title: 2011/549/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II — Council#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II — Council

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/23

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II — Council
   (2011/549/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 — C7-0213/2010) (2),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,

               —

               having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

               —

               having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (4),

               —

               having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Decision No 190/2003 of the Secretary-General of the Council/High-Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy concerning reimbursement of travel expenses of delegates of Council Members (6),

               —

               having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, of 17 May 2006, on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (7),

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0088/2011),

               1.

               Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the Council budget for the financial year 2009;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

      (2)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ C 303, 9.11.2010, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 129.

      (5)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (6)  Decision stemming from the Rules of Procedure of the Council of 22 July 2002 (OJ L 230, 28.8.2002, p. 7).

      (7)  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2011
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II — Council
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 — C7-0213/2010) (2),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,

                  —

                  having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

                  —

                  having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (4),

                  —

                  having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Decision No 190/2003 of the Secretary-General of the Council/High-Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy concerning reimbursement of travel expenses of delegates of Council Members (6),

                  —

                  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, of 17 May 2006, on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (7) (IIA),

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0088/2011),

                  A.

                  whereas ‘citizens have the right to know how their taxes are being spent and how the power entrusted to political bodies is handled’ (8),

                  B.

                  whereas the conclusions of the European Council of Cologne of 3 and 4 June 1999 envisaged giving operational capacities to the Council in the field of a strengthened common European security and defence policy,

                  C.

                  whereas Council Decision 2004/197/CFSP (9) established a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications, called ATHENA, and whereas that Decision, together with Decision 2004/582/EC of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 28 April 2004 concerning privileges and immunities granted to ATHENA (10), grants privileges and immunities to ATHENA and gives operational power to the Council,

                  D.

                  whereas Council Decision 2000/178/CFSP of 28 February 2000 on the rules applicable to national experts in the military field on secondment to the General Secretariat of the Council during the interim period (11) and Council Decision 2001/80/CFSP of 22 January 2001 on the establishment of the Military Staff of the European Union (12) specify that expenditure arising from the secondment of military experts is to be charged to the Council budget,

                  1.

                  Notes that in 2009 the Council had commitment appropriations available amounting to a total of EUR 642 000 000 (2008: EUR 743 000 000), with a utilisation rate of 92,33 %, almost on par with 2007 (93,31 %), and still below the average of the other institutions (97,69 %);

                  2.

                  Believes that since Article 335 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises that Union institutions possess a certain administrative autonomy in their operation, this autonomy implies a corresponding degree of responsibility and accountability; whereas Parliament is the sole directly elected body, and one of its tasks is, acting on the Council’s recommendation, to give discharge in respect of the implementation of the Union general budget, Parliament has decided to reflect this autonomy in the discharge procedure, and to set apart the sections of the general budget which are autonomously administered by each of the other Union institutions, and to give discharge to each of those institutions;

                  3.

                  Regrets the difficulties encountered in the 2007 and 2008 discharge procedures, and reaffirms its position expressed in its resolution of 16 June 2010 (13) on the Council discharge for the financial year 2008, in particular, its call on the Council to establish together with Parliament an annual procedure within the discharge procedure with a view to providing all the information needed as regards the execution of the Council budget;

                  4.

                  Reiterates that the expenditure of the Council ought to be scrutinised in the same way as that of the other Union institutions, and suggests that the most appropriate approach would be as indicated in its resolution of 16 June 2010, in particular, that ‘such scrutiny is based on the following written documents submitted by all institutions:

                              —

                              accounts of the preceding financial year relating to the implementation of the budget,

                              —

                              a financial statement of the assets and liabilities,

                              —

                              Annual Activity Report on their budget and financial management,

                              —

                              annual report of the Internal Auditor,

                        as well as an oral presentation given in the meeting of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure’;

                  5.

                  Deeply regrets both that the Council Presidency declined the invitations to attend the meeting of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, where it was planned to discuss the Council Presidency’s standing on the proposed procedure and the possible modalities of cooperation as regards the discharge, and also that the Secretary-General of the Council declined to attend the meeting of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure and to exchange views on the Council discharge procedure;

                  6.

                  Notes the proposed memorandum of understanding between the Parliament and the Council on their cooperation during their annual discharge procedure, as annexed to the letter of the Secretary-General of the Council of 4 March 2011, and takes note of the Council’s readiness to treat the discharge procedure separately from the budgetary procedure, but reiterates that a distinction must be maintained with regard to the different roles of Parliament and the Council in the discharge procedure and that at no time and under no circumstances can the Council be anything other than fully accountable to the public for the funds entrusted to it; deeply regrets that the Council Presidency and the General Secretariat of the Council declined to attend the meeting of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure to provide information and answers to questions on the Council discharge for the financial year 2009, and that they also declined to provide written replies to the questionnaire as submitted by the rapporteur;

                  7.

                  Notes the goodwill of the Hungarian Presidency and the progress achieved; proposes, in order to facilitate the exchange of information in the discharge procedure, to follow the same approach as the rest of the other institutions, the fundamental elements of which should be:

                              —

                              that a formal meeting be held between representatives of the Council and Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, to be attended by the Secretary-General of the Council and the Presidency in office, the bureau of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, the rapporteur and the members representing political groups (coordinators and/or shadow rapporteurs) in order to provide all the necessary information on the implementation of the Council budget,

                              —

                              that the Secretary-General of the Council answer questions submitted to the Council by the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, and

                              —

                              that a timetable be established so as to streamline and stabilise this interim solution,

                        thus considers the idea of concluding an interinstitutional agreement with the Council on the Council’s discharge to be unnecessary;

                  8.

                  Urges the Court of Auditors to perform an in-depth assessment of supervisory and control systems in the Council, similar to the assessments it performed on the Court of Justice, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor in the course of preparation of the Court of Auditors’ annual report concerning the financial year 2009;

         Reasons for postponement of the discharge decision

                  9.

                  Indicates that the reasons for postponement are as follows:

                              (a)

                              the Council has not accepted any invitation to officially and formally meet Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure or its rapporteur to discuss matters concerning the Council budget execution for 2009;

                              (b)

                              the Council refused to provide a written answer providing Parliament with the information and documents requested from the Council in the annex to a letter of 14 December 2010 signed by the rapporteur;

                              (c)

                              Parliament has not received fundamental documents from the Council, such as the full list of budgetary transfers;

         Further actions to be taken by the Council

                  10.

                  Calls on the Secretary-General of the Council to provide Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, by 15 June 2011 at the latest, with comprehensive written answers to the following questions:

                              (a)

                              with regard to previous Council discharge debates in Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, the Council did not attend these meetings regularly, however, it is considered of utmost importance that the Council attends in order to reply to committee members’ questions referring to the Council discharge. Does the Council agree to attend future debates in Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure on the Council discharge?

                              (b)

                              why does the Council change the presentation/the format of the internal audit every year? Why is the internal audit so short, generic and unclear every year? Will the Council for the 2010 discharge onwards please present the internal audit in (a) language(s) other than French?

                              (c)

                              has an external audit been carried out? If so, may Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure see it? If an external audit does not exist, why has the Council chosen not to make one?

                              (d)

                              until now, the activity of the Council implied co-financing with the Commission, which has experienced an increase after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. What audit and control systems have been put in place to ensure full transparency? Given that the Treaty of Lisbon increased the co-financing with the Commission, what is the Council’s understanding of ‘respond to the appropriate enquiries’?

                              (e)

                              the Court of Auditors, in its annual report 2009, found that in two out of six procurement procedures audited, the Council did not respect the rules of the Financial Regulation for the publication of the outcome of the procedure. Has the Council scrutinised more samples of similar procurements? Has the internal procedure been streamlined in order to avoid similar cases in the future?

                              (f)

                              staff of European Union Special Representatives (EUSRs): Please indicate the staff (all staff, establishment plan and others) — number of posts, grade — for the EUSRs in the Council for 2009. In which way and when will the EUSRs-staff posts be allocated between the Council and the European External Action Service (EEAS)? What was the travel budget for each of the EUSRs? How many of the EUSRs’ staff were transferred on 1 January 2011 to the EEAS? How many will remain with the Council and why?

                              (g)

                              the Council highlights budgetary questions concerning the consequences of the Treaty of Lisbon in point 2.2 in the financial activity report — 11327/10, FIN 278. Has the Council solved the problems concerning Mr Solana’s expenditures? What part of the expenditures falls under the Council budget and what part falls under the Commission budget?

                              (h)

                              what were the operational expenditures, administrative expenditures, staff, buildings, etc. envisaged by the Council for 2009 in order to set up the High Representative/Vice President of the Commission (HR/VP)?

                              (i)

                              the HR/VP came into office on 1 December, 2009. How was the cost distributed between the Council and the Commission (for staff, travel, etc.)? How did the Council prepare the budget for the HR/VP for 2010? Which budget lines and sums were reserved for her activities?

                              (j)

                              how will office space released in the process of staff transfer to the EEAS influence Council’s plans on buildings? Have arrangements been made for the subsequent use of such office space? What is the anticipated cost for the removals? When were calls for tenders for the removals (if any) published?

                              (k)

                              what was the administrative and operational expenditure related to the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)/Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) tasks, which were at least part-financed from the Union budget in 2009? What was the total amount of CFSP expenditure in 2009? Could the Council identify at least the main missions and their cost in 2009?

                              (l)

                              what was the cost of meetings for Council working groups on CFSP/CSDP in Brussels and elsewhere and where did these meetings take place?

                              (m)

                              what was the administrative expenditure relating to the implementation of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP)/CSDP military operations? What share of the total amount of expenditures arising from military operations has been charged to the Union budget?

                              (n)

                              what was the administrative expenditure implemented for the operation of the ‘ATHENA’ mechanism, how many posts were needed for that mechanism, will any of the posts in question be transferred to the EEAS? To whom will the postholders report?

                              (o)

                              there is a low occupation rate of posts in the Council’s establishment plan (91 % in 2009,90 % in 2008). Does this consistently low rate cause any repercussions on how the Council’s General Secretariat (CGS) functions? Can the CGS perform all its functions with the current occupation rate? Are lower occupation rates specific to any particular services? What are the reasons for the persistent discrepancy?

                              (p)

                              what is the total number of posts assigned to the task of ‘policy coordination’ and administrative support (as defined in the Commission’s annual staff screening reports)? What is its percentage in relation to the overall number of posts?

                              (q)

                              to achieve the administrative objectives in 2009 the Council added teleworking to its working procedures. How does the Council prove the efficiency of this working procedure? In addition, the Council is asked to report on further measures taken in this respect and in particular those to improve the quality of financial management as well as their impact;

                              (r)

                              the Council increased its posts by 15 (8 AD and 7 AST) to cover the staffing requirements of the Irish language unit. How many staff deal with other languages (staff per language)? Are there already staff employed for and from the applicant countries? If the answer is in the affirmative — how many posts are concerned (separated per country and language)?

                              (s)

                              the ‘Reflection Group’ was established on 14 December 2007, and its members appointed on 15-16 October 2008. What were the reasons why the necessary financing could not have been envisaged and included in Budget 2009? Is a transfer in Budget 2009 from the contingency reserve to a budget position financing a structure conceived in 2007 strictly budget neutral? The Council earmarked EUR 1 060 000 for the ‘Reflection Group’. How many posts can be allocated to this group?

                              (t)

                              the expenditures concerning travel delegations still seem to be problematic (cf. Council note 15 June 2010, SGS10 8254, II bullet, page 4). Why do these expenditures appear in so many different budget lines?

                              (u)

                              why does the internal audit still find it necessary to add ‘les frais de voyage des délégués et les frais d’interprétation’ (delegates’ travelling expenses and interpretation expenses) after strong criticism in the last two resolutions from Parliament on the Council discharge?

                              (v)

                              the Council again has used underspending on interpretation to provide extra financing for delegations’ travel expenses; as a result, actual 2009 commitments for travel expenses amounted to considerably less than the initial budget, and less than half of the amount available after the transfer (EUR 36 100 000 initial and EUR 48 100 000 available after transfer against EUR 22 700 000 committed).What were the reasons for this EUR 12 000 000 transfer (cf. the financial activity report — 11327/10, FIN 278 -point 3.3.2-VI bullet)? Why is the transfer from interpretation to delegates’ travelling expenses estimated at EUR 12 000 000 by the Council at page 12 and at EUR 10 558 362 at page 13? What has the remaining amount transferred from interpretation been spent on (the total amount transferred from interpretation is EUR 17 798 362)? In addition, the Council is asked to explain the large amount of recovery orders made before 2009 and carried over to 2009 (EUR 12 300 000) as well as recoveries made from declarations relating to 2007 (EUR 6 300 000);

                              (w)

                              in 2009 the Council, as it did in 2008, reallocated a considerable amount of its budget to buildings, in particular, more than doubling the initial allocations to the acquisition of the Residence Palace (reallocated EUR 17 800 000 in addition to EUR 15 000 000 earmarked in Budget 2009). What are the reasons for this? Can the CGS provide concrete figures of the savings achieved as a result of this? What was the initially projected cost of the Residence Palace Building? Does the Council think the initially projected cost will be accurate or could the cost be higher than estimated? What steps are envisaged to finance the building?

                              (x)

                              implementation of the Council budget — appropriations carried over: Could the Council present the estimated amount and subject of the invoices which were not received by June 2010 for the year 2009 and therefore carried over?

                              (y)

                              the carry-over to 2010 of the appropriations of assigned revenues accrued in 2009 amounted to EUR 31 800 000. This is about 70 % of the assigned revenue for 2009. What are the reasons for this high carry-over ratio? What will happen/has happened to this revenue in 2010?

                              (z)

                              what does ‘technical provision of EUR 25 000 000 for the launch of the European Council 2010’ mean? (cf. the financial activity report — 11327/10, FIN 278 — point 3.1, IV bullet);

                              (aa)

                              what is the level of confidentiality of the Council budget specified by the different budget lines?

                              (ab)

                              can the Council point out the specific measures taken to improve the quality of the Council’s financial management, in particular as regards the points raised in paragraph 5 of Parliament’s resolution (14) of 25 November 2009 accompanying its decision on discharge to the Council for the financial year 2007?

         Documents to be presented to Parliament

                  11.

                  Calls on the Secretary-General of the Council to provide Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, by 15 June 2011 at the latest, with:

                              (a)

                              the full list of budgetary transfers concerning the 2009 Council budget;

                              (b)

                              a written statement on the Council’s mission expenses as carried out by the EUSRs;

                              (c)

                              the Members States’ declaration for 2007 (cf. the financial activity report — 11327/10, FIN 278 — point 3.2.2, II bullet); and

                              (d)

                              the report of the ‘Reflection Group’ in order to understand why such a report costs EUR 1 060 000 (cf. the financial activity report — 11327/10, FIN 278 — point 2.2).

         (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

         (2)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ C 303, 9.11.2010, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 129.

         (5)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (6)  Decision stemming from the Rules of Procedure of the Council of 22 July 2002 (OJ L 230, 28.8.2002, p. 7).

         (7)  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

         (8)  The European Transparency Initiative.

         (9)  OJ L 63, 28.2.2004, p. 68.

         (10)  OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 125.

         (11)  OJ L 57, 2.3.2000, p. 1.

         (12)  OJ L 27, 30.1.2001, p. 7.

         (13)  OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 24.

         (14)  OJ L 19, 23.1.2010, p. 9.


title: 2011/351/EU: Council Decision of 7 March 2011 on the conclusion of a Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland#Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland

text:
               18.6.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 160/37

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 7 March 2011
   on the conclusion of a Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland
   (2011/351/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 78(2)(e), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Following the authorisation given to the Commission on 27 February 2006, negotiations with the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein of a Protocol on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Protocol’) have been finalised.

               (2)

               In accordance with the Decision of the Council of 28 February 2008, and subject to its conclusion at a later date, the Protocol was signed on behalf of the European Community, on 28 February 2008.

               (3)

               As a consequence of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, the European Union has replaced and succeeded the European Community.

               (4)

               The Protocol should be approved.

               (5)

               In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, these Member States are taking part in the adoption and application of this Decision.

               (6)

               In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland and the declarations annexed thereto are approved on behalf of the European Union.
   The text of the Protocol, its Final Act and related Declarations are attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to deposit on behalf of the Union the instrument of approval provided for in Article 8(1) of the Protocol, in order to express the consent of the Union to be bound, and to make the following notification:

      ‘As a consequence of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, the European Union has replaced and succeeded the European Community and from that date exercises all rights and assumes all obligations of the European Community. Therefore, references to “the European Community” in the Protocol as well as in the Agreement are, where appropriate, to be understood as to “the European Union”.’

   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
   Article 4
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 7 March 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         CZOMBA S.

      PROTOCOL
      between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland
      THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
      and
      THE SWISS CONFEDERATION
      and
      THE PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN,
      hereinafter referred to as the ‘Contracting Parties’,
      HAVING REGARD TO the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland signed on 26 October 2004 (1) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland’),
      RECALLING that Article 15 thereof provides for the possibility of the Principality of Liechtenstein acceding to the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland by way of Protocol,
      CONSIDERING the geographical situation of the Principality of Liechtenstein,
      CONSIDERING the wish of the Principality of Liechtenstein to be associated to the Community legislation covering the Dublin and Eurodac Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Dublin/Eurodac acquis’),
      WHEREAS the European Community, on 19 January 2001, concluded an agreement with the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway based on the Dublin Convention (2),
      WHEREAS it is desirable that the Principality of Liechtenstein be associated on an equal footing with Iceland, Norway and Switzerland in the implementation, application and development of the Dublin/Eurodac acquis,
      WHEREAS a Protocol should be concluded between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein providing for Liechtenstein to enjoy rights and obligations similar to those agreed between the European Community, of the one part, and Iceland and Norway, as well as Switzerland of the other part,
      WHEREAS the provisions of Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the acts adopted on the basis of that Title do not apply to the Kingdom of Denmark pursuant to the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Community, but it should be made possible for the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein of the one part and Denmark of the other part to apply the substantive provisions of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland in their relations with each other, as provided for in Article 11(1) thereof,
      WHEREAS it is necessary to ensure that the States with which the European Community has established an association for the purpose of implementing, applying and developing the Dublin/Eurodac acquis also apply that acquis in their relations with each other,
      WHEREAS the smooth operation of the Dublin/Eurodac acquis requires that this Protocol be applied simultaneously with the agreements between the various parties associated with or participating in the implementation and development of the Dublin/Eurodac acquis governing their mutual relations,
      WHEREAS Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (3) must be applied by the Principality of Liechtenstein as it is applied by the Member States of the European Union when processing data for the purposes of this Protocol,
      HAVING REGARD TO the Protocol on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis
          (4),
      BEARING IN MIND the link between the Community acquis concerning the establishment of criteria and mechanisms for determining the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in one of the Member States and concerning the setting-up of Eurodac and the Schengen acquis,
      WHEREAS that link requires that the Schengen acquis be applied simultaneously with the Community acquis concerning the establishment of criteria and mechanisms for determining the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in one of the Member States and concerning the setting-up of Eurodac,
      HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
      Article 1
      1.   In accordance with Article 15 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland’), the Principality of Liechtenstein (hereinafter referred to as ‘Liechtenstein’) accedes to that Agreement, under the terms and conditions set out in this Protocol.
      2.   This Protocol creates reciprocal rights and obligations between the Contracting Parties, in accordance with the rules and procedures set out in herein.
      Article 2
      1.   The provisions of the:

                  —

                  Dublin Regulation (5),

                  —

                  Eurodac Regulation (6),

                  —

                  Eurodac implementing Regulation (7), and

                  —

                  the Dublin implementing Regulation (8)

            shall be implemented by Liechtenstein, and applied in its relations with the Member States of the European Union and with Switzerland.
      2.   The acts and measures taken by the European Community amending or building upon the provisions referred to in paragraph 1 and the decisions taken in accordance with the procedures set out in those provisions, without prejudice to Article 5, shall also be accepted, implemented and applied by Liechtenstein.
      3.   For the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2, references to the ‘Member States’ in the provisions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to include Liechtenstein.
      Article 3
      The rights and obligations set out in Articles 2, 3(1) to (4), Articles 5 to 7, Article 8(1) second subparagraph and Article 8(2), Articles 9 to 11 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland shall apply mutatis mutandis to Liechtenstein.
      Article 4
      A representative of the Government of Liechtenstein shall become a member of the Mixed Committee as established by Article 3 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland.
      The office of the President of the Mixed Committee shall be held alternately for a period of six months, by the representative of the Commission of the European Communities (hereafter ‘the Commission’) and by the representative of the Government of Liechtenstein or Switzerland, respectively.
      Article 5
      1.   Subject to paragraph 2, when the Council of the European Union (hereafter ‘the Council’) adopts acts or measures amending or building upon the provisions of Article 2 and when acts or measures are adopted in accordance with the procedures set out in those provisions, those acts or measures shall be applied simultaneously by the Member States and Liechtenstein, except where express provisions exist to the contrary.
      2.   The Commission shall notify Liechtenstein without delay of the adoption of the acts or measures referred to in paragraph 1. Liechtenstein shall decide whether to accept their contents and to implement them in its internal legal order. That decision shall be notified to the Commission within 30 days of the adoption of the acts or measures concerned.
      3.   If the contents of such an act or a measure can become binding on Liechtenstein only after the fulfilment of constitutional requirements, Liechtenstein shall inform the Commission of this at the time of its notification. Liechtenstein shall promptly inform the Council and the Commission in writing upon fulfilment of all constitutional requirements. Where a referendum is not required, notification shall, at the latest, take place 30 days after the referendum deadline expires. If a referendum is required, Liechtenstein shall have a maximum of 18 months from the date of the Commission’s notification within which to make its notification. From the date laid down for the entry into force of the act or measure for Liechtenstein and until it has given notification that the constitutional requirements have been met, Liechtenstein shall, where possible, implement the act or measure in question on a provisional basis.
      4.   If Liechtenstein cannot implement the act or measure at issue on a provisional basis, and if this causes difficulties that disrupt the operation of Dublin/Eurodac cooperation, the situation shall be examined by the Mixed Committee. The European Community may take proportionate, appropriate measures against Liechtenstein to ensure that Dublin/Eurodac cooperation operates smoothly.
      5.   Acceptance by Liechtenstein of the acts and measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall create rights and obligations between Liechtenstein, Switzerland and the Member States of the European Union.
      6.   This Protocol shall be suspended if:

                  (a)

                  Liechtenstein notifies its decision not to accept the contents of an act or measure referred to in paragraph 1 and to which the procedures set out in this Protocol have been applied; or

                  (b)

                  Liechtenstein does not carry out notification within the 30-day time limit referred to in paragraph 2; or

                  (c)

                  Liechtenstein does not carry out the notification at the latest 30 days after the referendum deadline has expired or, in the case of a referendum, within the 18-month time limit set out in paragraph 3, or does not provide for provisional implementation as envisaged in the same paragraph from the date laid down for the entry into force of the act or measure concerned.

            7.   The Mixed Committee shall examine the matter which gave rise to suspension and shall endeavour to deal with the underlying causes of non-acceptance or non-ratification within 90 days. After examining all other options with a view to ensuring that the Protocol continues to operate smoothly, including the possibility of noting that the Contracting Parties’ laws and regulations are equivalent, it may decide, on a unanimous basis, to reinstate this Protocol. If this Protocol is still suspended after 90 days, it shall be considered terminated.
      Article 6
      As regards the administrative and operating costs associated with the setting up and operation of the Eurodac central unit, Liechtenstein shall make a contribution to the general budget of the European Communities amounting to 0,071 % of an initial reference amount of EUR 11 675 000 and, from the 2004 financial year, an annual contribution amounting to 0,071 % of the corresponding budgetary appropriations for the financial year in question.
      Article 7
      This Protocol shall not affect agreements between Liechtenstein and Switzerland in so far as they are compatible with this Protocol. If such agreements are incompatible with this Protocol, the latter shall prevail.
      Article 8
      1.   This Protocol shall be ratified or approved by the Contracting Parties. Instruments of ratification or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the Council, who shall be the depositary.
      2.   This Protocol shall enter into force on the first day of the month following notification by the depositary to the Contracting Parties that the final instrument of ratification or approval has been deposited.
      3.   Articles 1, 4 and the first sentence of Article 5(2) of this Protocol and the rights and obligations set out in Articles 2, 3(1) to (4) of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland shall apply provisionally to Liechtenstein as of the date on which this Protocol is signed.
      Article 9
      With respect to acts or measures adopted after this Protocol has been signed but before it enters into force, the 30-day period referred to in Article 5(2), last sentence shall start to run from the day of entry into force of this Protocol.
      Article 10
      1.   This Protocol shall be applied only if the agreements to be concluded by Liechtenstein and referred to in Article 11 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland are also implemented.
      2.   In addition, this Protocol shall be applied only if the Protocol concluded between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis is also implemented.
      Article 11
      1.   This Protocol may be denounced by any Contracting Party. The depositary shall be notified of denunciation, which shall take effect six months after notification.
      2.   In case of denunciation by Switzerland of this Protocol or of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland, or in case of the termination of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland with respect to Switzerland, the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland and this Protocol shall remain in force with respect to the relations between the European Community on the one part and Liechtenstein on the other part.
      3.   This Protocol shall be considered to have been terminated if Liechtenstein terminates one of the agreements referred to in Article 11 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland that have been concluded by Liechtenstein, or terminates the Protocol referred to in Article 10(2).
      Article 12
      This Protocol shall be drawn up in triplicate in the Bulgarian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish languages, each text being equally authentic.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries have hereunto set their hands.
         Съставено в Брюксел на двадесет и осми февруари две хиляди и осма година.
         Hecho en Bruselas, el veintiocho de febrero de dos mil ocho.
         V Bruselu dne dvacátého osmého února dva tisíce osm.
         Udfærdiget i Bruxelles den otteogtyvende februar to tusind og otte.
         Geschehen zu Brüssel am achtundzwanzigsten Februar zweitausendacht.
         Kahe tuhande kaheksanda aasta veebruarikuu kahekümne kaheksandal päeval Brüsselis.
         Έγινε στις Βρυξέλλες, στις είκοσι οκτώ Φεβρουαρίου δύο χιλιάδες οκτώ.
         Done at Brussels on the twenty-eighth day of February in the year two thousand and eight.
         Fait à Bruxelles, le vingt-huit février deux mille huit.
         Fatto a Bruxelles, addì ventotto febbraio duemilaotto.
         Briselē, divtūkstoš astotā gada divdesmit astotajā februārī.
         Priimta du tūkstančiai aštuntų metų vasario dvidešimt aštuntą dieną Briuselyje.
         Kelt Brüsszelben, a kétezer-nyolcadik év február huszonnyolcadik napján.
         Magħmul fi Brussell, fit-tmienja u għoxrin jum ta’ Frar tas-sena elfejn u tmienja.
         Gedaan te Brussel, de achtentwintigste februari tweeduizend acht.
         Sporządzono w Brukseli dnia dwudziestego ósmego lutego roku dwa tysiące ósmego.
         Feito em Bruxelas, em vinte e oito de Fevereiro de dois mil e oito.
         Încheiat la Bruxelles, la douăzeci și opt februarie în anul două mii opt.
         V Bruseli dňa dvadsiateho ôsmeho februára dvetisícosem.
         V Bruslju, dne osemindvajsetega februarja leta dva tisoč osem.
         Tehty Brysselissä kahdentenakymmenentenäkahdeksantena päivänä helmikuuta vuonna kaksituhattakahdeksan.
         Som skedde i Bryssel den tjugoåttonde februari tjugohundraåtta.

            За Европейската общност
            Por la Comunidad Europea
            Za Evropské společenství
            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 vārdā
            az Európai Közösség részéről
            Għall-Komunità Ewropea
            Voor de Europese Gemeenschap
            W imieniu Wspólnoty Europejskiej
            Pela Comunidade Europeia
            Pentru Comunitatea Europeană
            Za Európske spoločenstvo
            Za Evropsko skupnost
            Euroopan yhteisön puolesta
            På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar

            За Конфедерация Швейцария
            Por la Confederación Suiza
            Za Švýcarskou konfederaci
            For Det Schweiziske Forbund
            Für die Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft
            Šveitsi Konföderatsiooni nimel
            Για την Ελβετική Συνομοσπονδία
            For the Swiss Confederation
            Pour la Confédération suisee
            Per la Confederazione svizzera
            Šveices Konfederācijas vārdā
            Šveicarijos Konfederacijos vardu
            A Svájci Állmszövetség részéről
            Għall-Konfederazzjoni Żvizzera
            Voor de Zwitserse Bondsstaat
            W imieniu Konfederacji Szwajcarskiej
            Pela Confederação Suiça
            Pentru Confederația Elvețiană
            Za Švajčiarsku konfederáciu
            Za Švicarsko konfederacijo
            Sveitsin valaliiton puolesta
            För Schweiziska edsförbundet

            За Княжeство Лиxтeнщaйн
            Por el Principado de Liechtenstein
            Za Lichtenštejnské knížectví
            For Fyrstendømmet Liechtenstein
            Für das Fürstentum Liechtenstein
            Liechtensteini Vürstiriigi nimel
            Για τo Πριγκιπάτo τoυ Λιχτενστάιν
            For the Principality of Liechtenstein
            Pour la Principauté de Liechtenstein
            Per il Principato del Liechtenstein
            Lihtenšteinas Firstistes vārdā
            Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės vardu
            A Liechtensteini Hercegség részéről
            Għall-Prinċipat ta’ Liechtenstein
            Voor het Vorstendom Liechtenstein
            W imieniu Księstwa Liechtensteinu
            Pelo Principado do Liechtenstein
            Pentru Principatul Liechtenstein
            Za Lichtenštajnské kniežatstvo
            Za Kneževino Lihtenštajn
            Liechtensteinin ruhtinaskunnan puolesta
            För Furstendömet Liechtenstein

         (1)  OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.

         (2)  OJ L 93, 3.4.2001, p. 38.

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

         (4)  See page 3 of this Official Journal.

         (5)  Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ L 50, 25.2.2003, p. 1).

         (6)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 of 2 September 2003 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ L 222, 5.9.2003, p. 3).

         (7)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention (OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1).

         (8)  Council Regulation (EC) No 407/2002 of 28 February 2002 laying down certain rules to implement Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 concerning the establishment of ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention (OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 1).

      FINAL ACT
      The plenipotentiaries
      of the EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
      and
      of the SWISS CONFEDERATION
      and
      of the PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN,
      hereinafter referred to as ‘the Contracting Parties’
      meeting in Brussels on the twenty-eighth day of February in the year 2008 for the signature of the Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland, have adopted the Protocol.
      The plenipotentiaries of the Contracting Parties have taken note of the following Declarations listed below and annexed to this Final Act:

                  —

                  Common Declaration of the Contracting Parties on a close dialogue,

                  —

                  Declaration by Liechtenstein on Article 5(3),

                  —

                  Joint Declaration on joint meetings of the Mixed Committees.

            За Европейската общност
            Por la Comunidad Europea
            Za Evropské společenství
            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 vārdā
            az Európai Közösség részéről
            Għall-Komunità Ewropea
            Voor de Europese Gemeenschap
            W imieniu Wspólnoty Europejskiej
            Pela Comunidade Europeia
            Pentru Comunitatea Europeană
            Za Európske spoločenstvo
            Za Evropsko skupnost
            Euroopan yhteisön puolesta
            På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar

            За Конфедерация Швейцария
            Por la Confederación Suiza
            Za Švýcarskou konfederaci
            For Det Schweiziske Forbund
            Für die Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft
            Šveitsi Konföderatsiooni nimel
            Για την Ελβετική Συνομοσπονδία
            For the Swiss Confederation
            Pour la Confédération suisee
            Per la Confederazione svizzera
            Šveices Konfederācijas vārdā
            Šveicarijos Konfederacijos vardu
            A Svájci Állmszövetség részéről
            Għall-Konfederazzjoni Żvizzera
            Voor de Zwitserse Bondsstaat
            W imieniu Konfederacji Szwajcarskiej
            Pela Confederação Suiça
            Pentru Confederația Elvețiană
            Za Švajčiarsku konfederáciu
            Za Švicarsko konfederacijo
            Sveitsin valaliiton puolesta
            För Schweiziska edsförbundet

            За Княжeство Лиxтeнщaйн
            Por el Principado de Liechtenstein
            Za Lichtenštejnské knížectví
            For Fyrstendømmet Liechtenstein
            Für das Fürstentum Liechtenstein
            Liechtensteini Vürstiriigi nimel
            Για τo Πριγκιπάτo τoυ Λιχτενστάιν
            For the Principality of Liechtenstein
            Pour la Principauté de Liechtenstein
            Per il Principato del Liechtenstein
            Lihtenšteinas Firstistes vārdā
            Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės vardu
            A Liechtensteini Hercegség részéről
            Għall-Prinċipat ta’ Liechtenstein
            Voor het Vorstendom Liechtenstein
            W imieniu Księstwa Liechtensteinu
            Pelo Principado do Liechtenstein
            Pentru Principatul Liechtenstein
            Za Lichtenštajnské kniežatstvo
            Za Kneževino Lihtenštajn
            Liechtensteinin ruhtinaskunnan puolesta
            För Furstendömet Liechtenstein

         COMMON DECLARATION OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES ON A CLOSE DIALOGUE
         The Contracting Parties stress the importance of a close, productive dialogue between all parties participating in the implementation of the provisions listed in Article 2(1) of this Protocol.
         In accordance with Article 3(1) of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland, at Mixed Committee meetings with a view to holding exchanges of views with Switzerland, the Commission will invite experts from the Member States to hear experts from Liechtenstein on all the matters dealt with in the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland.
         The Contracting Parties note that the Member States are prepared to accept this invitation and to take part in these exchanges of views with Liechtenstein on all the matters dealt with in the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland.

         DECLARATION BY LIECHTENSTEIN ON ARTICLE 5(3)
         (Time limit for accepting new developments in the Dublin/Eurodac acquis)
         The maximum time limit of 18 months laid down in Article 5(3) covers both the approval and the implementation of the act or measure. It includes the following stages:

                     —

                     the preparatory stage,

                     —

                     the parliamentary procedure,

                     —

                     the referendum deadline of 30 days,

                     —

                     where applicable the referendum (organisation and voting),

                     —

                     the sanctioning of the ruling prince.

               The Government of Liechtenstein shall inform the Council and the Commission without delay of the completion of each of the stages.
         The Government of Liechtenstein undertakes to use every means at its disposal to ensure that the abovementioned stages are completed as swiftly as possible.

         JOINT DECLARATION ON JOINT MEETINGS OF THE MIXED COMMITTEES
         The delegation of the European Commission,
         The delegations representing the Governments of the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway,
         The delegation representing the Government of the Swiss Confederation,
         The delegation representing the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein,
         Note that Liechtenstein accedes to the Mixed Committee established by the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland via a Protocol to this Agreement.
         Have decided to organise the meetings of the Joint Committees, established by the Agreement between the European Community and Iceland and Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway, on the one hand, and the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland as complemented by the Protocol on the accession of Liechtenstein, on the other hand, jointly.
         Note that holding these meetings jointly calls for a pragmatic arrangement regarding the office of presidency of such meetings when that presidency is to be held by the associated States according to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or Switzerland as complemented by the Protocol on the accession of Liechtenstein or the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway.
         Note the wish of the associated States to cede, as necessary, the exercise of their presidencies and rotate it among them in alphabetical order of name as from the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or Switzerland as complemented by the Protocol on the accession of Liechtenstein.


title: 2011/608/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/237

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009
   (2011/608/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year ended 31 December 2009, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 15 February 2011 (05894/2011 — C7-0051/2011),

               —

               having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

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

               —

               having regard to Council Decision 2007/198/Euratom of 27 March 2007 establishing the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy and conferring advantages upon it (3), and in particular Article 5 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0131/2011),

               1.

               Grants the Director of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy discharge in respect of the implementation of the Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2009,

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Director of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 342, 16.12.2010, p. 22.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 90, 30.3.2007, p. 58.

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

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2011
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2009,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year ended 31 December 2009, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 15 February 2011 (05894/2011 — C7-0051/2011),

                  —

                  having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to Council Decision 2007/198/Euratom of 27 March 2007 establishing the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy and conferring advantages upon it (3), and in particular Article 5 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to the Financial Regulation of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy, adopted by decision of 22 October 2007 of the Joint Undertaking’s Governing Board (hereinafter ‘ITER Financial Regulation’),

                  —

                  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0131/2011),

                  A.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts for the financial year 2009 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

                  B.

                  whereas the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy is in a start-up phase and had not fully established its internal control and financial reporting systems by the end of 2009,

                  C.

                  whereas the ITER Financial Regulation is based on the framework Financial Regulation, which was recently amended to bring it into line with changes made to the general Financial Regulation,

                  D.

                  whereas on 9 October 2008 the Court of Auditors delivered Opinion No 4/2008 on the ITER Financial Regulation,

         Implementation of the budget

                  1.

                  Notes that the Joint Undertaking final 2009 budget was EUR 173 600 000 and its overall utilisation rate for payment appropriations was 65,3 %;

                  2.

                  Recognises that the Joint Undertaking is still in a start-up period and that the underspending mostly relates to delays in the progress of the Euratom fusion programme, as was also reported by the Court of Auditors in 2008;

                  3.

                  Notes that year-end bank deposits totalling EUR 42 000 000 represent a breach of the budgetary principle of equilibrium;

                  4.

                  Considers it to be important, in order to define the application of this derogation from the general budgetary principle of equilibrium, to specify the conditions under which, if it is positive, the balance of the outturn account shall be entered in the budget of the Joint Undertaking of the following financial year;

         Presentation of accounts

                  5.

                  Calls on the Joint Undertaking to harmonise its accounts under the guidance of the Commission;

                  6.

                  Acknowledges that unlike other Union joint undertakings, ITER is entirely publicly funded;

         Internal control systems

                  7.

                  Urges the Joint Undertaking to complete the implementation of its internal controls and financial information system;

                  8.

                  Calls, in addition, on the Joint Undertaking to include in its Financial Rules a specific reference to the powers of the Internal Audit Service (IAS) as its Internal Auditor, on the basis of the provision set out in the framework Financial Regulation for the Community bodies;

                  9.

                  Considers, in particular, that the role of the IAS as Internal Auditor should be to advise the Joint Undertaking on how to deal with risks, by issuing independent opinions on the quality of management and control systems and by issuing recommendations for improving the conditions of implementation of operations and for promoting sound financial management; considers it to be also essential that the Joint Undertaking submit to the discharge authority a report drawn up by its director summarising the number and the type of internal audits conducted by the Internal Auditor, the recommendations made and the actions taken regarding these recommendations;

                  10.

                  Is of the opinion that, in view of the size of its budget and the complexity of its tasks, the Joint Undertaking should establish an audit committee, reporting directly to the Governing Board;

         Financial Regulation

                  11.

                  Urges the Joint Undertaking to amend its Financial Regulation in order to integrate the Court of Auditors’ recommendations made in its Opinion No 4/2008 on that Regulation; considers further improvement to be necessary in relation to:

                              —

                              the exceptions to budgetary principles,

                              —

                              the role of the IAS,

                              —

                              the establishment of an audit committee,

                              —

                              late payment of members’ contributions,

                              —

                              the rules on the award of grants,

                              —

                              the transitional provisions set out in Article 133 of the ITER Financial Regulation.

         (1)  OJ C 342, 16.12.2010, p. 22.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 90, 30.3.2007, p. 58.

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