title: EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 36/17/COL of 10 February 2017 regarding the lack of effective compliance with the Act referred to at point 66n of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC, as amended) and its implementing rules in respect of certificates issued by the Hellenic Aviation Training Academy (HATA), and Part-66 licenses issued on the basis thereof [2017/457]

text:
               16.3.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 71/20

         EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION
   No 36/17/COL
   of 10 February 2017
   regarding the lack of effective compliance with the Act referred to at point 66n of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC, as amended) and its implementing rules in respect of certificates issued by the Hellenic Aviation Training Academy (HATA), and Part-66 licenses issued on the basis thereof [2017/457]
   THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,

      Having regard to the Act referred to at 66n of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’)

         Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC
          (1), as amended (‘the Act’),
      as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular to Article 11(2) of the Act,

   Having regard to Article 5 of the Decision of the Standing Committee No 3/2012/SC of 26 October 2012 laying down procedures for committees assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority in carrying out its functions under Article 3 of Protocol 1 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and of a Court of Justice,
   After consulting the EFTA Transport Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In February 2014, the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘the Agency’) carried out an Airworthiness Standardisation inspection (AIR.EL.02.2014) to the Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority (HCAA). During this inspection, a non-conformity was identified raising safety concerns if not timely corrected (class D-finding), in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 628/2013 (2).

               (2)

               The non-conformity concerned alleged examination fraud at the Part-147 maintenance training organisation, Hellenic Aviation Training Academy (HATA), with approval number EL.147.0007. Safety concerns were raised due to the possibility that aircraft maintenance certifying staff have gained a Part-66 license based on Certificates of Recognition issued by HATA under Annex III (Part-66) to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 (3), on the basis of alleged fraudulent activities, and are exercising privileges and releasing aircraft following maintenance without having the necessary aircraft basic knowledge.

               (3)

               On 26 February 2014, the HCAA revoked the approval of HATA and informed all Member States' Competent Authorities of the possibility of fraudulent Certificates of Recognition issued by HATA.

               (4)

               On 3 July 2014, the Agency and HCAA agreed a corrective action plan, including amongst others, investigations into Certificates of Recognition that have been used to issue Part-66 licences by Member States' Competent Authorities and Certificates of Recognition that have not yet been used to gain Part-66 licenses.

               (5)

               On 9 December 2014, the Agency issued a Safety Information Bulletin (SIB No: 2014-32) informing about the potential safety concern associated with the alleged examination fraud at HATA and recommending concrete measures to the Member States' Competent Authorities in order to address this situation.

               (6)

               In April 2016, the Agency carried out another Standardisation inspection of the HCAA. During this inspection, the Agency reviewed the agreed corrective action plan and concluded that HCAA had not been able to adequately implement the agreed actions before the agreed due dates. Consequently, in May 2016, the Agency issued a Supplementary Report to the HCAA, in accordance with Article 22(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 628/2013.

               (7)

               Since HCAA had not conducted sufficient investigations of HATA to detect the alleged fraud committed by this organisation and had not fully investigated Part-66 licences which have been issued on the basis of Certificates of Recognition issued by HATA, the potential safety concern remains. There are concerns with regard to the Certificates of Recognition issued by HATA for basic knowledge exams on the technical modules (modules 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17).

               (8)

               In light of all the above, the Agency recommended that Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 shall cease to apply to the Certificates of Recognition for basic knowledge examination on technical modules issued by HATA and to the Part-66 licences issued by the Member States' Competent Authorities on the basis of these Certificates of Recognition. In addition, those Competent Authorities shall be required to take appropriate corrective action and safeguard measures in order to address the safety risks.

               (9)

               On 19 December 2016, the European Commission decided that Certificates of Recognition for basic knowledge examination on technical modules issued by the Hellenic Aviation Training Academy (HATA) pursuant to 147.A.145(a)(4) and Appendix III to Annex IV (Part-147) to Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014, which are submitted by an applicant as supporting documentation for the issue of a Part 66 licence by the Competent Authorities pursuant to 66.B.100 of Annex III (Part-66) to this Regulation do not effectively comply with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 (4).

               (10)

               As a consequence of this, the European Commission also decided that Part-66 aircraft maintenance licenses issued by the Competent Authorities of the EU Member States pursuant to Annex III (Part-66) to Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 on the basis of Certificates of Recognition for basic knowledge examination on technical modules issued by HATA pursuant to 147.A.145(a)(4) and Appendix III to Annex IV (Part-147) to that Regulation do not effectively comply with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008.

               (11)

               It is therefore necessary that the EFTA Surveillance Authority adopts a corresponding decision as regards Part-66 aircraft maintenance licenses issued by the Competent Authorities of the EFTA States and that the EFTA States take corrective action ensuring the required level of safety under the circumstances.

               (12)

               In accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, a decision by the EFTA Surveillance Authority regarding the recognition of the concerned certificates and on the corrective action and safeguard measures to be taken by the Competent Authorities needs to be notified to all EFTA States,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Scope
   The following does not effectively comply with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and its implementing rules:

               Part-66 aircraft maintenance licenses issued by the Competent Authorities pursuant to Annex III (Part-66) to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 on the basis of Certificates of Recognition for basic knowledge examination on technical modules issued by the Hellenic Aviation Training Academy pursuant to 147.A.145(a)(4) and Appendix III to Annex IV (Part-147) to that Regulation.

         Article 2
   Corrective Actions
   1.   The Competent Authorities of the EFTA States that have issued Part-66 licenses on the basis of Certificates of Recognition for basic knowledge examination on technical modules issued by HATA shall carry out within 3 months from the date of notification of this decision a reassessment of each Part-66 license concerned, taking into account, without prejudice to the present Decision, the recommendations laid down in Safety Information Bulletin EASA SIB No: 2014-32 issued by the Agency on 9 December 2014, at its latest revision.
   2.   After the completion of this re-assessment, the Competent Authorities of the EFTA States shall:

               (a)

               where justified in view of Article 1, limit, suspend or revoke the Part-66 licence in accordance with 66.B.500 of Annex III (Part-66), as appropriate; and

               (b)

               in any event, provide the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the Agency with the results of the reassessment.

         Article 3
   Entry into force
   This Decision is addressed to the EFTA States and shall enter into force on the day of its publication.

      Done at Brussels, 10 February 2017.

            For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

         Helga JÓNSDÓTTIR

            College Member

         Carsten ZATSCHLER

            Director

      (1)  OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

      (2)  The act mentioned at point 66qa of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 628/2013 of 28 June 2013 on working methods of the European Aviation Safety Agency for conducting standardisation inspections and for monitoring the application of the rules of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2006 (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 46)).

      (3)  The act mentioned at point 66q of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 of 26 November 2014 on the continuing airworthiness of aircraft and aeronautical products, parts and appliances, and on the approval of organisations and personnel involved in these tasks (OJ L 362, 17.12.2014, p. 1)).

      (4)  See, Commission Decision (EU) 2016/2357 of 19 December 2016 regarding the lack of effective compliance with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and its implementing rules in respect of certificates issued by the Hellenic Aviation Training Academy (HATA), and Part-66 licenses issued on the basis thereof (OJ L 348, 21.12.2016, p. 72).


Important legal notice

|

E2001C1206(03)

Decisions by Norway to grant or revoke operating licences pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992 on licensing of air carriers

Official Journal C 344 , 06/12/2001 P. 0010 - 0010

Decisions by Norway to grant or revoke operating licences pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992 on licensing of air carriers(2001/C 344/10)NORWAYOperating licence revokeCategory B: Operating licences including the restriction of Articles 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92>TABLE>


Avis juridique important

|

31986D0036

86/36/EEC: Commission Decision of 26 February 1986 accepting undertakings entered into in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into Greece of certain categories of glass originating in Turkey, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia and terminating the investigation

Official Journal L 051 , 28/02/1986 P. 0073

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 26 February 1986  accepting undertakings entered into in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into Greece of certain categories of glass originating in Turkey, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia and terminating the investigation  (86/36/EEC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84 of 23 July 1984 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,  Following consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for by that Regulation,  Whereas:  A. Procedure  1. In January 1985 a complaint was lodged with the Commission that certain categories of glass originating in Turkey were being imported at dumped prices, thus causing injury to a Community industry. The complaint was from the Comité Permanent des Industries de Verre de la Communauté Économique Européenne (CPIV) and by the Greek Glass Federation, on behalf of the Greek manufacturer accounting for all national production of such products, the Hellenic Chemical and Fertilizers Company Ltd, Athens.  2. The complaint included evidence of dumping and of major damage resulting for the industry in Greece. This evidence was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding and the Commission therefore announced, by a notice in the Official Journal of the European Communities (2), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into Greece of certain categories of glass originating in Turkey. The Commission began its investigation.  The products concerned are a type of unworked drawn or blown glass (including flashed glass), in rectangles, of a thickness of 2,5 mm or more but not more than 5,5 mm, falling within Common Customs Tariff heading No ex 70.05 corresponding to NIMEXE codes ex 70.05-61, 70.05-63, 70.05-65 and ex 70.05-69, and a type of 'float glass', cast, or rolled, and drawn or blown glass (including flashed or wired glass), in rectangles, surface ground or polished, but not further worked, of a thickness of 2,5 mm or more but not more than 5,5 mm falling within Common Customs Tariff heading No ex 70.06 corresponding to NIMEXE codes ex 70.06-61, 70.06-65, 70.06-71 and 70.06-75.  3. The Commission officially informed the exporter and importer known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting country and the complainant of the initiation of the proceeding and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity of making their views known in writing and of being heard orally.  The Turkish exporter known to be concerned, the company Cam Pazarlama AS, and the importer concerned, the company Makedoniki, and the complainant took the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to be heard orally. Certain arguments were also put to the Commission by processors of these products.  4. In June 1985 the CPIV and the Greek Glass Federation, on behalf of the Greek manufacturer, lodged a further complaint with the Commission requesting extension of the proceeding to imports of such products originating in Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia.  5. This further complaint contained evidence of the existence of dumping and of consequent major injury for the Greek industry. This evidence was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding and the Commission consequently announced, by a notice in the Official Journal of the European Communities (1), the extension of the anti-dumping proceeding to imports of the products concerned originating in Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia.  6. The Commission officially brought the extension of the proceeding to the notice of the exporters and the importers known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting country and the complainant, and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make known their views in writing and to be heard orally.  The exporters known to be concerned, viz:  - Jugoslovenska, Industrija Ravnog Stakla, Yugoslavia;  - Romsnit, Bucharest, Romania;  - Industrialimport, Sofia, Bulgaria;  - Ferunion, Budapest, Hungary;  - Glassexport, Prague, Czechoslovakia,  and most of the Greek importers concerned, in particular:  - Athanassopoulos, Athens;  - Aslanidis, Athens;  - Hellas Glass, Karditsa;  - Garifallou, Kavala,  and the complainant took the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to be heard orally.  7. The Commission gathered and checked all the information it deemed necessary to determine the existence of dumping and injury and carried out inspections at the premises of the complaint producer, the Turkish exporter, the Yugoslav exporter, and the following Greek importers:  - Makedoniki, Thessaloniki;  - Athanassopoulos, Athens;  - Aslanidis, Athens;  - Hellas Glass, Karditsa;  - Garifallou, Kavala.  The Commission asked for and obtained detailed written information from the complainant concerning the injury and its causes, and from all the exporters and most of the importers concerned. The information thus gathered was checked by the Commission to the extent necessary.  8. The period decided upon by the Commission for investigating the existence of any dumping was 1 January 1984 to 28 February 1985.  B. Definition of the Product  9. The products alleged to have been dumped are:  - transparent drawn glass, in rectangles, of a thickness of 2,5 mm or more but not more than 5,5 mm,  - transparent cast glass obtained by the float method, in rectangles, of a thickness of 2,5 mm or more but not more than 5,5 mm.  According to the complaint these products constitute 'like products' within the meaning of the anti-dumping rules.  The results of the investigation show this not to be so. It is true that both products, although manufactured by different processes, use the same raw materials and that their chemical composition is basically the same. They are of the same shape and are generally pre-cut into standard sizes with a thickness of 2,5 to 5,5 mm. When looked at straight on, they seem fairly similar.  However, the very process of manufacturing drawn glass leads to optical defects which are evident if it is regarded at an angle. In addition, the float process makes it possible to obtain larger rectangles, which are essential for certain purposes. Thus, most modern  industrial outlets are closed to drawn glass, only float glass being usable for such purposes as double glazing, mirrors, motor vehicle glass, technical glass, etc.  Thus, as regards both optical characteristics and trade outlets, float glass and drawn glass are not like products within the meaning of Article 2 (12) of Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84.  10. The investigation also revealed that, within the thickness range covered by the proceeding, the products concerned are normally distributed in commercial thicknesses of 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm.  C. Community production  11. The Greek producer, Hellenic Chemical and Fertilizers Company Ltd, has no facilities for the float glass process and thus produces only drawn glass.  The question whether the Greek industry represents a Community industry within the meaning of Article 4 (5) second indent, of Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84 therefore arises only in the case of drawn glass. The investigation showed the Greek producer to sell nearly all its production on the Greek market, where demand for drawn glass was not met to any substantial degree by drawn glass producers established elsewhere in the Community. The share of the regional drawn glass market supplied through intra-Community imports has never, since 1981, exceeded 0,7 %.  It is consequently, considered that the complainant producer constitutes a Community industry for the drawn glass products concerned.  D. Normal Value  12. As regards imports from Turkey, the normal value was established on the basis of the comparable prices actually paid or payable in the ordinary course of trade for the like product intended for consumption in Turkey. It was calculated on the basis of a weighted average.  13. As regards imports from Yugoslavia, the normal value was established, for 3 mm, 4 mm and 4,5 mm glass on the comparable prices actually paid or payable in the ordinary course of trade for the like products intended for consumption in Yugoslavia. It was established on the basis of a weighted average. As regards 55 mm drawn glass, in which there is no trade on the Yugoslav market, the normal value established took account of the difference in physical characteristics (additional thickness) of the product compared with those of the products marketed in Yugoslavia, on the basis of prices paid or payable on the domestic market.  14. In order to establish whether the imports from Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia were being dumped, the Commission had to make allowance for the fact that these countries do not have a market economy, and it thus had to proceed on the basis of the normal value in a country with such a market economy. The complainant had proposed that the Turkish domestic market be taken as a reference, and this led the Bulgarian and Czechoslovak exporters to raise objections on the grounds of that market's monopolistic structure and very high level of customs protection. The Commission took the view, and this was not contested by any of the parties, that prices on the Yugoslav domestic market offered an appropriate and not unreasonale basis for comparison.  E. Export price  15. As regards both the exports from Turkey and Yugoslavia and those from Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the Commission took as the export price the price actually paid or payable on exports to Greece.  F. Comparison  16. For the purpose of comparing the normal value with export prices at the ex-factory stage for each of the like products, the Commission made allowances for differences affecting the comparability of the prices and made appropriate adjustments when the interested parties produced evidence that a request for this was justified (transport and packaging costs and payment conditions). All the comparisons were made at the ex-factory stage.  17. As regards imports from Turkey, the Commission, on the basis of the information in its possession, found no difference between the characteristics of drawn glass sold in Turkey and that exported to Greece such as significantly to affect the comparability of prices. A request for an adjustment to make allowance for the difference in the commission paid by Cam Pazarama AS to its parent company Turkish Glassworks Inc., as between domestic sales and exports, was refused as not being supported by conclusive evidence. Another adjustment requested by the Turkish exporter to allow for differing stock levels needing to be maintained for domestic sales and export sales which was claimed to lead to higher financial burdens for domestic sales, was refused: the discrepancies concerned were in fact the result of differences in production costs.  G. Margins  18. Examination of the facts showed that all the transactions concerned involved dumping. The dumping margins calculated, equal to the difference between the normal values established and average prices on exports to Greece, showed there was substantial dumping in exports by Cam Pazarlama AS (Turkey), Jugoslovenska Industrija Ravnog Stakla (Yugoslavia), Romsit (Romania), Industrialimport (Bulgaria), Ferunion (Hungary) and Glassexport (Czechoslovakia).  19. The degree of dumping varied with the thickness of the drawn glass concerned, and from one exporter to another. The weighted average dumping margins amounted to the following percentages of the cif price free at the Greek frontier, not cleared through customs:  - Cam Pazarlama AS: more than 100 % on all thicknesses;  - Jugoslovenska Industrija Ravnog Stakla: from 33,5 % to 81 %;  - Romsit: from 43,2 % to more than 100 %;  - Industrialimport: from 73,9 % to more than 100 %;  - Ferunion: from 16,6 % to 66,9 %;  - Glassexport: from 75,8 % to more than 100 %.  H. Injury  20. As regards the injury to the Greek industry from the dumped imports, the enquiries made by the Commission show that the total volume of dumped imports into Greece of the drawn glass concerned rose from 1 199 tonnes in 1981 to 2 318 tonnes in 1983 and 15 183 tonnes in 1984.  At the same time these imports' share of the Greek market increased considerably from 2,8 % in 1981 to 7,3 % in 1983 and 55 % in 1984.  It should be noted here that the degree of market penetration by drawn glass imports from the countries concerned in the proceeding is very much lower in the rest of the Community (something like 25 % in 1984).  21. A thorough examination of the export prices of the drawn glass in question originating in Turkey, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia showed permanent undercutting, as against the Greek producer's prices, as fixed by the national administration, throughout the period of the investigation. Average undercutting varied according to the thickness of the glass and from one exporter to another, as follows:  (in %)  1.2 //  //  // Cam Pazarlama AS   // from 16,4 to 29,7  // Jugoslovenska Industrija Ravnog Stakla   // from 24,6 to 56,7   // Romsit   // from 16,1 to 30,8   // Industrialimport  // from 39,5 to 40,2   // Ferunion   // from 11,2 to 21,2  // Glassexport   // from 28,3 to 34,0   //    //  22. As regards the impact on the Greek industry, the Commission took into account the effect of all the imports recognized as having been dumped. Information which the Commission was able to verify showed production of drawn glass by the Greek producer to have fallen from 43 706 tonnes in 1981 to 14 280 tonnes in 1984, a reduction of 67,3 %, far greater than the fall in consumption in Greece over the same period (42 862 tonnes in 1981, 27 743 tonnes in 1984, a reduction of 35,3 %). The utilization rate of production capacities thus fell from 54,6 % in 1981 to 15,5 % in 1984. The worsening situation obliged the Greek producer to close down his main furnace at the end of 1983.  At the same time as sales fell so sharply (41 372 tonnes in 1981, 12 373 in 1984, a fall of 70 %), the Greek producer's stocks began to pile up greatly (3 033 tonnes at the end of 1981, 8 220 at the end of 1984). Its market share fell from 96,5 % in 1981 to 44,6 % in 1984.  Because of this fall in activity the Greek producer also had to reduce his workforce from 577 persons in 1981 to 260 in 1984.  Consequently, the Greek industry saw a considerable part of its profitability eroded, with very substantial losses being recorded in 1984.  23. The Commission examined the other factors which, individually or together, might also have damaged the interests of the Greek producer.  It examined the effect of imports into Greece where no dumping was alleged, the level of consumption of drawn glass in Greece and the matter of its progressive replacement by float glass, together with the effect on the industry's profitability of the Government's price control mechanism.  - Imports from countries against which no allegations of dumping were made were practically nil in 1981, 1982, 1983 and only 80 tonnes in 1984. The fact that the Greek market's intra-Community imports were also negligible (107 tonnes in 1984) means that almost all Greek imports of drawn glass came from the countries concerned by the proceeding and were therefore dumped.  - In addition, the very appreciable fall in consumption of drawn glass in Greece, resulting both from a slowdown in the building sector and the progressive replacement of drawn glass by float glass for certain purposes, did indisputedly affect sales by the complainant producer; nonetheless, the fall in its sales on the Greek market between 1981 and 1984 (70 % down) was much greater than the fall in demand (35,3 %).  - In assessing the impact of causes of injury other than imports shown to be dumped, the Commission took into account the fact that since 1983 the sale prices of the Greek producer have been subject to a system of price control by the Greek authorities. To the extent that the Greek producer's costs have been substantially higher than the prices it has been obliged to charge, the resultant losses should not be attributed to dumped imports. Thus, for the purpose of analysing the degree of injury caused by the imports concerned as regards prices, the Commission looked only at the differences between the Greek producers' prices as fixed by its national authorities and the market prices of the dumped imports.  Examination of the differences as thus defined shows a degree of undercutting varying between 11,2 % and 56,7 %. Thus, independently of the injury caused by the price control system, the prices of the imports shown to be dumped were distinctly lower than those of the Greek producer, and this contributed to the sharp fall in its activites, and consequently to an increase in its costs.  24. The results of the investigation thus show that the Greek producer is faced with serious difficulties, which existed in part before the considerable increase in imports in 1984. The causes of injury other than dumped imports include the distinct fall in consumption of drawn glass in Greece, the progressive replacement of drawn glass by float glass - not produced by the Greek industry - and the price control system.  Nonetheless, in view of all the injury factors examined in points 22 and 23 above, and in particular the fact that the degree of market penetration of dumped imports increased considerably in 1984, the Commission is persuaded, on the basis of the evidence before it, that the injury caused during the period under investigation by the dumped imports must, seen in isolation, be considered as a major factor, having considerably magnified the Greek producers' difficulties.  I. Community interest  25. In these circumstances, and as the producer concerned is Greece's only independent source of supply of drawn glass, the Community interest requires that a measure of protection be adopted against imports shown to be dumped.  J. Undertakings  26. The exporters concerned and the complainant have been informed of the main results of the investigation and have been offered the possibility of making any comments. In addition, as the case involves a regional element, the Commission gave exporters, in accordance with Article 13 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84, an opportunity to offer undertakings for the market concerned. Price undertakings have been given by all the exporters concerned as regards their exports to the Greek market.  The aim of the undertakings is to eliminate the differences between import prices and prices fixed by the Greek Government and so to remove the injury caused by the dumped imports. It emerges also that it will be possible for the fulfilment of these undertakings to be controlled effectively.  This being so, the price undertakings given are judged acceptable and the investigation may therefore be terminated without anti-dumping duties being imposed.  No objection has been raised to this course within the Advisory Committee. HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The price undertakings entered into by Cam Pazarlama AS (Turkey), Jugoslovenska Industrija Ravnog Stakla (Yugoslavia), Romsit (Romania), Industrialimport (Bulgaria), Ferunion (Hungary) and Glassexport (Czechoslovakia) during the anti-dumping investigation concerning imports into Greece of certain categories of unworked drawn glass, in rectangles, falling within Common Customs Tariff heading No ex 70.05, corresponding to Nimexe codes ex 70.05-61, 70.05-63, 70.05-65 and ex 70.05-69, originating in Turkey, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia are hereby accepted.  Article 2  The investigation referred to in Article 1 is hereby terminated.  Done at Brussels, 26 February 1986.  For the Commission  Willy DE CLERCQ  Member of the Commission  (1) OJ No L 201, 30. 7. 1984, p. 1.  (2) OJ No C 66, 14. 3. 1985, p. 13.  (1) OJ No C 200, 8. 8. 1985, p. 3.


Avis juridique important

|

41992D0374

92/374/EEC, Euratom, ECSC: Decision of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Communities of 24 June 1992 appointing Judges to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities

Official Journal L 196 , 15/07/1992 P. 0035 - 0035 Finnish special edition: Chapter 1 Volume 2 P. 0171  Swedish special edition: Chapter 1 Volume 2 P. 0171

DECISION  OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES  of 24 June 1992  appointing Judges to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities  (92/374/EEC, Euratom, ECSC)THE  REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 32d (3) thereof,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 168a (3) thereof,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 140a (3) thereof,  Having regard to Council Decision 88/591/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 24 October 1988 establishing a Court of First Instance of the European Communities (1),  Whereas the terms of office of Mr José Juis da Cruz Vilaça, Mr Cornelis Paulus Briët, Mr Koenraad Lenaerts, Mr Romain Schintgen, Mr Bo Vesterdorf and Mr Christos G. Yeraris, Judges at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, expire on 31  August 1992, in accordance with Article 12 of Decision 88/591/ECSC, EEC, Euratom;  Whereas it is necessary to carry out partial replacement of the Court of First Instance for the period 1 September 1992 to 31 August 1998 inclusive,  HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Sole Article  The following are hereby appointed Judges to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities for the period 1 September 1992 to 31 August 1998 inclusive:  José Luis da Cruz Vilaça  Cornelis Paulus Briët  Koenraad Lenaerts  Romain Schintgen  Bo Vesterdorf  Andreas Kalogeropoulos Done at Brussels, 24 June 1992. The President  J.C. PAULOURO das NEVES   (1) OJ No L 319, 25. 11. 1988, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31988D0345

88/345/EEC: Council Decision of 22 June 1988 on the conclusion of the Joint Declaration on the establishment of official relations between the European Economic Community and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance

Official Journal L 157 , 24/06/1988 P. 0034 - 0034

*****COUNCIL  DECISION  of 22 June 1988  on the conclusion of the Joint Declaration on the establishment of official relations between the European Economic Community and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance  (88/345/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 235 thereof,  Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,  Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,  Whereas, for the attainment of the objectives of the Community in the sphere of external relations, the Joint Declaration on the establishment of official relations between the European Economic Community and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance should be approved; whereas the Treaty has not provided the necessary powers, other than those of Article 235,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The Joint Declaration on the establishment of official relations between the European Economic Community and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.  The text of the Joint Declaration is attached to this Decision.  Article 2  The President of the Council is hereby authorized to designate the persons empowered to sign the Joint Declaration on behalf of the Community.  Article 3  This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.  Done at Luxembourg, 22 June 1988.  For the Council  The President  M. BANGEMANN


title: Council Decision 2008/901/CFSP of 2 December 2008 concerning an independent international fact-finding mission on the conflict in Georgia

text:
               3.12.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 323/66

      COUNCIL DECISION 2008/901/CFSP
   of 2 December 2008
   concerning an independent international fact-finding mission on the conflict in Georgia
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 13(3) and Article 23(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 1 September 2008, the European Council stated that the European Union is ready to commit itself to support every effort to secure a peaceful and lasting solution to the conflicts in Georgia, and that it is ready to support confidence-building measures.

               (2)

               On 15 September 2008, the Council supported the idea of an independent international inquiry into the conflict in Georgia.

               (3)

               Ms Heidi TAGLIAVINI should be appointed as head of this fact-finding mission,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   Head of the independent international fact-finding mission and terms of reference
   1.   Ms Heidi TAGLIAVINI is hereby appointed head of the independent international fact-finding mission on the conflict in Georgia, hereinafter ‘the fact-finding mission’, for the period from 2 December 2008 to 31 July 2009.
   2.   The aim of the fact-finding mission shall be to investigate the origins and the course of the conflict in Georgia, including with regard to international law (1), humanitarian law and human rights, and the accusations made in that context (2). The geographical scope and time span of the investigation will be sufficiently broad to determine all the possible causes of the conflict. The results of the investigation will be presented to the parties to the conflict, and to the Council, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the United Nations (UN), in the form of a report.
   3.   The head of the fact-finding mission shall be responsible for the implementation of the fact-finding mission. She shall determine, in complete independence, the procedures and working methods of the fact-finding mission, and the content of the report referred to in paragraph 2.
   Article 2
   Financing
   1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the implementation of the fact-finding mission shall be EUR 1 600 000 for the period from 2 December 2008 to 31 July 2009.
   2.   The expenditure financed by the amount stipulated in paragraph 1 shall be eligible as from 2 December 2008.
   3.   The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the rules and procedures applicable to the general budget of the European Communities. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the head of the fact-finding mission and the Commission.
   4.   The head of the fact-finding mission shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
   Article 3
   Composition of the fact-finding mission
   The composition of the fact-finding mission shall be decided by the head of mission. It shall comprise recognised experts, in particular lawyers, historians, military staff and human rights experts.
   Article 4
   Assessment
   The implementation of this Decision shall be reviewed by the Council before 31 July 2009.
   Article 5
   Entry into effect and expiry
   This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.
   It shall expire on 31 July 2009.
   Article 6
   Publication
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 2 December 2008.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. LAGARDE

      (1)  Including the Helsinki Final Act.

      (2)  Including allegations of war crimes.


title: 2006/618/EC: Council Decision of 24 July 2006 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women And Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime concerning the provisions of the Protocol, in so far as the provisions of this Protocol fall within the scope of Articles 179 and 181a of the Treaty establishing the European Community

text:
               22.9.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 262/44

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 24 July 2006
   on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women And Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime concerning the provisions of the Protocol, in so far as the provisions of this Protocol fall within the scope of Articles 179 and 181a of the Treaty establishing the European Community
   (2006/618/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 179 and 181a, in conjunction with the first subparagraph of Article 300(2), and first subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The elements of the Protocol which are subject to Community competence were negotiated by the Commission, with the approval of the Council, on behalf of the Community.

               (2)

               The Council instructed the Commission to negotiate the accession of the Community to the international agreement in question.

               (3)

               Negotiations were successfully concluded and the resulting instrument was signed by the Community on 12 December 2000 in accordance with Council Decision 2001/87/EC of 8 December 2000 (2).

               (4)

               Some Member States are parties to the Protocol while the ratification process is under way in other Member States.

               (5)

               The conclusion of the Convention was approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 2004/579/EC of 29 April 2004 (3) which is a condition for the Community to become a Party to the Protocol, pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Convention.

               (6)

               The other conditions permitting the Community to deposit the instrument of approval provided for in Article 36(3) of the Convention and Article 16(3) of the Protocol have been fulfilled.

               (7)

               In so far as the provisions of the Protocol fall within the scope of Articles 179 and 181a of the Treaty, the conclusion of the Protocol should be approved on behalf of the Community.

               (8)

               In so far as the provisions of the Protocol fall within the scope of Part III, Title IV of the Treaty, the conclusion of the Protocol on behalf of the Community should be approved by means of a separate decision of the Council (4).

               (9)

               The Community should, when depositing the instrument of approval, also deposit a declaration on the extent of the Community's competence with respect to matters governed by the Protocol under Article 16(3) of the Trafficking Protocol,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against transnational organised crime, as set out in Annex I, is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community.
   The Community's instrument of formal confirmation shall comprise a declaration of competence according to Article 16(3) of the Protocol as set out in Annex II.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall apply in so far as the provisions of the Protocol fall within the scope of Articles 179 and 181a of the Treaty.
   Article 3
   The President of the Council is authorised to designate the person empowered to deposit the instrument of formal confirmation in order to bind the Community.
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 24 July 2006.

            For the Council

            The President

         K. RAJAMÄKI

      (1)  Not yet Publisher in the Official Journal.

      (2)  OJ L 30, 1.2.2001, p. 44.

      (3)  OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 69.

      (4)  See page 51 of this Official Journal.

      ANNEX I

         PROTOCOL
         to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime
         PREAMBLE
         THE STATES PARTIES TO THIS PROTOCOL,
         DECLARING that effective action to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, especially women and children, requires a comprehensive international approach in the countries of origin, transit and destination that includes measures to prevent such trafficking, to punish the traffickers and to protect the victims of such trafficking, including by protecting their internationally recognised human rights,
         TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the fact that, despite the existence of a variety of international instruments containing rules and practical measures to combat the exploitation of persons, especially women and children, there is no universal instrument that addresses all aspects of trafficking in persons,
         CONCERNED that, in the absence of such an instrument, persons who are vulnerable to trafficking will not be sufficiently protected,
         RECALLING General Assembly resolution 53/111 of 9 December 1998, in which the Assembly decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental ad hoc committee for the purpose of elaborating a comprehensive international convention against transnational organised crime and of discussing the elaboration of, inter alia, an international instrument addressing trafficking in women and children,
         CONVINCED that supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime with an international instrument for the prevention, suppression and punishment of trafficking in persons, especially women and children, will be useful in preventing and combating that crime,
         HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
         I.   GENERAL PROVISIONS
         Article 1
         Relation with the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime
         1.   This Protocol supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime. It shall be interpreted together with the Convention.
         2.   The provisions of the Convention shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to this Protocol unless otherwise provided herein.
         3.   The offences established in accordance with article 5 of this Protocol shall be regarded as offences established in accordance with the Convention.
         Article 2
         Statement of purpose
         The purposes of this Protocol are:

                     (a)

                     to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, paying particular attention to women and children;

                     (b)

                     to protect and assist the victims of such trafficking, with full respect for their human rights; and

                     (c)

                     to promote cooperation among States Parties in order to meet those objectives.

               Article 3
         Use of terms
         For the purposes of this Protocol:

                     (a)

                     ‘trafficking in persons’ shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs;

                     (b)

                     the consent of a victim of trafficking in persons to the intended exploitation set forth in subparagraph (a) of this article shall be irrelevant where any of the means set forth in subparagraph (a) have been used;

                     (c)

                     the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation shall be considered ‘trafficking in persons’ even if this does not involve any of the means set forth in subparagraph (a) of this article;

                     (d)

                     ‘child’ shall mean any person under 18 years of age.

               Article 4
         Scope of application
         This Protocol shall apply, except as otherwise stated herein, to the prevention, investigation and prosecution of the offences established in accordance with article 5 of this Protocol, where those offences are transnational in nature and involve an organised criminal group, as well as to the protection of victims of such offences.
         Article 5
         Criminalisation
         1.   Each State Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences the conduct set forth in article 3 of this Protocol, when committed intentionally.
         2.   Each State Party shall also adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences:

                     (a)

                     subject to the basic concepts of its legal system, attempting to commit an offence established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article;

                     (b)

                     participating as an accomplice in an offence established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article; and

                     (c)

                     organising or directing other persons to commit an offence established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article.

               II.   PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
         Article 6
         Assistance to and protection of victims of trafficking in persons
         1.   In appropriate cases and to the extent possible under its domestic law, each State Party shall protect the privacy and identity of victims of trafficking in persons, including, inter alia, by making legal proceedings relating to such trafficking confidential.
         2.   Each State Party shall ensure that its domestic legal or administrative system contains measures that provide to victims of trafficking in persons, in appropriate cases:

                     (a)

                     information on relevant court and administrative proceedings;

                     (b)

                     assistance to enable their views and concerns to be presented and considered at appropriate stages of criminal proceedings against offenders, in a manner not prejudicial to the rights of the defence.

               3.   Each State Party shall consider implementing measures to provide for the physical, psychological and social recovery of victims of trafficking in persons, including, in appropriate cases, in cooperation with non-governmental organisations, other relevant organisations and other elements of civil society, and, in particular, the provision of:

                     (a)

                     appropriate housing;

                     (b)

                     counselling and information, in particular as regards their legal rights, in a language that the victims of trafficking in persons can understand;

                     (c)

                     medical, psychological and material assistance; and

                     (d)

                     employment, educational and training opportunities.

               4.   Each State Party shall take into account, in applying the provisions of this article, the age, gender and special needs of victims of trafficking in persons, in particular the special needs of children, including appropriate housing, education and care.
         5.   Each State Party shall endeavour to provide for the physical safety of victims of trafficking in persons while they are within its territory.
         6.   Each State Party shall ensure that its domestic legal system contains measures that offer victims of trafficking in persons the possibility of obtaining compensation for damage suffered.
         Article 7
         Status of victims of trafficking in persons in receiving States
         1.   In addition to taking measures pursuant to article 6 of this Protocol, each State Party shall consider adopting legislative or other appropriate measures that permit victims of trafficking in persons to remain in its territory, temporarily or permanently, in appropriate cases.
         2.   In implementing the provision contained in paragraph 1 of this article, each State Party shall give appropriate consideration to humanitarian and compassionate factors.
         Article 8
         Repatriation of victims of trafficking in persons
         1.   The State Party of which a victim of trafficking in persons is a national or in which the person had the right of permanent residence at the time of entry into the territory of the receiving State Party shall facilitate and accept, with due regard for the safety of that person, the return of that person without undue or unreasonable delay.
         2.   When a State Party returns a victim of trafficking in persons to a State Party of which that person is a national or in which he or she had, at the time of entry into the territory of the receiving State Party, the right of permanent residence, such return shall be with due regard for the safety of that person and for the status of any legal proceedings related to the fact that the person is a victim of trafficking and shall preferably be voluntary.
         3.   At the request of a receiving State Party, a requested State Party shall, without undue or unreasonable delay, verify whether a person who is a victim of trafficking in persons is its national or had the right of permanent residence in its territory at the time of entry into the territory of the receiving State Party.
         4.   In order to facilitate the return of a victim of trafficking in persons who is without proper documentation, the State Party of which that person is a national or in which he or she had the right of permanent residence at the time of entry into the territory of the receiving State Party shall agree to issue, at the request of the receiving State Party, such travel documents or other authorisation as may be necessary to enable the person to travel to and re-enter its territory.
         5.   This article shall be without prejudice to any right afforded to victims of trafficking in persons by any domestic law of the receiving State Party.
         6.   This article shall be without prejudice to any applicable bilateral or multilateral agreement or arrangement that governs, in whole or in part, the return of victims of trafficking in persons.
         III.   PREVENTION, COOPERATION AND OTHER MEASURES
         Article 9
         Prevention of trafficking in persons
         1.   States Parties shall establish comprehensive policies, programmes and other measures:

                     (a)

                     to prevent and combat trafficking in persons; and

                     (b)

                     to protect victims of trafficking in persons, especially women and children, from revictimisation.

               2.   States Parties shall endeavour to undertake measures such as research, information and mass media campaigns and social and economic initiatives to prevent and combat trafficking in persons.
         3.   Policies, programmes and other measures established in accordance with this article shall, as appropriate, include cooperation with non-governmental organisations, other relevant organisations and other elements of civil society.
         4.   States Parties shall take or strengthen measures, including through bilateral or multilateral cooperation, to alleviate the factors that make persons, especially women and children, vulnerable to trafficking, such as poverty, underdevelopment and lack of equal opportunity.
         5.   States Parties shall adopt or strengthen legislative or other measures, such as educational, social or cultural measures, including through bilateral and multilateral cooperation, to discourage the demand that fosters all forms of exploitation of persons, especially women and children, that leads to trafficking.
         Article 10
         Information exchange and training
         1.   Law enforcement, immigration or other relevant authorities of States Parties shall, as appropriate, cooperate with one another by exchanging information, in accordance with their domestic law, to enable them to determine:

                     (a)

                     whether individuals crossing or attempting to cross an international border with travel documents belonging to other persons or without travel documents are perpetrators or victims of trafficking in persons;

                     (b)

                     the types of travel document that individuals have used or attempted to use to cross an international border for the purpose of trafficking in persons; and

                     (c)

                     the means and methods used by organised criminal groups for the purpose of trafficking in persons, including the recruitment and transportation of victims, routes and links between and among individuals and groups engaged in such trafficking, and possible measures for detecting them.

               2.   States Parties shall provide or strengthen training for law enforcement, immigration and other relevant officials in the prevention of trafficking in persons. The training should focus on methods used in preventing such trafficking, prosecuting the traffickers and protecting the rights of the victims, including protecting the victims from the traffickers. The training should also take into account the need to consider human rights and child- and gender-sensitive issues and it should encourage cooperation with non-governmental organisations, other relevant organisations and other elements of civil society.
         3.   A State Party that receives information shall comply with any request by the State Party that transmitted the information that places restrictions on its use.
         Article 11
         Border measures
         1.   Without prejudice to international commitments in relation to the free movement of people, States Parties shall strengthen, to the extent possible, such border controls as may be necessary to prevent and detect trafficking in persons.
         2.   Each State Party shall adopt legislative or other appropriate measures to prevent, to the extent possible, means of transport operated by commercial carriers from being used in the commission of offences established in accordance with article 5 of this Protocol.
         3.   Where appropriate, and without prejudice to applicable international conventions, such measures shall include establishing the obligation of commercial carriers, including any transportation company or the owner or operator of any means of transport, to ascertain that all passengers are in possession of the travel documents required for entry into the receiving State.
         4.   Each State Party shall take the necessary measures, in accordance with its domestic law, to provide for sanctions in cases of violation of the obligation set forth in paragraph 3 of this article.
         5.   Each State Party shall consider taking measures that permit, in accordance with its domestic law, the denial of entry or revocation of visas of persons implicated in the commission of offences established in accordance with this Protocol.
         6.   Without prejudice to article 27 of the Convention, States Parties shall consider strengthening cooperation among border control agencies by, inter alia, establishing and maintaining direct channels of communication.
         Article 12
         Security and control of documents
         Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary, within available means:

                     (a)

                     to ensure that travel or identity documents issued by it are of such quality that they cannot easily be misused and cannot readily be falsified or unlawfully altered, replicated or issued; and

                     (b)

                     to ensure the integrity and security of travel or identity documents issued by or on behalf of the State Party and to prevent their unlawful creation, issuance and use.

               Article 13
         Legitimacy and validity of documents
         At the request of another State Party, a State Party shall, in accordance with its domestic law, verify within a reasonable time the legitimacy and validity of travel or identity documents issued or purported to have been issued in its name and suspected of being used for trafficking in persons.
         IV.   FINAL PROVISIONS
         Article 14
         Saving clause
         1.   Nothing in this Protocol shall affect the rights, obligations and responsibilities of States and individuals under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law and, in particular, where applicable, the 1951 Convention (1) and the 1967 Protocol (2) relating to the Status of Refugees and the principle of non-refoulement as contained therein.
         2.   The measures set forth in this Protocol shall be interpreted and applied in a way that is not discriminatory to persons on the ground that they are victims of trafficking in persons. The interpretation and application of those measures shall be consistent with internationally recognised principles of non-discrimination.
         Article 15
         Settlement of disputes
         1.   States Parties shall endeavour to settle disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Protocol through negotiation.
         2.   Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Protocol that cannot be settled through negotiation within a reasonable time shall, at the request of one of those States Parties, be submitted to arbitration. If, six months after the date of the request for arbitration, those States Parties are unable to agree on the organisation of the arbitration, any one of those States Parties may refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice by request in accordance with the Statute of the Court.
         3.   Each State Party may, at the time of signature, ratification, acceptance or approval of or accession to this Protocol, declare that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2 of this article. The other States Parties shall not be bound by paragraph 2 of this article with respect to any State Party that has made such a reservation.
         4.   Any State Party that has made a reservation in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article may at any time withdraw that reservation by notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
         Article 16
         Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession
         1.   This Protocol shall be open to all States for signature from 12 to 15 December 2000 in Palermo, Italy, and thereafter at United Nations Headquarters in New York until 12 December 2002.
         2.   This Protocol shall also be open for signature by regional economic integration organisations provided that at least one member State of such organisation has signed this Protocol in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article.
         3.   This Protocol is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. A regional economic integration organisation may deposit its instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval if at least one of its member States has done likewise. In that instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, such organisation shall declare the extent of its competence with respect to the matters governed by this Protocol. Such organisation shall also inform the depositary of any relevant modification in the extent of its competence.
         4.   This Protocol is open for accession by any State or any regional economic integration organisation of which at least one Member State is a Party to this Protocol. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. At the time of its accession, a regional economic integration organisation shall declare the extent of its competence with respect to matters governed by this Protocol. Such organisation shall also inform the depositary of any relevant modification in the extent of its competence.
         Article 17
         Entry into force
         1.   This Protocol shall enter into force on the 90th day after the date of deposit of the 40th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, except that it shall not enter into force before the entry into force of the Convention. For the purpose of this paragraph, any instrument deposited by a regional economic integration organisation shall not be counted as additional to those deposited by Member States of such organisation.
         2.   For each State or regional economic integration organisation ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Protocol after the deposit of the 40th instrument of such action, this Protocol shall enter into force on the 30th day after the date of deposit by such State or organisation of the relevant instrument or on the date this Protocol enters into force pursuant to paragraph 1 of this article, whichever is the later.
         Article 18
         Amendment
         1.   After the expiry of five years from the entry into force of this Protocol, a State Party to the Protocol may propose an amendment and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall thereupon communicate the proposed amendment to the States Parties and to the Conference of the Parties to the Convention for the purpose of considering and deciding on the proposal. The States Parties to this Protocol meeting at the Conference of the Parties shall make every effort to achieve consensus on each amendment. If all efforts at consensus have been exhausted and no agreement has been reached, the amendment shall, as a last resort, require for its adoption a two-thirds majority vote of the States Parties to this Protocol present and voting at the meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
         2.   Regional economic integration organisations, in matters within their competence, shall exercise their right to vote under this article with a number of votes equal to the number of their Member States that are Parties to this Protocol. Such organisations shall not exercise their right to vote if their Member States exercise theirs and vice versa.
         3.   An amendment adopted in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by States Parties.
         4.   An amendment adopted in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article shall enter into force in respect of a State Party 90 days after the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of an instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of such amendment.
         5.   When an amendment enters into force, it shall be binding on those States Parties which have expressed their consent to be bound by it. Other States Parties shall still be bound by the provisions of this Protocol and any earlier amendments that they have ratified, accepted or approved.
         Article 19
         Denunciation
         1.   A State Party may denounce this Protocol by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Such denunciation shall become effective one year after the date of receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
         2.   A regional economic integration organisation shall cease to be a Party to this Protocol when all of its Member States have denounced it.
         Article 20
         Depositary and languages
         1.   The Secretary-General of the United Nations is designated depositary of this Protocol.
         2.   The original of this Protocol, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned plenipotentiaries, being duly authorised thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Protocol.

         (1)  United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No 2545.

         (2)  Ibid., vol. 606, No 8791.

      ANNEX II

         Declaration concerning the competence of the European Community with regard to matters governed by the protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women And Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime
         Article 16(3) of the Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, provides that the instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of a regional economic integration organisation shall contain a declaration specifying the matters governed by the Protocol in respect of which competence has been transferred to the organisation by its Member States which are Parties to the Protocol.
         The Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, shall apply, with regard to the competences transferred to the European Community, to the territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Community is applied and under the conditions laid down in that Treaty, in particular Article 299 thereof and the Protocols annexed to it.
         This declaration is without prejudice to the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland under the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis into the framework of the European Union and under the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community.
         This declaration is equally without prejudice to the position of Denmark under the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community.
         Pursuant to Article 299, this declaration is also not applicable to the territories of the Member States in which the said Treaty does not apply and is without prejudice to such acts or positions as may be adopted under the Protocol by the Member States concerned on behalf of and in the interests of those territories. In accordance with the provision referred to above, this declaration indicates the competence that the Member States have transferred to the Community under the Treaties in matters governed by the Protocol. The scope and the exercise of such Community competence are, by their nature, subject to continuous development as the Community further adopts relevant rules and regulations, and the Community will complete or amend this declaration, if necessary, in accordance with Article 16(3) of the Protocol.
         The Community points out that it has competence with regard to the crossing of external borders of the Member States, regulating standards and procedures when carrying out checks on persons at such borders and rules on visas for intended stays of no more than three months.
         The Community is also competent for measures on immigration policy regarding conditions of entry and residence and measures to counter illegal immigration and illegal residence, including repatriation of illegal residents. Moreover, it can take measures to ensure cooperation between the relevant departments of the administrations of the Member States, as well as between those departments and the Commission, in the aforementioned areas. In these fields the Community has adopted rules and regulations and, and, where it has done so, it is hence solely for the Community to enter into external undertakings with third States or competent international organisations.
         In addition, Community policy in the sphere of development cooperation complements policies pursued by Member States and includes provisions to prevent and combat trafficking in persons.