title: 2011/240/EU: Commission Decision of 14 April 2011 extending the transitional period concerning the acquisition of agricultural land in Lithuania  Text with EEA relevance

text:
               15.4.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 101/122

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 14 April 2011
   extending the transitional period concerning the acquisition of agricultural land in Lithuania
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2011/240/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia,
   Having regard to the Act of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and in particular Chapter 4 of Annex IX thereto,
   Having regard to the request made by Lithuania,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The 2003 Act of Accession provides that Lithuania may maintain in force, under the conditions laid down therein, for a 7-year period following the accession, expiring on 30 April 2011, prohibitions on the acquisition of agricultural land by natural and legal persons from other EU Member States who are neither established nor registered nor having a branch or an agency in Lithuania. This is a temporary exception to the free movement of capital as guaranteed by Articles 63 to 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This transitional period may only be extended once for a period of up to 3 years.

               (2)

               On 4 February 2011, Lithuania requested to extend the transitional period concerning the acquisition of agricultural land by 3 years.

               (3)

               The main reason for the transitional period was the need to safeguard the socioeconomic conditions for agricultural activities following the introduction of the single market and the transition to the common agricultural policy in Lithuania. In particular, it aimed to meet concerns raised about the possible impact on the agricultural sector of liberalising the acquisition of agricultural land due to initial large differences in land prices and income compared with Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom (hereinafter the EU-15). The transitional period was also designed to ease the process of restitution and privatisation of agricultural land to farmers. In its Report of 16 July 2008 on the Review of the transitional measures for the acquisition of agricultural real estate set out in the 2003 Accession Treaty (hereinafter the ‘Mid-Term Review of 2008’), the Commission has already emphasised the importance of the completion of the abovementioned agricultural reform by the end of the foreseen transitional period (1).

               (4)

               The land reform is still ongoing in Lithuania. According to data supplied by the Lithuanian authorities, there is a total of 429 000 ha of State land for which ownership rights need to be clarified. At the moment only 77 200 ha of State agricultural land have been privatised and for 351 000 ha of agricultural land, which constitutes 11,42 % of the total agricultural land in Lithuania, the ownership rights still remain to be solved.

               (5)

               In the view of the Lithuanian authorities, the lack of clarity on property rights together with the unfavourable structure of the farms inevitably hinders land transactions and consolidation of agricultural land. Land fragmentation, however, leads to lower competitiveness and less market-oriented farms. In this context, data relating to 2009 made available by the Lithuanian authorities show that, in that year, farms of a size of up to 5 ha amounted to 52,5 % of all farms.

               (6)

               The aforementioned lower competitiveness of the Lithuanian agricultural sector compared to the agricultural sector in EU-15 is compounded by difficulties in access to financial resources and high interest rates applied to commercial credit lines for the acquisition of agricultural land (more than 10 % in 2009).

               (7)

               Moreover, the recent global financial and economic crisis also had a negative impact on Lithuania’s economy and in particular on the selling prices of agricultural products. According to the data of the Lithuanian Department of Statistics under the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, the total index of the purchase prices of the agricultural products in 2009, as compared to 2008, was 77,8. The fall was especially significant in the plant growing sector, where the total index of the purchase prices of these agricultural products in 2009 compared to 2008 was equal to 69,1.

               (8)

               In the light of the factors mentioned above, the still considerable, although decreasing over time, gap in the agricultural income of farmers in Lithuania and of farmers in the EU-15 can be explained. According to Eurostat, in 2009 the level of the farmers’ income in Lithuania decreased by 13,6 %, while the average of the income of the EU-27 decreased by 10,7 %.

               (9)

               Similarly to the levels of agricultural income, the gap in the agricultural land sales prices between Lithuania and the other EU Member States also persists. According to Eurostat data, the prices of the agricultural land parcels in Lithuania remain low in comparison to the other EU Member States. Complete convergence in agricultural land sales prices was neither expected nor seen as a necessary pre-condition for terminating the transitional period. Nevertheless, the noticeable differences in agricultural land sales prices between Lithuania and the EU-15 are such that they may hinder smooth progress towards price convergence.

               (10)

               Against this background, it may be anticipated, as do the Lithuanian authorities, that the lifting of the restrictions on 1 May 2011 would exert pressure on the land prices in Lithuania. Therefore, a threat of serious disturbances on the Lithuanian agricultural land market upon the expiry of the transitional period exists.

               (11)

               An extension by 3 years of the transitional period referred to in Chapter 4 of Annex IX to the Act of Accession should therefore be granted.

               (12)

               In order to fully prepare the market for liberalisation, it continues to be of utmost importance, even amid adverse economic circumstances, to foster the improvement of factors such as credit and insurance facilities for farmers, and the completion of the agricultural structural reform during the transitional period, as already emphasised in the Mid-Term Review of 2008.

               (13)

               Since an open single market has always been at the heart of the European prosperity, an increased inflow of foreign capital would bring along potential benefits also for the agricultural market in Lithuania. As emphasised in the Mid-Term Review of 2008, foreign investment in the agriculture sector would also have important long-term effects on the provision of capital and know-how, on the functioning of land markets and on agricultural productivity. The progressive loosening of the restrictions on foreign ownership during the transitional period would also contribute to preparing the market for full liberalisation.

               (14)

               For the purpose of legal certainty and in order to avoid a legal vacuum in the national legal system of Lithuania after the expiry of the current transitional period, this Decision should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The transitional period concerning the acquisition of agricultural land in Lithuania referred to in Chapter 4 of Annex IX to the 2003 Act of Accession shall be extended until 30 April 2014.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 14 April 2011.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  COM(2008) 461 final, 16 July 2008.


Avis juridique important

|

41998D0026

The Schengen acquis - Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up a Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen (SCH/ Com-ex (98) 26 def.)

Official Journal L 239 , 22/09/2000 P. 0138 - 0143

DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEof 16 September 1998setting up a Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen(SCH/ Com-ex (98)26 def.)THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,Having regard to Article 132 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement,Having regard to Article 7 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement,Having regard to the Joint Declaration concerning Article 139 in the Final Act annexed to the Convention,Whereas the initiative to set up the Standing Committee stems from a concern for complementarity with existing instruments within the European Union;Mindful of the need to observe the principle of national sovereignty;Whereas this Committee may in due course have to be adapted to take account of the operational framework of the European Union,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:A Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen (hereinafter "the Standing Committee") shall be set up under the aegis of the Executive Committee, firstly to establish whether all the preconditions for bringing the Convention into force in a candidate State thereto have been fulfilled and secondly to ensure that the Schengen acquis is properly applied by the States already implementing the Convention, notably by pinpointing problems and proposing solutions.The Standing Committee shall have sole responsibility for drafting the reports with a view to evaluating the preparations by the candidate States to bring the Schengen Convention into force and verifying that all of the preconditions for the practical application of the Schengen Convention and the abolition of checks at the internal borders have been fulfilled.The second task of the Standing Committee shall be to lay the foundations so that the Executive Committee can ensure the proper application of the Schengen Convention by the States which have already brought it into force, in particular by following up the recommendations made by the visiting committees to the external borders, by ensuring that follow-up action is taken to remedy the shortcomings mentioned in the Annual Report on the External Borders, by focusing greater attention on the joint efforts needed to improve the quality of controls at the external borders and by optimising the application of the Convention in the fields of police cooperation, judicial cooperation and the SIS. The Standing Committee shall seek solutions to the problems detected and shall make proposals for the satisfactory and optimal implementation of the Convention. Sole responsibility for checking to ensure that the Convention is properly applied shall continue to remain with the Schengen States. The Standing Committee shall therefore confine itself to carrying out the verification procedures as defined in the following mandate.These two tasks warrant the Standing Committee being awarded two separate mandates:1. to prepare the reports to serve as a basis for establishing that all the preconditions for bringing the Schengen Convention into force in a candidate State have been satisfied. In these cases it shall be called the "Evaluation Committee", and shall be in charge of evaluating how well these States are prepared;2. to lay the foundations so that the Executive Committee can ensure the proper application of the Convention in the States already implementing the Convention with a view to optimising its application and cooperation between the Schengen partners. First, it has to find solutions to problems encountered since the bringing into force of the Convention and make proposals on improving controls in accordance with the objectives set and the spirit of the Convention. Here, it shall be called the "Implementation Committee".I. EVALUATION COMMITTEE FOR CANDIDATE STATES TO BRING THE CONVENTION INTO FORCE1. TASKS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEEEach time a State is a candidate to bring the Convention into force, the Standing Committee, acting in the context of its evaluation remit, shall draw up a report laying down a list of the criteria to be satisfied by the candidate States. This list shall indicate precisely the standard to be reached in all of the areas covered by the Convention. Once these criteria have been approved by the Executive Committee, the Standing Committee shall verify in another report whether a candidate State to bring the Convention into force satisfies the criteria and complies with the standard required.In each of the Committee's spheres of competence, it may instruct a group of competent experts to draft a report in its specific field. These reports shall deal with the qualitative, quantitative, operational, administrative and organisational aspects and should pinpoint shortcomings or weaknesses, whilst proposing solutions.2. SPHERES OF COMPETENCEThe Committee shall draft a detailed and exhaustive report and shall assess how well prepared the candidate States to bring into force the Schengen Convention are in all of the fields referred to in Decision SCH/Com-ex (93) 10 of 14 December 1993 and shall ensure that all of the preconditions for implementing the Schengen acquis are respected. The assessment shall cover the following areas in particular:- checks at the external borders, in particular the application of the Common Manual,- surveillance of external land and sea borders,- visas, in particular the application of the Common Consular Instructions,- conditions governing the movement of aliens, including measures taken with regard to illegal immigration and aliens illegally on Schengen territory,- residence permits and alerts for the purpose of refusing entry,- police cooperation,- mutual assistance in criminal matters, including extradition,- drugs,- SIS, in particular the application of the Sirene Manual,- protection of personal data,- policy on expulsion and readmission,- arrangements for movement within airports.On the one hand, the Standing Committee shall take as its basis the following tasks in the areas relating to external borders, police cooperation, the SIS and visas; on the other, it shall draw up a list of tasks to be carried out by the experts in the other areas:(a) Controls at the external borders and migratory flows, including bilateral and multilateral cooperation with third States and the question of readmissionTaking into account the local geographical situation and depending on the kind of external borders in the visited State, the experts shall:- visit all external maritime borders in order to gather information in situ regarding the efficiency of surveillance measures on sea and land, particularly at night; and observe how checks are carried out on persons and freight in major ports,- observe control measures at the land borders with the aim of verifying their efficiency day and night. They must obtain information on the fight against the smuggling of illegal immigrants, inter alia, by means of interviews with the control authorities,- visit all airports for the purpose of checking how Schengen provisions have been applied,- visit in addition the Central Authorities in charge of external border and immigration controls and examine administrative structures and coordination between national and local levels,- enquire about practices for the issue of visas at the border when visiting the border crossing points and the Central Authority,- verify, when visiting the border crossing points and the Central Authority, that the SIS can be put into operation,- assess the arrangements for carrying out checks at the external borders, at the official border crossing points and in the intervening areas,- assess the technical means available at the external borders, inter alia, to deal with false documents,- assess the surveillance of land and sea borders,- check whether there are sufficient staffing levels at the different borders visited, together with their training, inter alia, on detecting false documents,- check the measures taken at the external borders visited to tackle illegal immigration and more generally crime,- check the measures taken vis-à-vis persons not admitted at the border or present illegally,- check the means deployed to combat illegal immigration networks,- assess cooperation with the bordering State(s).The objective of the visit shall be to assess in situ the efficiency of surveillance measures and their compliance with the Schengen control standards laid down in the Schengen Convention, the Common Manual and the relevant Executive Committee decisions.(b) Cooperation at the joint borders with States already applying the Convention, mainly with regard to police and judicial cooperation, in particular the conclusion of bilateral agreements and the secondment of liaison officersIn this context, the Standing Committee shall have the task of verifying:- the efficiency of day-to-day cooperation in the common border regions in implementation of the Convention and bilateral agreements,- the capacity and the willingness to implement and develop joint cross-border operations in compliance with the Convention and bilateral agreements,- the capacity and the willingness to implement and develop cooperation with liaison officers,- the efficiency of cooperation with States adjacent to Schengen's external borders in the fight against crime and, in particular, the fight against illegal immigration networks,- police access to databases and general training,- the efficiency of cross-border cooperation structures,- direct cooperation and relations between the authorities of the candidate State and the Schengen States,- security means and staff level in the border region.(c) The SIS, the Sirene Bureaux, the protection of facilities and personal dataIn this context, the Standing Committee shall have the task of verifying:Technical aspects- the qualitative, quantitative, operational, organisational and technical aspects of the future N.SIS,- the technical means and the procedures used to transfer information from the national information systems to the N.SIS (downloading to the SIS from national systems),- the technical means for making SIS data available to users on the ground and ensuring synchronisation of N.SIS and C.SIS data,- the technical availability of the N.SIS.Aspects concerning data and their use- the quantity of data the State is prepared to integrate into the SIS,- the quality of the data to be incorporated (completion of headings),- the geographical location of terminals, the number of terminals and their operational state (accessibility of SIS data to end-users),- training of employees authorised to use data contained in the SIS,- the internal procedures and the instructions for issuing alerts to be applied in the event of a hit,- the use of different options for alerts,- the operational capacity of the Sirene Bureaux (coordination between services, reply times).Protection of the facilities and data- the organisational and technical aspects of the protection of the facilities and personal data,- measures to prevent access to the systems and to data,- measures geared towards different levels of processing according to the user's responsibilities,- the conditions governing the removal of alerts which have expired.(d) The issue of visas- general conditions governing the issue of visas compared to those laid down in the Common Consular Instructions,- provisions for consultation prior to the issue of visas,- provisions for consulting the SIS prior to the issue of visas,- provisions for procuring Schengen stickers and storage conditions.The Standing Committee shall oversee the coordination of these reports and shall submit a general report to the Executive Committee.II. IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE FOR THE STATES ALREADY APPLYING THE CONVENTION1. TASKSThe Standing Committee shall provide the scope for detecting any problems encountered at external borders and for identifying situations which do not comply with the standard set in accordance with the spirit and objectives of the Convention. By means of the Standing Committee, the State visited and the Executive Committee shall be informed of the problems encountered, together with solutions proposed for applying the Convention in a satisfactory and most effective manner. As for any problems encountered since the bringing into force of the Convention, it shall be up to the Committee to make technical proposals to improve checks, security and judicial cooperation, including extradition.The Committee shall also check whether the recommendations and observations put forward by the visiting committees to external borders have been acted upon and have enabled any shortcomings in security to be overcome. The Committee shall also have the task of following up the problems highlighted in the annual report on the situation at the external borders of the States applying the Convention.Finally, the Committee shall perform its duties flexibly and objectively, in cooperation with the competent authorities and in compliance with the legal and ethical rules applicable at national level, and in so doing strive to meet the common objective of improving security and taking account of the interests of the other States applying the Convention.2. AREAS TO BE COVEREDFor those States already applying the Convention, the Committee shall be granted a wider remit than that of the visiting committees, but it shall continue to focus on the practical aspects. The following areas, extending across the whole of the Schengen acquis, may undergo evaluation and therefore have to be taken into account:- external border checks and surveillance,- police cooperation at the border areas of States already applying the Convention,- the Schengen Information System,- the conditions for the issuing of Schengen visas (in particular the arrangements governing prior consultation of the Partner States on sensitive nationalities),- measures aimed at terminating the stay of aliens discovered to be illegally on the territory,- mutual assistance in criminal matters, including extradition.The following should be given priority:(a) External border checks and surveillance- provisions for carrying out checks at the authorised crossing points along the external borders and in the border areas,- technical means available at the external borders, in particular for detecting counterfeit documents,- determining whether staff levels are adequate for the particular border visited,- external border checks and surveillance, encompassing mobile patrols as well as systems and methods of stationary surveillance,- training for officials, inter alia, in the detection of counterfeit documents,- measures taken at the external borders visited to combat illegal immigration and crime in general,- measures taken against individuals not granted admission at the border or individuals who are illegally on Schengen territory,- means deployed to combat illegal immigration networks,- existing forms of cooperation with neighbouring State(s),- administrative organisation of the service(s) responsible for combating illegal immigration and for coordination between these services at national and local level,- SIS use at border posts.(b) Police cooperation in the border areas of States already applying the Convention- existence of bilateral agreements,- exercising the right to pursuit and surveillance,- organisation of cross-border cooperation,- direct cooperation between services,- equipment and staff deployed in the border region for security purposes,- cooperation involving liaison officers.(c) The Schengen Information System- downloading to the SIS from the national systems,- technical availability of the N.SIS and the Sirene Bureaux,- end users' access to SIS data,- conditions for deleting expired alerts,- exploiting the different possibilities with regard to alerts,- operational capacity of the Sirene Bureaux: response time etc.(d) Conditions for the issue of Schengen visas- provisions for consultation prior to the issue of visas, as laid down in Annex 5B to the Common Consular Instructions,- provisions for consulting the SIS prior to the issue of Schengen visas,- VLTVs issued: quantity, target groups, grounds,- provisions for procuring Schengen stickers and storage conditions.III. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE STANDING COMMITTEEComposition of the Standing CommitteeThe Committee shall be a standing body. It shall be composed of one high-ranking representative from each Signatory State to the Convention or to the Cooperation Agreement. (This high-ranking representative may be accompanied). The Standing Committee shall be assisted by the Secretariat in connection with its meetings and various tasks.The Standing Committee shall visit all of the countries, in an order and at intervals to be laid down by the Executive Committee.For the performance of their tasks, the permanent members shall be able to call on the Schengen States to second temporarily experts in each of the Committee's areas of competence, in particular for the purpose of carrying out the assignments in the countries, in line with the arrangements defined by the permanent members. Certain assignments involving experts may be carried out jointly or may focus on one area. Each State shall be entitled to appoint an expert to perform assignments in the framework of the Standing Committee. The Standing Committee shall, however, endeavour to maintain membership of the delegations at a level that is compatible with the technical constraints of the assignments.Where there are several visits taking place at the same time involving groups of experts specialising in each of the specific areas, a coordination meeting shall be organised with all the experts before the end of the visit.The experts must have the requisite qualifications and, in general, it would be desirable for the same experts to be designated each time.The European Commission shall participate as an observer in the Standing Committee's work and in the activities of the working groups which serve the Committee, the Central Group and the Executive Committee.Joint Supervisory AuthorityThe Standing Committee shall carry out its tasks without prejudice to the powers of the Joint Supervisory Authority. The Committee shall be authorised to consult the Authority in areas within its sphere of competence.Locations to be visitedThe Standing Committee shall, in conjunction with the respective working groups, select the locations to be visited and the information to be gathered on a case-by-case basis.Language arrangementsDetails of the language arrangements to be used during the visits shall be determined for each visit.Facilitating the activities of the CommitteeThe authorities of the visited State shall ensure that its authorities afford the Committee the cooperation and assistance it requires to enable it to perform its tasks properly. The visited State must provide the Committee with the relevant information on the locations to be visited and all useful statistical, factual, analytical or other information (in one of the official Schengen languages) at least one month before the start of the visit.Reimbursement of travel and accommodation expenses incurred during the visitsThe costs of travel and accommodation are to be met by the Committee members or their experts. The host State shall bear the costs of the logistical support in situ.Drafting of the reportThe report shall be drafted on the basis of a standard model to be laid down by the Standing Committee in consultation with the competent working groups. The model may be adjusted according to needs and circumstances.A preliminary draft of the report shall be written by the Presidency and submitted to the group of experts, who shall seek a consensus on how the report should be drafted. The representatives of the host State shall have observer status within this group. Once the report has been drawn up by the experts, it shall be submitted to the host State, which may draft an opinion. The report and the opinion shall be submitted to the Standing Committee, which shall attempt to find a consensus between the two documents. With regard to points that remain contentious, the Committee shall put the position of each of the Parties.The reports must clearly show in which areas the objectives have been reached and those in which this is not the case, together with concrete proposals for measures to take with a view to remedying or improving the situation. Responsibility for adopting the final decision shall in any case rest with the Executive Committee.ConfidentialityThe Committee members and the experts shall regard as confidential the information they acquire in the course of performing their duties. The reports drawn up pursuant to this Decision shall be regarded as confidential.Königswinter, 16 September 1998.The ChairmanM. Kanther


( UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION ) DECISION NO. 31 OF 27 OCTOBER 1960 CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF PARAGRAPH ( 1 ), FIRST SENTENCE, AND OF PARAGRAPHE ( 2 ) OF ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION NO. 4 ON THE METHODS OF OPERATION OF THE REDUCTION AND SUSPENSION CLAUSES


title: 2014/911/EU: Council Decision of 4 December 2014 on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Latvia

text:
               17.12.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 360/28

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 4 December 2014
   on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Latvia

      (2014/911/EU)

   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (1), in particular Article 25 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2008/616/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the implementation of Decision 2008/615/JHA on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (2), in particular Article 20 and Chapter 4 of the Annex thereto,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               According to the Protocol on Transitional Provisions annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, the legal effects of the acts of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union adopted prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon are preserved until those acts are repealed, annulled or amended in implementation of the Treaties.

               (2)

               Accordingly, Article 25 of Decision 2008/615/JHA is applicable and the Council must unanimously decide whether the Member States have implemented the provisions of Chapter 6 of that Decision.

               (3)

               Article 20 of Decision 2008/616/JHA provides that decisions referred to in Article 25(2) of Decision 2008/615/JHA are to be taken on the basis of an evaluation report based on a questionnaire. With respect to automated data exchange in accordance with Chapter 2 of Decision 2008/615/JHA, the evaluation report is to be based on an evaluation visit and a pilot run.

               (4)

               According to Chapter 4, point 1.1, of the Annex to Decision 2008/616/JHA, the questionnaire drawn up by the relevant Council Working Group concerns each of the automated data exchanges and has to be answered by a Member State as soon as it believes it fulfils the prerequisites for sharing data in the relevant data category.

               (5)

               Latvia has completed the questionnaire on data protection and the questionnaire on dactyloscopic data exchange.

               (6)

               A successful pilot run has been carried out by Latvia with Austria.

               (7)

               An evaluation visit has taken place in Latvia and a report on the evaluation visit has been produced by the Austrian evaluation team and forwarded to the relevant Council Working Group.

               (8)

               An overall evaluation report, summarising the results of the questionnaire, the evaluation visit and the pilot run concerning dactyloscopic data exchange has been presented to the Council,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   For the purposes of automated searching of dactyloscopic data, Latvia has fully implemented the general provisions on data protection of Chapter 6 of Decision 2008/615/JHA and is entitled to receive and supply personal data pursuant to Article 9 of that Decision as from the day of the entry into force of this Decision.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 4 December 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         A. ORLANDO

      (1)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 12.


title: 2006/955/EC,Euratom: Decision of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities as regards the language arrangements

text:
                  29.12.2006

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 386/44

         DECISION OF THE COUNCIL
         of 18 December 2006
         amending the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities as regards the language arrangements
         (2006/955/EC, Euratom)
         THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
         Having regard to Article 64 of the Statute of the Court of Justice,
         In accordance with the procedure referred to in the second paragraph of Article 245 of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the second paragraph of Article 160 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,
         Having regard to the request of the Court of Justice,
         Having regard to the opinion of the Commission of 12 December 2006,
         Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament of 13 December 2006,
         Whereas with the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, Bulgarian and Romanian will become official languages of the European Union and whereas those languages should be included in those listed in the Rules of Procedure as the languages of a case,
         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

            Article 1
            The Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 19 June 1991 (OJ L 176, 4.7.1991, p. 7. Corrigendum: OJ L 383, 29.12.1992, p. 117), as amended on 21 February 1995 (OJ L 44, 28.2.1995, p. 61), 11 March 1997 (OJ L 103, 19.4.1997, p. 1. Corrigendum: OJ L 351, 23.12.1997, p. 72), 16 May 2000 (OJ L 122, 24.5.2000, p. 43), 28 November 2000 (OJ L 322, 19.12.2000, p. 1), 3 April 2001 (OJ L 119, 27.4.2001, p. 1), 17 September 2002 (OJ L 272, 10.10.2002, p. 24. Corrigendum: OJ L 281, 19.10.2002, p. 24), 8 April 2003 (OJ L 147, 14.6.2003, p. 17), 19 April 2004 (OJ L 132, 29.4.2004, p. 2), 20 April 2004 (OJ L 127, 29.4.2004, p. 107), 12 July 2005 (OJ L 203, 4.8.2005, p. 19) and 18 October 2005 (OJ L 288, 29.10.2005, p. 51) are hereby amended as follows:
            Article 29(1) shall be replaced by the following:

                  ‘1.   The languages of a case shall be Bulgarian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovene, Spanish, or Swedish.’.

            Article 2
            This Decision shall take effect at the same time as the Treaty concerning the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union.

            The texts of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice in Bulgarian and Romanian shall be adopted after the entry into force of the Treaty referred to in paragraph 1.
            Done at Brussels, 18 December 2006.

                  For the Council

                  The President

               J.-E. ENESTAM


Avis juridique important

|

31997D0874

97/874/EC, Euratom: Commission Decision of 16 December 1997 amending Decision 94/204/EC, Euratom relating to the creation of the European Science and Technology Assembly (Text with EEA relevance)

Official Journal L 354 , 30/12/1997 P. 0034 - 0034

COMMISSION DECISION of 16 December 1997 amending Decision 94/204/EC, Euratom relating to the creation of the European Science and Technology Assembly (Text with EEA relevance) (97/874/EC, Euratom)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,Whereas in its Decision 94/204/EC, Euratom (1) the Commission instituted an Advisory Committee called the European Science and Technology Assembly, hereinafter referred to as 'the Assembly`;Whereas Article 3 (1) and (2) of the said Decision provides that the Assembly shall have, at most, 100 members, and shall consist of high-level personalities from the European circles that represent the exact and natural, economic, social and human sciences in proportions and areas affected by Community research, technology and industry;Whereas Article 5 of that Decision states that the Assembly shall be provided with a Bureau of 20 members comprising on the one hand, a representative of the Commission and nine members appointed by the Commission from the representatives of the organizations referred to in Article 3 (3), and, on the other hand 10 members elected by the Assembly from its own members;Whereas the text of Article 5 should be amended so as to adapt the composition of the Bureau to the actual composition of the Assembly,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1 Paragraph 1 of Article 5 of Decision 94/204/CE, Euratom is hereby replaced by the following text:'The Assembly shall be provided with a Bureau with a maximum of 20 members comprising, on the one hand, up to 10 members elected by the Assembly from its own members - election being by two-thirds majority of the members present - and, on the other hand, one representative of the Commission and up to 9 members appointed by the Commission from the representatives of the organizations referred to in Article 3 (3). The exact number of members elected by the Assembly and members appointed by the Commission shall be determined in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly referred to in Article 7.`Article 2 The Decision presented is applicable from 17 December 1997.Done at Brussels, 16 December 1997.For the CommissionÉdith CRESSONMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 98, 16. 4. 1994, p. 34.


title: Council Decision of 18 May 2010 appointing the members and alternate members of the Management Board of the European Institute for Gender Equality

text:
               27.5.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 137/22

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 18 May 2010
   appointing the members and alternate members of the Management Board of the European Institute for Gender Equality
   2010/C 137/08
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1922/2006 of 20 December 2006 on establishing a European Institute for Gender Equality (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1922/2006 provides, inter alia, that the Council should appoint 18 members, as well as alternates, of the Management Board of the European Institute for Gender Equality for a period of three years.

               (2)

               Eighteen Member States (Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, Spain, France, Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and United Kingdom) are due to nominate members and alternate members for the period from 1 June 2010 to 31 May 2013.

               (3)

               The Governments of all the above-mentioned Member States have submitted to the Council lists of candidates,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Management Board of the European Institute for Gender Equality for the period from 1 June 2010 to 31 May 2013:

      GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES

               Country

               Members

               Alternates

               Belgium

               Mr Michel PASTEEL

               Ms Annemie PERNOT

               Bulgaria

               Ms Tatyana Spassova KMETOVA

               Ms Petia Mihaylova MOEVA

               Czech Republic

               Ms Andrea BARŠOVÁ

               Mr Czeslaw WALEK

               Germany

               Ms Eva Maria WELSKOP-DEFFAA

               Ms Renate AUGSTEIN

               Estonia

               Ms Käthlin SANDER

               Mr Christian VESKE

               Spain

               Ms Enriqueta CHICANO JÁVEGA

               Ms Cecilia PAYNO DE ORIVE

               France

               Ms Elisabeth TOMÉ-GERTHEINRICHS

               Ms Françoise VILAIN

               Hungary

               Ms Zsuzsa SEBESTYÉN

               Ms Katalin KISSNÉ BENCZE

               Malta

               Ms Therese BUGEJA

               Ms Therese SPITERI

               Netherlands

               Ms Carlien SCHEELE

               Mr Ferdi LICHER

               Austria

               Ms Vera JAUK

               Mr Dietmar HILLBRAND

               Portugal

               Ms Sara FALCÃO CASACA

               Mr Pedro DELGADO ALVES

               Romania

               Mr Florin-Marian NEGREA

               Ms Andra Cristina CROITORU

               Slovenia

               Mr Roman KUHAR

               Ms Maruša GORTNAR

               Slovakia

               Ms Martina JANÍKOVÁ

               Ms Jana STANKOVÁ

               Finland

               Ms Tarja HEINILÄ-HANNIKAINEN

               Ms Riitta MARTIKAINEN

               Sweden

               Ms Helén LUNDKVIST

               Mr Lars WITTENMARK

               United Kingdom

               Ms Helene REARDON-BOND

               Ms Celia REED

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

      Done at Brussels, 18 May 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. SALGADO

      (1)  OJ L 403, 30.12.2006, p. 9.


title: 2013/339/EU: Decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 26 June 2013 appointing a Judge to the General Court

text:
               29.6.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 179/95

         DECISION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES
   of 26 June 2013
   appointing a Judge to the General Court
   (2013/339/EU)
   THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 19 thereof,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 254 and 255 thereof,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Under Articles 5 and 7 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and following the resignation of Mr Josef AZIZI, with effect from 1 September 2013, a Judge should be appointed to the General Court for the remainder of the term of office of Mr AZIZI, which runs until 31 August 2016.

               (2)

               Mr Viktor KREUSCHITZ has been proposed as a candidate for the vacant post.

               (3)

               The panel set up by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on Mr Viktor KREUSCHITZ's suitability to perform the duties of a Judge of the General Court,

         HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Mr Viktor KREUSCHITZ is hereby appointed Judge to the General Court for the period from 1 September 2013 to 31 August 2016.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 26 June 2013.

            The President

         R. MONTGOMERY


Avis juridique important

|

32000D0642

Council Decision of 17 October 2000 concerning arrangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units of the Member States in respect of exchanging information

Official Journal L 271 , 24/10/2000 P. 0004 - 0006

Council Decisionof 17 October 2000concerning arrangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units of the Member States in respect of exchanging information(2000/642/JHA)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 34(2)(c) thereof,Having regard to the initiative of the Republic of Finland,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,Whereas:(1) The action plan to combat organised crime was approved by the Amsterdam European Council on 16 to 17 June 1997(1). The action plan recommended, in particular in recommendation 26(e), that there should be an improvement in cooperation between contact points competent to receive suspicious transaction reports pursuant to Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering(2).(2) All Member States have set up financial intelligence units (FIUs) to collect and analyse information received under the provisions of Directive 91/308/EEC with the aim of establishing links between suspicious financial transactions and underlying criminal activity in order to prevent and to combat money laundering.(3) Improvement of the mechanisms for exchanging information between the FIUs is one of the objectives recognised by the Money Laundering Experts' Group set up within the Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime, along with an improvement in the exchange of information between FIUs and the investigating authorities in Member States and in the multidisciplinary organisation of FIUs, to incorporate knowledge of the financial, law enforcement and judicial sectors.(4) The Council conclusions of March 1995 highlighted the fact that the strengthening of systems for combating money laundering depends on closer cooperation between the different authorities involved in fighting it.(5) The second Commission report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Directive 91/308/EEC identifies the difficulties which still appear to prevent the communication and exchange of information between certain units having a different legal status.(6) It is necessary that close cooperation take place between the relevant authorities of the Member States involved in the fight against money laundering and that provision be made for direct communication between those authorities.(7) Arrangements have already been successfully adopted by Member States in relation to this matter based mainly on the principles laid down in the model memorandum of understanding proposed by the informal worldwide network of FIUs referred to as "the Egmont Group".(8) Member States must organise the FIUs in such a way as to ensure that information and documents are submitted within a reasonable space of time.(9) This Decision does not affect any Convention or arrangement regarding mutual assistance in criminal matters between judicial authorities,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 11. Member States shall ensure that FIUs, set up or designated to receive disclosures of financial information for the purpose of combating money laundering shall cooperate to assemble, analyse and investigate relevant information within the FIU on any fact which might be an indication of money laundering in accordance with their national powers.2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that FIUs exchange, spontaneously or on request and either in accordance with this Decision or in accordance with existing or future memoranda of understanding, any available information that may be relevant to the processing or analysis of information or to investigation by the FIU regarding financial transactions related to money laundering and the natural or legal persons involved.3. Where a Member State has designated a police authority as its FIU, it may supply information held by that FIU to be exchanged pursuant to this Decision to an authority of the receiving Member State designated for that purpose and being competent in the areas mentioned in paragraph 1.Article 21. Member States shall ensure that, for the purposes of this Decision, FIUs shall be a single unit for each Member State and shall correspond to the following definition:"A central, national unit which, in order to combat money laundering, is responsible for receiving (and to the extent permitted, requesting), analysing and disseminating to the competent authorities, disclosures of financial information which concern suspected proceeds of crime or are required by national legislation or regulation".2. In the context of paragraph 1, a Member State may establish a central unit for the purpose of receiving or transmitting information to or from decentralised agencies.3. Member States shall indicate the unit which is an FIU within the meaning of this Article. They shall notify this information to the General Secretariat of the Council in writing. This notification does not affect the current relations concerning cooperation between the FIUs.Article 3Member States shall ensure that the performance of the functions of the FIUs under this Decision shall not be affected by their internal status, regardless of whether they are administrative, law enforcement or judicial authorities.Article 41. Each request made under this Decision shall be accompanied by a brief statement of the relevant facts known to the requesting FIU. The FIU shall specify in the request how the information sought will be used.2. When a request is made in accordance with this Decision, the requested FIU shall provide all relevant information, including available financial information and requested law enforcement data, sought in the request, without the need for a formal letter of request under applicable conventions or agreements between Member States.3. An FIU may refuse to divulge information which could lead to impairment of a criminal investigation being conducted in the requested Member State or, in exceptional circumstances, where divulgation of the information would be clearly disproportionate to the legitimate interests of a natural or legal person or the Member State concerned or would otherwise not be in accordance with fundamental principles of national law. Any such refusal shall be appropriately explained to the FIU requesting the information.Article 51. Information or documents obtained under this Decision are intended to be used for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1).2. When transmitting information or documents pursuant to this Decision, the transmitting FIU may impose restrictions and conditions on the use of information for purposes other than those stipulated in paragraph 1. The receiving FIU shall comply with any such restrictions and conditions.3. Where a Member State wishes to use transmitted information or documents for criminal investigations or prosecutions for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1), the transmitting Member State may not refuse its consent to such use unless it does so on the basis of restrictions under its national law or conditions referred to in Article 4(3). Any refusal to grant consent shall be appropriately explained.4. FIUs shall undertake all necessary measures, including security measures, to ensure that information submitted under this Decision is not accessible by any other authorities, agencies or departments.5. The information submitted will be protected, in conformity with the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981 for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data and taking account of Recommendation No R(87)15 of 15 September 1987 of the Council of Europe Regulating the Use of Personal Data in the Police Sector, by at least the same rules of confidentiality and protection of personal data as those that apply under the national legislation applicable to the requesting FIU.Article 61. FIUs may, within the limits of the applicable national law and without a request to that effect, exchange relevant information.2. Article 5 shall apply in relation to information forwarded under this Article.Article 7Member States shall provide for, and agree on, appropriate and protected channels of communication between FIUs.Article 8This Decision shall be implemented without prejudice to the Member States' obligations towards Europol, as they have been laid down in the Europol Convention.Article 91. To the extent that the level of cooperation between FIUs, as expressed in memoranda of understanding concluded or to be concluded between authorities of the Member States, is compatible with this Decision or goes further than the provisions thereof, it shall remain unaffected by this Decision. Where the provisions of this Decision go further than the provisions of any memorandum of understanding concluded between the authorities of Member States, this Decision shall supersede such memoranda of understanding two years after this Decision takes effect.2. The Member States shall ensure that they are able to cooperate fully in accordance with the provisions of this Decision at the latest three years after this Decision takes effect.3. The Council will assess Member States' compliance with this Decision within four years of the date on which it takes effect, and may decide to continue such assessments on a regular basis.Article 10This Decision shall apply to Gibraltar. To this effect, notwithstanding Article 2, the United Kingdom may notify to the General Secretariat of the Council an FIU in Gibraltar.Article 11This Decision shall take effect on 17 October 2000.Done at Luxembourg, 17 October 2000.For the CouncilThe PresidentÉ. Guigou(1) OJ C 251, 15.8.1997, p. 1.(2) OJ L 166, 28.6.1991, p. 77.


Avis juridique important

|

41979D0172

79/172/ECSC, EEC, Euratom: Decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Communities of 6 February 1979 appointing a judge to the Court of Justice

Official Journal L 037 , 13/02/1979 P. 0033 - 0033

****    CONFERENCE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE   GOVERNMENTS   OF THE MEMBER STATES    DECISION   OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES   OF 6 FEBRUARY 1979   APPOINTING A JUDGE TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE  ( 79/172/ECSC , EEC , EURATOM )   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 32B THEREOF ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 167 THEREOF ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 139 THEREOF ,   WHEREAS MR A . M . DONNER , JUDGE AT THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES SUBMITTED HIS RESIGNATION IN A LETTER DATED 28 SEPTEMBER 1978 , WITH EFFECT FROM 1 APRIL 1979 ;   WHEREAS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 8 OF THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY , TO ARTICLE 7 OF THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY AND TO ARTICLE 7 OF THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY , A JUDGE SHOULD BE APPOINTED FOR THE REMAINING PERIOD OF MR A . M . DONNER ' S TERM OF OFFICE ,   HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :   ARTICLE 1   MR TH . KOOPMANS IS HEREBY APPOINTED JUDGE TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES UNTIL 6 OCTOBER 1982 .   ARTICLE 2   THIS DECISION SHALL ENTER INTO EFFECT ON 1 APRIL 1979 .   DONE AT BRUSSELS , 6 FEBRUARY 1979 .   THE PRESIDENT   J . FRANCOIS-PONCET