title: 2011/687/CFSP: Council Decision 2011/687/CFSP of 14 October 2011 amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo, EULEX KOSOVO

text:
               15.10.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 270/31

         COUNCIL DECISION 2011/687/CFSP
   of 14 October 2011
   amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (1), EULEX KOSOVO
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 28 and 43(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 4 February 2008, the Council adopted Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP (2).

               (2)

               On 9 June 2009, the Council adopted Joint Action 2009/445/CFSP (3), which amended Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP by increasing the financial reference amount to cover the expenditure of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (‘EULEX KOSOVO’) until the expiry of Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP.

               (3)

               On 8 June 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/322/CFSP (4), which amended and extended Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP for a period of 2 years until 14 June 2012, and laid down the financial reference amount until 14 October 2010.

               (4)

               The financial reference amount provided in Council Decision 2010/619/CFSP, of 15 October 2010, amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo, EULEX KOSOVO (5), and intended to cover the expenditure related to EULEX KOSOVO until 14 October 2011 should cover the period until 14 December 2011.

               (5)

               EULEX KOSOVO will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the common foreign and security policy as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty.

               (6)

               Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Article 16(1) of Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP is hereby replaced by the following:

      ‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO until 14 October 2010 shall be EUR 265 000 000.
      The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 October 2010 until 14 December 2011 shall be EUR 165 000 000.
      The financial reference amount for the subsequent period for EULEX KOSOVO shall be decided by the Council.’.

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

      Done at Brussels, 14 October 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. DOWGIELEWICZ

      (1)  Under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999).

      (2)  OJ L 42, 16.2.2008, p. 92.

      (3)  OJ L 148, 11.6.2009, p. 33.

      (4)  OJ L 145, 11.6.2010, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 272, 16.10.2010, p. 19.


title: 2004/617/EC: Council Decision of 11 August 2004 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and India pursuant to Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 relating to the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the GATT 1994

text:
               28.8.2004

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 279/17

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 11 August 2004
   on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and India pursuant to Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 relating to the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the GATT 1994
   (2004/617/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
    Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 June 2003, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations under Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 with a view to modify certain concessions for rice. Accordingly, the Community notified the WTO on 2 July 2003 of its intention to modify certain concessions in EC Schedule CXL.

               (2)

               Negotiations have been conducted by the Commission in consultation with the Committee established by Article 133 of the Treaty and within the framework of the negotiating directives issued by the Council.

               (3)

               The Commission has negotiated with the United States of America, having a principal supplying interest in products of HS code 1006 20 (husked rice) and substantial supplier interest in products of HS code 1006 30 (milled rice), Thailand, having a principal supplying interest in products of HS code 1006 30 (milled rice) and substantial supplier interest in products of HS code 1006 20 (husked rice) and India and Pakistan, each having a substantial supplier interest in products of HS code 1006 20 (husked rice).

               (4)

               In order to ensure that the Agreement may be fully applied by 1 September 2004 and pending the amendment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1785/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1), the Commission should be authorised to adopt temporary derogations from that Regulation.

               (5)

               The measures necessary for the implementation of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (2).

               (6)

               The Commission has successfully negotiated an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and India. The Agreement should therefore be approved,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and India pursuant to Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 relating to the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the GATT 1994 is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   To the extent necessary to permit the full application of this Agreement by 1 September 2004, the Commission may derogate from Regulation (EC) No 1785/2003, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 3(2) of this Decision, until that Regulation is amended but at the latest until 30 June 2005.
   Article 3
   1.   The Commission shall be assisted by the Management Committee for Cereals instituted by Article 25 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (3).
   2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 4 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply.
   The period provided for in Article 4(3) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at one month.
   3.   The Committee shall adopt its Rules of Procedure.
   Article 4
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in order to bind the Community (4).

      Done at Brussels, 11 August 2004.

            For the Council

            The President

         B. BOT

      (1)  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 96.

      (2)  OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

      (3)  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

      (4)  The date of entry into force of the Agreement will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
   AGREEMENT IN THE FORM OF AN EXCHANGE OF LETTERS
   between the European Community and India pursuant to Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 relating to the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the GATT 1994
   Sir,
   Following negotiations between the European Community (EC) and India under Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 for the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), the EC agrees to the conclusions as outlined below.
   Final import regime
   The tariff rate for husked rice (CN code 1006 20) shall be EUR 65/tonne.
   With respect to the import regime of husked rice (CN codes 1006 20 17 and NC 1006 20 98) of the varieties Basmati 370, Basmati 386, Type-3 (Dehradun), Taraori Basmati (HBC-19), Basmati 217, Ranbir Basmati, Pusa Basmati and Super Basmati, the EC's specific bound rate of duty shall be zero. To that purpose:

               —

               a Community control system based on DNA analysis at the border shall be created; India shall actively cooperate with the EC to set up such a control system and the EC shall provide the appropriate technical assistance in this matter,

               —

               it is understood that Basmati rice of the varieties described above is produced in certain geographical areas and that India will protect Basmati rice as a geographical indication. The EC would welcome an application for protection as a geographical indication of Basmati rice under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1). The EC shall process any such application as expeditiously as possible. The EC shall provide any necessary technical assistance in this matter.

         Transitional arrangement
   As from 1 September 2004 and until the date of entry into force of the abovementioned Community control system, the EC shall put in place a transitional regime with regard to husked rice (CN codes 1006 20 17 and 1006 20 98) of the varieties described above based on the following elements.
   The EC's autonomous applied rate of duty shall be zero. However, if market disturbance occurs, the EC will consult with India's competent authorities to agree an appropriate solution. If no agreement is reached, the EC reserves the right to revert to the bound rate of duty of EUR 65/tonne for husked rice (CN code 1006 20).
   General
   For the purposes of this Agreement:

               —

               the EC shall establish separate tariff lines for Basmati rice of the varieties indicated in the agreements with India and Pakistan,

               —

               the competent Indian authorities shall continue to issue the authenticity certificates prior to the issuance of import licences, meaning that the current system of administration of the certificates of authenticity shall be maintained.

         The EC recognises that India has initial negotiating rights with respect to the concessions specified in the present letter.
   This Agreement shall be approved by the Parties in accordance with their own procedures.
   The provisions of this Agreement shall be applicable from 1 September 2004.
   I would be grateful if you could confirm the agreement of your Government to the above.
   Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.

      Hecho en Bruselas, el
      V Bruselu dne
      Udfærdiget i Bruxelles, den
      Geschehen zu Brüssel am
      Brüssel,
      Έγινε στις Βρυξέλλες, στις
      Done at Brussels,
      Fait à Bruxelles, le
      Fatto a Bruxelles, addì
      Briselÿ,
      Priimta Briuselyje,
      Kelt Brüsszelben,
      Magÿmula fi Brussel,
      Gedaan te Brussel,
      Sporzÿdzono w Brukseli, dnia
      Feito em Bruxelas,
      V Bruseli
      V Bruslju,
      Tehty Brysselissä
      Utfärdat i Bryssel den

      Por la Comunidad Europea
      Za Evropské společenstvί
      For Det Europæiske Fællesskab
      Für die Europäische Gemeinschaft
      Euroopa Ühenduse nimel
      Για την Ευρωπαϊκή Κοινότητα
      For the European Community
      Pour la Communauté européenne
      Per la Comunità europea
      Eiropas Kopienas vārdā
      Europos bendrijos vardu
      az Európai Közösség részéről
      Għall-Komunità Ewropea
      Voor de Europese Gemeenschap
      W imieniu Wspólnoty Europejskiej
      Pela Comunidade Europeia
      Za Európske spoločenstvo
      za Evropsko skupnost
      Euroopan yhteisön puolesta
      På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar

   Sir,
   I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of today's date, worded as follows:
   ‘Following negotiations between the European Community (EC) and India under Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 for the modification of concessions with respect to rice provided for in EC Schedule CXL annexed to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), the EC agrees to the conclusions as outlined below.
   Final import regime
   The tariff rate for husked rice (CN code 1006 20) shall be EUR 65/tonne.
   With respect to the import regime of husked rice (CN codes 1006 20 17 and NC 1006 20 98) of the varieties Basmati 370, Basmati 386, Type-3 (Dehradun), Taraori Basmati (HBC-19), Basmati 217, Ranbir Basmati, Pusa Basmati and Super Basmati, the EC's specific bound rate of duty shall be zero. To that purpose:

               —

               a Community control system based on DNA analysis at the border shall be created; India shall actively cooperate with the EC to set up such a control system and the EC shall provide the appropriate technical assistance in this matter,

               —

               it is understood that Basmati rice of the varieties described above is produced in certain geographical areas and that India will protect Basmati rice as a geographical indication. The EC would welcome an application for protection as a geographical indication of Basmati rice under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (2). The EC shall process any such application as expeditiously as possible. The EC shall provide any necessary technical assistance in this matter.

         Transitional arrangement
   As from 1 September 2004 and until the date of entry into force of the abovementioned Community control system, the EC shall put in place a transitional regime with regard to husked rice (CN codes 1006 20 17 and 1006 20 98) of the varieties described above based on the following elements.
   The EC's autonomous applied rate of duty shall be zero. However, if market disturbance occurs, the EC will consult with India's competent authorities to agree an appropriate solution. If no agreement is reached, the EC reserves the right to revert to the bound rate of duty of EUR 65/tonne for husked rice (CN code 1006 20).
   General
   For the purposes of this Agreement:

               —

               the EC shall establish separate tariff lines for Basmati rice of the varieties indicated in the agreements with India and Pakistan,

               —

               the competent Indian authorities shall continue to issue the authenticity certificates prior to the issuance of import licences, meaning that the current system of administration of the certificates of authenticity shall be maintained.

         The EC recognises that India has initial negotiating rights with respect to the concessions specified in the present letter.
   This Agreement shall be approved by the Parties in accordance with their own procedures.
   The provisions of this Agreement shall be applicable from 1 September 2004.
   I would be grateful if you could confirm the agreement of your Government to the above.’
   India has the honour of confirming its agreement with the contents of this letter.
   Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.

      Done at Brussels,
      Hecho en Bruselas, el
      V Bruselu dne
      Udfærdiget i Bruxelles, den
      Geschehen zu Brüssel am
      Brüssel,
      Έγινε στις Βρυξέλλες, στις
      Fait à Bruxelles, le
      Fatto a Bruxelles, addì
      Briselÿ,
      Priimta Briuselyje,
      Kelt Brüsszelben,
      Magÿmula fi Brussel,
      Gedaan te Brussel,
      Sporzÿdzono w Brukseli, dnia
      Feito em Bruxelas,
      V Bruseli
      V Bruslju,
      Tehty Brysselissä
      Utfärdat i Bryssel den

      On behalf of India
      En nombre de la India
      Za Indii
      På Indiens vegne
      Im Namen Indiens
      India nimel
      Εξ ονόματος της Ινδίας
      Au nom de l'Inde
      Per l'India
      Indijas vārdā
      Indijos vardu
      India nevében
      Għan-nom ta’ l-Indja
      Namens India
      W imieniu Indii
      Em nome da Índia
      V mene Indie
      V imenu Indije
      Intian puolesta
      På Indiens vägnar

      (1)  OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003, p. 1).

      (2)  OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003, p. 1).


title: 2011/31/EU: Commission Decision of 19 January 2011 terminating the anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand

text:
               20.1.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 15/17

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 19 January 2011
   terminating the anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand
   (2011/31/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 597/2009 of 11 June 2009 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 14 thereof,
   After consulting the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

   1.1.   Initiation

               (1)

               On 22 December 2009, the European Commission (the ‘Commission’) announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2) (‘Notice of initiation’), the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports into the Union of purified terephthalic acid and its salts (‘PTA’) originating in Thailand (‘the country concerned’).

               (2)

               The anti-subsidy proceeding was initiated following a complaint lodged on 13 November 2009 by BP Aromatics Limited NV and CEPSA Quimica S.A. (‘the complainants’) representing a major proportion, in this case more than 50 %, of the total Union production of PTA. The complaint contained prima facie evidence of subsidisation of the product concerned originating in the country concerned and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the opening of a proceeding.

               (3)

               On the same day, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (3), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the Union of PTA originating in Thailand. This investigation has been terminated by means of Commission Decision 2011/32/EU (4).

               (4)

               Prior to the initiation of the proceeding and in accordance with Article 10(7) of the basic Regulation, the Commission notified the Government of Thailand that it had received a properly documented complaint alleging that subsidised imports of PTA originating in Thailand were causing material injury to the Union industry. The Government of Thailand was invited for consultations with the aim of clarifying the situation as regards the contents of the complaint and arriving at a mutually agreed solution. The Government of Thailand accepted the offer of consultations and consultations were subsequently held. During the consultations, no mutually agreed solution could be arrived at. However, due note was taken of comments made by the authorities of Thailand in regard to the allegations contained in the complaint regarding the lack of countervailability of the schemes. During the consultations, submissions were received from the Government of Thailand.

         1.2.   Parties concerned by the proceeding

               (5)

               The Commission officially advised the complainants, other known producers in the Union, the known exporting producers in Thailand, the representatives of the exporting country concerned and known importers and users of the initiation of the proceeding. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the Notice of initiation. All interested parties who so requested and showed that there were particular reasons why they should be heard were granted a hearing.

               (6)

               The Commission sent questionnaires to the authorities of the exporting country, the complainants, other known producers in the Union, the known exporting producers in Thailand and to the known importers and users of product concerned and to all other parties that requested a questionnaire within the deadlines set out in the Notice of initiation.

               (7)

               Questionnaire replies were received from the authorities of Thailand, from the three known Thai exporting producers, from three Union producers, from one Union importer, and from five Union users.

               (8)

               The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for the determination of subsidisation, resulting injury and Union interest.

               (9)

               Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following State authorities:
               Office of Board of Investment, Bangkok, Thailand.

               (10)

               Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following companies:

                           (a)

                           Union producers:

                                       —

                                       BP Aromatics Limited NV, Geel, Belgium,

                                       —

                                       CEPSA Química, S.A., Madrid, Spain,

                                       —

                                       Lotte Chemical UK Ltd (formerly Artenius), Wilton, Redcar, United Kingdom;

                           (b)

                           Union importers:

                                       —

                                       Mitsui & Co. Benelux NV, Brussels, Belgium;

                           (c)

                           Union users:

                                       —

                                       DSM Powder Coating Resins B.V., Zwolle, Netherlands,

                                       —

                                       M&G Polimeri Italia SPA, Patrica (Frosinone), Italy,

                                       —

                                       NOVAPET S.A., Barbastro (Huesca), Spain,

                                       —

                                       UAB NEO Group, Klaipeda, Lithuania;

                           (d)

                           Exporting producers in Thailand:

                                       —

                                       TPT Petrochemicals Public Company Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand (hereinafter ‘TPT’),

                                       —

                                       TPT Petrochemicals Public Company Ltd, Rayong, Thailand (hereinafter ‘TPT’),

                                       —

                                       Indorama Petrochem Ltd, Rayong, Thailand (hereinafter ‘Indorama’),

                                       —

                                       Siam Mitsui PTA Company Ltd, Rayong, Thailand (hereinafter ‘SMPC’).

               (11)

               Given that both TPT and Indorama are owned by the same holding company, they will be referred to in this document as the ‘Indorama group’.

         1.3.   Investigation period and period considered

               (12)

               The investigation of subsidisation and injury covered the period from 1 December 2008 to 30 November 2009 (the ‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the investigation period (‘the period considered’).

         2.   PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

   2.1.   Product concerned

               (13)

               The product concerned is terephthalic acid and its salts of a purity by weight of 99,5 % or more, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 36 00 (‘the product concerned’).

               (14)

               PTA is obtained by the purification of crude terephthalic acid, which is a result of making paraxylene (PX) react with a solvent and a catalyst solution.

         2.2.   Like product

               (15)

               The product concerned and the PTA produced and sold on the domestic market of Thailand, as well as the PTA produced and sold in the Union by the Union industry were found to have the same basic physical and chemical characteristics and uses. They are therefore considered to be alike within the meaning of Article 2(c) of the basic Regulation.

         3.   SUBSIDISATION

   3.1.   Introduction

               (16)

               On the basis of the information contained in the complaint and the replies to the Commission’s questionnaire, the following schemes, which allegedly involved the granting of subsidies by a Governmental authority, were investigated:

                           —

                           exemption or reduction on duties on imports of machinery,

                           —

                           exemption from corporate income tax,

                           —

                           exemption of import duties on raw and essential materials used in the manufacturing of export products,

                           —

                           double deduction from taxable income of transportation, electricity and water costs for 10 years from the date of first revenue derived from the promoted activity,

                           —

                           deduction from net profit of 25 % of the project’s infrastructure installation or construction costs in addition to normal depreciation,

                           —

                           tax and duty compensation of the exported goods produced in Thailand.

         3.2.   General

               (17)

               Investment Promotion Act B.E. 2544 (‘IPA’) provides incentives to promote development of the Thai economy. The IPA, which is administered by the Board of Investment of Thailand (‘BOI’), grants the benefits resulting from the schemes mentioned in section 3.1. above with respect to the qualifying projects. In order to receive IPA benefits, each company makes an application to the BOI for a ‘Certificate of promotion’, which specifies the goods to be produced and benefits granted.

               (18)

               Tax and Duty Compensation of Exported Goods Produced in the Kingdom Act B.E.2524 (1981) prescribes the criteria and conditions for the participation in tax and duty compensation of exported merchandise scheme. This scheme is administered by the Thai Ministry of Finance.

               (19)

               The sum of all calculated subsidies for each individual company is under the de minimis threshold, i.e. less than 2 % ad valorem. Therefore, in accordance with Article 14(3) and 14(5) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation, even if all the subsidies in question were countervailable, no anti-subsidy duties could be imposed on the Thai exporters. Because of the de minimis subsidisation the specificity of the subsidy schemes mentioned in recital 16 was not examined.

               (20)

               However, for the purpose of clarity, details of the schemes and the corresponding subsidy rates for individual companies are set out below, without prejudice to whether or not the subsidies are considered to be countervailable.

         3.3.   Individual Schemes

   3.3.1.   Exemption or reduction on duties on imports of machinery

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (21)

               Article 28 of the IPA provides the legal basis for an exemption from duties on machinery imports. Under this scheme companies are entitled to the full exemption from payment of import duty on machinery as approved by the BOI, providing that no such machinery comparable in quality is being produced or assembled within Thailand. Article 29 of IPA provides the legal basis for the 50 % reduction on import duties on imported machinery.

         (b)   Practical implementation

               (22)

               In order to benefit from this scheme, the company must posses a Certificate of promotion which specifies that it is entitled to an exemption or reduction on duties on imports of machinery pursuant to Articles 28 and 29 of the IPA. The Customs Department will receive a copy of the licence and the so-called ‘Master list of Machinery’, previously approved by the BOI, and will, on importation of the machinery, release this machinery without import duty being paid.

         (c)   Calculation of the subsidy amount

               (23)

               The benefit to the exporters was calculated on the basis of the amount of unpaid customs duty due on imported capital goods, by spreading this amount across a period which reflects the normal depreciation of such capital goods in the industry of the product concerned. This period has been established to be 15 years, which is in line with the depreciation periods used by the majority of the companies producing product concerned, both in Thailand and in the EU. The amount so calculated which is attributable to the investigation period has been adjusted by adding interest during the investigation period, in order to establish the full benefit to the recipient under this scheme, the commercial interest rate in Thailand during the investigation period being considered appropriate. This amount has then been allocated over total sales during the investigation period.

         (d)   Conclusion

               (24)

               Indorama Group received a benefit of 0,3 %, and Siam Mitsui PTA Co., Ltd received a benefit of 0,19 %.

         3.3.2.   Exemption from corporate income tax

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (25)

               Article 31 of the IPA provides the legal basis for corporate income tax exemption. Normal corporate income tax in Thailand is 30 %.

         (b)   Conclusion

               (26)

               None of the investigated companies benefited from this scheme during the investigation period. All of the Thai exporting producers offset the profits generated during the investigation period against losses they were carrying forward from previous accounting periods. This practice is allowed by the Thai Revenue Code for all companies, both promoted by BOI and non-promoted by BOI, and does not constitute a subsidy. Due to this fact investigated companies did not use the corporate income tax exemption scheme.

         3.3.3.   Double deduction from taxable income of transportation, electricity and water costs for 10 years from the date of first revenue derived from the promoted activity

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (27)

               Article 35(2) of the IPA provides the legal basis for the double deduction from taxable income of transportation, electricity and water costs for 10 years from the date of first revenue derived from the promoted activity.

         (b)   Practical implementation

               (28)

               In order to benefit from this scheme, the company must posses a Certificate of promotion which specifies that it is entitled to double deduction from taxable income of transportation, electricity, and water costs pursuant to Article 35(2) of the IPA. In addition to the usual deduction of the abovementioned costs, the BOI-promoted companies are allowed to deduct the same amount a second time from their profit on the tax return certificate. The company must fill out a special column in its annual tax return designated for the promoted activity. Consequently the taxable net profit is decreased by this amount; or the net loss is increased by this amount.

         (c)   Calculation of the subsidy amount

               (29)

               The benefit of this scheme should be calculated on the basis of the amount deducted a second time from the net profit as recorded on the tax return in the special column for promoted activities. For non-promoted activities this amount would be part of the net profit liable for corporate income tax, therefore 30 % of this amount (normal corporate tax rate in Thailand) forms the benefit for the companies. This amount has then been allocated over total sales during the investigation period.

         (d)   Conclusion

               (30)

               Indorama Group received a benefit of 0,55 %, and Siam Mitsui PTA Co., Ltd received a benefit of 0,57 %.

         3.3.4.   Deduction from net profit of 25 % of the project’s infrastructure, installation or construction costs in addition to normal depreciation

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (31)

               Article 35(3) of the IPA provides the legal basis for this scheme. The scheme involves a permission to deduct from the net profit, in addition to normal depreciation, an amount not exceeding 25 % of the project’s cost of installation or construction of facilities used in the promoted activity. The beneficiary should avail himself of the benefit within 10 years from the date the income is derived from the promoted activity.

         (b)   Conclusion

               (32)

               None of the investigated companies benefited from this scheme during the investigation period. In the periods before the investigation period all of the exporting producers either did not benefit from the income tax exemption scheme (since they were netting of profits against cumulated losses from the past) or were making losses. For theses reasons they could not obtain benefits from this scheme.

         3.3.5.   Exemption of import duties on raw and essential materials used in the manufacturing of export products

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (33)

               Article 36(1) of the IPA provides the legal basis for this scheme. Under this scheme the BOI is authorised to grant the exemption of import duties on raw materials and essential materials used in the manufacture of goods for export. Companies in any zone are eligible for this scheme provided that they are promoted.

         (b)   Conclusion

               (34)

               None of the investigated companies benefited from this scheme during the investigation period. The import duty on the main raw materials used in production of PTA is zero. Therefore there was no benefit from this scheme for the investigated Thai exporters.

         3.3.6.   Tax and duty compensation of the exported goods produced in Thailand

   (a)   Legal Basis

               (35)

               ‘Notification of the Compensation of Tax of Export Merchandise Produced in the Kingdom 1/2547 – Rate of Compensation’ provides for the benefit from this scheme.

         (b)   Practical implementation

               (36)

               Companies receive refund in the value of 0,38 % of the FOB value of exported goods. The benefit is calculated per export transaction, but companies usually submit several applications for refund at the same time. The companies submit applications for refunds to the relevant authority and receive the refund.

         (c)   Calculation of the subsidy amount

               (37)

               The benefit for this scheme is the actual amount received as a refund and consequently recorded in companies’ accounts as income. This amount has then been allocated over export sales during the investigation period.

         (d)   Conclusion

               (38)

               Indorama Group received a benefit of 0,36 % and Siam Mitsui PTA Co., Ltd also received a benefit of 0,36 %.

         3.4.   Amount of subsidies

               (39)

               The provisional amounts of subsidies in accordance with the provisions of the basic Regulation, expressed ad valorem, for the Thai exporting producers are:
               —   Indorama Petrochem Limited: 1,3 %,
               —   TPT Petrochemical Public Company Limited: 1 %,
               —   Siam Mitsui PTA Co., Ltd: 1,1 %.

               (40)

               Due to the fact that Indorama Petrochem Limited and TPT Petrochemical Public Company Limited are part of the same group, a common anti-subsidy duty rate was established for them. The final rate for Indorama/TPT group is 1,2 %.

                  Summary table

                           Import duty exemption or reduction on machinery Scheme

                           Double deduction from taxable income Scheme

                           Export Tax compensation Scheme

                           Total subsidy margin

                           Siam Mitsui

                           0,19 %

                           0,57 %

                           0,36 %

                           1,1 %

                           Indorama

                           0,18 %

                           0,78 %

                           0,35 %

                           1,3 %

                           TPT

                           0,47 %

                           0,23 %

                           0,36 %

                           1 %

                           Indorama/TPT Group

                           0,3 %

                           0,55 %

                           0,36 %

                           1,2 %

               (41)

               In view of the de minimis amounts of countervailable subsidies for the Thai exporting producers, provisional measures on imports of PTA originating in Thailand should not be imposed.

         4.   INJURY, CAUSATION AND UNION INTEREST

               (42)

               In view of the above findings with respect to subsidies it is not considered necessary to present any analysis on injury, causation and Union interest.

         5.   TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING

               (43)

               The proceeding should therefore be terminated as the amounts of countervailable subsidies for the Thai exporting producers are less than 2 % ad valorem. Interested parties were informed accordingly and were given the opportunity to comment.

               (44)

               With respect to subsidy aspects comments were received from the Government of Thailand (‘GOT’) and one of the complainants.

               (45)

               The GOT argued that the schemes investigated cannot be considered as specific subsidy schemes since they form part of the country’s decentralisation policy, they are not export contingent and do not limit access to certain business sectors or regions. In this respect it is noted that the investigation has established clearly that the investigated schemes that the exporting producers used during the IP (import duty exemption on machinery, double deduction from taxable income, and export tax compensation) are countervailable subsidies in line with the provisions of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation. Therefore, the claims of the GOT have to be rejected.

               (46)

               One of the complainants argued that some subsidies, in particular the income tax exemption scheme, should have been spread on a shorter period. This had to be rejected because none of the exporting producers benefited from this scheme during the IP.

               (47)

               As far as injury aspects are concerned no representations were submitted by any interested party.

               (48)

               In conclusion, no comments from any interested party undermine the findings that protective measures are unnecessary.

               (49)

               In light of all the above, the Commission therefore concludes that the anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports into the Union of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand should be terminated without the imposition of anti-subsidy measures,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Sole Article
   The anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports of terephthalic acid and its salts of a purity by weight of 99,5 % or more, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 36 00, originating in Thailand, is hereby terminated.

      Done at Brussels, 19 January 2011.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.

      (2)  OJ C 313, 22.12.2009, p. 22.

      (3)  OJ C 313, 22.12.2009, p. 17.

      (4)  See page 22 of this Official Journal.


title: 2011/666/CFSP: Council Decision 2011/666/CFSP of 10 October 2011 amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus

text:
               11.10.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 265/17

         COUNCIL DECISION 2011/666/CFSP
   of 10 October 2011
   amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 25 October 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus (1).

               (2)

               On the basis of a review of Decision 2010/639/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be extended until 31 October 2012.

               (3)

               In view of the gravity of the situation in Belarus, additional persons should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures as set out in Annex IIIA to Decision 2010/639/CFSP.

               (4)

               Furthermore, the information relating to certain persons and to an entity listed in Annex IIIA to that Decision should be updated.

               (5)

               It is necessary to include a derogation to the asset freeze in Decision 2010/639/CFSP in order to ensure that EU companies are not prohibited from recovering funds owed to them by the listed entities under contracts entered into prior to the listing of those entities.

               (6)

               Decision 2010/639/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Decision 2010/639/CFSP is hereby amended as follows:

               1.

               The following paragraph is added to Article 3:
               ‘3.   Article 2(1) shall not prevent a listed natural or legal person, entity or body from making a payment due under a contract entered into before the listing of such a natural or legal person, entity or body, provided that the relevant Member State has determined that the payment is not, directly or indirectly, received by a natural or legal person, entity or body referred to in Article 2(1).’;

               2.

               Article 7(2) is replaced by the following:
               ‘2.   This Decision shall apply until 31 October 2012. It shall be kept under constant review. It may be renewed or amended, as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.’.

         Article 2
   The persons listed in Annex I to this Decision shall be added to the list set out in Annex IIIA to Decision 2010/639/CFSP.
   Article 3
   In Annex IIIA to Decision 2010/639/CFSP, the entries for the following persons and entity shall be replaced by the respective entries set out in Annex II to this Decision:

               (1)

               Mazouka Siarhei

               (2)

               Bazanau, Aliaksandr Viktaravich

               (3)

               Peftiev Vladimir

               (4)

               Ipatau, Vadzim Dzmitryevich

               (5)

               Bushnaia, Natallia Uladzimirauna

               (6)

               Bushchyk, Vasil Vasilievich

               (7)

               Katsuba, Sviatlana Piatrouna

               (8)

               Kisialiova, Nadzeia Mikalaeuna

               (9)

               Padaliak, Eduard Vasilievich

               (10)

               Rakhmanava, Maryna Iurievna

               (11)

               Shchurok, Ivan Antonavich

               (12)

               Sport-Pari

               (13)

               Shadryna, Hanna Stanislavauna.

         Article 4
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Luxembourg, 10 October 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. ASHTON

      (1)  OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p. 18.

      ANNEX I

         Persons referred to in Article 2

                  Names
                  Transcription of Belarusian spelling
                  Transcription of Russian spelling

                  Names
                  (Belarusian spelling)

                  Names
                  (Russian spelling)

                  Place and date of birth

                  Position

                  1.

                  Kamisarau, Valery Mikalayevich
                  Komissarov, Valeri Nikolaevich

                  Камiсараў Валерый Мiкалаевiч

                  Комиссаров Валерий Николаевич

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as chief judge) the appeals against the sentences of political and civil society activists Dmitri Dashkevich, Eduard Lobov, Aleksandr Otroshchenkov, Dmitri Novik, Aleksandr Molchanov. These trials were a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  2.

                  Stsiapurka, Uladzimir Mikhailavich
                  Stepurko, Vladimir Mikhailovich

                  Сцяпурка Уладзiмiр Мiхайлавiч

                  Степурко Владимир Михайлович

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as chief judge) the appeals against the sentences of political and civil society activists Irina Khalip, Sergei Martselev, Pavel Severinets, Dmitri Bondarenko, Dmitri Doronin, Sergei Kazakov, Vladimir Loban, Vitali Matsukevich, Evgeni Sekret and Oleg Fedorkevich. These trials were a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  3.

                  Khrypach, Siarhei Fiodaravich
                  Khripach, Sergei Fiodorovich

                  Хрыпач Сяргей Фёдаравiч

                  Хрипач Сергей Федорович

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as chief judge) the appeals against the sentences of ex presidential candidates Andrei Sannikov, Nikolai Statkevich, Dmitri Uss, Vladimir Nekliaev, political and civil society activists Andrei Dmitriev, Ilia Vasilevich, Fiodor Mirzayanov, Oleg Gnedchik, Vladimir Yeriomenok, Andrei Pozniak, Aleksandr Klaskovski, Aleksandr Kviatkevich, Artiom Gribkov, Dmitri Bulanov and (as associate judge) Dmitri Dashkevich, Eduard Lobov, Aleksandr Otroshchenkov, Dmitri Novik, Aleksandr Molchanov. These trials were a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  4.

                  Nazaranka, Vasil Andreyevich
                  Nazarenko, Vasili Andreevich

                  Назаранка Васiль Андрэевiч

                  Назаренко Василий Андреевич

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as chief judge) the appeals against the sentences of political and civil society activists Vasili Parfenkov and (as associate judge) Dmitri Dashkevich, Eduard Lobov. These trials were a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  5.

                  Kamarouskaya, Volha Paulauna
                  Komarovskaia, Olga Pavlovna

                  Камароўская Вольга Паўлаўна

                  Комаровская Ольга Павловна

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. She dismissed (as associate judge) the appeals against the sentences of ex presidential candidate Andrei Sannikov, political and civil society activists Irina Khalip, Sergei Martselev, Pavel Severinets, Aleksandr Otroshchenkov, Dmitri Novik, Aleksandr Molchanov, Ilia Vasilevich, Fiodor Mirzayanov, Oleg Gnedchik, Vladimir Yeriomenok, Dmitri Doronin, Sergei Kazakov, Vladimir Loban, Vitali Matsukevich, Evgeni Sekret and Oleg Fedorkevich. These trials were a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  6.

                  Zaitsava, Viktoryia Henadzeuna
                  Zaitseva, Viktoria Gennadievna

                  Зайцава Вiкторыя Генадзеўна

                  Зайцева Виктория Геннадьевна

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. She dismissed (as associate judge) the appeals against the sentences of ex presidential candidate Andrei Sannikov, political and civil society activists Ilia Vasilevich, Fiodor Mirzayanov, Oleg Gnedchik amd Vladimir Yeriomenok. The trial was a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  7.

                  Unukevich, Tamara Vasileuna
                  Vnukevich, Tamara Vasilievna

                  Унукевiч Тамара Васiлеўна

                  Внукевич Тамара Васильевна

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. She dismissed (as associate judge) the appeals against the sentences of political and civil society activists Irina Khalip, Sergei Martselev, Pavel Severinets. The trial was a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  8.

                  Krot, Ihar Uladzimiravich
                  Krot, Igor Vladimirovich

                  Крот Iгар Уладзiмiравiч

                  Крот Игорь Владимирович

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as associate judge) the appeal against the sentence of the political activist Vasili Parfenkov. The trial was a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  9.

                  Khrobastau, Uladzimir Ivanavich
                  Khrobostov, Vladimir Ivanovich

                  Хробастаў Уладзiмiр Iванавiч

                  Хробостов Владимир Иванович

                  Judge of the City Court of Minsk. He dismissed (as associate judge) the appeal against the sentence of the political activist Vasili Parfenkov. The trial was a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  10.

                  Ihnatovich-Mishneva, Liudmila
                  Ignatovich-Mishneva, Liudmila

                  Iгнатовiч-Мiшнева Людмiла

                  Игнатович-Мишнева Людмила

                  Prosecutor of the City Court of Minsk dealing with the dismissal of the appeal against the sentence of Dmitri Dashkevich and Eduard Lobov, activists of the Molodoi Front (Young Front). The trial was a clear violation of the Code of Penal Procedure.

                  11.

                  Yarmalitski, Siarhei Uladzimiravich
                  Ermolitski, Sergei Vladimirovich
                  (Yermolitski, Sergei Vladimirovich)

                  Ярмалiцкi Сяргей Уладзiмiравiч

                  Ермолицкий Сергей Владимирович

                  Director of the prison camp in Shklov. He is responsible for the inhuman treatment of the detainees and persecution of ex presidential candidate Nikolai Statkevich, who was imprisoned in relation to the 19 December 2010 events, and other inmates.

                  12.

                  Kavaliou, Aliaksandr Mikhailavich
                  Kovalev, Aleksandr Mikhailovich

                  Кавалёў Аляксандр Мiхайлавiч

                  Ковалёв Александр Михайлович

                  Director of the prison camp in Gorki. He is responsible for the inhuman treatment of the detainees, especially for persecution and torturous treatment of civil society activist Dmitri Dashkevich, who was imprisoned in relation to the 19 December 2010 elections and the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.

                  13.

                  Paluyan, Uladzimir Mikalayevich
                  Paluyan, Vladimir Nikolaevich

                  Палуян Уладзiмiр Мiкалаевiч

                  Полуян Владимир Николаевич

                  Village Nekrashevichi of Karelichi district of Hrodna region
                  1961

                  Minister of Taxes and Duties. Supervises tax authorities that support the criminal case against Byalyatski using the pretext of tax evasion. Byalyatski was active in defending and providing assistance to those who suffered from repression in relation with the 19 December 2010 elections and the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.

                  14.

                  Kornau, Uladzimir Uladzimiravich
                  Kornov, Vladimir Vladimirovich

                  Корнаў Уладзiмiр Уладзiмiравiч

                  Корнов Владимир Владимирович

                  Judge at the City Court of Minsk who authorised the rejection of Byalyatski's lawyers's appeal. Byalyatski was active in defending and providing assistance to those who suffered from repression in relation with the 19 December 2010 elections and the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.

                  15.

                  Shastakou Maksim Aleksandrauvich
                  (Shastakou Maksim Aleksandravich, Shastakou Maxim Aleksandrauvich, Shastakou Maxim Aleksandravich, Shastakou Maxsim Aleksandrauvich, Shastakou Maxsim Aleksandrauvich)
                  Shestakov, Maksim Aleksandrovich

                  Шастакоў Максiм Александравiч

                  Шестаков Максим Александрович

                  Prosecutor who presented the case against Byalyatski in the Pervomaiski District Court of Minsk after Byalyatski's application to the court regarding his detention. Byalyatski was active in defending and providing assistance to those who suffered from repression in relation with the 19 December 2010 elections and the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.

                  16.

                  Herasimovich Volha Ivanavna
                  (Herasimovich Volha Ivanovna)
                  Gerasimovich Olga Ivanovna

                  Герасiмовiч Вольга Иванаўна
                  (Герасiмовiч Вольга Иваноўна)

                  Герасимович Ольга Ивановна

                  Prosecutor who presented the case against Byalyatski in the City Court of Minsk after Byalyatski's application to the court regarding his detention. Byalyatski was active in defending and providing assistance to those who suffered from repression in relation with the 19 December 2010 elections and the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.

      ANNEX II

         Persons and entity referred to in Article 3

                  Names
                  Transcription of Belarusian spelling
                  Transcription of Russian spelling

                  Name in Belarusian

                  Name in Russian

                  Place and date of birth

                  Position

                  1.

                  Mazouka, Kiryl Viktaravich
                  Mazovka, Kirill Viktorovich

                  Мазоўка Кiрыл Вiктаравiч

                  Мазовка Кирилл Викторович

                  Prosecutor of the Dashkevich-Lobov case. Dmitri Dashkevich and Eduard Lobov, activists of the Molodoi Front (Young Front), were sentenced to several years of imprisonment for ‘hooliganism’. The real reason for their imprisonment was that both actively participated in the electoral campaign in December 2010 supporting one of the candidates of the opposition.

                  2.

                  Bazanau, Aliaksandr Viktaravich
                  Bazanov, Aleksandr Viktorovich

                  Базанаў Аляскандр Вiктаравiч

                  Базанов Александр Викторович

                  Kazakhstan, 26.11.1962

                  Director, Information and Analytical Center of the President.

                  3.

                  Peftiev Vladimir
                  Peftiev Vladimir Pavlovich

                  Пефцiеў Уладзiмiр Паўлавiч

                  Пефтиев Владимир Павлович

                  1 July 1957, Berdyansk, Zaporozhskaya Oblast, Ukraine; Present passport No.: MP2405942

                  Person associated with Aliaksandr Lukashenka, Viktar Lukashenka and Dzmitry Lukashenka. Provides economic advice to President Lukashenka and is a key financial sponsor of the Lukashenka regime. Majority shareholder and Chairman of the Council of Shareholders of Beltechexport, one of the largest export/import companies of defence products in Belarus.

                  4.

                  Ipatau, Vadzim Dzmitryevich
                  Ipatov, Vadim Dmitrievich

                  Iпатаў Вадзiм Дзмiтрыевiч

                  Ипатов Вадим Дмитриевич

                  Deputy Chairperson, Central Electoral Commission (CEC). As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, he bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  5.

                  Bushnaia, Natallia Uladzimirauna (Bushnaya, Natallia Uladzimirauna)
                  Bushnaia, Natalia Vladimirovna (Bushnaya, Natalya Vladimirovna)

                  Бушная Наталля Уладзiмiраўна

                  Бушная, Наталья Владимировна

                  1953, Mogilev

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, she bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  6.

                  Bushchyk, Vasil Vasilievich
                  Bushchik, Vasili Vasilievich

                  Бушчык Васiль Васiльевiч

                  Бущик, Василий Васильевич

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, he bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  7.

                  Katsuba, Sviatlana Piatrouna
                  Katsubo, Svetlana Petrovna

                  Кацуба Святлана Пятроўна

                  Кацубо, Светлана Петровна

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, she bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  8.

                  Kisialiova, Nadzeia Mikalaeuna (Kisyaliova, Nadzeya Mikalaeuna)
                  Kiseleva, Nadezhda Nikolaevna

                  Кiсялёва Надзея Мiкалаеўна

                  Киселева, Надежда Николаевна

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, she bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  9.

                  Padaliak, Eduard Vasilievich (Padalyak, Eduard Vasilyevich)
                  Podoliak, Eduard Vasilievich (Podolyak, Eduard Vasilyevich)

                  Падаляк Эдуард Васiльевiч

                  Подоляк, Эдуард Васильевич

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, he bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  10.

                  Rakhmanava, Maryna Iurievna
                  Rakhmanova, Marina Iurievna

                  Рахманава Марына Юр’еўна

                  Рахманова, Марина Юрьевна

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, she bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  11.

                  Shchurok, Ivan Antonavich
                  Shchurok, Ivan Antonovich

                  Шчурок Iван Антонавiч

                  Щурок, Иван Антонович

                  CEC Member. As a Member of the Central Electoral Commission, he bears shared responsibility for the violations of international electoral standards in the Presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

                  12.

                  Sport-Pari

                  ‘ЗАО Спорт-пари’ (оператор республиканской лотереи)

                  Entity controlled by Mr Peftiev Vladimir in conjunction with Lukashenka, Dzmitry Aliaksandravich, through the latter’s control of the President’s Sports Club, which holds a mandatory, state-owned majority share in Sport-Pari.

                  13.

                  Shadryna, Hanna Stanislavauna
                  Shadrina, Anna Stanislavovna

                  Шадрына Ганна Станiславаўна

                  Шадрина Анна Станиславовна

                  Former Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the paper ‘Sovietskaia Belarus’.


title: Decision of the European Central Bank of 22 April 2004 laying down the terms and conditions for transfers of the European Central Bank’s capital shares between the national central banks and for the adjustment of the paid-up capital (ECB/2004/7)

text:
               9.6.2004

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 205/9

      DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

   of 22 April 2004
   laying down the terms and conditions for transfers of the European Central Bank’s capital shares between the national central banks and for the adjustment of the paid-up capital
   (ECB/2004/7)
   (2004/504/EC)
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank and in particular Article 28.5 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The adjustment of the weightings assigned to the national central banks (NCBs) in the expanded key for subscription to the European Central Bank’s (ECB’s) capital (hereinafter the capital key weightings and the capital key respectively) as provided for in Decision ECB/2004/5 of 22 April 2004 on the national central banks' percentage shares in the key for subscription to the European Central Bank’s capital (1) requires the Governing Council to determine the terms and conditions for transfers of capital shares between the NCBs that are part of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) on 30 April 2004 in order to ensure that the distribution of these shares corresponds to the adjustments made.

               (2)

               Česká národní banka, Eesti Pank, the Central Bank of Cyprus, Latvijas Banka, Lietuvos bankas, Magyar Nemzeti Bank, the Central Bank of Malta, Narodowy Bank Polski, Banka Slovenije and Národná banka Slovenska (hereinafter the acceding country NCBs) only become part of the ESCB on 1 May 2004, which means that transfers of capital shares pursuant to Article 28.5 of the Statute do not apply to the acceding country NCBs.

               (3)

               Decision ECB/2004/6 of 22 April 2004 laying down the measures necessary for the paying-up of the European Central Bank’s capital by the participating national central banks (2) determines how and to what extent the NCBs of the Member States that have adopted the euro (hereinafter the participating NCBs) should pay up the ECB’s capital in view of the expanded capital key. Decision ECB/2004/10 of 23 April 2004 laying down the measures necessary for the paying-up of the European Central Bank’s capital by the non-participating national central banks (3) determines the percentage that the NCBs of the Member States that have not adopted the euro on 1 May 2004 (hereinafter the non-participating NCBs) should pay up on 1 May 2004 in view of the expanded capital key.

               (4)

               The participating NCBs paid up their shares in the ECB’s subscribed capital as required under Decision ECB/2003/18 of 18 December 2003 laying down the measures necessary for the paying-up of the European Central Bank’s capital by the participating national central banks (4). In view of this fact, Article 2 of Decision ECB/2004/6 states that either a participating NCB should transfer an additional amount to the ECB, or the ECB should transfer an amount back to a participating NCB, as appropriate, in order to arrive at the amounts shown in the table in Article 1 of Decision ECB/2004/6. Likewise, Danmarks Nationalbank, Sveriges Riksbank and the Bank of England paid up their shares in the ECB’s subscribed capital as required under Decision ECB/2003/19 of 18 December 2003 laying down the measures necessary for the paying-up of the European Central Bank’s capital by the non-participating national central banks (5). In view of this fact, Article 2(1) of Decision ECB/2004/10 states that each of these three NCBs should either transfer an additional amount to the ECB, or receive an amount back from the ECB, as appropriate, in order to arrive at the amounts shown in the table in Article 1 of Decision ECB/2004/10. Article 2(2) of Decision ECB/2004/10 states that each of the acceding country NCBs should transfer to the ECB the amount shown next to its name in the table in Article 1 of the same Decision,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   Transfer of capital shares
   Considering the share in the ECB’s capital that each of the participating NCBs, as well as Danmarks Nationalbank, Sveriges Riksbank and the Bank of England, will have subscribed on 30 April 2004 and the share in the ECB’s capital that each of these NCBs will subscribe from 1 May 2004 as a consequence of the adjustment of the capital key weightings as described in Article 2 of Decision ECB/2004/5, these NCBs shall transfer capital shares among themselves via transfers to and from the ECB to ensure that the distribution of capital shares on 1 May 2004 corresponds to the adjusted weightings. To this effect, each of these NCBs shall, by virtue of this Article and without any further formality or act being required, either transfer or receive on 1 May 2004 the share in the ECB’s subscribed capital shown next to its name in the fourth column of the table in Annex I to this Decision, whereby ‘+’ shall refer to a capital share that the ECB shall transfer to the NCB and ‘-’ to a capital share that the NCB shall transfer to the ECB.
   Article 2
   Adjustment of the paid-up capital
   1.   Considering the amount of the ECB’s capital that each NCB has paid up (if any) and the amount of the ECB’s capital that each NCB shall pay up on 1 May 2004, as set out in Article 1 of Decision ECB/2004/6 for the participating NCBs and Article 1 of Decision ECB/2004/10 for the non-participating NCBs respectively, each NCB shall on 3 May 2004 either transfer or receive the net amount (in euro) shown next to its name in the fourth column of the table in Annex II to this Decision, whereby ‘+’A shall refer to an amount that the NCB shall transfer to the ECB and ‘-’ to an amount that the ECB shall transfer to that NCB.
   2.   On 3 May 2004, the ECB and the NCBs that are under an obligation to transfer an amount under paragraph 1 shall each separately transfer any interest accruing over the period from 1 May 2004 until 3 May 2004 on the respective amounts due from the ECB and such NCBs under paragraph 1. The transferors and recipients of this interest shall be the same as the transferors and recipients of the amounts on which the interest accrues.
   Article 3
   General provisions
   1.   The transfers described in Article 2 shall take place through the Trans-European Automated Real-time Gross settlement Express Transfer system (TARGET).
   2.   Where an NCB does not have access to TARGET on 3 May 2004, it shall transfer the amounts described in Article 2 on 3 May 2004 by crediting an account that the ECB shall nominate in due time.
   3.   Any interest accruing under Article 2(2) shall be calculated on a daily basis, using the actual 360-day method of calculation, at a rate equal to the marginal interest rate used by the ESCB in its most recent main refinancing operation.
   4.   The ECB and NCBs that are under an obligation to make a transfer under Article 2 shall, in due course, give the necessary instructions for duly executing such transfer on time.
   Article 4
   Final provision
   This Decision shall enter into force on 23 April 2004.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 22 April 2004.

            The President of the ECB

         Jean-Claude TRICHET

      (1)  See page 5 of this Official Journal.

      (2)  See page 7 of this Official Journal.

      (3)  See page 19 of this Official Journal.

      (4)  OJ L 9, 15.1.2004, p. 29.

      (5)  OJ L 9, 15.1.2004, p. 31.


Avis juridique important

|

32001D0900

2001/900/EC: Council Decision of 10 December 2001 amending Decision 1999/733/EC providing supplementary macro-financial assistance to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Official Journal L 334 , 18/12/2001 P. 0029 - 0029

Council Decisionof 10 December 2001amending Decision 1999/733/EC providing supplementary macro-financial assistance to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia(2001/900/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 308 thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),Whereas:(1) Decision 1999/733/EC(2) provides supplementary macro-financial assistance to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia comprising a loan component of a maximum principal of EUR 50 million and a grant component of a maximum of EUR 30 million.(2) The implementation of this assistance was delayed due to difficulties in reaching agreement on a new Stand-by Arrangement between the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the International Monetary Fund.(3) The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is determined to continue on its economic stabilisation and reform path and continues to require external financial support in addition to what can be provided by international financial institutions.(4) Decision 1999/733/EC does not permit the commitment of grant funds beyond the year 2000.(5) The Commission has consulted the Economic and Financial Committee before submitting its proposal,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Sole ArticleDecision 1999/733/EC is hereby amended as follows:1. Article 1(3) shall be replaced by the following: "3. The grant component of this assistance shall amount to a maximum of EUR 48 million."2. A new Article 6 shall be inserted: "Article 6This Decision shall expire on 31 December 2003."Done at Brussels, 10 December 2001.For the CouncilThe PresidentL. Michel(1) Opinion delivered on 29 November 2001 (not yet published in the Official Journal).(2) OJ L 294, 16.11.1999, p. 31.


title: Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/298 of 17 February 2017 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Central Asia

text:
               21.2.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 43/209

         COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2017/298
   of 17 February 2017
   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 Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 15 April 2015, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/598 (1) appointing Mr Peter BURIAN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) for Central Asia. The EUSR's mandate is to expire on 28 February 2017.

               (2)

               The EUSR's mandate should be extended for a further period of 16 months.

               (3)

               The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   European Union Special Representative
   The mandate of Mr Peter BURIAN as the EUSR for Central Asia is extended until 30 June 2018. The Council may decide that the mandate of the EUSR be terminated earlier, based on an assessment by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).
   Article 2
   Policy objectives
   The mandate of the EUSR shall be based on the Union's policy objectives in Central Asia. These objectives include:

               (a)

               promoting good and close relations between the Union and the countries of Central Asia 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 the Union;

               (e)

               enhancing the Union's effectiveness and visibility in the region, including through closer coordination with other relevant partners and international organisations, such as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the United Nations (UN).

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

               (a)

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

               (b)

               monitor, on behalf of the HR, together with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Commission, the implementation process of the Union Strategy for a New Partnership with Central Asia, complemented by relevant Council conclusions and subsequent progress reports on the implementation of the Union Strategy for 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, the judiciary, civil society and mass media;

               (e)

               encourage Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, 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;

               (g)

               contribute to the implementation of the Union's human rights policy in the region in cooperation with the EUSR for Human Rights, including the Union Guidelines on human rights, in particular the Union Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict as well as on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them, and Union policy regarding UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security, including by monitoring and reporting on developments as well as formulating recommendations in this regard;

               (h)

               contribute, in close cooperation with the UN and the OSCE, to conflict prevention and resolution by developing contacts with the authorities and other local actors such as non-governmental organisations, political parties, minorities, religious groups and their leaders;

               (i)

               provide input to the formulation of energy security, border security, countering serious crime, including narcotics and trafficking in human beings, as well as water resource management, environment and climate change aspects of the common foreign and security policy with respect to Central Asia;

               (j)

               promote regional security within Central Asian borders in the context of the reduction of the international presence in Afghanistan.

         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 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.
   3.   The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the EEAS and its relevant departments.
   Article 5
   Financing
   1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the EUSR's mandate for the period from 1 March 2017 to 30 June 2018 shall be EUR 1 195 000.
   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 the EUSR's mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting a 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 the team.
   2.   Member States, the institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of staff to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the sending Member State, the sending institution of the Union or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with 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, the sending institution of the Union or the EEAS, respectively, and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the EUSR's mandate.
   4.   The EUSR staff shall be co-located with the relevant EEAS department or Union delegation in order to ensure coherence and consistency of their respective activities.
   Article 7
   Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and the EUSR's staff
   The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the EUSR's mission and the members of the EUSR's staff shall be agreed with the host countries, as appropriate. Member States and the EEAS shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
   Article 8
   Security of EU classified information
   The EUSR and the members of the EUSR's team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2013/488/EU (2).
   Article 9
   Access to information and logistical support
   1.   Member States, the Commission, the EEAS and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
   2.   The Union delegations in the region and/or the 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 accordance with the EUSR's mandate and on the basis of the security situation in the area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under the EUSR's direct authority, in particular by:

               (a)

               establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility as well as the management of security incidents and including a contingency plan 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 area of responsibility;

               (c)

               ensuring that all members of the EUSR's team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;

               (d)

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

         Article 11
   Reporting
   The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with oral and written reports. The EUSR shall also report to Council working parties, as necessary. Regular reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. The EUSR may provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports. In accordance with Article 36 of the Treaty, the EUSR may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
   Article 12
   Coordination
   1.   The EUSR shall contribute to the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the Union's action and shall help ensure that all Union instruments and Member States' actions are engaged consistently to attain the Union's policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with the relevant geographic department of the EEAS, as well as with the Commission. 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 relevant Heads of Member States' Missions and Heads of Union delegations. They shall make every effort 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
   Assistance in relation to claims
   The EUSR and the EUSR's staff shall assist in providing elements to respond to any claims and obligations arising from the mandates of the previous EUSRs for Central Asia, and shall provide administrative assistance and access to relevant files for such purposes.
   Article 14
   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 Council, the HR and the Commission with a progress report by the 30 September 2017 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report by the 31 March 2018.
   Article 15
   Entry into force
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 17 February 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. BARTOLO

      (1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/598 of 15 April 2015 appointing the European Union Special Representative for Central Asia (OJ L 99, 16.4.2015, p. 25).

      (2)  Council Decision 2013/488/EU of 23 September 2013 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information (OJ L 274, 15.10.2013, p. 1).