title: 2011/12/EU: Commission Decision of 12 January 2011 amending Decision 2007/134/EC establishing the European Research Council

text:
               13.1.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 9/5

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 12 January 2011
   amending Decision 2007/134/EC establishing the European Research Council
   (2011/12/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Decision No 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) (1) and in particular Articles 2 and 3 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2006/972/EC of 19 December 2006 concerning the Specific Programme: ‘Ideas’ implementing the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) (2) and in particular Article 4(2) and (3) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The European Research Council (ERC) was established by Commission Decision 2007/134/EC (3).

               (2)

               According to the Specific Programme ‘Ideas’, an independent review was carried out of the ERC’s structures and mechanisms, against the criteria of scientific excellence, autonomy, efficiency and transparency and with the full involvement of the Scientific Council. The Review Panel suggested a number of adjustments in order to ensure a more effective European Research Council and a coherent presentation of the ERC’s activities to stakeholders.

               (3)

               On the basis of the review and the ambition to make the ERC fully sustainable, the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: ‘The European Research Council — meeting the challenge of world class excellence’ (4), sets out the aims for the second phase of the ERC’s development. It includes a number of specific actions to improve the ERC’s operations to ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the ‘Ideas’ Specific Programme.

               (4)

               In accordance with that Communication, it is necessary to ensure a single clear and transparent vision and seamless liaison between the ERC’s strategy and operational implementation, reflecting the activities of both the European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA), established by Commission Decision 2008/37/EC (5) and the Scientific Council, and to develop and implement a coherent and integrated communication strategy.

               (5)

               In order to recognise the personal commitment of the members of the Scientific Council, and especially the Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons, it is appropriate to introduce an honorarium for their attendance at the Scientific Council plenary meetings. The honorarium should reflect their responsibilities and be benchmarked against similar provisions in similar entities and Member States. It is also appropriate to provide for the financing of a standing Identification Committee for the identification of future Scientific Council members.

               (6)

               It is necessary to continue the arrangements for the local support to the Chairperson and the Vice-Chairpersons of the Scientific Council, using the ‘Coordination and Support Action’ grant funding scheme of the Seventh Framework Programme.

               (7)

               The term of office of the founding members of the Scientific Council expires on 1 February 2011 and there is a need for the staged renewal of the Scientific Council, as provided for in Article 4(6) of Decision 2007/134/EC. The identification of new members was carried out by means of an independent Identification Committee and in accordance with the provisions of Article 4(4) of Decision 2007/134/EC, including a report to Parliament and Council. This Committee made recommendations for the staged renewal of the Scientific Council and these recommendations have been accepted.

               (8)

               Decision 2007/134/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   Decision 2007/134/EC is amended as follows:

               1.

               Article 1 is replaced by the following:
               ‘Article 1
               Establishment
               The European Research Council is hereby established for the period from 2 February 2007 to 31 December 2013 for the implementation of the Specific Programme “Ideas”. It shall be composed of a Scientific Council and the European Research Council Executive Agency as established by Commission Decision 2008/37/EC (6).

               2.

               In Article 3 the following paragraph 3 is added:
               ‘3.   The Scientific Council shall cooperate with the European Research Council Executive Agency to ensure coherent and efficient implementation of the Specific Programme “Ideas” and close alignment of the scientific and administrative aspects of the ERC’s operations. That cooperation shall include a coherent communication of the ERC’s activities and the setting up of a common website covering the different aspects of the ERC’s operations.’

               3.

               Article 4 is amended as follows:

                           (a)

                           paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:
                           ‘4.   Future members shall be appointed by the Commission based on the factors and criteria set out in Annex I and following an independent and transparent procedure for their identification, agreed with the Scientific Council, including a consultation of the scientific community and a report to the European Parliament and the Council. The appointment of future members shall be published in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. For this purpose, a high level standing Identification Committee of independent experts may be set up as an expert group with honoraria paid under the operational budget of the Specific Programme “Ideas”.’;

                           (b)

                           paragraph 9 is deleted.

               4.

               Article 5 is amended as follows:

                           (a)

                           paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:
                           ‘4.   The Scientific Council shall be accountable to the Commission, maintain continuous close liaison with it and the European Research Council Executive Agency, and establish any necessary arrangements for this.’;

                           (b)

                           paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:
                           ‘6.   The Commission shall provide information and assistance necessary for the work of the Scientific Council allowing it to operate under conditions of autonomy and independence. A Coordination and Support Action as referred to in Annex III to Decision No 1982/2006/EC may be used to provide local administrative or advisory support to the Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons of the Scientific Council.’;

                           (c)

                           the following paragraph 8 is added:
                           ‘8.   The Scientific Council is provided access to documents and data in possession of the European Research Council Executive Agency in accordance with the procedure set out in Annex III.’

               5.

               Article 6 is amended as follows:

                           (a)

                           paragraphs 3 and 4 are replaced by the following:
                           ‘3.   The Scientific Council shall adopt its rules of procedure which shall include detailed provisions for the elections referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, as well as a code of conduct on confidentiality, potential conflict of interest, and processing of personal data in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
                           4.   The Scientific Council shall meet in plenary up to five times a year as required by its work. A summary minute of the plenary meetings shall be published on the ERC website.’;

                           (b)

                           the following paragraph 6 is added:
                           ‘6.   The Scientific Council may set up, from amongst its members, Standing Committees, Working Groups and other structures addressing specific tasks of the Scientific Council.’

               6.

               Article 8 is replaced by the following:
               ‘Article 8
               Honoraria and meeting expenses
               1.   The Scientific Council members shall be compensated for the tasks they perform by means of an honorarium for their attendance at Scientific Council plenary meetings. The honoraria and travel and subsistence expenses shall be charged to the operational budget allocated to the Specific Programme “Ideas”. The honoraria and related implementation rules are set out in Annex IV.
               2.   For other meetings than plenary meetings, the European Research Council Executive Agency shall reimburse travel expenses and, where appropriate, subsistence expenses of the members of the Scientific Council necessary for carrying out their activities, in accordance with the Commission’s rules on the compensation of external experts (7). Subject to prior approval of the European Research Council Executive Agency, travel and subsistence expenses related to such other meetings, necessary for the conduct of the Scientific Council’s work may be also covered.

               7.

               Annex II is replaced as set out in the Annex to this Decision.

               8.

               Annexes III and IV, as set out in the Annex to this Decision, are added.

         Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 12 January 2011.

            For the Commission

         Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 400, 30.12.2006, p. 243.

      (3)  OJ L 57, 24.2.2007, p. 14.

      (4)  COM(2009) 552 final.

      (5)  OJ L 9, 12.1.2008, p. 15.

      (6)  OJ L 9, 12.1.2008, p. 15.’

      (7)  Commission Decision C(2007) 5858.’

      ANNEX
      ‘
            ANNEX II

               MEMBERS OF THE ERC SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL

                        Name and Institute

                        End of term of office

                        Claudio BORDIGNON, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan

                        1 February 2013

                        Nicholas CANNY, National University of Ireland, Galway

                        31 December 2013

                        Sierd A.P.L. CLOETINGH, Free University of Amsterdam

                        26 April 2013

                        Mathias DEWATRIPONT, Université Libre de Bruxelles

                        1 February 2013

                        Tomasz DIETL, Polish Academy of Sciences

                        31 December 2013

                        Daniel DOLEV, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

                        31 December 2013

                        Carlos M. DUARTE, Spanish Council for Scientific Research, Majorca

                        26 April 2013

                        Daniel ESTEVE, CEA Saclay

                        31 December 2013

                        Pavel EXNER, Doppler Institute, Prague

                        31 December 2013

                        Hans-Joachim FREUND, Fritz-Haber-Institute, Berlin

                        1 February 2013

                        Timothy HUNT, London Research Institute

                        31 December 2013

                        Carl-Henrik HELDIN, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research

                        31 December 2013

                        Norbert KROO, Hungarian Academy of Sciences

                        1 February 2013

                        Maria Teresa LAGO, University of Porto

                        1 February 2013

                        Henrietta L. MOORE, University of Cambridge

                        26 April 2013

                        Helga NOWOTNY, Wissenschaftszentrum, Wien

                        31 December 2013

                        Christiane NÜSSLEIN-VOLHARD, Max-Planck-Institute for Developmental Biology, Tübingen

                        1 February 2013

                        Alain PEYRAUBE, CNRS, Paris

                        31 December 2013

                        Jens ROSTRUP-NIELSEN, Haldor Topsoe A/S

                        1 February 2013

                        Mart SAARMA, University of Helsinki

                        31 December 2013

                        Anna TRAMONTANO, University of Rome La Sapienza

                        31 December 2013

                        Isabelle VERNOS, Centre Regulació Genómica, Barcelona

                        31 December 2013

            ANNEX III

               ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS AND DATA

               Access to documents and data

                        1.

                        In order to perform the tasks entrusted to it, the Scientific Council may request access to documents and to process data which are in possession of the European Research Council Executive Agency.

                        2.

                        Beyond the material to which they have the right of access under the regime related to public access to documents (1), the European Research Council Executive Agency shall provide the Scientific Council with documents and data necessary for the performance of the tasks entrusted to the Scientific Council as long as this is done in compliance with and within the limits of the obligations on confidentiality, security and protection of personal data as provided by the European Union law.

                        3.

                        The members of the Scientific Council shall use such documents and data only for the purposes and tasks for which they are provided and shall be bound by an obligation of confidentiality.

                        4.

                        Appropriate organisational and technical measures to ensure the security and confidentiality of access and processing shall be set out, in order to prevent any unauthorised disclosure or access, accidental or unlawful destruction, loss or alteration of data and documents.

               Access to personal data

                        5.

                        For the processing of personal data, the members of the Scientific Council who receive these personal data shall guarantee the level of protection of personal data in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and the Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2).

                        6.

                        The members of the Scientific Council shall not process any personal data in a way incompatible with the purposes and tasks for which they are transmitted.

                        7.

                        The members of the Scientific Council shall give due care to the legitimacy, adequacy, relevance, accuracy, necessity and the limitation in time of personal data collected and processed.

               Information

                        8.

                        In case access to documents and data or access to personal data may not be granted because of protection of personal data, confidentiality, security or public interest reasons, the European Research Council Executive Agency shall provide the Scientific Council with a written explanation of the reasons why access may not be granted, as well as any information on the topic in question that it considers possible to provide within the provisions of the regulations.

            ANNEX IV

               Honoraria and implementation rules for the participation of the ERC Scientific Council members at Scientific Council plenary meetings

            Honoraria, travel expenses and subsistence expenses for the participation in up to five plenary meetings per year shall be implemented via an ad-hoc appointment-letter according to the following modalities.
            The Scientific Council plenary meeting is normally of 1,5 days duration.
            The honoraria of the members of the Scientific Council members shall be EUR 2 000 for full attendance at a plenary meeting of the Scientific Council or EUR 1 000 for partial attendance.
            The honoraria of Vice-Chairpersons of the Scientific Council shall be EUR 3 500 for full attendance at a plenary meeting of the Scientific Council or EUR 1 750 for partial attendance.
            The honorarium of the Chairperson of the Scientific Council shall be EUR 5 000 for full attendance at a plenary meeting of the Scientific Council or EUR 2 500 for partial attendance.
            Payment will be authorised by the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency or his/her duly authorised deputy on the basis of an attendance list validated by the Chairperson of the Scientific Council and the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency or their duly authorised deputies. The attendance list will indicate if each member’s attendance covered the full extent of the meeting (full attendance) or otherwise (partial attendance).
         ’

         (1)  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, OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

         (2)  OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.


title: 2012/496/EU: Council Decision of 2 December 2010 on the signature of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning reciprocal liberalisation measures on agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products, the replacement of Protocols 1, 2 and 3 and their Annexes and amendments to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part

text:
               7.9.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 241/1

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 2 December 2010
   on the signature of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning reciprocal liberalisation measures on agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products, the replacement of Protocols 1, 2 and 3 and their Annexes and amendments to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part
   (2012/496/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(5) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 16 of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part (1) (hereinafter ‘the Association Agreement’), which has been in force since 1 March 2000, provides for the gradual implementation of greater liberalisation of reciprocal trade in agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products.

               (2)

               In July 2005, the EU-Morocco Association Council adopted an Action Plan of the European Neighbourhood Policy, including a specific provision having the objective of the further liberalisation of trade in agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products.

               (3)

               On 14 October 2005, the Council authorised the Commission to conduct negotiations with the Kingdom of Morocco within the framework of the Association Agreement, in order to achieve that objective.

               (4)

               On 14 December 2009, the Commission concluded negotiations on behalf of the Union in respect of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters (hereinafter the ‘Agreement’) with the aim of amending the Association Agreement.

               (5)

               The Agreement should be signed,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The signature of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters (hereinafter the ‘Agreement’) between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning reciprocal liberalisation measures on agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products, the replacement of Protocols No 1, 2 and 3 and their Annexes and amendments to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part, is hereby approved on behalf of the European Union, subject to its conclusion (2).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is authorised to appoint the person empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the European Union, subject to its conclusion.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 2 December 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. WATHELET

      (1)  OJ L 70, 18.3.2000, p. 2.

      (2)  The text of the Agreement will be published with the Decision on its conclusion.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2016/1316 of 26 July 2016 amending Decision 2009/908/EU, laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council

text:
                  2.8.2016

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 208/42

            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/1316
      of 26 July 2016
      amending Decision 2009/908/EU, laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council
      THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,
      Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
      Having regard to European Council Decision 2009/881/EU of 1 December 2009 on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
      Whereas,

                  (1)

                  By Decision 2009/908/EU (2) the Council established the order in which the office of President of the Council was to be held for the Member States of the European Union as from 1 January 2007 until 30 June 2020, and it set out therein the division of that order of Presidencies into groups of three Member States.

                  (2)

                  The European Union was enlarged on 1 July 2013 to include Croatia as a new Member State.

                  (3)

                  Although no notification has as yet been received under Article 50 TEU from its government, a Member State has made it known publicly that it will withdraw from the Union. The order of presidencies of the Council should be amended to take account of that circumstance, without prejudice to the rights and obligations of that Member State.

                  (4)

                  The Council should establish the order in which the office of President of the Council shall be held for the near future. That order should be determined in accordance with the criteria laid down in the Treaties and in Decision 2009/881/EU of the European Council. The Decision 2009/908/EU should be amended accordingly,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
      Article 1
      Council Decision 2009/908/EU of 1 December 2009 laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council, is amended as follows:

                  (1)

                  Article 1 is replaced by the following:
                  ‘Article 1
                  The order in which the Member States shall hold the Presidency of the Council as from 1 July 2017 and until 31 December 2030, as well as the division of this order of Presidencies into groups of three Member States is set out in Annex I to this Decision.’;

                  (2)

                  Article 3 is replaced by the following:
                  ‘Article 3
                  The Council shall, before 31 December 2029, decide the order in which the Member States will hold the Presidency of the Council as from 1 January 2031’;

                  (3)

                  the text of Annex I to Council Decision 2009/908/EU is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Decision.

            Article 2
      This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
      It shall apply from 1 July 2017.
      It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

         Done at Brussels, 26 July 2016.

               For the Council

               The President

            M. LAJČÁK

         (1)  OJ L 315, 2.12.2009, p. 50.

         (2)  Council Decision 2009/908/EU of 1 December 2009, laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council (OJ L 322, 9.12.2009, p. 28).

         ANNEX

               ‘ANNEX I

                  Draft Table of Presidencies of the Council
                   (*)

                           Netherlands (**)

                           January-June

                           2016

                           Slovakia (**)

                           July-December

                           2016

                           Malta (**)

                           January-June

                           2017

                           Estonia

                           July-December

                           2017

                           Bulgaria

                           January-June

                           2018

                           Austria

                           July-December

                           2018

                           Romania

                           January-June

                           2019

                           Finland

                           July-December

                           2019

                           Croatia

                           January-June

                           2020

                           Germany

                           July-December

                           2020

                           Portugal

                           January-June

                           2021

                           Slovenia

                           July-December

                           2021

                           France

                           January-June

                           2022

                           Czech Republic

                           July-December

                           2022

                           Sweden

                           January-June

                           2023

                           Spain

                           July-December

                           2023

                           Belgium

                           January-June

                           2024

                           Hungary

                           July-December

                           2024

                           Poland

                           January-June

                           2025

                           Denmark

                           July-December

                           2025

                           Cyprus

                           January-June

                           2026

                           Ireland

                           July-December

                           2026

                           Lithuania

                           January-June

                           2027

                           Greece

                           July-December

                           2027

                           Italy

                           January-June

                           2028

                           Latvia

                           July-December

                           2028

                           Luxembourg

                           January-June

                           2029

                           Netherlands

                           July-December

                           2029

                           Slovakia

                           January-June

                           2030

                           Malta

                           July-December

                           2030

            (*)  Without prejudice to the United Kingdom's rights and obligations as a Member State.

            (**)  The current trio is inserted in this Annex for information purposes.’


title: 2010/443/CFSP: Council Decision 2010/443/CFSP of 11 August 2010 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Central Asia

text:
               12.8.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 211/29

         COUNCIL DECISION 2010/443/CFSP
   of 11 August 2010
   extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Central Asia
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 28, 31(2) and 33 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 5 October 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/670/CFSP (1) appointing Mr Pierre MOREL European Union Special Representative (hereinafter the EUSR) for Central Asia.

               (2)

               On 22 February 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/112/CFSP (2) extending the mandate of the EUSR until 31 August 2010.

               (3)

               The mandate of the EUSR should be extended until 31 August 2011. However, the mandate of the EUSR may be terminated earlier, if the Council so decides, on a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (hereinafter the HR) following the entry into force of the Decision establishing the European External Action Service.

               (4)

               The EUSR will implement his mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could harm the Common Foreign and Security Policy objectives set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   European Union Special Representative
   The mandate of Mr Pierre MOREL as the EUSR for Central Asia is hereby extended until 31 August 2011. The mandate of the EUSR may be terminated earlier, if the Council so decides, on a proposal of the HR following the entry into force of the Decision establishing the European External Action Service.
   Article 2
   Policy objectives
   The EUSR’s mandate shall be based on the Union’s policy objectives in Central Asia. These objectives include:

               (a)

               promoting good and close relations between countries of Central Asia and the Union on the basis of common values and interests as set out in relevant agreements;

               (b)

               contributing to strengthening the stability and cooperation between the countries in the region;

               (c)

               contributing to strengthening democracy, the rule of law, good governance and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Central Asia;

               (d)

               addressing key threats, especially specific problems with direct implications for Europe;

               (e)

               enhancing the Union’s effectiveness and visibility in the region, including through a closer coordination with other relevant partners and international organisations, such as the OSCE.

         Article 3
   Mandate
   1.   In order to achieve the policy objectives, the EUSR’s mandate shall be to:

               (a)

               promote overall political coordination of the Union in Central Asia and ensure consistency of the external actions of the Union in the region;

               (b)

               monitor, on behalf of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR) and in accordance with his mandate, together with the Commission the implementation process of the EU Strategy for a New Partnership with Central Asia, make recommendations and report to relevant Council bodies on a regular basis;

               (c)

               assist the Council in further developing a comprehensive policy towards Central Asia;

               (d)

               follow closely political developments in Central Asia by developing and maintaining close contacts with governments, parliaments, judiciary, civil society and mass media;

               (e)

               encourage Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to cooperate on regional issues of common interest;

               (f)

               develop appropriate contacts and cooperation with the main interested actors in the region, and all relevant regional and international organisations, including the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Community (EURASEC), the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Program (CAREC) and the Central Asian Regional Information and Coordination Centre (CARICC);

               (g)

               contribute to the implementation of the EU human rights policy and E U Guidelines on Human Rights, in particular with regard to women and children in conflict-affected areas, especially by monitoring and addressing developments in this regard;

               (h)

               contribute, in close cooperation with the OSCE, to conflict prevention and resolution by developing contacts with the authorities and other local actors (NGOs, political parties, minorities, religious groups and their leaders);

               (i)

               provide input to the formulation of energy security, anti-narcotics and water resource management aspects of the CFSP with respect to Central Asia.

         2.   The EUSR shall support the work of the HR and maintain an overview of all activities of the Union in the region.
   Article 4
   Implementation of the mandate
   1.   The EUSR shall be responsible for the implementation of the mandate acting under the authority of the HR.
   2.   The Political and Security Committee (hereinafter the PSC) shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
   Article 5
   Financing
   1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR in the period from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2011 shall be EUR 1 250 000.
   2.   The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union.
   3.   The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
   Article 6
   Constitution and composition of the team
   1.   Within the limits of his mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting his team. The team shall include the expertise on specific policy issues as required by the mandate. The EUSR shall keep the Council and the Commission promptly informed of the composition of his team.
   2.   Member States and institutions of the Union may propose the secondment of staff to work with the EUSR. The salary of personnel who are seconded by a Member State or an institution of the Union to the EUSR shall be covered by the Member State or the institution of the Union concerned respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the General Secretariat of the Council may also be posted to the EUSR. International contracted staff shall have the nationality of a Member State.
   3.   All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State or Union institution and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
   Article 7
   Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and his staff
   The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the mission of the EUSR and the members of his staff shall be agreed with the host party/parties, as appropriate. Member States and the Commission shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
   Article 8
   Security of EU classified information
   The EUSR and the members of his team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2001/264/EC of 19 March 2001 adopting the Council’s security regulations (3), in particular when managing EU classified information.
   Article 9
   Access to information and logistical support
   1.   Member States, the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
   2.   The Union delegations and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
   Article 10
   Security
   In accordance with the Union’s policy on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty, the EUSR shall take all reasonably practicable measures, in conformity with his mandate and the security situation in his geographical area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under his direct authority, notably by:

               (a)

               establishing a mission-specific security plan based on guidance from the General Secretariat of the Council, including mission-specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the mission area, as well as management of security incidents and a mission contingency and evacuation plan;

               (b)

               ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high risk insurance as required by the conditions in the mission area;

               (c)

               ensuring that all members of his team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the mission area, based on the risk ratings assigned to the mission area by the General Secretariat of the Council;

               (d)

               ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented and providing the HR, the Council and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the mid-term and mandate implementation reports.

         Article 11
   Reporting
   The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with oral and written reports. The EUSR shall also report as necessary to Council working parties. Regular written reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. Upon recommendation of the HR or the PSC, the EUSR may provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports.
   Article 12
   Coordination
   1.   The EUSR shall promote overall Union political coordination. He shall help to ensure that all Union instruments in the field are engaged coherently to attain the Union’s policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with those of the Commission, as well as those of the EUSR for Afghanistan. The EUSR shall provide regular briefings to Member States’ missions and the Union’s delegations.
   2.   In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Heads of the Union delegations and Member States’ Heads of Mission. They shall make best efforts to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall also liaise with other international and regional actors in the field.
   Article 13
   Review
   The implementation of this Decision and its consistency with other contributions from the Union to the region shall be kept under regular review. The EUSR shall present the HR, the Council and the Commission with a progress report at the end of February 2011 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report at the end of the mandate.
   Article 14
   Entry into force
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 11 August 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         S. VANACKERE

      (1)  OJ L 275, 6.10.2006, p. 65.

      (2)  OJ L 46, 23.2.2010, p. 27.

      (3)  OJ L 101, 11.4.2001, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31999D0371

1999/371/EC: Administrative Commission of the European Communities on social security for migrant workers - Decision No 172 of 9 December 1998 on the model forms necessary for the application of Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 (E 101)

Official Journal L 143 , 08/06/1999 P. 0013 - 0030

DECISION No 172of 9 December 1998on the model forms necessary for the application of Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 (E 101)(1999/371/EC)THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS,Having regard to Article 81(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community(1), under which it is the duty of the Administrative Commission to deal with all administrative questions arising from Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and subsequent Regulations,Having regard to Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 of 21 March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community(2), under which it is the duty of the Administrative Commission to draw up models of certificates, certified statements, declarations, applications and other documents necessary for the application of the Regulations,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1606/98 of 29 June 1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, with a view to extending them to cover special schemes for civil servants(3),Whereas this model form should be adapted to take account of Decision No 164;Whereas the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992, amended by the Protocol of 17 March 1993, Annex VI, implements Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 within the European Economic Area;Whereas, by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee, the model forms necessary to implement Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 are to be adapted and used within the European Economic Area;Whereas, for practical reasons, identical forms should be used within the Community and within the European Economic Area;Whereas the language in which the forms should be drawn up is dealt with byRecommendation No 15 of the Administrative Commission,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:1. The model form E 101 reproduced in Decision No 164 of 27 November 1996 shall be replaced by the model appended hereto.2. The competent authorities of the Member States shall make available to those involved (rightful claimants, institutions, employers, etc.) the form according to the attached model.3. The form shall be available in the official languages of the Community and laid out in such manner that the different versions are perfectly superposable, thereby making it possible for each person or body to which a form is addressed (rightful claimant, institution, employer, etc.) to receive the form printed in their own language.4. This Decision shall be applicable from the first day of the month following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.The Chairman of the Administrative CommissionHelmut SIEDL(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.(2) OJ L 74, 27.3.1972, p. 1.(3) OJ L 209, 25.7.1998, p. 1.>PIC FILE= "L_1999143EN.001502.EPS">>PIC FILE= "L_1999143EN.001601.EPS">>PIC FILE= "L_1999143EN.001701.EPS">>PIC FILE= "L_1999143EN.001801.EPS">


title: 2008/373/EC: Council Decision of 28 April 2008 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000

text:
               17.5.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 129/44

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 28 April 2008
   concerning the conclusion of the Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000
   (2008/373/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 310 thereof, in conjunction with the second sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Having regard to the assent of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 96 of the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part (2) (hereafter referred to as ‘the Partnership Agreement’), a Party which, after having conducted a strengthened political dialogue, considers that another Party fails to fulfil an obligation in respect of one of the essential elements referred to in Article 9 of the Partnership Agreement may invite the other Party to hold consultations and, in certain circumstances, take appropriate measures, including where necessary the partial or full suspension of application of the Partnership Agreement to the Party concerned.

               (2)

               Pursuant to Article 97 of the Partnership Agreement, a Party which considers that a serious case of corruption has occurred may invite the other Party to hold consultations and, in certain circumstances, take appropriate measures, including where necessary the partial or full suspension of application of the Partnership Agreement to the Party concerned.

               (3)

               Pursuant to Article 11b of the Partnership Agreement, a Party which, after having conducted a strengthened political dialogue, informed in particular by reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and other relevant multilateral institutions, considers that the other Party has failed to fulfil an obligation stemming from paragraph 1 of that article on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, is to invite the other party to hold consultations and, in certain circumstances, take appropriate measures, including where necessary the partial or full suspension of application of the Partnership Agreement to the party concerned.

               (4)

               An effective procedure should be adopted when it is intended to take appropriate measures under Article 96, Article 97, or paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of Article 11b of the Partnership Agreement.

               (5)

               The Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 should be approved,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, and the declarations made by the Community unilaterally or jointly with other parties and attached to the Final Act, are hereby approved on behalf of the European Community (3).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to deposit the instrument of approval as required by Article 93 of the Partnership Agreement on behalf of the European Community.
   Article 3
   1.   Where, at the initiative of the Commission or a Member State, after having exhausted all possible options for dialogue under Article 8 of the Partnership Agreement, the Council considers that an ACP State fails to fulfil an obligation concerning one of the essential elements referred to in Article 9 of the Partnership Agreement, or in serious cases of corruption, the ACP State concerned shall be invited, unless there is special urgency, to hold consultations in accordance with Articles 96 and 97 of the Partnership Agreement.
   Where, at the initiative of the Commission or a Member State, informed in particular by reports by the IAEA, the OPCW and other relevant multilateral institutions, the Council considers that an ACP State has failed to fulfil an obligation stemming from Article 11b(1) of the Partnership Agreement on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the ACP State concerned shall be invited, unless there is special urgency, to hold consultations in accordance with Article 11b(4), (5) and (6) of the Partnership Agreement.
   The Council shall act by a qualified majority.
   In the consultations, the Community shall be represented by the Presidency of the Council and the Commission.
   2.   If, on expiry of the deadlines for consultations provided for in Article 11b(5), Article 96(2) or Article 97(2) of the Partnership Agreement, and despite all efforts, no solution has been found, or immediately in a case of urgency or refusal to hold consultations, the Council may, pursuant to those Articles, decide, on a proposal from the Commission and acting by a qualified majority, to take appropriate measures including partial suspension.
   The Council shall act unanimously in the case of a full suspension of application of the Partnership Agreement in relation to the ACP State concerned.
   These measures shall remain in force until such time as the Council has used the applicable procedure as set out in the first subparagraph to take a decision amending or revoking the measures adopted previously, or where applicable, for the period indicated in the Decision.
   For that purpose the Council shall proceed to review the above measures regularly and at least every six months.
   The President of the Council shall notify the measures thus adopted to the ACP State concerned and to the ACP-EC Council of Ministers before they enter into force.
   The Council’s Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Where the measures are adopted immediately, notification thereof shall be addressed to the ACP State and to the ACP-EC Council of Ministers at the same time as an invitation to hold consultations.
   3.   The European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed of any decision taken under paragraphs 1 and 2.
   4.   If the ACP-EC Council of Ministers develops further modalities for consultation as referred to in Article 3(5) of the Annex VII of the Partnership Agreement, the position to be taken by the Council within the ACP-EC Council of Ministers shall be based on a proposal by the Commission.
   Article 4
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Luxembourg, 28 April 2008.

            For the Council

            The President

         D. RUPEL

      (1)  Assent given on 18 January 2007 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

      (2)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3. Agreement as last amended by the Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement (OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 27).

      (3)  The texts of the Agreement and of the Final Act have already been published in OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 27.


title: 2013/575/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on the closure of the accounts of the Community Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/227

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on the closure of the accounts of the Community Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2011
   (2013/575/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the Community Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2011, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05753/2013 – C7-0041/2013),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 768/2005 of 26 April 2005 establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (4), and in particular Article 36 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0109/2013),

               1.

               Approves the closure of the accounts of the Community Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2011;

               2.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Executive Director of the European Fisheries Control Agency (previously referred to as Community Fisheries Control Agency), the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 388, 15.12.2012, p. 86.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 128, 21.5.2005, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.


Avis juridique important

|

31990D0075

90/75/EEC: Council Decision of 12 February 1990 concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on a programme plan to stimulate the international cooperation and interchange needed by European research scientists (Science)

Official Journal L 050 , 26/02/1990 P. 0029

COUNCIL DECISION  of 12 February 1990  concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on a programme plan to stimulate the international cooperation and interchange needed  by European research scientists (Science)  (90/75/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 130 q (2) thereof,  Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),  In cooperation with the  European Parliament (2),  Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),  Whereas by Decision 88/419/EEC (4), the Council adopted a programme plan to stimulate the international cooperation and interchange needed by European  research scientists (1988 to 1992) (Science); whereas Article 5 of that Decision authorizes the Commission to negotiate agreements with third countries and in particular with those European countries having concluded framework agreements for scientific  and technical cooperation with the Community with a view to associating them wholly or partly with the programme plan;  Whereas by Decision 87/177/EEC (5), the Council approved the conclusion on behalf of the European Economic Community of the Framework  Agreement for scientific and technical cooperation between the European Communities and, among others, the Swiss Confederation;  Whereas the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on a programme plan to  stimulate the international cooperation and interchange needed by European research scientists (Science) should be approved,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:   Article 1  The Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on a programme plan to stimulate the international cooperation and interchange needed by European research scientists (Science), is hereby approved  on behalf of the Community.  The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.  Article 2  The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 11 of the Agreement (6).    Done at Brussels, 12 February 1990.  For the Council  The President  A. REYNOLDS         (1) OJ No C 197, 2. 8. 1989, p. 21.  (2) OJ No C 291, 20. 11. 1989, p. 42 and OJ No C 38,  19. 2. 1990.  (3) OJ No C 298, 27. 11. 1989, p. 30.  (4) OJ No L 206, 30. 7. 1988, p. 34.  (5) OJ No L 71, 14. 3. 1987, p. 29.  (6) The date of entry  into force of the Agreement will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities by the General Secretariat of the Council.


title: 2006/713/EC: Commission Decision of 20 October 2006 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of recordable digital versatile discs (DVD+/-R) originating in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan

text:
               24.10.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 293/7

      COMMISSION DECISION

   of 20 October 2006
   terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of recordable digital versatile discs (DVD+/-R) originating in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan
   (2006/713/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Communities (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
   After consulting the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   A.   PROCEDURE
   1.   Initiation

               (1)

               On 6 August 2005, the Commission announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2) the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the Community of recordable digital versatile discs (‘DVD+/-R’) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’), Hong Kong and Taiwan (‘the countries concerned’).

               (2)

               The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged on 24 June 2005 by CECMA (‘the complainant’) on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this case more than 60 %, of the total Community production of DVD+/-R. The complaint contained evidence of dumping of DVD+/-R and of material injury resulting from it, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.

         2.   Parties concerned by the proceeding

               (3)

               The Commission officially advised the complainant, the complainant producers, other known Community producers, the exporting producers in the countries concerned, importers, distributors, retailers and consumer organisations known to be concerned, and representatives of the countries concerned of the opening of the proceeding.

               (4)

               In order to allow exporting producers in the PRC to submit a claim for market economy treatment (‘MET’) or individual treatment (‘IT’), if they so wished, the Commission sent claim forms to the exporting producers known to be concerned and to all the other companies that made themselves known within the deadlines set out in the notice of initiation. Fifteen companies requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation or IT should the investigation establish that they did not meet the conditions for MET.

               (5)

               The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned, including all complainant producers, all other known Community producers, exporting producers in the countries concerned and importers, retailers and distributors. Questionnaires were also sent to exporting producers in Japan that was considered a replacement for Taiwan as potential analogue country to establish a normal value for exporting producers in the PRC to which MET might not be granted. The change of potential analogue country followed objections raised by interested parties, mainly relating to the fact that dumping had been found in the past for major Taiwanese exporters of a neighbouring and to an extent, substitutable product. Replies were received from twenty-two exporting producers in the countries concerned, all complainant producers, one other Community producer, eight unrelated importers, one distributor and seven retailers (one of whom is a combined wholesaler/retailer).

               (6)

               Due to the high number of replies from the PRC (nine groups of companies) and Taiwan (eleven companies), sampling was applied for these two countries, as envisaged in the notice of initiation. In accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, the sample was based on the largest representative volume of exports which can reasonably be investigated within the time available. The samples selected consisted respectively of four Chinese exporting producers, representing 79 % of the export volume of the Chinese co-operating parties and five Taiwanese exporting producers, representing 97 % of the export volume of the Taiwanese cooperating parties. In accordance with Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, the Chinese and Taiwanese authorities were consulted and raised no objection. Concerning Hong Kong, sampling was not necessary.

               (7)

               The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for a determination of dumping, resulting injury and Community interest and carried out verifications at the premises of the following companies:

                           (a)

                           Community producers

                                       —

                                       Computer Support Italcard s.r.l. (Milano, Italy)

                                       —

                                       Manufacturing Advanced Media (Mulhouse, France)

                                       —

                                       TDK Recording Media Europe (Luxembourg)

                                       —

                                       Sony DADC (Salzburg, Austria)

                           (b)

                           Exporting producers in Hong Kong

                                       —

                                       UME Disc Ltd.

                                       —

                                       China Shing Manufacturing

                                       —

                                       MDA Technology Ltd.

                                       —

                                       Giant Base Technology Ltd.

                                       —

                                       Pop Hero Holdings Ltd.

                                       —

                                       Wealth Fair Investment Ltd.

                           (c)

                           Exporting producers in Taiwan

                                       —

                                       Prodisc Technology, Inc (Taipei, Taiwan)

                                       —

                                       Daxon Technology (Taipei, Taiwan)

                           (d)

                           Unrelated importers and distributors

                                       —

                                       Verbatim Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

                                       —

                                       Maxell Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

                                       —

                                       Philips Recordable Media (Wiesbaden, Germany)

                                       —

                                       Sony France S.A. (Paris, France)

                                       —

                                       Ingram Micro Distribution GmbH (München, Germany)

                                       —

                                       SK Kassetten GmbH & Co. KG (Neuenrade, Germany)

                                       —

                                       Intenso GmbH (Vechta, Germany)

                                       —

                                       Emtec International S.p.a. (Paris, France)

                           (e)

                           Wholesaler/Retailer

                                       —

                                       Metro Group Buying GmbH

                           (f)

                           Retailers

                                       —

                                       Carrefour Marchandises Internationales (Paris, France)

                                       —

                                       El Corte Inglés S.A. (Madrid, Spain)

                                       —

                                       FNAC S.A. (Paris, France)

                           (g)

                           Producer in analogue country

                                       —

                                       Taiyo Yuden (Takasaki, Japan).

               (8)

               It is recalled that no provisional measures were imposed in the current investigation. All parties received a disclosure of the facts and considerations on which the decision not to impose provisional measures was based. All parties were granted a period within which they could make comments in relation to these disclosures.

               (9)

               Some interested parties submitted comments in writing. Those parties who requested were also granted an opportunity to be heard orally. The Commission continued to seek and verify all information it deemed necessary for its definitive findings.

         3.   Investigation Period

               (10)

               The investigation period of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 (‘IP’). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2002 to the end of the investigation period (‘period considered’).

         4.   Product concerned and like product
   4.1.   Product concerned

               (11)

               The product concerned is recordable digital versatile discs (‘DVD+/-R’) originating in the PRC, Hong Kong and Taiwan normally declared within CN code ex 8523 90 30 (CN code since 1 January 2006). This code covers products with a recording capacity exceeding 900 megabytes but not exceeding 18 gigabytes, other than erasable. This CN code is only given for information. The product concerned belongs to the recording media industry.

               (12)

               A DVD-R is an optical storage medium for digital data consisting of a polycarbonate disk, coated with single layers of dye. DVD+/-Rs consist normally of two 0,6 mm thick polycarbonate substrate of 120 mm or less, glued together. Although recording on such discs can be done in several steps, the recorded information can not be erased. The disk is an optical storage medium for digital data, music and video. Recording is realised by exposing the dye layer (recording dye) to an infrared laser beam in a DVD-R Recorder.

               (13)

               There are two different standards of DVD, namely DVD minus R (‘DVD-R’) and DVD plus R (‘DVD+R’). Depending on what group of companies that originally developed the different standards, producers traditionally either supported the production of either DVD+R or DVD-R (For example, DVD-R is a product standard supported by a group labelled ‘DVD Forum’ which included inter alia the Japanese producer Panasonic). Nowadays, most producers are manufacturing and marketing both standards and almost all DVD-players are able to play both DVD-R and DVD+R.

               (14)

               DVD+/-Rs can be distinguished according to the appearance, the type of data stored, the storage capacity, the reflective metal layer and whether or not the DVD+/-R is printed upon. Furthermore, there are different kinds of recording speeds from 4× to higher speed DVD+/-Rs (8×, 16× or higher).

               (15)

               The product is sold in different quantities. DVD+/-Rs come on the market in different types of packaging, partly in so called ‘slim/jewel-cases’ containing 1 DVD+/-R, so called ‘cake boxes’ of 10 to 100 DVD+/-Rs, so called ‘shrink/wrapped spindles’ of 10 to 100 DVD+/-Rs and envelopes containing DVD+/-R packed in cellophane, carton boxes etc.

               (16)

               The usable capacity for single-layer DVD+/-R is 4,7 gigabyte (‘GB’), whereas the double-sided layer of DVD+/-Rs is doubling the date storage capacity to 9,4 GB.

               (17)

               Although the quality of the various types of DVD+/-Rs sold differs, this does not entail any significant differences in the basic physical and technical characteristics of the different types and standards. Moreover, the investigation has shown that all DVD+/-Rs have the same end-use. They are therefore considered as one product for the purpose of this investigation.

         4.2.   Like product

               (18)

               The investigation has shown that there were no differences in the basic physical and technical characteristics and uses between the product concerned and the DVD+/-R’s

                           —

                           produced and sold domestically in the countries concerned,

                           —

                           produced by the complainant producers and other Community producers and sold on the Community market,

                           —

                           produced and sold on the domestic market in the analogue country (Japan) for the purpose of establishing the normal value with respect to imports from the PRC.

               (19)

               It is therefore concluded that all types of DVD+/-Rs form one product and are considered to be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

         B.   DUMPING, INJURY AND CAUSATION

               (20)

               The investigation established the existence of dumping and injury resulting from it. However, given the conclusions as set out below, it is not necessary to detail these findings.

         C.   COMMUNITY INTEREST
   5.   General remarks

               (21)

               In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation it was examined whether, despite the conclusion on injurious dumping, compelling reasons exist for concluding that it is not in the Community interest to adopt anti-dumping measures in this particular case. The likely impact of possible measures on all parties involved as well as the likely consequences of not taking measures were considered.

               (22)

               The definition of Community production and Community industry has followed the criteria set out in Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation.

               (23)

               In this case, the following related companies have been considered to constitute the Community industry:

                           —

                           Computer Support Italcard s.r.l. (‘CSI’)

                           —

                           Manufacturing Advanced Media (‘MAME’).

               (24)

               In the complaint, one more company was also mentioned as complainant. However, it was found that this company imported from the countries concerned a major portion, as compared to the total production, of the product concerned during the IP. These imports had occurred over a sustained period of time. Furthermore, this company was found to have the core of activities located outside the Community. Therefore, in accordance with Article 4(1)(a) of the basic Regulation, this company has been excluded from the definition of the Community industry.

               (25)

               Moreover, one additional producer also fully cooperated. However, it was found that also this company imported from the countries concerned a major portion, as compared to the total production, of the product concerned during the IP. These imports were found to have taken place over a sustained period of time. As detailed in recital 24, also this company, as part of a company group, has its core activities located outside the Community. Therefore, in accordance with Article 4(1)(a) of the basic Regulation, this company has been also excluded from the definition of the Community industry.

               (26)

               Finally, further to the liquidation of one of the two remaining companies after the end of the investigation period, it was considered whether this company should be excluded from the definition of the Community industry. However, in view of the conclusions reached below, it was not considered necessary to take a decision on this issue.

               (27)

               Therefore, only CSI and MAME, whose collective output constitutes 88 % of the total estimated Community production, constitute the Community industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation.

         6.   Interest of the Community industry, unrelated importers, users and consumers

               (28)

               Based on information gathered from the interested parties, the evolution of total consumption in the Community and market shares of the Community industry during the period considered have developed as follows below:
               EU consumption

                           Thousands of units

                           2002

                           2003

                           2004

                           IP

                           Total EU consumption

                           10 570

                           602 390

                           1 575 562

                           1 687 509

                           Index (2002 = 100)

                           100

                           5 700

                           14 906

                           15 965

                     Total EU consumption of the product concerned increased massively by almost 16 000 percentage points.
               Market shares on the Community market

                           2002

                           2003

                           2004

                           IP

                           Community Industry

                           0 %

                           0,4 %

                           0,6 %

                           0,8 %

                           Cooperating producers excluded from the definition of the Community production (see recitals (24) to (25) above)

                           6,3 %

                           1,0 %

                           3,1 %

                           5,1 %

                           Other non-cooperating producers in the Community still in operation (estimation)

                           0 %

                           0,5 %

                           0,2 %

                           0,2 %

                           Imports from the countries concerned

                           93,7 %

                           87,6 %

                           89,0 %

                           86,1 %

                           Imports from other third countries

                           0 %

                           10,5 %

                           7,1 %

                           7,8 %

               (29)

               On the basis of the facts provided above, it appears that the Community industry’s share of the Community market started from 0 % in 2000 but still only reached 0,8 % in the IP. The market share of imports from the countries concerned decreased in the period considered, but was still at a level of around 87 % during the IP. Their loss of market share corresponded broadly to the increase of imports from third countries.

               (30)

               The complainant has argued that some of the non-cooperating producers that have ceased their production during or after the end of the IP could resume their production should measures be introduced. However, in the absence of information directly from these non-cooperating producers that would confirm these alleged intentions, or other evidence substantiating the allegation, this argument has to be rejected. It is also noted that even if these companies were to resume production, their production would in all likelihood not be very substantial as compared to the very important volumes from the countries concerned.

               (31)

               Moreover, and as seen from above, it appears evident that the production of DVD+/-Rs by the Community industry started up rather late as compared to the exporters in the countries concerned. It is highly unlikely that the imposition of measures would enable the Community industry to increase their prices to reach a level of profitability which would allow them to survive or alternatively, to increase their sales to lower the cost of production and thereby to benefit from economies of scale. The developments during the period considered, show that the Community industry has never been able to gain a substantial market share and the loss of market share by the countries concerned was almost entirely taken over by imports from third countries. Furthermore, two out of the four cooperating companies gave up their interests as Community producers and became importers of DVD+/-Rs from the countries concerned. Under these circumstances, it highly unlikely that the remaining Community industry would be viable and could benefit from the imposition of anti-dumping measures.

               (32)

               All importers, distributors and most of the retailers have argued that, should measures be introduced, the resulting cost increase would have to be borne by one or several levels in the distribution chain (thereby significantly decreasing their respective margins), or passed on to the consumers (thereby perhaps even affecting the overall consumption of the DVD+/-Rs negatively), or shared between both.

               (33)

               The likely reaction of importers, distributors or retailers to the cost increase following the imposition of measures will depend on the situation of each Member State. In some Member States, the demand for DVD+/-Rs is already under pressure from ‘special levies’ on recordable media (a tax which increases the retail price significantly for the consumer). In this case, the consumers of DVD +/-Rs would possibly not be ready to pay more as a result of anti-dumping duties as the retail price is already perceived as high. The full cost of measures would in all likelihood therefore have to be borne by the distribution chain in order to avoid that consumers turn increasingly to other means of media storages such as hard discs and flash memory sticks. As the mark-up of the importers/wholesalers in these countries can be estimated at around 4 %, the imposition of anti-dumping duties would significantly decrease the already small margin.

               (34)

               Adversely, in Member States with the lowest (or absence of) special levies, it is more likely that a substantial part of the cost increase is passed on to consumers. Therefore, the relative effect of anti-dumping measures would be the greatest there, since the price increase would be relatively higher. As a result, consumption might decrease, as consumers would have an incentive to turn to substitution products.

               (35)

               It follows from the above that the price strategy of the importers, distributors and retailers will vary depending on the situation in each Member State. Nonetheless, it is apparent that all of them will suffer from the introduction of anti-dumping measures, either by way of decreased margins or by way of decreased sales volumes. Similarly, to the extent that the cost increase of anti-dumping measures is passed on the consumers, the latter will also be negatively affected.

               (36)

               Many interested parties stated that the effect of any measures on the Community industry should be set against the risk that the consumption of DVD+/-Rs would in any event decrease in favour of other media storage products such as hard discs on DVD-recorders and flash-memory sticks. Indeed, the investigation proved that the technological development in the market of media storage products is fast and that the new media storage products have the advantage of bigger storage capacity which, in the case of flash memory sticks, is combined with small sizes.

               (37)

               It has been further argued that the situation of the Community industry would be the result of abusive behaviour by certain dominant exporting producers, consisting in pursuing a strategy of below-cost prices which would have prevented the Community industry from building up any significant market presence. Firstly, it has to be noted that a corresponding decision or investigation concerning an abuse of dominance under the EU competition rules does not exist, nor has the complainant pointed to any respective decision under national competition rules. Secondly, the investigation has revealed a large number of operators in Europe and the world on the relevant product market. Within the purview of this investigation it has not been demonstrated that any of the operators, solely or jointly, holds a market share significant enough that this could likely be considered to constitute a dominant position. In addition, neither has it been demonstrated that any of the companies enjoys such economic strength as to impede effective competition. Thirdly, there is no indication of any significant loss-making with the exporters concerned suggesting that the exporters pursued a strategy of selling below-cost prices. The argument was therefore rejected.

               (38)

               Moreover, while Article 21 of the basic Regulation indeed refers to the need to give special consideration to the need to remedy the trade distorting effects of injurious dumping and to restore effective competition, this particular provision has to be seen in the overall framework of the Community interest test as laid down in the aforementioned Article. Thus the effects of imposing measures or not imposing measures on all parties concerned have to be examined and balanced. In this respect it should be noted that there are a number of other exporters and producers in competition on the world market and to a certain extent also on the Community market. Even in a medium term perspective the Community industry would be unlikely to take full benefit of possible measures given that it is to be expected that other third countries would considerably increase their part on the Community market.

               (39)

               Taking into account the relative maturity of the DVD+/-Rs market, the prospect of Community industry to become a strong player in the short or medium term would appear quite remote in particular in terms of market share, production capacity or technology, if measures are imposed. Otherwise, the imposition of measures would concern nearly 90 % of the EU consumption of the product concerned and would be detrimental to importers, distributors, retailers and consumers. In such circumstances, the imposition of anti-dumping measures would be disproportionate.

               (40)

               On the basis of the above, it can be concluded that the imposition of measures would have substantial negative effects on importers, distributors, retailers and consumers of the product concerned and that the Community industry is unlikely to obtain any significant benefits. It is therefore considered that the imposition of measures would be disproportionate and against the Community interest.

         7.   Conclusion of Community Interest

               (41)

               In view of the above, compelling reasons exist on Community interest grounds not to adopt anti-dumping measures as regards imports of DVD+/-Rs from the countries concerned.

         D.   TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING

               (42)

               Under these circumstances, the proceeding with regard to imports of DVD+/-Rs from the countries concerned should be terminated on the grounds of Community interest.

               (43)

               The complainant and all other interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which the Commission intends to terminate this proceeding. Subsequently, the complainants made known their views which however were not of a nature to change the above conclusions,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of recordable digital versatile discs (‘DVD+/-R’) originating in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, falling within CN Code ex 8523 90 30 (CN code since 1 January 2006) is hereby terminated.

      Done at Brussels, 20 October 2006.

            For the Commission

         Peter MANDELSON

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 (OJ L 340, 23.12.2005, p. 17).

      (2)  OJ C 192, 6.8.2005, p. 12.


title: 2010/292/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision EUPOL Afghanistan/1/2010 of 18 May 2010 concerning the appointment of the Head of Mission of EUPOL Afghanistan ad interim

text:
               21.5.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 125/52

         POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION EUPOL AFGHANISTAN/1/2010
   of 18 May 2010
   concerning the appointment of the Head of Mission of EUPOL Afghanistan ad interim
   (2010/292/CFSP)
   THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 38 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010 on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL Afghanistan) (1), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 10(1) of Decision 2010/279/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee, in accordance with Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of political control and strategic direction of the EUPOL Afghanistan mission, including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission.

               (2)

               The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy has proposed the appointment of the current Deputy Head of Mission, Chief Superintendent Nigel THOMAS, as Head of Mission ad interim from 31 May 2010 until the subsequent appointment of a new Head of Mission,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Chief Superintendent Nigel THOMAS is hereby appointed Head of Mission of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan as from 31 May 2010 until the subsequent appointment of a new Head of Mission.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
   It shall apply until the subsequent appointment of a new Head of Mission.

      Done at Brussels, 18 May 2010.

            For the Political and Security Committee

            The President

         C. FERNÁNDEZ-ARIAS

      (1)  OJ L 123, 19.5.2010, p. 4.


Avis juridique important

|

32004D0013

2004/13/EC: Commission Decision of 6 January 2004 terminating the examination procedure concerning the Brazilian Export Financing programme "PROEX" as applied in the regional aircraft sector

Official Journal L 004 , 08/01/2004 P. 0025 - 0026

Commission Decisionof 6 January 2004terminating the examination procedure concerning the Brazilian Export Financing programme "PROEX" as applied in the regional aircraft sector(2004/13/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community's rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the Word Trade Organisation(1), and in particular Article 11(1) thereof,Whereas:(1) On 27 January 1999 the German manufacturer of regional aircraft Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH (hereafter referred to as "Dornier"), lodged a complaint with the Commission pursuant to Articles 3 and 4 of the trade barriers Regulation. The complaint related to the Brazilian export financing programme "Programa de Financiamentò às Exportacoes" (PROEX), which, for exports of aircraft, operates as an interest rate equalisation system.(2) The complainant alleged that the application of PROEX to the Brazilian aircraft industry, and in particular to the regional jet manufacturer Embraer, allowed the latter to compete unfairly with Dornier on the 30-seat jet market. In particular, that PROEX allowed purchasers of Embraer aircraft to reduce their financing costs to levels below those offered in the financial markets, which led to a significant reduction of the aircraft price. The complainant contended that PROEX constituted a prohibited export subsidy under Article 3.1(a) of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). Dornier further claimed that Embraer's abuse of the PROEX programme caused material injury to it on the Community market as well as adverse trade effects on non EC markets and most notably the US and Switzerland.(3) The Commission found that the complaint contained sufficient prima facie evidence of a trade barrier and announced the initiation of an examination procedure in a notice published on 17 April 1999 in the Official Journal(2). The Commission's main findings are summarised below.(4) PROEX acts as an interest rate equalisation system by virtue of which the Brazilian Government reimburses part of the interest rate which foreign purchasers of Embraer aircraft have to pay to finance their purchase. The reimbursement amounted to 3,8 percentage points per annum over a period of 15 years. PROEX allowed airlines to acquire aircraft at financing conditions that were far more favourable than those available on the market place, resulting in a net present value benefit in the range of 15 % of the aircraft's purchase price. As a result, Embraer was in a position to systematically undercut the price of Dornier's 30-seat jet and gain the lion's share of the Community and US 30-seat jet markets. In most fleet deals the PROEX financing terms were by far the most decisive factor for airlines to opt for the Brazilian jet.(5) Under these circumstances the Commission considered that the complainant's allegations on the existence of an obstacle to trade were well founded and that PROEX resulted in adverse trade effects and injury within the meaning of Article 2(3) and (4) of the TBR.(6) In the course of the TBR examination, a panel established, upon Canadian request by the Dispute Settlement Body (the DSB) of the World Trade Organisation (the WTO), concluded that PROEX payments constituted prohibited export subsidies inconsistent with Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (the SCM Agreement). The conclusions and recommendations of the panel were upheld by the WTO Appellate Body and both reports were adopted by the DSB on 20 August 1999.(7) On 19 November 1999, Brazil informed the DSB of changes introduced to PROEX (PROEX II) in order to implement the DSB recommendations. However, Canada considered that PROEX II continued to provide export subsidies contrary to the SCM Agreement and initiated a compliance procedure under Article 21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). The compliance panel and the Appellate Body upheld Canada's position and found PROEX II also to constitute an illegal export subsidy.(8) On 6 December 2000, Brazil adopted a further revised version of PROEX (PROEX III) and Canada initiated a further compliance panel under Article 21.5 DSU to examine its WTO compatibility. This time, the panel report (adopted by the DSB on 23 August 2001) concluded that, unlike its previous versions, PROEX III as such was not in violation of Article 3.1(a) of the SCM Agreement as it did not require Brazil to provide export credits in such terms and conditions that they would constitute subsidies. The panel conclusions referred only to PROEX III as a law on its face and independently of its application and it was clearly stated that it would not necessarily follow that future applications of PROEX III would be consistent with the SCM Agreement.(9) After the adoption of the Panel by the DSB the European Communities stated that it would remain vigilant to ensure that Brazil would respect its WTO obligations in its application of PROEX III to individual transactions. However, during the last two years of monitoring no further allegations have been made or evidence submitted against Brazil in that respect.(10) In the absence of any evidence concerning unfair trade practices by Brazil after the adoption of the WTO Panel report on PROEX III, the European Communities considers that no action is required and that, therefore, in accordance with Article 11(1) of the Regulation, the procedure should be terminated.(11) The Advisory Committee has been consulted on the measures provided for in this Decision,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Sole ArticleThe examination procedure concerning the Brazilian Export Financing programme "PROEX" as applied in the regional aircraft sector initiated on 17 April 1999 is hereby terminated.Done at Brussels, 6 January 2004.For the CommissionPascal LamyMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 349, 31.12.1994, p. 71, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 356/95 (OJ L 41, 23.2.1995, p. 3).(2) OJ C 108, 17.4.1999, p. 33.