to be implemented, involving the lead committee with legislative competence for the subject matter of the Initiative alongside the Committee on Petitions, under the terms of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure and the implementing rules adopted by the Bureau;

U.  bearing in mind the valuable role of fact-finding visits regarding petitions under investigation, regularly organised by the Committee on issues to which it has given specific priority, and the need for reports of such visits to be of the highest level of quality and credibility and to be drawn up in faithful cooperation leading to a desirable consensus among participants; recalls the visits undertaken in 2013 to Spain - twice, to Poland, to Denmark, and to Greece; whereas more flexibility in the practical arrangements of these missions, mainly as regards the eligible weeks, would contribute to an even higher success of these visits particularly as regards the availability of members and reducing the risk of cancellation;

V.  bearing in mind the Committee’s responsibilities in relation to the office of the European Ombudsman, which is responsible for investigating complaints from EU citizens about possible maladministration within the EU Institutions and bodies, and about which it also produces an Annual Report, based upon the European Ombudsman’s own Annual Report; and recalling that in 2013 the Committee was actively involved in the organisation of the election of a new European Ombudsman following the retirement of the then incumbent of this office, Mr Nikiforos Diamandouros;

W.  whereas although a new European Ombudsman, Ms Emily O’Reilly, was successfully elected to serve as from October 1st 2013 by the members of this House, a new election must be organised at the beginning of the next legislature, as is provided for under the Rules of Procedure (Rule 204), and whereas it would be wise to ensure that clear and transparent rules for the process are published in good time which further clarify the responsibility of the Petitions Committee in this process and which ensure adequate transparency for the election, notably by means of an improved dedicated web facility;

X.  whereas the Petitions Committee is a member of the network of European Ombudsmen, which includes some Petitions Committees of national parliaments where they exist, and whereas it appears to be important that cooperation between Petitions Committees themselves should be further highlighted and where practical, further reinforced and that the European Parliament could play a central role in this development in the interest of European citizens;

Y.  whereas the Committee on Petitions intends to be a useful and transparent tool at the service of European citizens and residents, which exercises democratic control and scrutiny over many aspects of European Union activity, especially regarding the implementation of EU laws by the national authorities; and whereas it can contribute further, on the basis of petitions received, on the one hand to a more coherent and coordinated application of EU legislation and on the other to the improvement of future EU legislation by drawing attention to the lessons that should be learned from the substance of petitions received;

Z.  whereas this report is the last annual PETI Report of the 7th legislature of the European Parliament which is why it is outlining the Committee’s activities in 2013, as well as overviewing the whole parliamentary term and assessing to what extent the PETI Committee managed to meet citizens’ expectations , following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty;

1.  Acknowledges the substantial and fundamental role of the Petitions Committee in defending and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residents, ensuring that through the petitions process the concerns of petitioners are better recognised and their legitimate grievances resolved wherever possible, in a reasonable time-frame;

2.  Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at a procedural level;

3.  Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry and the European Ombudsman, play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizen; highlights the fact that these bodies, together with the European Citizens’ Initiative, are fundamental tools for a democratic EU and the creation of a European demos, and that proper access to them and their reliable functioning must be guaranteed;

4.  Underlines that throughout the current parliamentary term the Petitions Committee was taking up the challenges to meet the expectations of the citizens of the European Union; emphasises the importance of citizens direct involvement in the Parliament’s activity and to have their concerns, proposals or complaints specifically addressed by the Committee members; points out the amount of work that had been done to resolve possible infringements of citizens’ rights and by cooperating with national, regional and local authorities on issues related to the application of European laws; while maintaining a vital role in reconnecting with European citizens and reinforcing the democratic legitimacy and accountability of the EU decision-making process;

5.  Recalls the Commission’s significant role in assisting with the handling of the cases raised by petitions; considers that the Commission’s investigation of petitions should go into greater depth and look into the substance of cases with regard to EU legislation; stresses the importance of transparency in these processes and of a proper public access to relevant documents and case-related information;

6.  Stresses the importance of proactive monitoring and timely preventive action by the Commission, where there is well-founded evidence that certain planned and published projects may breach EU legislation;

7.  Observes the variety of thematic key areas concerned in the citizens’ petitions, such as fundamental rights, internal market, environmental law, public health issues, child welfare, transport and constructions, Spanish Coastal Law, new Regulation on good administration, persons with disabilities, age discrimination, public access to documents, European Schools, Fiscal Union, and the Steel Industry, animal rights and many more;

8.  Considers that petitions which fall under said thematic areas lend proof to the issue that the frequencies of widespread situations of unsatisfactory transposition of EU legislation or misapplication of the law are still occurring;

9.  Considers it important to enhance cooperation with Member States’ parliaments and governments, based on reciprocity, and, where necessary, to encourage Member States’ authorities to transpose and apply EU legislation with full transparency; stresses the importance of the Commission’s cooperation with the Member States and deplores the negligence of some Member States with regard to full transposition and enforcement of European legislation, in particular on environmental matters;

10.  Recalls that the Petitions Committee considers admissible petitions, related to the principles and the contents of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as an inherent part of its activity, and it pursues its investigations on the merits of each case, reminds that, the European Commission has frequently felt itself unable to act when requested by the Committee because of the existence of Article 51 of the Charter; stresses the fact that the expectations of citizens are much greater than the Charter’s strictly legal provisions allow for;

11.  Congratulates the Committee on the work it has undertaken in relation to petitions received on issues related to disability, about which there has been a significant increase in 2013; notes the efforts which were made to ensure the successful launch of the EU framework under the terms of article 33 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability where the Petitions Committee was associated with the European Commission, the Fundamental Rights Agency and the European Disability Forum, and notes the willingness of the Committee to continue to support this activity; regrets that subsequently the involvement of the Petitions Committee within the UNCRPD Framework has been terminated and that it has been replaced by legislative committees which also have responsibility in this field, considers this latter decision to have been based on a misinterpretation of the functions attributed under the UNCRPD Framework;

12.  Notes the amount of attention which was given to some major petitions received regarding the proposed development of a new airport at Notre Dame-des-Landes, near Nantes; acknowledges that significant contributions were received from petitioners which opposed the scheme on environmental grounds and that a substantial petition was also received from those who favoured the project which gave rise to an intensive debate in Committee at which the French authorities and the Director General for Environment at the Commission participated alongside the main petitioners; considers that such serious discussions not only improve public awareness and allow citizens to become actively and legitimately involved, but they also permit several controversial features associated with the project that allegedly conflict with EU law to be clarified and remedies identified which allow for the proper respect of European legislation as it should apply in such circumstances;

13.  Acknowledges that in 2013, many petitioners voiced their alarm at the apparent injustices which occur in Denmark regarding the administrative and judicial procedures related to parental separation and divorce and the subsequent custody of young children; notes in this context that in the case of bi-national couples there are clear examples of discrimination on grounds of nationality in favour of the spouse from the Member State concerned with the proceedings and against the non-national of that state, with severe and often very negative and dramatic repercussions on the rights of the child; notes in this context severe violations of the fundamental rights of both the petitioner and the child; notes that the Petitions Committee undertook a fact-finding visit to Denmark to investigate such claims directly where the situation appears to be particularly acute; notes that some cases were also recorded from other countries, notably Germany (especially cases concerning the activities of the Jugendamt), France and the UK;

14.  Recalls the investigations conducted on the basis of petitions related to the consequences of failed implementation of the Waste Framework Directive throughout the parliamentary term, and the adoption of the relevant report; recalls the recommendations concerning the lack of proper decision-making as regards landfills and the effect of this on local populations; stresses that the situation is far from having been resolved , given the petitions that have been considered subsequently, particularly in relation to the persistence of toxic fires caused by heavily pollutant industrial waste in some areas of Campania, and to the lack of transparency regarding plans and institutional management in Lazio over the last months, following the scheduled closure of the Malagrotta landfill, which is currently the subject of high-level judicial inquiries; recalls the intensive fact-finding visit to Greece conducted in the autumn of 2013 on this subject which has drawn attention to the shortcomings in the application of the relevant waste-related directives, the lack of progress in waste management as regards plans and systems high up in the waste hierarchy, as well as to the impact on the health of populations in certain areas of Greece; notes that several other petitions on waste management deficiencies have been recently submitted concerning other Member States, particularly in the Valencia region of Spain and in the UK;

15.  Acknowledges the report of the fact-finding visit to Poland which investigated a proposed open-cast mine site in Lower Silesia; welcomed also the intensive discussions held on this occasion with petitioners and national authorities regarding the possible exploration and exploitation of shale-gas reserves about which the Committee had already conducted a workshop in 2012;

16.  Highlights the very constructive work undertaken by the entire Committee as regards the petitions received which concern the Spanish law on coastal management (Ley de Costas) both as regards the results and conclusions of the fact-finding visit and as regards the cooperation with both petitioners and the responsible national authorities; recalls that a special ad hoc working group was established by the Committee to look at this complex issue in more detail and to ensure liaison with the very large number petitioners concerned; recognises that although some advances were obtained for petitioners in the new legislation adopted by the Spanish Parliament; requests the Commission to continue to actively monitor the issue;

17.  Welcomes the fact that the fact-finding visit to Galicia, which took place in February 2013, was able to hold extensive discussions with petitioners and the regional authorities on issues related to the lack of proper waste-water treatment facilities in the region; ratifies the conclusions and recommendations of the report of the fact-finding mission approved in the Committee on Petitions on 17 December 2013 in the sense that the efforts for the culmination of the clean-up and regeneration of the rías object of the visit should continue;

18.  Emphasises the role of reporting obligation of the Committee; draws attention to several resolutions adopted in 2013 in the form of reports such as the Special Report of the European Ombudsman on the Commission’s handling of deficiencies in the environmental impact assessment in the Vienna Airport enlargement project, besides the Annual Report on the activities of the European Ombudsman as a whole; stresses the relevant input provided by the Committee thanks to the expertise achieved through the handling of many concrete cases over the years in the forms of opinions to lead committees and in particular to the revision of the EIA Directive as well as the opinion on the location of the seats of the European Union’s Institutions; believes that thanks to such documents Petitions Committee can bring the issues of importance to European Citizens to plenary;

19.  Recalls that, under Rule 202(2), the Petitions Committee is entitled to submit not only non-legislative own-initiative reports to plenary on matters relating to several petitions, but also short motions for resolutions to be voted on in plenary in relation to urgent matters;

20.  Believes that the organisation of public hearings is a very important tool for examining problems raised by petitioners; draws attention to the public hearing held on the impact of the crisis on Europe’s citizens and the reinforcement of democratic involvement in the governance of the Union, as well as to the public hearing on making the most of EU citizenship, which analysed the concerns raised in both respects by EU citizens based on petitions received; considers that the information provided in petitions demonstrates the personal impact of the austerity drive on the rights of the petitioners as well as showing the greater role and commitment of civil society; recognizes that to tackle tomorrow’s financial challenge Europe needs credible, visible and accountable economic governance; underlines the importance of combating the remaining obstacles to EU Citizens’ enjoyment of their rights under EU law as well as promoting EU citizens’ political participation in the life of the EU;

21.  Considers it essential to its work on particular subjects to use other forms of activity such as parliamentary questions for oral answer dealt with during plenary sittings; recalls they are a direct form of parliamentary scrutiny of other EU institutions and bodies; points out that it has used its right 9 times in 2013 tabling questions concerning, for instance, disabilities, animal welfare, waste management and European citizens’ initiative; deeply regrets the fact that some of the initiatives proposed by the committee are kept in the pipeline for several months before being debated in plenary , thus preventing the recurrent concerns of EU citizens from being voiced and from receiving a direct answer from the Commission;

22.  Notes the constant influx of correspondence from citizens who turn to Parliament for redress on issues that fall outside the EU’s area of competence pursuant to Article 227 of the Treaty as well as Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls for finding better solutions for dealing with these submissions from citizens while taking into account Parliament’s obligations with regard to its correspondence with citizens; regrets, in this regard, the failure of the appropriate Parliament services to follow through on the recommendations on submissions from citizens on issues that fall outside the EU’s area of competence presented in its resolution of 21 November 2012 on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2011;

23.  Acknowledges that environmental issues remain a priority for petitioners, thus highlighting the fact that Member States continue to fall short in this area; observes that many of the petitions focus on public health e.g. waste management, water safety, nuclear energy, and protected animals; points out that many petitions are concerned with new and upcoming projects which increase the dangers of effecting the aforementioned areas; recalls that as Member States strive to address these situations it is clear that finding a sustainable solution is still a hindrance; points to the case of the ILVA steel plant in Taranto that is of major concern, due to the severe deterioration in environmental conditions and the health situation of the local population; urges the Commission to use the mechanisms available to it in order to ensure, as far as possible, immediate compliance by the Italian authorities with the EU environmental legislation;

24.  Calls on the Committee on Petitions to continue examining the effects of case law pertaining to the Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation (Ellinikí Radiofonía Tileórasi, ERT) on the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and its consequences concerning petitions and to investigate what actual obstacles lie in the way of EU citizens applying for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice in order to obtain reliable interpretations of central issues under European legislation in cases before the national courts;

25.  Welcomes the implementation of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) on 1 April 2012, as well as the registration of the first ECI, dedicated to policies for Europe’s Youth - Fraternity 2020, and the recently successful ECI dedicated to the Right to Water; believes that the ECI constitutes the first instrument of transnational participatory democracy and will enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation; reconfirms its commitment to participate in the organisation of public hearings for successful European Citizens’ Initiatives with the active involvements of all concerned parliamentary committees; underlines the need for regular review of the state of play with the European Citizens’ Initiatives, with the aim of improving the procedure while limiting the red tape and other obstacles; is aware that the outcome of the first parliamentary hearings of the first successful ECIs taking place in 2014 are crucial in setting high procedural standards and meeting citizens’ expectations regarding the exercise of this right in the future, and undertakes to give institutional priority to ensuring the effectiveness of the participatory process;

26.  Appreciates the Commission’s decision to declare 2013 the ‘European Year of Citizenship’ providing valuable information and insight for EU citizens regarding their rights and of the democratic instruments available to them to assert those rights; considers that the ‘European Year of Citizenship’ should be used for the broad dissemination of information on the new ‘European Citizens’ Initiative’, therefore providing clear and understandable guidelines in order to curtail the high rate of inadmissibility comparable to the rate that is still to be found in the ‘petitions’ field; is convinced that the petitions web portal represents a concrete and valuable contribution by Parliament to European citizenship;

27.  Calls on the Commission as guardian of the Treaty to ensure that the current inadequate implementation of EU law, as illustrated by the number of petitions submitted to Parliament, is remedied in order to allow EU citizens to take full advantage of their rights;

28.  Calls on the Commission to propose legislation to resolve the issues surrounding mutual recognition by Member States of civil status documents, while respecting the competences of the Member States;

29.  Deplores that European citizens continue to experience frequent problems caused by the misapplication of Internal Market law by public authorities while exercising their freedom of movement;

30.  Deplores the fact that in the recent time the reports on fact-finding missions and other documents were not translated to the EU official languages, especially the national languages of petitioners;

31.  Acknowledges the important role of the SOLVIT network, which regularly uncovers and resolves problems linked to the implementation of internal market legislation; urges for the reinforcement of this tool and for more active collaboration between the Petitions Committee and the SOLVIT network; recalls that 2013 was the Year of European Citizenship and pays tribute to the institutions and bodies both of the European Union and of the Member States that advertised more intensively their service to European citizens and residents during this year, in light of the principles contained in the Treaties and the facts revealed in this report;

New horizons and relations with other institutions

32.  Points out the importance of making this Committee work more substantial inside the House by raising its profile as a scrutiny Committee; invites the newly elected Petitions Committee to nominate internal Annual Rapporteurs on the major policies, which are of concern of European petitioners, and to enhance cooperation with other parliamentary committees by systematically inviting their members to those debates in the Petitions Committee which concern their respective fields of legislative competence; invites the other parliamentary committees to involve the Petitions Committee more as an opinion giving committee on implementation reports and other instruments to monitor the correct transposition and implementation or eventual revision of the European legislation in the Member States; stresses the importance, also in view of the ever-increasing amount of petitions received and their related undertakings, of enjoying a de-neutralised status in the Parliament’s committee portfolio; invites the Plenary Session of the European Parliament to dedicate more time to the work of the Petitions Committees;

33.  Highlights the need to reinforce the Petitions Committee collaboration with the other EU Institutions and bodies, and the national authorities in the Member States; considers its importance to enhance structured dialogue and systematic cooperation with Member States especially with the National Parliaments’ Petitions Committees, e.g. by holding regular meetings with the chairs of all national Petitions Committees; creating such a partnership will allow best exchange of experience and practices and more systematic and efficient ’referral of petitions to the competent level and body, and ultimately will bring the European Parliament closer to the European citizens’ concerns; welcomes the establishment in Ireland of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Investigation, Oversight and Petitions, and the useful links it has established with the European Parliament in the course of this year in order to bring about an even better service to citizens; notes that parliaments in other member states are currently considering creating petitions committees or similar bodies, or that some have other processes for dealing with petitions;

34.  Calls on the Commission to duly recognise the role of petitions in monitoring the effective implementation of EU law, since petitions are usually the earliest indications that Member States are lagging behind in implementing legal measures; invites the European Parliament to recommend in its Interinstitutional Agreement with the Commission to reduce the time it takes to respond to the Committee’s requests and to also keep the Petitions Committee informed of developments in infringement proceedings directly linked to petitions; believes, in general terms, that the European institutions ought to supply more information and be more transparent with regard to EU citizens, in order to combat the increasing perception of democratic deficits;

35.  Stresses that close cooperation with the Member States is essential for the work of the Petitions Committee; encourages Member States to play a proactive role in responding to petitions related to the implementation and enforcement of European law, and considers the presence and the active cooperation of Member State representatives at Petitions Committee meetings to be of the utmost importance; is determined to maintain close cooperation and communication between EU Institutions and the citizens;

36.  Stresses the importance of the reinforced collaboration with the European Ombudsman by putting in place a new inter institutional agreement; underlines the importance of the involvement of the European Parliament in the network of National Ombudsmen; applauds the excellent relations in the institutional framework between the Ombudsman and this Committee; especially appreciates the regular contributions by Ombudsman to the work of Petitions Committee through the legislative term; reminds that still not all EU citizens have a national ombudsman, which means that not all EU citizens have the equal access to redress; is of an opinion that office of national ombudsman in each Member State within the European Network of Ombudsmen would deliver substantial support for the European Ombudsman;

Working methods

37.  Calls upon MEPs in the Petitions Committee to adopt final internal rules to ensure maximum efficiency and openness in the work of the Committee and to make proposals to revise accordingly the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament in order to consolidate their continuous attempts during the whole seventh legislature to improve working methods; calls on the Petitions Committee to adopt clear deadlines in the process of petitions in order to speed up the petitions life-cycle in the European Parliament and make the whole process even more transparent and democratic; underlines that this could put in place a defined lifecycle of the petition from registration until their final closure in the European Parliament, similarly to the existing deadlines for the work in process on legislative and non-legislative files; considers that these deadlines should establish an alert mechanism which automatically draws Members’ attention to petitions on which there has not been any action or correspondence for a considerable amount of time, in order to avoid old petitions staying open over years without substantial reason; recalls that fact-finding visits are one of the key investigative instruments of the Petitions Committee, therefore an urgent revision of the relevant rules is needed, in order to enable the newly elected Members to carry out efficient visits and report swiftly back to the petitioners and the Committee on their findings and recommendations;

38.  Welcomes the presence of public authorities of the Member State concerned at meetings of the Petitions Committee, as well as of other interested parties; highlights the fact that the Petitions Committee is the only Committee which systematically provides a platform for citizens to voice their concerns directly to Members of the European Parliament and which enables a multiparty dialogue between the EU institutions, the national authorities and petitioners; suggests that in order to facilitate organisation of the meetings as well as to reduce the travel costs in the future, that the Petitions Committee and Parliament’s administration explore the possibility for participation of the petitioners or the public authorities by means of video conference or similar facility;

39.  Notes the growing number of petitions in the course of the legislative period and remains highly concerned that delays and response times are still too long throughout the registration phase and the admissibility phase in the process; calls for providing the Unit for Reception and Referral of Official Documents and the Petitions Committee Secretariat, respectively, with an additional administrator with juridical background, to issue recommendations related to whether the petition lies within the competence of European law; considers that, these recommendations, along with summaries of petitions, need to be provided to Members only in English first and then to be translated into all official languages only when being published; in order to further speed up the first decisions on admissibility; expects that the launch of the new petitions web-portal will diminish the number of questionable submissions which are occasionally registered as petitions;

o
o   o

40.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, and the governments and the parliaments of the Member States, their committees on petitions and their national ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.


Horticulture
PDF 236kWORD 63k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on the future of Europe’s horticulture sector – strategies for growth (2013/2100(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0205A7-0048/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Part Three, Titles III and VII of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market,

–  having regard to Directive 2009/128/EC of 21 October 2009 on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products(1) ,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1182/2007 of 26 September 2007 laying down specific rules as regards the fruit and vegetable sector(2) and to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(3),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers(4),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products(5),

–  having regard to Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms(6),

–  having regard to its resolution of 21 June 1996 on a Community initiative for ornamental horticulture(7),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 9 December 2008 on food prices in Europe (COM(2008)0821),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 16 July 2008 on the Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan (COM(2008)0397),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 28 October 2009 on a better functioning food supply chain in Europe (COM(2009)0591),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 28 May 2009 on agricultural product quality policy (COM(2009)0234),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 3 May 2011 entitled ‘Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020’ (COM(2011)0244),

–  having regard to Commission Decision 2008/359/EC of 28 April 2008 setting up the High Level Group on the Competitiveness of the Agro-Food Industry, and to the Report of that High Level Group of 17 March 2009 on the Competitiveness of the European Agro-Food Industry, along with the Group’s recommendations and roadmap of key initiatives(8),

–  having regard to the November 2012 study entitled ‘Support for Farmers’ Cooperatives’ (SFC), which presents the findings of the SFC project launched by the Commission(9),

–  having regard to the 2013 study by the Commission Joint Research Centre – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies entitled ‘Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU. A State of Play of their Socio-Economic Characteristics’(10),

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0048/2014),

A.  whereas the fruit and vegetables (F&V) sector receives about 3 % of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) aid yet accounts for 18 % of the total value of agricultural production in the EU, represents 3 % of the EU’s usable agricultural area and is worth more than EUR 50 billion;

B.  whereas horticulture includes fruit, vegetables, potatoes, salads, herbs and ornamentals, and whereas the horticulture sector incorporates nurseries, perennial nurseries, gardening services, cemetery gardening, gardening supplies retailers, garden centres, florists and landscape gardening;

C.  whereas the F&V supply chain has an estimated turnover of more than EUR 120 billion, with approximately 550 000 employees, and is important for the economy of those areas within the EU that tend to have a high unemployment rate;

D.  whereas the EU is the world’s second-largest producer, and also the second‑largest importer of F&V; whereas demand in this sector is growing and currently exceeds supply; whereas F&V trade rose from over USD 90 billion in 2000 to nearly USD 218 billion in 2010 and accounts for almost 21 % of global food and animal product trade; whereas the EU has opened up its markets considerably to imports from third countries with which it has concluded bilateral and multilateral agreements;

E.  whereas the horticulture sector – primary production and processing industry – acts as an economic multiplier at European level, stimulating both demand and the creation of added value in other economic sectors such as trade, construction and financial services;

F.  whereas the organic F&V sector is the fastest growing organic sector within any EU market, valued at EUR 19,7 billion in 2011 and with a growth rate of 9 % between 2010 and 2011, in a decade-long trend of annual growth of between 5-10 %; whereas in terms of area planted, the share of organic fruit increased by 18,2 % and that of organic vegetables by 3,5 % between 2010 and 2011;

G.  whereas per capita F&V consumption in 2011 for the EU-27 decreased by 3 % compared with the average consumption of the previous five years, in spite of the substantial health benefits which eating F&V brings;

H.  whereas the EU is the world’s biggest producer of flowers, bulbs and potted plants (44 % of global production), with the highest density per hectare; whereas the ornamental sector has an estimated turnover of EUR 20 billion in production, EUR 28 billion in wholesale trade and EUR 38 billion in retail trade, and employs approximately 650 000 people;

I.  whereas the F&V regime is part of the CAP and seeks, among other objectives, to restore balance in the food chain, promote F&V, boost competitiveness and support innovation; whereas membership of producer organisations (POs) should be increased, including in those regions in which no operational funds have been available for some years and/or production methods are outdated, by making the system more attractive, in view of the fact that more than half of all EU growers still do not belong to a PO despite the Commission’s objective of an average rate of 60 % PO membership by 2013; whereas the low rate of organisation in some Member States has been partly caused by the suspension of POs, which creates uncertainty among producers; whereas, given that POs play a key role in enhancing the negotiating power of F&V organisations, it is essential to prevent uncertainty among producers by clarifying European legislation on the recognition of POs;

J.  whereas, according to Eurostat, total input costs for EU farmers climbed on average by almost 40 % between 2000 and 2010, while farm gate prices increased on average by less than 25 %; whereas the increase in input costs was almost 80 % for synthetic fertilisers and soil improvers, almost 30 % for seeds and planting stock and almost 13 % for plant protection products;

K.  whereby the loss of soil fertility due to erosion, decreased input of organic matter leading to poor crumb structure and humus levels, decreased nutrient and water retention, and a reduction in ecological processes is a significant cost to both farmers and the public budget;

L.  whereas the ‘knowledge pipeline’ to translate research into practice for horticulture is under strain, and whereas spending by the private sector on research is low overall, with research and development (R&D) accounting for only 0,24 % of total food industry expenditure across the EU-15 in 2004, the latest period for which figures are available;

M.  whereas a large number of F&V varieties are under threat of extinction because they are not sufficiently profitable, and whereas farmers who continue to grow those varieties play an environmentally, socially and culturally valuable role in preserving important components of Europe’s agricultural base;

N.  whereas the growing difficulties being experienced in connection with plant pest prevention, control and eradication and the limited availability of plant protection products for vegetable crops could have an adverse effect on agricultural diversity and vegetable quality in Europe;

O.  whereas businesses operating in the horticulture sector are often also involved in the areas of production, sales and services;

P.  whereas cisgenesis can be defined as a genetic engineering technique which introduces into a subject plant a gene from its relatives of the same genus or species;

1.  Stresses the importance of promoting the EU horticulture sector and enabling it to compete better in the global marketplace, through innovation, research and development, energy efficiency and security, adaptation to and mitigation of climate change and measures to improve marketing, as well as of continuing efforts to eliminate the imbalance between operators and suppliers;

2.  Emphasises the need to make it easier for producers to gain access to third-country markets; calls on the Commission to increase its efforts to support exporters of fruit, vegetables, flowers and ornamental plants to overcome the increasing number of non-tariff barriers, such as some third-country phytosanitary standards that make export from the EU difficult, if not impossible;

3.  Calls on the Commission to establish the same market access conditions, as regards marketing standards, designations of origin, etc. for all market participants in the EU and to carry out checks to ensure that those conditions are observed, in order to prevent distortions of competition;

4.  Encourages the promotion of F&V consumption in Member States through educational activities such as the EU School Fruit Scheme, as well as, for example, the Grow Your Own Potato and Cook Your Own Potato industry schemes in the UK;

5.  Notes that local and regional markets often have insufficient supplies of horticultural products produced therein and agricultural entrepreneurship should therefore be promoted in these regions, in particular through incentives for young entrepreneurship, which would provide employment opportunities in the agricultural sector as well as a guarantee regarding the supply of fresh local produce;

6.  Emphasises the benefits of ornamental horticulture to human health and well-being in enhancing green spaces, thereby improving the urban environment with respect to climate change and the rural economy; stresses the need for more active support for this sector in terms of encouraging investment and career development;

7.  Welcomes the measures in the EU F&V regime which are intended to increase market orientation among EU growers, encourage innovation, promote F&V, increase growers’ competitiveness and improve marketing, product quality and the environmental aspects of production, through the provision of support to POs, PO associations and the recognition of inter-branch organisations, also promoting the formation of clusters that will generate new income streams, to be channelled into new investments; points out, at the same time, that steps must be taken to ensure that self- and direct marketers do not suffer discrimination but have the opportunity to implement innovative projects and enhance their competitiveness;

8.  Points out that local and regional production and marketing help to create and safeguard economic activity and jobs in rural areas;

9.  Points out that short value chains help to reduce emissions which are damaging to the climate;

10.  Notes that urban farming offers new options to the horticulture sector;

11.  Welcomes the report on the Commission public consultation entitled ‘A Review of the EU Regime for the Fruit and Vegetables Sector’, in particular section 3,8 thereof, which acknowledges the need for simplification of the current rules governing POs, endorses its proposal to strengthen POs and notes that most of the replies are in favour of maintaining the basic philosophy of the current support arrangements;

12.  Emphasises that cutting red tape is particularly important for small and medium-sized businesses, although such measures must not undermine the legal certainty upon which such businesses also rely;

13.  Welcomes the fact that the CAP reform agreement retains the PO‑based European F&V aid system, while acknowledging that existing instruments have not always been effective, as recognised by the Commission in its public consultation document entitled ‘A Review of the EU Regime for the Fruit and Vegetables Sector’, and therefore supports the work of the Newcastle Group aimed at improving the EU fruit and vegetables regime, which should take account of the specific nature of the legal arrangements governing cooperatives in the Member States, so as not to limit the creation of new POs, while respecting the fact that growers may opt to remain outside the PO system; notes, also the establishment of a Union instrument for managing serious crises affecting a number of Member States and stresses that it should be open to all producers, irrespective of whether or not they are members of a PO;

14.  In order to strengthen the beneficial activities carried out by POs for producers, calls on the Commission, in its review of the EU F&V regime, to produce clear and practical rules on the design and working methods of POs and adjust the scheme to fit the market structures that exist in Member States, so that POs can play their intended role and so that growers have an incentive to join POs, provided that this does not jeopardise the achievement of the regime’s fundamental objectives and that growers remain free to make their own decisions on these matters;

15.  Notes with concern that PO scheme rules are open to wide interpretation by the Commission’s auditors, which leads to a high degree of uncertainty and can leave Member States at risk of disallowance and judicial review; stresses, also, that audit procedures and financial corrections must be carried out in a more timely manner and within an agreed audit time period;

16.  Notes that unfair trading practices remain across the EU which undermine horticultural businesses and their POs, and diminish growers’ confidence to invest in the future, Believes that codes of conduct agreed by all actors in the supply chain, backed by a legislative framework and overseen by a national adjudicator in each Member State to monitor trading practices, could significantly improve the functioning of the food chain and the internal market;

17.  Takes the view that the private standards for pesticide residues that have been adopted by many large retail chains are anti-competitive and detrimental to the interests of F&V growers; calls on the Commission to put an end to such practices, given that the pesticide residue levels laid down in EU legislation provide adequate protection for the health of both consumers and producers;

18.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote integrated pest management (IPM), support innovation and entrepreneurship through increased research into and development of non-chemical alternatives, such as natural predators and parasites of pest species, and use the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation to fund applied research that supports the development of integrated strategies for pest, disease and weed control, provide producers with the necessary tools and information to address Directive 2009/128/EC in which it is stated in Article 14 thereof that Member States must ‘take all necessary measures to promote low pesticide-input pest management, giving, wherever possible, priority to non-chemical methods’ and ‘establish, or support the establishment of necessary conditions for the implementation of integrated pest management’;

19.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote and emphasise the intensification of ecological processes ensuring long-term soil health, fertility and formation, as well as managing and regulating pest populations; believes that this can lead to long-term productivity gains for farmers and reduced costs to public budgets;

20.  Stresses that horticulture is reliant on a variety of plant protection products (PPPs), and urges the Commission to take a risk-based approach to the regulation of these products that is justified by peer-reviewed, independent, scientific evidence; emphasises that minor uses are particularly vulnerable owing to the scarcity of the relevant active substances; calls on the Commission to strengthen the co-ordination of data generation across the Member States, in particular residues data, which is an essential requirement for authorisations on edible speciality crops; calls on DG Agri, DG Sanco, DG Environment and DG Competition to work together strategically to take into account the impact of changes to PPP regulation from multiple perspectives;

21.  Urges the Commission to review the operation of the arrangements for mutual recognition of PPP authorisations laid down in Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, with a view to streamlining their implementation and removing any unnecessary red tape, and consider the long-term goal of global harmonisation for regulating PPPs and reducing non-tariff trade barriers to export trade;

22.  Urges the Commission to submit, in accordance with Article 51(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and without further delay, a report to Parliament and the Council on the establishment of a European fund for minor uses and specialty crops; stresses that such a fund should be used to finance an ongoing European work programme for coordination and cooperation between agri-food operators, competent authorities and stakeholders, including research bodies, on carrying out and, where appropriate, funding research and innovation work geared to protecting specialty crops and minor uses;

23.  Points out that imports are not required to meet the same phytosanitary requirements as European products; stresses that this ongoing disparity undermines the competitiveness of European producers and is detrimental to the interests of European consumers;

24.  Recalls that both the Plant Protection Products Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of 21 October 2009(11)) and the new Biocides Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of 22 May 2012(12)) require the Commission to specify scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine-disrupting properties by December 2013; emphasises how important it is that the procedure should be transparent, so that the market actors concerned understand the scientific basis for the decisions and are aware of the actors who were involved in developing new criteria; urges the Commission to fully consider the impact of different approaches when presenting proposals for endocrine disruptors;

25.  Emphasises that the horticulture sector relies heavily on the use of high quality, well specified fertiliser materials; welcomes the current review of the EU fertilisers regulation, but notes with concern the Commission’s aim to include the previously non‑prescribed material soil improvers; stresses that this material does not require precision in manufacturing and use, and calls on the Commission not to include it within the scope of the fertilisers regulation;

26.  Highlights the fact that the horticulture sector is leading the development and adoption of innovative precision farming systems and believes that such systems will reduce the use of pesticides and fertilisers, increase marketable yields and reduce waste, as well as improve continuity of supply and economic performance; stresses that plant cultivation methods, such as crop rotation and the planting of catch crops, as well as research and development, should be geared to minimising environmental damage;

27.  Notes the Commission proposal for a regulation on plant reproductive material (COM(2013)0262) and is concerned that it would impact disproportionately on the horticultural sector, and in particular on ornamentals and fruit; stresses that any legislation should be proportional and recognise the principle of subsidiarity; stresses, also, that changes to legislation must not endanger traditional varieties and crops, and should contribute to genetic diversity of and within populations of crops, for long-term food security and resilience of food systems;

28.  Notes the impact of non-native invasive horticultural species on the wider environment, but recommends that a regional, or country-based approach be taken in the Commission proposal for a regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species (COM(2013)0620), which recognises that some areas of Europe are more vulnerable than others and that different areas in Europe have different climates which will support a different array of plants;

29.  Strongly urges the Commission to safeguard as a general principle the freedom of plant breeders to use existing plant materials freely to develop and market new ones, regardless of any patent claims extending to plant materials;

30.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support the development of local fruit and vegetable markets and of short supply chains, thereby ensuring product freshness;

31.  Calls on the Commission to differentiate between cisgenic and transgenic plants and to create a different approvals process for cisgenic plants; awaits the EFSA opinion demanded by DG Sanco evaluating the findings of the working group of new biotech breeding techniques;

32.  Highlights the seasonally high labour needs of the horticulture sector and calls on the Member States to ensure that there are effective schemes in place to ensure that horticulture producers can access the labour they need for key periods of the year, while fully respecting the requirements of the seasonal workers directive, including the principle of fair wages;

33.  Welcomes the renewed emphasis on workforce training and apprenticeships, but notes with concern that the numbers of people completing horticulture apprenticeships in some Member States remains low, restricting the openings for young people with an interest in this sector; recognises that not all young people taking apprenticeships are suited to them; emphasises that efforts to encourage young people to consider jobs in the horticulture sector and provide them with training should be supported by means of awareness-raising and information campaigns which enhance the sector’s image;

34.  Urges the agri-food sector and the research community to work together in a systematic way to attract and train the next generation of researchers and upskill the existing workforce;

35.  Emphasises the benefits of strengthening and extending partnerships between government, industry and research organisations and the need to ensure that schemes to support such partnerships are structured in a way that maximises the impact and coherence of investments overall;

36.  Stresses the vital importance of making efficient use of qualified scientific resources so as to speed up the application of research and innovation results through the transfer of innovatory agricultural production technology to the horticulture sector and the combination of research, innovation, training and expansion in the agricultural sector with economic policies meeting the requirements of horticultural production development while increasing its efficiency;

37.  Is of the view that the floriculture and ornamental plant sector must be allowed to make better use of Union programmes for research, technological development and innovation, and calls on the Commission to include ‘protected cultivation’ in Horizon 2020 calls in order to stimulate innovation regarding, for example, sustainable crop protection, sustainable water and nutrient usage, energy efficiency, advanced cultivation and production systems, and sustainable transport;

38.  Is of the view that with funding for agricultural and horticultural research under budgetary constraint in Member States, funding by third parties, including, but not limited to, retailers, should be encouraged, and should be in line with the total research interest of the sector;

39.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to facilitate access to long-term funding for investment in modern horticultural production technologies, so as to enhance the competitiveness of horticultural products and services;

40.  Underlines the crucial importance of a good-quality business plan in securing capital finance; recommends that growers make greater use of business support and advisory services and urges the Commission to work more closely with industry to ensure that such services are easily accessible to growers;

41.  Urges the Commission to update, as part of a transparent process involving those working in the sector, the items in chapter six (live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers; and ornamental foliage) of the combined nomenclature for 2012;

42.  Is concerned by the prospect of horticultural production being transferred out of the EU;

43.  Is deeply concerned that between a third and a half of edible produce is wasted because of its appearance and calls on the Commission to create, as a matter of urgency, possibilities for marketing, particularly in local and regional markets, a wider range of quality specifications of produce, while ensuring transparency and the proper functioning of the market; draws attention to trials conducted in Austria and Switzerland involving the sale of blemished fruit and vegetables; calls on supermarkets to take into account market research which shows that many consumers are not necessarily worried about the cosmetic appearance of fruit and vegetables and are happy to purchase lower grade produce, particularly if this may appear to be cheaper;

44.  Notes with concern the overall loss and waste of fruit and vegetables intended for first market use and the significant economic loss to business; recognises that reducing systemic food waste is a key to increasing the supply of food to a growing world population; welcomes, nevertheless, the efforts being made by actors in the food supply chain to redirect this produce into a secondary market rather than to dispose of it;

45.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make the legislative and political environment as supportive as possible for uses of horticultural waste; points out that there are a number of materials, such as spent mushroom compost, which could be used in the production of value-added growing media, were it not classified as ‘waste’;

46.  Points out that aquaponic systems can make sustainable local food production possible and that the combination of freshwater fish farming and vegetable cultivation in a closed system can help to reduce resource consumption in comparison with traditional systems;

47.  Underlines the importance of improving the monitoring of prices and the quantities produced and marketed, as well as the need to produce EU-wide horticultural user statistics to help producers better understand market trends, predict crises and prepare future harvests; calls on the Commission to include ornamentals in its forecast information;

48.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.
(2) OJ L 273, 17.10.2007, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18.
(5) OJ L 189, 20.7.2007, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 106, 17.4.2001, p. 1.
(7) OJ C 198, 8.7.1996, p. 266.
(8) Available at http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/food/competitiveness/high-level-group/documentation/
(9) Available at http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/external-studies/2012/support-farmers-coop/fulltext_en.pdf
(10) Available at http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC80420.pdf
(11) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1.
(12) OJ L 167, 27.6.2012, p. 1.


Eradication of torture in the world
PDF 253kWORD 100k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on the eradication of torture in the world (2013/2169(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0206A7-0100/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other UN human rights treaties and instruments,

–  having regard to the UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1975(1),

–  having regard to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) and the Optional Protocol thereto (OPCAT),

–  having regard to the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and other relevant universally applicable UN standards,

–  having regard to the reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment(2),

–  having regard to the UN General Assembly resolutions on torture,

–  having regard to the statement adopted by the UN Committee against Torture on 22 November 2001 in connection with the events of 11 September 2001, pointing out that the prohibition against torture is an absolute and non-derogable duty under international law and expressing its confidence that ‘whatever responses to the threat of international terrorism are adopted by States parties [to the Convention], such responses will be in conformity with the obligations undertaken by them in ratifying the Convention against Torture’,

–  having regard to the UN General Assembly resolution of 20 December 2012 on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty(3),

–  having regard to the UN General Assembly resolutions on the rights of the child, most recently its resolution of 20 December 2012 thereon(4),

–  having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, and in particular Article 3 thereof, which states that ‘no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’,

–  having regard to the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

–  having regard to the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted by the UN on 28 July 1951(5),

–  having regard to the 23rd General Report of the Council of Europe’s European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, published on 6 November 2013(6),

–  having regard to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the two Optional Protocols thereto, on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography(7) and on the involvement of children in armed conflict(8), respectively,

–  having regard to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocol thereto(9),

–  having regard to the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, which entered into force in 1997(10),

–  having regard to the Statute of the International Criminal Court,

–  having regard to the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Istanbul Protocol)(11),

–  having regard to Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

–  having regard to the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy(12), as adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council on 25 June 2012,

–  having regard to the Guidelines to EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as updated in 2012(13),

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines on the death penalty of 16 June 2008(14),

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law(15),

–  having regard to the EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World in 2012, adopted by the Council on 6 June 2013(16),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2012 on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2011 and the European Union’s policy on the matter(17),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2012 on the review of the EU’s human rights strategy(18),

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA(19),

–  having regard to its study of March 2007 entitled ‘The Implementation of the EU Guidelines on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’(20),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 of 27 June 2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment(21),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 June 2010 on implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment(22),

–  having regard to its recommendation to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, to the Council and to the Commission of 13 June 2013 on the 2013 review of the organisation and the functioning of the EEAS(23),

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0100/2014),

A.  whereas, although the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is a key international norm, provided for in both UN and regional human rights conventions, torture still persists worldwide;

B.  whereas in this resolution the term ‘torture’ should be understood in accordance with the UN definition and also includes cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

C.  whereas the CAT and the OPCAT have created an international framework with real potential to move towards the eradication of torture, especially through the creation of independent and effective national preventive mechanisms (NPMs);

D.  whereas the EU has reinforced the commitment made in the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights to continue to campaign vigorously against torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment;

E.  whereas the eradication of torture, ill-treatment and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is an integral part of EU human rights policy, closely interlinked with other areas and instruments of EU action;

F.  whereas the EU Guidelines on torture were updated in 2012, while the last comprehensive public stocktaking and review of implementing measures took place in 2008;

G.  whereas, according to the updated guidelines, in the fight against terrorism the Member States are determined to comply fully with international obligations prohibiting torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

H.  whereas torture can be both physical and psychological; whereas there is a growing number of cases in which psychiatry has been used as a tool for the coercion of human rights defenders and dissidents, who are placed in psychiatric institutions in order to prevent them from carrying out their political and community activities;

I.  whereas the Member States' judiciaries should have the tools to prosecute those torturers who have never been judged, and whereas particular attention should be given to cases of torture under dictatorships in Europe, as many of these crimes have gone unpunished;

J.  whereas the erosion of the absolute prohibition of torture remains a persistent challenge in the context of antiterrorism measures in many countries;

K.  whereas there are significant policy challenges as regards the specific protection needs of vulnerable groups, in particular children;

L.  whereas the police in some countries use torture as their interrogation method of choice; whereas torture cannot be regarded as an acceptable way to solve crimes;

1.  Stresses that the prohibition of torture is absolute under international and humanitarian law and under the CAT; stresses that torture constitutes one of the ultimate violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, takes a terrible toll on millions of individuals and their families, and cannot be justified under any circumstances;

2.  Welcomes the inclusion of three actions relating to the eradication of torture in the EU Action Plan on Democracy and Human Rights, but emphasises the need for specific and measurable benchmarks to assess their timely implementation, in partnership with civil society;

3.  Pays tribute to all those civil society organisations, national human rights institutions, NPMs and individuals striving to provide redress and reparation to victims, fighting impunity and actively preventing the scourge of torture and ill‑treatment around the world;

4.  Notes that, according to the CAT, the term 'torture' means any act by which ‘severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person ... by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity’; considers, however, that situations in which acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment occur with the involvement of actors other than state or public officials also need to be addressed through policy measures for prevention, accountability and rehabilitation;

5.  Denounces the continued prevalence of torture and other forms of ill-treatment throughout the world and reiterates its absolute condemnation of such acts, which are and must remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever and can thus never be justified; observes that the implementation of the EU guidelines on torture remains insufficient and at odds with EU statements and commitments to addressing torture as a matter of priority; urges the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Member States to give renewed impetus to the implementation of those guidelines, namely by identifying priorities, best practices and public diplomacy opportunities, consulting relevant stakeholders, including civil society organisations and reviewing the implementation of the torture-related issues mentioned in the Action Plan; calls, in this connection, for the full and timely implementation of the three actions in the Action Plan that relate to the eradication of torture;

6.  Recommends that a forthcoming revision of the Action Plan define more ambitious and specific actions to eradicate torture, such as more efficient information- and burden-sharing, training and joint initiatives with UN field offices and the relevant UN Special Rapporteurs and other international actors, such as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, along with support for the establishment and strengthening of regional torture prevention mechanisms;

7.  Welcomes the 2012 update of the EU Guidelines on torture; underlines the importance of effective and results-oriented implementation of those Guidelines in conjunction with other guidelines and policy initiatives;

8.  Welcomes the fact that the guidelines reflect a holistic policy approach, including the promotion of an adequate legislative and judicial framework for the effective prevention and prohibition of torture, monitoring of places of detention, efforts to address impunity, and the full and effective rehabilitation of torture victims, backed up by credible, consistent and coherent action;

9.  Calls on the Council, the EEAS and the Commission to take more effective steps to ensure that Parliament and civil society are involved, at the very least, in the assessment exercise in respect of the EU Guidelines on torture;

10.  Reiterates the vital importance of rehabilitation centres for torture victims, both inside and outside the EU, in addressing not only the physical, but also the long-term psychological, problems experienced by torture victims; welcomes the EU’s provision of financial aid to rehabilitation centres for torture victims throughout the world and suggests that they adopt a multidisciplinary approach in their activities, encompassing counselling, access to medical treatment, and social and legal support; remains convinced that the funding provided by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) to such centres in third countries should not be cut, even in the current financial and economic crisis, since national healthcare systems in those countries are often not in a position to address the specific problems of torture victims adequately;

11.  Regrets the fact that no comprehensive public stocktaking and review of the implementation of the guidelines has been carried out since 2008 and stresses the need for regular and comprehensive assessment of their implementation;

12.  Recommends that the Guidelines be accompanied by detailed implementing measures to be circulated to EU heads of mission and Member State representations in third countries; calls on heads of mission to include individual cases of torture and ill-treatment in their implementation and follow-up reports;

13.  Stresses that EU policy should be based on the efficient coordination of initiatives and actions at EU and Member State level so as to exploit the full potential of available political instruments and their synergy with EU-funded projects;

14.  Calls on the Commission, the EEAS and the Member States to undertake periodic reviews of the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 banning the trade of torture and capital punishment equipment, and to promote that regulation worldwide as a viable model for enforcing an effective ban on torture tools;

15.  Takes note of the recent Commission proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (COM(2014)0001); stresses the importance of addressing brokering services, technical assistance and the transit of relevant goods; reiterates Parliament’s earlier call for the insertion of a ‘torture end-use catch-all clause’ into the regulation in order to allow Member States, on the basis of prior information, to license or refuse the export of any items which pose a substantial risk of being used for torture, ill-treatment or capital punishment;

16.  Considers that the death penalty, as a violation of the right to personal integrity and human dignity, is incompatible with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment under international law and calls on the EEAS and the Member States formally to acknowledge this incompatibility and to adapt EU policy on capital punishment accordingly; emphasises the need to interpret the respective EU guidelines on the death penalty and torture as cross-cutting; considers deplorable the physical and psychological isolation of, and pressures on, prisoners on death row; reiterates the need for a comprehensive legal study and discussions at UN level on the links between the application of the death penalty, including the death row phenomenon of severe mental trauma and physical deterioration, and the prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

17.  Supports an immediate ban on stoning; stresses that it is a brutal form of execution;

18.  Encourages the resumption of the Council’s torture task force, which should give renewed impetus to the implementation of the EU guidelines by identifying priorities, best practices and public diplomacy opportunities, undertaking consultation with relevant stakeholders and civil society organisations and contributing to the regular review of implementation in respect of the torture-related issues mentioned in the Action Plan;

19.  Is particularly concerned about the torture of human rights defenders in prisons, including community activists, journalists, human rights lawyers and bloggers; recognises that it is often the people who are most involved in the fight for human rights and democracy who suffer the most through unlawful detention, intimidation, torture and the exposure of their families to danger; insists that both EU missions on the ground and high‑level EU officials systematically and consistently raise this issue in meetings with their third-country counterparts, including by mentioning the names of specific human rights defenders who are in prison;

20.  Notes with grave concern the existence of secret detention centres and the practice of incommunicado detention and prolonged solitary confinement in several countries, which represent some of the most worrying examples of torture and ill-treatment; believes that these cases should be systematically raised in statements and démarches and included in the list of individual cases discussed during human rights dialogues and consultations between the EU and third countries;

21.  Reiterates its concern about widespread and systematic human rights abuses in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), in particular the use of torture and labour camps for political prisoners and repatriated citizens of the DPRK; calls on the DPRK authorities, as a first step, to allow inspections of all types of detention facility by independent international experts;

22.  Stresses that no exceptions from the absolute prohibition of torture and practices involving cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment can be justified, and that states have an obligation to implement safeguards to prevent the perpetration of torture and ill‑treatment, and to ensure accountability and access to effective remedies and reparations at all times, including in the context of national security concerns and counterterrorism measures; considers it worrying that some countries are assigning parallel policing tasks to paramilitary groups in an attempt to elude their international obligations; emphasises that the prohibition also applies to the transfer and use of information where it is either obtained by or likely to result in torture; recalls that the prohibition of torture is a binding norm under international human rights law and international humanitarian law, which means that it is valid both in peacetime and in wartime;

23.  Expresses its concern at police brutality in certain countries and considers this issue to be central to the prevention of torture and degrading treatment, especially in cases where peaceful demonstrations are put down, bearing in mind that according to the international definitions violence of this kind constitutes ill-treatment, at the very least, if not torture;

24.  Welcomes the joint project of the Council of Europe and the Association for the Prevention of Torture aimed at drawing up a practical guide for parliamentarians on visiting immigration detention centres;

25.  Calls for the adoption of a practical guide for parliamentarians on visiting places of detention as part of regular visits to third countries by European Parliament delegations; considers that the guide should include specific advice on visits to detention centres and other places where children and women may be detained, and should secure the application of the ‘do no harm’ principle in accordance with the UN Training Manual on Human Rights Monitoring, in particular with a view to avoiding reprisals against detainees and their families following such visits; calls for such visits to be undertaken in consultation with the EU delegation in the country concerned, NGOs and organisations active in prisons;

26.  Calls on the EEAS, the Human Rights Working Group (COHOM) and other relevant actors jointly to undertake a survey of EU support for the establishment and functioning of NPMs, and to identify best practices as outlined in the Action Plan;

27.  Calls on the EEAS, the Member States and the Commission to facilitate the establishment and functioning of independent and effective NPMs, and particularly the professional training of their staff;

28.  Calls on COHOM, the torture task force and the Commission’s DG HOME to develop measures integrating torture prevention into all freedom, security and justice activities;

Addressing protection gaps, in particular vis-à-vis the torture of children

29.  Expresses its particular concern regarding acts of torture and ill-treatment committed against members of vulnerable groups, in particular children; calls for the EU to take political, diplomatic and financial measures to prevent the torture of children;

30.  Calls for the EU to address various forms of human rights violation affecting children, especially those linked to child trafficking, child pornography, child soldiers, children in military detention, child labour, accusations of child witchcraft, and cyber bullying, where they amount to torture, including in orphanages, detention centres and refugee camps, and to implement effective safeguards to protect children wherever authorities are involved in any way in torture affecting children;

31.  Points out that unaccompanied migrant children should never be sent back to a country where they may be in danger of being tortured or of suffering inhuman or degrading treatment;

32.  Notes that the abusive deprivation of children’s liberty, especially in the context of preventive detention and the detention of migrant children, has resulted in overcrowded detention centres and an increase in torture and ill-treatment of children; calls on states to ensure that the deprivation of children’s liberty is, as required by universal human rights standards, genuinely used only as a measure of last resort, for the minimum necessary period and always taking into account the best interest of the child;

33.  Calls on states to develop a more child-friendly justice system, comprising free and confidential child-friendly reporting mechanisms, including in detention centres, that empower children not only to assert their rights, but also to report violations;

34.  Stresses the need for the EU to address the use of the internet by adults and children for the psychological torture of children and harassment through social media; notes that, despite the existence of its Safer Internet programme, the EU's response to the phenomenon of internet bullying has been inadequate; highlights the recent spate of incidents involving children taking their lives as a result of online bullying, and the continued existence of websites, hosted in Member States, which have been directly or indirectly implicated in these actions; stresses, therefore, the urgency of the EU taking clear and firm action against online bullying and harassment and the websites facilitating it;

35.  Recommends focusing EU policy efforts on rehabilitation and psychological support centres for children who are victims of torture, with a child-friendly approach that takes account of cultural values;

36.  Recommends including the torture of children in the planned targeted campaign on the rights of the child, as set out in the Action Plan;

37.  Recommends that the EEAS and the Commission pay special attention to torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment targeting artists, journalists, human rights defenders, student leaders, health professionals and individuals belonging to other vulnerable groups, such as ethnic, linguistic, religious and other minorities, especially when they are being held in detention or in prison;

38.  Calls on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the heads of the EU delegations, in their dialogue with authorities of third countries, to raise the issue of gender-based forms of torture that make girls a particularly vulnerable group, in particular female genital mutilation and early or forced marriages, as specified in the Strategic Framework and Action Plan;

39.  Calls on the EEAS and COHOM specifically to address the torture of children in the forthcoming updates of the EU guidelines on torture and the Action Plan;

40.  Expresses concern at the fact that women are particularly likely to be subjected to specific acts of torture and forms of inhuman or degrading treatment (rape, sexual mutilation, sterilisation, abortion, enforced birth control and deliberate impregnation), especially during armed conflicts, in which such acts are used as a type of warfare, even against those who are under age;

41.  Similarly condemns acts of torture, violence and abuse perpetrated on account of a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity;

42.  Points to the need to support the work of NGOs involved in preventing violence in conflict situations, and hence the torture and ill-treatment inflicted on the civilian population in such situations, and, to this end, to raise awareness within armed groups of the need to comply with international humanitarian standards, especially as regards gender‑based violence;

Fight against torture in the EU’s relations with third countries

43.  Calls on the EEAS, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights (EUSR) and COHOM to make sure that human rights country strategies (HRCSs) contain country-specific objectives and benchmarks relating to the fight against torture, including the identification of groups requiring special protection, such as children, women, displaced people, refugees and migrants, and those facing discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, caste or cultural background, religious or other beliefs, sexual orientation or gender identity;

44.  Appeals to the EU and the international community as a whole to observe the principle of non-refoulement, whereby no asylum-seekers should be sent back to a country where they may be in danger of torture or of suffering inhuman or degrading treatment as defined in the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees;

45.  Stresses that HRCSs should identify protection gaps, appropriate interlocutors and entry points such as the UN framework or security sector or judiciary reform, with a view to addressing torture-related concerns in each country;

46.  Recommends that HRCSs address the root causes of violence and ill-treatment by government agencies and in private settings, and define assistance needs with a view to offering EU technical assistance for capacity-building, legal reform and training, so as to help third countries comply with international obligations and norms, in particular in the context of signing and ratifying the CAT and the OPCAT and complying with their provisions on prevention (specifically the establishment of NPMs), fighting impunity, and the rehabilitation of victims;

47.  Further recommends that HRCSs include measures to encourage the establishment and operation, or where appropriate the strengthening, of national institutions which can effectively address the prevention of torture and ill-treatment, including the possibility of financial and technical assistance where necessary;

48.  Underlines the need for the EEAS and the EU delegations to make available specific information regarding the availability in third countries of support and possible legal remedies for victims of torture and ill-treatment;

49.  Calls on the EEAS and the EU delegations to make full, but carefully targeted and country‑specific, use of the political instruments at their disposal as outlined in the EU guidelines on torture, including public statements, local démarches, human rights dialogues and consultations, to raise individual cases, the legislative framework relating to torture prevention and the ratification and implementation of relevant international conventions; calls on the EEAS and the Member States to resume their past practice of carrying out targeted global campaigns on thematic issues relating to torture;

50.  Calls on the EU delegations and Member State embassies on the ground to implement the provisions of the EU guidelines on torture, and on the EEAS and COHOM regularly to monitor their implementation;

51.  Urges the EU delegations and Member States embassies throughout the world to mark the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture on 26 June each year by organising seminars, exhibitions and other events;

52.  Calls on the EEAS and the EUSR systematically to raise the issue of torture and ill-treatment in EU human rights dialogues and consultations with third countries;

53.  Recommends making torture-related issues the focus of local and regional civil society forums and seminars, with the potential for follow-up as part of the regular human rights consultations and dialogues;

54.  Calls on the EU, in its human rights dialogues, to promote the implementation of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners with a view to ensuring that prisoners’ inherent dignity is respected and that fundamental rights and guarantees are upheld, and also to ensure that the application of these rules is extended to all places of deprivation of liberty, including mental hospitals and police stations;

55.  Calls on the EU delegations and on Parliament delegations to carry out visits to prisons and other places of detention, including juvenile detention centres and places where children may be detained, to observe trials where there is reason to believe that defendants may have been subjected to torture or ill-treatment and to ask for information on and the independent investigation of individual cases;

56.  Calls on the EU delegations to provide support for members of civil society who are prevented from visiting prisons and observing trials;

57.  Calls on the EEAS, the Commission and the Member States to meet the commitments made in the Action Plan to facilitate the establishment and functioning of independent and effective NPMs; calls on the Member States to review and analyse with diligence and transparency the existing NPMs and national human rights institutions in the EU and in third countries, and to identify best practices among them, making sure that they include a child rights perspective, with a view to strengthening the existing mechanisms, making improvements and promoting these examples to partner countries;

58.  Invites the EU delegations to call for detention to be used as a last resort, and to seek alternatives, particularly for people in vulnerable situations such as women, children, asylum-seekers and migrants;

59.  Is deeply concerned at recent reports of EU-based companies supplying chemicals used for lethal injection drugs in the USA; welcomes, in this connection, the development by a number of European pharmaceutical companies of a contractual export and control system aimed at ensuring that the product Propofol is not used for lethal injections in countries still applying the death penalty, including the USA;

EU action in multilateral fora and international organisations

60.  Welcomes the EU’s persistent efforts to initiate and support the regular adoption of UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council resolutions and to treat the issue as a priority under the UN framework; suggests that the VP/HR and the EUSR maintain regular contact with the UN Special Rapporteur on torture with a view to sharing information relevant to the EU's foreign policy relations with third countries; suggests also that the Committee on Foreign Affairs and its Subcommittee on Human Rights regularly invite the UN Special Rapporteur on torture to brief Parliament on torture-related matters in specific countries;

61.  Points out that, as stipulated in Articles 7 and 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), torture, if committed systematically or on a large scale, can constitute a war crime or a crime against humanity; maintains that, by virtue of the responsibility to protect, the international community has a duty to protect populations who fall victim to such crimes, and, accordingly, calls for the decision-making procedure in the UN Security Council to be reviewed in order to avert deadlock in cases involving the responsibility to protect;

62.  Calls on third countries to cooperate fully with the UN Special Rapporteur, the Committee against Torture and regional anti-torture bodies such as the Committee for the Prevention of Torture in Africa, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) and the Organisation of American States (OAS) Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty; encourages the Member States and the EEAS systematically to take into account the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur and other bodies for follow-up in contacts with third countries, including as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process;

63.  Urges the EEAS, the EUSR and the Member States actively to promote the ratification and implementation of the CAT and the OPCAT as a priority and to step up their efforts to facilitate the establishment and functioning of effective and independent NPMs in third countries;

64.  Calls on the EEAS, the Commission and the Member States to support the establishment and functioning of regional torture prevention mechanisms, including the Committee for the Prevention of Torture in Africa and the OAS Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty;

65.  Calls on the EEAS, the EUSR and the Commission to step up their support for third countries, enabling them to implement effectively the recommendations of the relevant UN treaty bodies, including the Committee against Torture and its Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture, the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women;

66.  Calls on the EEAS, within its capacity, to provide technical assistance for the rehabilitation of torture victims and their families with the aim of empowering them to rebuild their lives;

67.  Underlines the importance of the Member States' active participation in implementing the provisions of the Action Plan and providing the EEAS with regular updates on the action they have undertaken in this regard;

68.  Calls on the EU to cooperate more efficiently with the CPT and the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe;

European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR)

69.  Welcomes the existing initiatives and projects under the EIDHR, 7 % of whose funds have been allocated to torture-related projects, and underlines the need to continue earmarking specific funds for the fight against torture and cruel or degrading treatment or punishment, with a focus on awareness-raising, prevention, addressing impunity, and the social and psychological rehabilitation of torture victims, priority being given to projects of a holistic nature;

70.  Stresses that the funds allocated to projects under the upcoming programming period should take into account the EU priorities outlined in the Action Plan;

71.  Calls on the Member States to provide an overview of bilateral assistance programmes in the field of torture prevention and rehabilitation with a view to sharing best practices, achieving efficient burden-sharing and creating synergies and complementarity with EIDHR projects;

Credibility, coherence and consistency of EU policy

72.  Points out that the EU and its Member States need to set an example in order to establish their credibility; calls, therefore, on Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Latvia and Slovakia to ratify the OPCAT as a matter of priority and establish independent, well‑resourced and effective NPMs; notes the importance of individual communications as an instrument for the prevention of torture and ill-treatment and urges the Member States to accept individual jurisdictions in compliance with Article 21 of the CAT; calls on the signatories to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to sign and ratify the 3rd Protocol thereto; also calls on the 21 Member States which have yet to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance to do so as a matter of urgency;

73.  Calls on those Member States which have not made declarations recognising the Article 22 jurisdiction of the CAT to do so as a matter of priority;

74.  Calls on all those Member States which have NPMs to engage in a constructive dialogue with a view to implementing NPM recommendations, along with the recommendations of the CPT, the CAT and its Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture, in a coherent and complementary way;

75.  Urges the EU to strengthen its commitment to the universal values of human rights and, accordingly, calls for it to use its neighbourhood policy and the principle of ‘more for more’ to encourage neighbouring countries to embark on reforms with a view to intensifying their action against torture;

76.  Regrets the very limited support provided by the Member States to the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture and the OPCAT Special Fund; calls on the Member States and the Commission to support the work of these funds through substantial and regular voluntary contributions, in line with their commitments under the Action Plan;

77.  Maintains that the EU should take a more determined stand, and calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to strengthen their commitment and political will with a view to securing a worldwide moratorium on capital punishment;

78.  Calls on the Commission to draw up an action plan with a view to creating a mechanism for listing and imposing targeted sanctions (travel bans, freezing of assets) against officials of third countries (including police officers, prosecutors and judges) involved in grave human rights violations, such as torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; stresses that the criteria for inclusion in the list should be based on well‑documented, converging and independent sources and convincing evidence, allowing for mechanisms for redress for those targeted;

79.  Recalls the obligation of all states, including the EU Member States, to adhere strictly to the principle of non-refoulement, under which states must not deport or extradite people to a jurisdiction where they run the risk of persecution; considers that the practice of seeking diplomatic assurances from the receiving state does not relieve the sending state of its obligations, and denounces such practices, which seek to circumvent the absolute prohibition of torture and refoulement;

80.  Notes the EU’s vital position on the world stage when it comes to combating torture, in close cooperation with the UN; stresses that strengthening the principle of zero tolerance for torture remains at the core of EU policies and strategies to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms, both outside and inside the EU; regrets the fact that not all the Member States comply fully with Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 and that some companies based in industrialised countries may have illegally sold to third countries policing and security devices that can be used for torture;

81.  Calls on the Council and the Commission to complete the current review of Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005, including the annexes thereto, with a view to more effective implementation in line with Parliament’s recommendations as set out in its resolution of 17 June 2010 on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005; calls on the Member States to comply fully with the provisions of that regulation, in particular the obligation of all Member States under Article 13 thereof to compile timely annual activity reports and make them public, and to share information with the Commission regarding licensing decisions;

Considerations on fighting torture and development policy

82.  Recalls the need to set up an integrated and comprehensive strategy to fight torture by addressing its root causes; believes that this should include overall institutional transparency and a stronger political will at state level to fight ill-treatment; underlines the urgent need to tackle poverty, inequality, discrimination and violence by using NPMs and strengthening local authorities and NGOs; stresses the need to further enhance the EU’s development cooperation and human rights implementation machinery in order to address the root causes of violence;

83.  Stresses that access to justice, the fight against impunity, impartial investigations, the empowerment of civil society and the promotion of education against ill-treatment are essential for combating torture;

84.  Stresses that the use of the term ‘torture’, and hence the absolute prohibition, prosecution and punishment of this practice, should not be ruled out when such acts are inflicted by irregular armed forces or tribal, religious or rebel groups;

85.  Recalls the importance and specificity of the dialogue on human rights as a component part of the political dialogue under Article 8 of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement; recalls also that every dialogue with third countries on human rights should include a robust anti‑torture component;

86.  Urges the Council and the Commission to encourage their partner countries to adopt a victim-oriented approach in the fight against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, by paying special attention to the needs of victims in development cooperation policy; stresses that introducing aid conditionality is an effective way of addressing the problem, but that high‑level dialogue and negotiation, civil society involvement, strengthening of national capacity and a focus on incentives can achieve better results;

Considerations on the fight against torture and women’s rights

87.  Urges the EU to ensure, by means of aid conditionality, that third countries protect all human beings from torture, especially women and girls; calls on the Commission to reconsider its aid policy towards countries practising torture and to divert aid to support victims;

88.  Welcomes the measures contemplated by the Commission in its communication entitled ‘Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation’(COM (2013)0833), and reiterates the need for consistency between the Union’s internal and external policies with regard to this problem; restates, moreover, the continuing need for the EU to work with third countries to eradicate the practice of female genital mutilation; encourages those Member States which have not yet done so to criminalise female genital mutilation in their national legislation and to ensure that the relevant legislation is implemented;

89.  Expresses its concern over cases involving the execution of women with mental health problems or learning difficulties;

90.  Condemns all forms of violence against women, in particular honour killings, violence entrenched in cultural or religious beliefs, forced marriage, child marriage, gendercide and dowry deaths; affirms that the EU must treat these as forms of torture; calls on all stakeholders to work actively to prevent torture practices through education and awareness-raising measures;

91.  Condemns all forms of torture of women related to charges of sorcery or witchcraft, as practised in various countries around the world;

92.  Welcomes the Rome Statute’s progressive and innovative approach in recognising sexual and gender-based violence, including rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced sterilisation and other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity, as a form of torture and, as such, as a war crime and a crime against humanity; also welcomes the implementation by the ICC's victim support fund of programmes to rehabilitate women who have suffered torture, notably in post-conflict situations;

93.  Calls for the EU to encourage those countries which have not yet done so to ratify and implement the CAT and the Rome Statute, and to incorporate the relevant provisions on gender-based violence into their domestic legislation;

94.  Urges states to condemn strongly torture and violence against women and girls committed in armed conflict and post-conflict situations; recognises that sexual and gender-based violence affects victims and survivors, relatives, communities and societies, and calls for effective measures for accountability and redress and for effective remedies;

95.  Regards it as crucial that national prosecutors and judges have the capacity and expertise properly to prosecute and try individuals for gender-based crimes;

96.  Considers that the failure to separate transgender women prisoners from male prisoners in detention is cruel, inhuman, degrading and unacceptable;

97.  Calls for the EU, in its human rights dialogues, to promote the implementation of the UN Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules), with a view to strengthening international norms for the treatment of women prisoners, encompassing the aspects of health, gender sensitivity and childcare;

o
o   o

98.  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 EU Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments of the Member States, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Special Rapporteur on torture.

(1) http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/DeclarationTorture.aspx
(2) http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Torture/SRTorture/Pages/SRTortureIndex.aspx
(3) (A/RES/67/176).
(4) (A/RES/67/167).
(5) http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/StatusOfRefugees.aspx
(6) http://www.cpt.coe.int/en/annual/rep-23.pdf
(7) http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPSCCRC.aspx
(8) http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPACCRC.aspx
(9) http://www.icrc.org/eng/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions/
(10) http://www.cidh.oas.org/Basicos/English/Basic9.Torture.htm
(11) Published by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training8Rev1en.pdf
(12) Council document 11855/2012.
(13) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/8590.en08.pdf
(14) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/10015.en08.pdf
(15) http://eeas.europa.eu/human_rights/docs/guidelines_en.pdf
(16) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/13/st09/st09431.en13.pdf
(17) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0503.
(18) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0504.
(19) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0418.
(20) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2007/348584/EXPO-DROI_ET(2007)348584_EN.pdf
(21) OJ L 200, 30.7.2005, p. 1.
(22) OJ C 236 E, 12.8.2011, p. 107.
(23) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0278.


Saudi Arabia
PDF 159kWORD 76k
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2014 on Saudi Arabia, its relations with the EU and its role in the Middle East and North Africa (2013/2147(INI))
P7_TA(2014)0207A7-0125/2014

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the cooperation agreement of 25 February 1989 between the European Union and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 July 1990 on the significance of the free trade agreement to be concluded between the EEC and the Gulf Cooperation Council(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 18 January 1996 on Saudi Arabia(2),

–  having regard to the Economic Agreement between the GCC member states, adopted on 31 December 2001 in Muscat (Oman), and to the GCC’s Doha declaration on the launch of the customs union for the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf, of 21 December 2002,

–  having regard to the ratification in October 2004 by Saudi Arabia of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), with particular reference to Article 7 thereof on political and public life,

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 March 2005 on Saudi Arabia(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2006 on the freedom of expression on the Internet(4),

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2007 entitled ‘Reforms in the Arab world: what strategy should the European Union adopt?(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2007 on women’s rights in Saudi Arabia(6),

–  having regard to the report on ‘Implementation of the European Security Strategy: Providing Security in a Changing World’, adopted by the Council in December 2008,

–  having regard to the joint communiqué of the 19th EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting of 29 April 2009, held in Muscat,

–  having regard to the Joint Action Programme (2010-2013) for implementation of the EU‑GCC Cooperation Agreement of 1989,

–  having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2010 on the Union for the Mediterranean(7),

–  having regard to the joint communiqué of the 20th EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting of 14 June 2010, held in Luxembourg,

–  having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2011 on the relations of the European Union with the Gulf Cooperation Council(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 April 2011 on the situation in Syria, Bahrain and Yemen(9),

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2011 on the situation in Syria, Yemen and Bahrain in the context of the situation in the Arab world and North Africa(10),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2011 on the situation in Syria(11),

–  having regard to its resolution of 27 October 2011 on Bahrain(12),

–  having regard to its resolutions on the annual meetings of the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva (2000-2012),

–  having regard to the visit of the European Parliament’s Chair of the Subcommittee on Human Rights on behalf of President Martin Schulz to Saudi Arabia from 24-25 November 2013,

–  having regard to its annual human rights reports,

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0125/2014),

A.  whereas the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is an influential political, economic and religious actor in the Middle East and the Islamic world, the world´s leading oil producer, and a founder and leading member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and of the G-20 group; whereas the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an important partner for the EU;

B.  whereas the EU is Saudi Arabia’s main trading partner with 15 % of total trade and KSA is the 11th-largest trade partner for the EU; whereas a large number of EU companies are investors in the Saudi economy, especially in the country’s petroleum industry and KSA is an important market for the export of EU industrial goods in areas such as defence, transport, automotive, medical and chemical exports;

C.  whereas the imports of goods from KSA to the EU, and the exports of goods from the EU to KSA increased considerably from 2010 to 2012;

D.  whereas the negotiations on a free trade agreement between the EU and the GCC, which were opened 20 years ago, are still not concluded;

E.  whereas the EU and KSA face common challenges that are global in origin and impact, such as a rapidly changing economy, migration, energy security, international terrorism, the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and environmental degradation;

F.  whereas the changing political and strategic context in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region necessitates a reassessment of EU-KSA relations;

G.  whereas KSA is a hereditary absolute monarchy without an elected parliament; whereas it faces the challenge of royal succession; whereas KSA has a population of 28 million, including 9 million foreigners and 10 million young people aged under 18; whereas modest and gradual reforms have been implemented in KSA since 2001, but are not institutionalised and can thus be easily reversed; whereas the country’s record in the field of human rights remains dismal, with fundamental gaps between its international obligations and their implementation;

H.  whereas Saudi Arabia’s first-ever municipal elections in 2005 constituted the first electoral process in the history of the country; whereas in 2015 only half of the members of the municipal councils will be elected, while the other half will still be appointed by the King;

I.  whereas only this year 30 women were appointed, for the first time, to the consultative Shura Council, and whereas only in 2015 will women be allowed to vote in municipal elections;

J.  whereas the World Bank report entitled ‘Women, Business and the Law 2014 – Removing Restrictions to Enhance Gender Equality’(13) places Saudi Arabia as the first in the list of countries whose laws limit the economic potential of women;

K.  whereas KSA is the only country in the world in which women are not allowed to drive and, although there is no official law banning women from driving, a ministerial decree in 1990 formalised an existing customary ban and women who attempt to drive face arrest;

L.  whereas the UNDP 2012 Gender Inequality Index (GII) ranks Saudi Arabia 145th out of 148 countries, making it one of the world’s most unequal countries; whereas the Global Gender Gap Report 2012 (World Economic Forum) ranks women’s labour market participation in KSA as one of the weakest in the world (133rd out of 135 countries);

M.  whereas the death penalty is carried out in KSA for a variety of crimes and at least 24 individuals were executed in 2013; whereas at least 80 people were executed in 2011 and a similar number in 2012 – more than triple the figure for 2010 – including minors and foreign nationals; whereas KSA is one of the rare countries to still carry out public executions; whereas there have been reports of women being executed by stoning in Saudi Arabia, contravening the standards laid down by the UN Commission on the Status of Women, which has condemned this as a barbaric form of torture;

N.  whereas KSA has taken strong and decisive action and enforced severe measures to combat terrorism and financial activities linked to terrorism; whereas, at the same time, KSA plays a leading role in disseminating and promoting worldwide a particularly rigorous Salafi/Wahhabi interpretation of Islam; whereas the most extreme manifestations of Salafism/Wahhabism have inspired terrorist organisations such as Al-Qaeda and pose a global security threat, including for KSA itself; whereas KSA has developed a system to control financial transactions to ensure that no funds are being channelled into terrorist organisations, which must be further reinforced;

O.  whereas UN human rights experts have expressed long-standing concerns about overly broad counter-terrorism measures, involving secret detention, which have also exposed peaceful dissidents to detention and imprisonment under terrorism charges; whereas international human rights organisations have urged King Abdullah to reject the counter-terrorism law adopted by the Council of Ministers on 16 December 2013, because of its overly broad definition of terrorism imposing unfair restrictions on free speech by potentially criminalising any speech critical of the Saudi Arabian government or society;

P.  whereas freedom of expression and freedom of the press and media, both online and offline, are crucial preconditions and catalysts for democratisation and reform and are essential checks on power;

Q.  whereas KSA has a lively community of online activists and the highest number of Twitter users in the Middle East;

R.  whereas the work of human rights organisations in KSA is severely restricted, as evidenced by the authorities’ refusal to register the Adala Centre for Human Rights or the Union for Human Rights; whereas charities are still the only type of civil society organisations allowed in the kingdom;

S.  whereas KSA needs to ensure the real freedom of religion, particularly regarding public practice and religious minorities, in line with an important role that KSA plays as custodian of the Two Holy Mosques of Islam in Mecca and Medina;

T.  whereas KSA continues to commit widespread violations of basic human rights despite its declared acceptance of numerous recommendations in the 2009 Universal Periodic Review before the UN Human Rights Council; whereas these recommendations include reform of its criminal justice system, which violates the most basic international standards with detainees routinely facing systematic violations of due process, because there is no written penal code which clearly defines what constitutes a criminal offence and judges are free to rule according to their interpretations of Islamic law and prophetic traditions; whereas the current Minister of Justice has emphasised his intent to codify Shari’a and to issue sentencing guidelines;

U.  whereas a number of gradual judicial reforms were initiated in 2007 by King Abdullah when he approved the plan for a new judicial system, including the establishment of a Supreme Court and special commercial, labour and administrative courts;

V.  whereas over one million Ethiopians, Bangladeshis, Indians, Filipinos, Pakistanis and Yemenis have been sent home in the last few months after a labour law reform was introduced to reduce the high number of migrant workers with the aim of combating unemployment among Saudi citizens; whereas the accelerated influx of huge numbers of returnees puts an extraordinary strain on the often poor and fragile countries of origin;

W.  whereas on 12 November 2013 the United Nations General Assembly elected KSA to serve a three-year term, beginning on 1 January 2014, on the Human Rights Council;

X.  whereas the opening of a dialogue between KSA and the EU on human rights could provide a very useful opportunity to enhance mutual understanding and promote further reforms in the country;

1.  Recognises the interdependence between the EU and KSA in terms of regional stability, relations with the Islamic world, the fate of the transitions in the Arab Spring countries, the Israel-Palestine peace process, the war in Syria, improving relations with Iran, counter-terrorism, stability of the global oil and financial markets, trade, investment and global governance issues, especially through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the G-20 framework; underlines that the geopolitical environment makes KSA and other GCC member states a focus of security challenges that have regional and global implications;

2.  Shares some of the concerns expressed by KSA, but urges the government to actively and constructively engage with the international community; welcomes in this context notably the agreement between the United States and Russia on ridding Syria of chemical weapons while avoiding a military confrontation;

3.  Appeals also to KSA to actively support the recent interim agreement between the E3+3 and Iran and to help secure a diplomatic resolution of outstanding nuclear issues in a more comprehensive agreement within the next 6 months in the interests of peace and security for the whole region;

4.  Underlines the European interest in a peaceful and orderly evolution and political reform process in KSA, as a key factor for long-term peace, stability and development in the region;

5.  Calls on the KSA authorities to open a dialogue on human rights with the EU, so as to enable better understanding and identification of the changes needed;

6.  Calls on the KSA authorities to enable the work of human rights organisations by facilitating the licence registration process; regrets the harassment of human rights activists and their detention without charges;

7.  Calls on the KSA authorities to allow its National Human Rights Association to operate with independence and to comply with the UN standards on national human rights institutions (the Paris Principles);

8.  Recalls that KSA’s human rights record was assessed under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council in February 2009, and that the KSA authorities formally accepted a significant number of the recommendations put forward by EU Member States during the review, including, for example, those calling for the abolition of male guardianship and those aimed at limiting the application of the death penalty and corporal punishment; awaits more substantive progress in implementing these recommendations and urges KSA to adopt a constructive approach with regard to the recommendations presented in the context of the ongoing 2013 Universal Periodic Review;

9.  Expresses grave concern that human rights violations such as arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, travel bans, judicial harassment and unfair trials continue to be widespread; is particularly concerned that alleged counter-terrorism measures are being increasingly used as a tool to arrest human rights defenders and that impunity for human rights violations is reportedly increasing; calls on the Saudi government to urgently act upon the recommendations of the 2009 UPR, including by continuing and intensifying its reform of the judicial system;

10.  Welcomes the engagement of KSA with the UN human rights system through the Human Rights Council and the universal human rights conventions it has ratified so far; calls, however, on KSA to sign and ratify the other core UN human rights treaties and agreements such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families;

11.  Believes that being a member of the UN Human Rights Council raises worldwide expectations to show particular respect for human rights and democracy, and appeals to KSA to increase its reform efforts; expects Human Rights Council members to fully cooperate with its special procedures and to allow unhampered visits by all UN Special Rapporteurs, notably to accept the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

12.  Notes that KSA has, reportedly, the highest ratio of Twitter users in the world indicating the strong role of internet-based social networks in the country and the increasing use of the internet and social networks among women; calls on the KSA authorities to allow independent press and media and ensure freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly for all inhabitants of KSA; regrets the repression of activists and protesters when they demonstrate peacefully; stresses that the peaceful advocacy of basic legal rights or making critical remarks using social media are expressions of an indispensable right, as Parliament has stressed in its report on digital freedom; emphasises that freedom of the press and media, both online and offline, is essential in a free society and forms a crucial check on power;

13.  Calls on the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to honour its commitments to several human rights instruments, including the Arab Charter on Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention against Torture, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;

14.  Calls on KSA to sign and ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC);

15.  Calls on the KSA authorities to improve their Shari’a-based criminal justice system in order to meet the international standards governing procedures for arrest, detention and trials, as well as prisoners’ rights;

16.  Calls on the KSA authorities to release prisoners of conscience, to end judicial and extra-judicial harassment of human rights defenders and to speed up the implementation of the new legislation on NGOs, ensuring their registration, freedom to operate and ability to operate legally;

17.  Calls on the EEAS to actively support civil society groups who work to enhance human rights and democracy in Saudi Arabia; calls on the EU Delegation in Riyadh to pursue an active human rights agenda by following law suits as observers and carrying out prison visits;

18.  Reiterates its call for the universal abolition of torture, corporal punishment, and the death penalty, and calls for an immediate moratorium on the carrying out of death sentences in KSA; regrets that KSA continues to apply the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes; calls also on the Saudi authorities to reform the justice system in order to eliminate all forms of corporal punishment; welcomes in this context the fact that KSA has recently passed legislation making domestic abuse a crime;

19.  Deplores the beheading in KSA last January of a Sri Lankan domestic worker, Rizana Nafeek, for a crime she allegedly committed while still a child, this being a clear violation of the Convention of the Rights of the Child which specifically prohibits capital punishment of persons under 18 at the time of the offence;

20.  Calls on the KSA authorities to ensure that all allegations of torture and other ill-treatment are thoroughly and impartially investigated, that all alleged perpetrators are prosecuted, and that any statement that may have been extracted under torture is not used as evidence in criminal proceedings;

21.  Deplores the fact that, despite ratification of the International Convention against Torture, confessions obtained under duress or as a result of torture are common; urges the KSA authorities to ensure the complete eradication of torture from the Saudi justice and prison system;

22.  Expresses its grave consternation that KSA is one of the countries in the world that still practises public executions, amputations and flogging; calls on the KSA authorities to pass legislation outlawing these practices, which constitute a gross violation of a number of international human rights instruments to which KSA is a party;

23.  Regrets that the KSA authorities have not extended an invitation to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, despite the recommendation of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for all states to extend official invitations to UN Special Rapporteurs;

24.  Calls on the KSA authorities to respect the public worship of any faith; welcomes the establishment of the ‘King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (KAICIID)’ in Vienna, which seeks to encourage dialogue among followers of different religions and cultures around the world; encourages the authorities to foster moderation and tolerance of religious diversity at all levels of the education system, including in religious establishments, as well as in the public discourse of officials and civil servants;

25.  Emphasises the need to respect the fundamental rights of all religious minorities; calls on the authorities to make greater efforts to ensure tolerance and coexistence among all religious groups; urges them to continue reviewing the education system, in order to eliminate existing discriminatory references to believers in other religions or beliefs;

26.  Calls on the KSA authorities to define a minimum age for marriage and take steps to ban child marriage in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which were both ratified by KSA;

27.  Notes the King’s appointment in 2013 of the first women to serve in the Consultative Assembly (Shura council) of KSA, occupying 30 seats out of 150, and looks forward to further developing the contacts and institutional links between the European Parliament and the Shura Council; expects the implementation of the King’s declaration that women will be allowed to vote and stand for office in the next municipal elections, to be held in 2015, and that they will subsequently be allowed to vote and stand for office in all other elections;

28.  Urges the KSA authorities to revoke the male guardianship system, and warns that the implementation of the law protecting women against domestic violence, adopted on 26 August 2013, will only be effective if the male guardianship system is removed, since the latter impedes the ability of women to report incidents of domestic or sexual abuse; urges the KSA authorities to also eliminate all restrictions on women’s human rights, freedom of movement, health, education, marriage, employment opportunities, legal personality and representation in judicial processes, and all forms of discrimination against women in family law and in private and public life in order to promote their participation in the economic, social, cultural, civic and political spheres; welcomes the global campaign in support of lifting the ban on women driving; calls on the authorities to stop exerting pressure on those who campaign for the right of women to drive; further reminds the Saudi Government of its commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child and of those which are incumbent upon it under UN General Assembly resolution 53/144 adopting the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders; draws attention to the need to promote awareness-raising campaigns and to also direct these at men, so that they too are aware of women’s rights and of the overall repercussions on society if those rights are not respected; stresses that this information should also reach rural areas and areas that are isolated from the rest of the country;

29.  Welcomes the recent legislation allowing Saudi girls in private schools to play sports, while regretting that girls in public schools are left out; welcomes also the great number of female university graduates who nowadays outnumber male graduates and encourages the government to intensify efforts to promote women’s education; stresses, however, that, while Saudi women make up 57 % of the country’s graduates, only 18 % of Saudi women over the age of 15 are employed – one of the lowest rates in the world; thus, calls on the Saudi Government to review and reform women’s education in order to increase their economic participation, ensure greater focus on fostering entrepreneurship competencies and address gender-specific challenges in the regulatory environment to improve women´s access to government business licensing services; welcomes the training programme established with the National Organisation for Joint Training, aimed at preparing girls to enter the labour market, and underlines the efforts made by the Saudi authorities to improve the status of girls in relation to training and to expanding their opportunities in new, usually male, sectors;

30.  Encourages efforts in KSA to promote higher education for women, resulting in new education trends in the Kingdom; notes that the number of women enrolled in institutions of higher education in 2011 amounted to 473 725 (429 842 males), whereas in 1961 only 4 women were enrolled, and that the number of women graduating from these institutions amounted to 59 948 (55 842 males); notes also that the percentage of female students at all school levels increased from 33 % in 1974-75 to 81 % in 2013; welcomes the international scholarship programme which allowed the number of female scholarship students abroad to stand at 24 581;

31.  Welcomes the first licences issued to women lawyers, but deplores the fact that the legal system is in the hands of male judges of religious background; takes note of the gradual codification of the Sharia which is underway and urges that it be speeded up, since lack of codification and the judicial precedent tradition often result in considerable uncertainty in the scope and content of the country’s laws and in miscarriages of justice; asserts the crucial importance of securing judicial independence and adequate legal training for judges;

32.  Welcomes KSA’s ratification of four UN human rights treaties, namely: the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW, ratified in 2000), the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT, 1997), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1996), and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1997);

33.  Stresses the importance of the debate opened among Islamic women scholars with a view to interpreting religious texts from the perspective of women’s rights and equality;

34.  Stresses that any negotiations on an EU free trade agreement that includes Saudi Arabia must first provide for strict obligations that safeguard the protection of women and girls;

35.  Welcomes the recent decision by the Ministry of Labour to accelerate the recruitment of women in various private-sector spheres, which has led to an increase in the number of Saudi women working in the private sector from 55 600 in 2010 to about 100 000 in 2011 and 215 840 at the end of 2012; welcomes the decision by the Ministry of Labour in conjunction with the Human Resources Development Fund to introduce programmes to promote women’s employment;

36.  Calls on the authorities to improve the working conditions and treatment of immigrant workers, with special attention to the situation of women working as domestic helpers, who are at particular risk of sexual violence and who often find themselves in conditions of virtual slavery; encourages the Saudi government to continue the reforms of the labour laws and notably to fully abolish the sponsorship (‘Kafala’) system, and welcomes the recent appeal by the National Society for Human Rights to the government to recruit foreign workers under a Labour Ministry agency instead; welcomes recent efforts to introduce national labour laws in order to provide standardised protection for domestic workers and ensure the prosecution of employers responsible for sexual, physical and labour rights abuses;

37.  Calls on the Saudi authorities to stop the recent violent attacks against migrant workers and to release the thousands who have been arrested and are being kept in makeshift centres, reportedly often without adequate shelter or medical attention; urges the home countries to cooperate with the Saudi authorities in order to organise the return of these workers in as humane a manner as possible; deplores the fact that the implementation of labour laws is often not conducted in line with international standards and that unjustified violence is used against irregular migrants, such as in the crackdown of November 2013 which ended with the deaths of three Ethiopian citizens, 33 000 persons in detention and the deportation of around 200 000 irregular migrants;

38.  Welcomes the ratification by KSA of some of the main ILO conventions, namely Convention No 182 concerning elimination of the worst forms of child labour; applauds its accession to the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (Palermo Protocol); expects the implementation of legal and political reforms to ensure that all those international treaties are enacted;

39.  Takes note of the fact that KSA has recently rejected a non-permanent seat at the UN Security Council;

40.  Believes that the solution to the region’s escalating security problems lies in establishing a common security framework, from which no country is excluded and in which the legitimate security interests of all countries are taken into consideration;

41.  Underlines the critical importance of EU-KSA cooperation in countering terrorism and violent extremism, and stresses that in order for it to be effective it must respect basic human rights and civil liberties; calls on the KSA authorities to improve control over the funding of radical militant groups abroad by Saudi citizens and charities; welcomes contribution agreement to launch the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Centre signed by the United Nations and KSA on 19 September 2011, and the decision of KSA to fund it for three years;

42.  Is concerned that some of the KSA’s citizens and organisations provide financial and political support for some religious and political groups notably in North Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and in particular in South Asia (namely Pakistan and Afghanistan), Chechnya and Dagestan, which may result in reinforcing fundamentalist and obscurantist forces that undermine efforts to nurture democratic governance and oppose the participation of women in public life;

43.  Calls on the KSA authorities to work with the EU and internationally to stop Salafi movements supporting the anti-state activities of the military rebels in Mali, which are leading to the destabilisation of the entire region;

44.  Stresses that KSA is a key member of the ‘Friends of Syria Group’; calls on KSA to contribute to a peaceful, inclusive solution to the Syrian conflict notably through support for the Geneva II talks, without preconditions; calls also for more active support and the provision of all possible humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people affected by the Syrian civil war; calls on KSA to stop any financial, military and political support of extremist groups and to encourage other countries to do the same;

45.  Reiterates its call on KSA to contribute constructively and to mediate in the interests of peaceful reforms and national dialogue in Bahrain;

46.  Calls on the KSA authorities to engage in peaceful dialogue with Iran over bilateral relations and the future of the region; further welcomes the 24 November 2013 statement by the KSA Government on the outcome of the Geneva Agreement with Iran;

47.  Calls on the EU and KSA to collaborate effectively with a view to bringing about a just and sustainable outcome for ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict;

48.  Urges the EU institutions to increase their presence in the region and to strengthen working relations with KSA, by increasing resources to the Delegation in Riyadh and by planning regular visits to the Kingdom, namely by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy;

49.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, the European External Action Service, the UN Secretary General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, H.M. King Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz, the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the Secretary-General of the Centre for National Dialogue of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

(1) OJ C 231, 17.9.1990, p. 216.
(2) OJ C 32, 5.2.1996, p. 98.
(3) OJ C 320 E, 15.12.2005, p. 281.
(4) OJ C 303 E, 13.12.2006, p. 879.
(5) OJ C 76 E, 27.3.2008, p. 100.
(6) OJ C 323 E, 18.12.2008, p. 529.
(7) OJ C 161 E, 31.5.2011, p. 126.
(8) OJ C 247 E, 17.8.2012, p. 1.
(9) OJ C 296 E, 2.10.2012, p. 81.
(10) OJ C 33 E, 5.2.2013, p. 158.
(11) OJ C 51 E, 22.2.2013, p. 118.
(12) OJ C 131 E, 8.5.2013, p. 125.
(13) http://wbl.worldbank.org/~/media/FPDKM/WBL/Documents/Reports/2014/Women-Business-and-the-Law-2014-Key-Findings.pdf

Legal notice - Privacy policy