Avis juridique important

|

32000H0581

2000/581/EC: Commission Recommendation of 15 September 2000 on the ratification of International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention No 182 of 17 June 1999 concerning the prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour (notified under document number C(2000) 2674)

Official Journal L 243 , 28/09/2000 P. 0041 - 0041

Commission Recommendationof 15 September 2000on the ratification of International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention No 182 of 17 June 1999 concerning the prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour(notified under document number C(2000) 2674)(2000/581/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the second indent of Article 211 thereof,Whereas:(1) ILO Convention No 182 concerning the prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour of 17 June 1999 requires ratifying States to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst of child labour as a matter of urgency.(2) ILO Convention No 182 was adopted unanimously at the 1999 International Labour Conference.(3) ILO Convention No 138 concerning the minimum age for admission to employment of 26 June 1973 provides that the minimum age for admission to any type of employment or work which by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out is likely to jeopardise the health, safety or morals of young persons shall not be less than 18 years.(4) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 recognises the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be harzadous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development.(5) The aim of ILO Convention No 182, the effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour, is also a long-standing objective of the Community.(6) Council Directive 94/33/EC of 22 June 1994 on the protection of young people at work provides that Member States shall ensure that young people are protected against economic exploitation and against any work likely to harm their safety, health or physical, mental, moral or social development or to jeopardise their education.(7) The 1999 EU Annual Report on Human Rights welcomes the adoption of ILO Convention No 182 and calls for rapid ratification and implementation of the new Convention.(8) The European Union, in its statement on the rights of the child delivered to the 56th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on 11 April 2000, strongly encouraged States that have not yet done so to ratify ILO Conventions No 138 and No 182.(9) The Community is committed to promoting respect for fundamental labour standards, reflecting the Community's commitment to democracy and the rule of law, and to respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.(10) The Community strongly supports international efforts to implement effectively the ILO's Declaration on fundamental principles and rights at work.(11) The widest possible ratification of ILO Convention No 182 will reinforce its effectiveness as a standard of universal validity,HEREBY RECOMMENDS:- that Member States, which have not yet done so, ratify the ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, adopted on 17 June 1999,- that Member States inform the Commission, within a period of one year from publication of this recommendation, of the steps taken pursuant to it.Done at Brussels, 15 September 2000.For the CommissionAnna DiamantopoulouMember of the Commission


title: Council Recommendation of 9 December 2013 on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States

text:
               24.12.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 378/1

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 9 December 2013
   on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States
   2013/C 378/01
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292, in conjunction with Article 19(1), thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), equality is one of the founding values of the Union. Pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 3(3) TEU, the Union shall combat social exclusion and discrimination and promote the protection of the rights of the child.

               (2)

               According to Article 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union shall aim to combat discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin in defining and implementing its policies and activities.

               (3)

               Article 19(1) TFEU enables the Council to take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.

               (4)

               Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states that any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language or membership of a national minority, shall be prohibited.

               (5)

               Council Directive 2000/43/EC (1) lays down a framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin throughout the Union in relation to employment and training, education, social protection (including social security and healthcare), social advantages and access to, and supply of, goods and services, including housing.

               (6)

               For the purposes of this Recommendation, as in other political documents of the European Parliament and of the Council, the term ‘Roma’ is used as an umbrella term which includes groups of people who have more or less similar cultural characteristics, such as Sinti, Travellers, Kalé, Gens du voyage, etc., whether sedentary or not.

               (7)

               Many Roma in the Union still face deep poverty, social exclusion, discrimination and barriers to exercising their fundamental rights which leaves them vulnerable to exploitation, for example through trafficking in human beings. Therefore, more effective social inclusion measures adapted to their situation and needs should be considered.

               (8)

               The situation of Roma children in the Union is particularly worrying, due to a range of factors that may make them especially vulnerable and exposed, inter alia, to poor health, poor housing, poor nutrition, exclusion, discrimination, racism and violence. The social exclusion of Roma children is often linked to the lack of birth registration and identity documents, to low participation in early childhood education and care as well as higher education, and to elevated school drop-out rates. Segregation is a serious barrier preventing access to quality education. Some Roma children also fall victim to trafficking and labour exploitation.

               (9)

               Roma who are third-country nationals staying legally in the Member States can also be placed in a vulnerable position, particularly when they share the same poor living conditions as many Roma who are citizens of the Union, whilst also facing the challenges of many migrants coming from outside the Union.

               (10)

               In the context of intra-Union mobility, it is necessary to respect the right to free movement of the citizens of the Union and the conditions for its exercise, including the possession of sufficient resources and of a comprehensive sickness insurance cover, in accordance with Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), while also seeking to improve the living conditions of Roma and pursuing measures to promote their economic and social integration in their Member States of origin as well as their Member States of residence.

               (11)

               The European Parliament resolutions of 9 September 2010 on the situation of Roma and on freedom of movement in the European Union and of 9 March 2011 on the EU strategy on Roma inclusion called on the Commission and the Member States to mobilise existing Union strategies and instruments with a view to securing the socio-economic inclusion of Roma.

               (12)

               In its Communication of 5 April 2011 entitled ‘An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’, the Commission encouraged Member States to adopt or to further develop a comprehensive approach and endorse a number of goals in education, employment, healthcare and housing in order to speed up Roma integration.

               (13)

               On 19 May 2011, the Council adopted Conclusions entitled ‘An EU framework for national Roma integration strategies up to 2020’, expressing the Member States' commitment to advancing the social and economic inclusion of Roma.

               (14)

               The European Council of 23 and 24 June 2011 called for the rapid implementation of the Council Conclusions of 19 May 2011, in particular as regards the preparation, updating or development of Member States' national Roma integration strategies or integrated sets of policy measures within their broader social inclusion policies for improving the situation of Roma.

               (15)

               In its Communication of 21 May 2012 entitled ‘National Roma Integration Strategies: a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework’, the Commission presented the results of a first assessment of all national Roma integration strategies and integrated sets of policy measures and invited Member States to consider a number of adaptations as a way forward.

               (16)

               The Commission enhanced its dialogue with the Member States on Roma integration, in particular by establishing in October 2012 the network of National Contact Points for Roma integration, in order to discuss solutions to the challenges identified. In November and December 2012, a group of National Contact Points for Roma integration further discussed how to enhance the effectiveness of measures to achieve Roma integration in the Member States. That group subsequently reported back to the network of National Contact Points for Roma integration.

               (17)

               In its Communication of 26 June 2013 entitled ‘Steps forward in implementing national Roma integration strategies’, the Commission highlighted the need for further action in order to secure the necessary preconditions for the successful implementation of measures aimed at speeding up progress on Roma integration as soon as possible.

               (18)

               The Commission Communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (the ‘Europe 2020 Strategy’) has given new impetus to the fight against poverty and social exclusion by setting common European targets to reduce the number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion, to reduce the rate of early school leaving, and to increase school attainment and employment levels. Roma integration is an essential part of the convergent efforts by the Union and Member States in this context. The current governance of the European Semester promotes implementation of the relevant country specific recommendations, and the Council conclusions of 20 June 2013 entitled ‘Towards social investment for growth and cohesion’ provide further guidance for the efforts to secure inclusive growth.

               (19)

               In light of the above considerations and of the shortcomings identified, the effectiveness of Roma integration measures needs to be improved and monitored. This should be done while fully respecting the principle of subsidiarity and the Member States' primary responsibility in this area, taking into account the fact that data collection on ethnic grounds can be a sensitive issue and acknowledging that Member States should choose their own monitoring methods, including appropriate methods for any data collection, and possible indicators.

               (20)

               This Recommendation aims to build on the various recommendations previously set out in the European Parliament resolutions, the Council conclusions and the Commission communications on Roma integration. It aims to complement existing Union anti-discrimination legislation in order to help make its implementation and enforcement more effective.

               (21)

               This Recommendation does not cover differences of treatment based on nationality and is without prejudice to provisions and conditions related to the legal status of third-country nationals and stateless persons on the territory of Member States under national and Union law or to the legal effects of that status.

               (22)

               Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) calls on Member States, where appropriate, to set out an integrated approach to addressing the specific needs of geographical areas most affected by poverty, or of target groups at highest risk of discrimination or social exclusion, with special regard to marginalised communities. Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) for the 2014-2020 programming period includes an investment priority under the European Social Fund (ESF) focused on the socio-economic integration of marginalised communities such as Roma, complementing the other European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) (5),

         NOTING THAT:
   PURPOSE
   The purpose of this Recommendation is to provide guidance to Member States in enhancing the effectiveness of their measures to achieve Roma integration and strengthen the implementation of their national Roma integration strategies or integrated sets of policy measures within broader social inclusion policies aimed at improving the situation of Roma and at closing any gaps between Roma and the general population.
   The size and the social and economic situation of the Roma population vary considerably between different Member States. Therefore national approaches to Roma integration should be tailored to the specific circumstances and needs on the ground, including by adopting or continuing to pursue policies that address marginalised and disadvantaged groups, such as Roma, in a broader context.
   This Recommendation explicitly focuses on measures to promote the integration of Roma without aiming to exclude other marginalised and disadvantaged groups. Integration measures should be based on the same principles in comparable conditions.
   HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT THE MEMBER STATES:
   1.   SUBSTANTIVE POLICY ISSUES

      Effective policy measures

               1.1.

               With a view to promoting the full equality of Roma in practice, take effective policy measures to ensure their equal treatment and the respect of their fundamental rights, including equal access to education, employment, healthcare and housing. This goal could be achieved either by means of mainstream measures or by means of targeted measures, including specific measures to prevent or compensate for disadvantages, or by a combination of both, paying special attention to the gender dimension.

               1.2.

               Adopt measures that may be based on socio-economic indicators, such as high long-term unemployment, level of educational attainment and health parameters, or may focus on geographical areas that are marginalised and/or segregated.

      Access to education

               1.3.

               Take effective measures to ensure equal treatment and full access for Roma boys and girls to quality and mainstream education and to ensure that all Roma pupils complete at least compulsory education (6). This goal could be attained by means of measures such as measures:

                           (a)

                           eliminating any school segregation;

                           (b)

                           putting an end to any inappropriate placement of Roma pupils in special needs schools;

                           (c)

                           reducing early school leaving (7) throughout all levels of education, including at secondary level and vocational training;

                           (d)

                           increasing the access to, and quality of, early childhood education and care, including targeted support, as necessary;

                           (e)

                           considering the needs of individual pupils and addressing those accordingly, in close cooperation with their families;

                           (f)

                           using inclusive and tailor-made teaching and learning methods, including learning support for struggling learners and measures to fight illiteracy, and promoting the availability and use of extracurricular activities;

                           (g)

                           encouraging greater parental involvement and improving teacher training, where relevant;

                           (h)

                           encouraging Roma participation in and completion of secondary and tertiary education;

                           (i)

                           widening access to second-chance education and adult learning, and providing support for the transition between educational levels and support for the acquisition of skills that are adapted to the needs of the labour market.

      Access to employment

               1.4.

               Take effective measures to ensure equal treatment of Roma in access to the labour market and to employment opportunities. This goal could be attained by means of measures such as measures:

                           (a)

                           supporting first work experience, vocational training, on-the-job training, lifelong learning and skills development;

                           (b)

                           supporting self-employment and entrepreneurship;

                           (c)

                           providing equal access to mainstream public employment services, alongside services to support individual job-seekers, focusing on personalised guidance and individual action planning and, where appropriate, promoting employment opportunities within the civil service;

                           (d)

                           eliminating barriers, including discrimination, to (re)entering the labour market.

      Access to healthcare

               1.5.

               Take effective measures to ensure equal treatment of Roma in access to universally available healthcare services (8) on the basis of general eligibility criteria. This goal could be attained by means of measures such as measures:

                           (a)

                           removing any barriers to access to the healthcare system accessible for the general population;

                           (b)

                           improving access to medical check-ups, prenatal and postnatal care and family planning, as well as sexual and reproductive healthcare, generally provided by national healthcare services;

                           (c)

                           improving access to free vaccination programmes targeting children and vaccination programmes targeting, in particular, groups most at risk and/or those living in marginalised and/or remote areas;

                           (d)

                           promoting awareness of health and healthcare issues.

      Access to housing

               1.6.

               Take effective measures to ensure equal treatment of Roma in access to housing. This goal could be attained by means of measures such as measures:

                           (a)

                           eliminating any spatial segregation and promoting desegregation;

                           (b)

                           promoting non-discriminatory access to social housing;

                           (c)

                           providing halting sites for non-sedentary Roma, in proportion to local needs;

                           (d)

                           ensuring access to public utilities (such as water, electricity and gas) and infrastructure for housing in compliance with national legal requirements.

               1.7.

               Whenever relevant, ensure that applications from local authorities for urban regeneration projects include integrated housing interventions in favour of marginalised communities.

               1.8.

               Promote community-led local development and/or integrated territorial investments supported by the ESIF.

      Funding

               1.9.

               Allocate adequate funding for the implementation and monitoring of their national and local strategies and action plans from any available sources of funding (local, national, Union and international) with a view to achieving the objective of Roma integration through mainstream or targeted measures.

               1.10.

               The promotion of social inclusion and combating poverty and discrimination, including, inter alia, the socio-economic integration of marginalised communities such as Roma, should be facilitated by the allocation of at least 20 % of the total ESF resources in each Member State to investment in people as set out in Articles 3 and 4 of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013.

               1.11.

               Depending on the size and social and economic situation of their Roma communities and the gap between Roma and non-Roma populations, as well as the challenges identified within the context of the European Semester for a number of Member States, take appropriate measures to include Roma integration among the priorities in the Partnership Agreements on the use of the ESIF (9) for the period 2014-2020.

               1.12.

               Improve their management, monitoring and evaluation capacities with the support of the ESIF technical assistance and facilitate the use of national and Union funds to support capacity building for local authorities and civil society organisations so that they can effectively implement projects.

               1.13.

               Target the allocation of public funding for implementing national Roma integration strategies or integrated sets of policy measures to the specific needs of Roma, or to the geographical areas most affected by poverty and social exclusion, and take into consideration the gender dimension.

         2.   HORIZONTAL POLICY MEASURES

      Anti-discrimination

               2.1.

               Continue their efforts to ensure the effective practical enforcement of Directive 2000/43/EC, in particular by ensuring that their national, regional and local administrative regulations are not discriminatory and do not result in segregation practices. The relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights should serve as a point of reference for the human rights compatibility of provisions and practices in this context.

               2.2.

               Implement, where relevant, desegregation measures concerning Roma both regionally and locally. Policies and measures to combat segregation should be accompanied by appropriate training and information programmes, including training and information on human rights protection, addressed to local civil servants and representatives of civil society and Roma themselves.

               2.3.

               Ensure that forced evictions are in full compliance with Union law as well with other international human rights obligations, such as those of the European Convention on Human Rights.

               2.4.

               Implement measures to combat discrimination and prejudice against Roma, sometimes referred to as anti-Gypsyism, in all areas of society. Such measures could include:

                           (a)

                           raising awareness about the benefits of Roma integration both in Roma communities and among the general public;

                           (b)

                           raising the general public's awareness of the diverse nature of societies, and sensitising public opinion to the inclusion problems Roma face, including, where relevant, by addressing those aspects in public education curricula and teaching materials;

                           (c)

                           taking effective measures to combat anti-Roma rhetoric and hate speech, and addressing racist, stereotyping or otherwise stigmatising language or other behaviours that could constitute incitement to discrimination against Roma.

      Protection of Roma children and women

               2.5.

               Combat all forms of discrimination, including multiple discrimination, faced by Roma children and women, and fight violence, including domestic violence, against women and girls, trafficking in human beings, underage and forced marriages, and begging involving children, in particular through the enforcement of legislation. To this end, Member States should ensure the involvement in this exercise of all relevant actors including public authorities, civil society and Roma communities. In this context, cooperation between Member States is encouraged in situations with a cross-border dimension.

      Poverty reduction through social investment

               2.6.

               Combat poverty and social exclusion affecting the disadvantaged, including Roma, through investment in human capital and social cohesion policies. This goal could be attained by means of measures such as measures:

                           (a)

                           supporting Roma at all stages of their lives, starting as early as possible and systematically dealing with the risks they face, including by investing in good-quality inclusive early childhood education and care, targeted youth guarantee schemes, life-long learning and active ageing measures;

                           (b)

                           pursuing policies of activation and enablement by supporting (re)entry to the labour market through targeted or mainstream employment support schemes, and promoting inclusive labour market by addressing discrimination in the workplace;

                           (c)

                           making social benefits and social services granted to the disadvantaged, including Roma, in accordance with national legislation, more adequate and sustainable through more joined-up social policies, through the simplification of procedures, and by combating fraud and errors; ensuring the take-up of social assistance schemes; and providing adequate income support to those eligible.

               2.7.

               Depending on the size and social and economic situation of their Roma populations, consider making Roma integration an important issue within their national reform programmes or their national social reports in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy.

      Empowerment

               2.8.

               Support the active citizenship of Roma by promoting their social, economic, political and cultural participation in society, including at the local level, since the active involvement and participation of Roma themselves, including through their representatives and organisations, is crucial for the improvement of their living conditions, as well as for the advancement of their social inclusion.

               2.9.

               Where appropriate to local approaches to integration, promote the training and employment of qualified mediators dedicated to Roma and use mediation as one of the measures to tackle the inequalities Roma face in terms of access to quality education, employment, healthcare and housing.

               2.10.

               Carry out information activities to further raise awareness among Roma of their rights (notably in relation to discrimination and the possibilities of seeking redress) and of their civic duties.

         3.   STRUCTURAL MEASURES

      Local action

               3.1.

               While respecting the competences of regional and local authorities, encourage those authorities to develop local action plans or strategies, or sets of local policy measures within wider social inclusion policies, which could include baselines, benchmarks and measurable objectives for Roma integration as well as appropriate funding.

               3.2.

               Involve regional and local authorities and local civil society in developing, implementing and monitoring their national strategies or integrated sets of policy measures within broader social inclusion policies. Relevant representatives and stakeholders should be involved as regards partnership agreements and operational programmes co-financed by the ESIF. Central and local authorities should cooperate in the implementation of those strategies.
               To this end, support local public authorities so as to facilitate the implementation of sets of policy measures at local level.

               3.3.

               Strive at the local level for an integrated approach concerning families with a Roma background facing multiple problems such as non-completion of school, debt, poverty and poor health. To this end, the capacity of local authorities could be strengthened, while respecting the division of responsibilities within each Member State, in order to allow them to effectively work in co-operation with the families concerned and also with, for example, schools, youth care organisations, police, public health organisations, welfare organisations and housing corporations.

      Monitoring and evaluating policies

               3.4.

               Appropriately monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their national strategies or integrated sets of policy measures within their broader social inclusion policies. This could be done by means of measures such as setting baselines or measurable targets or by collecting relevant qualitative or quantitative data on the social and economic effects of such strategies or measures, in line with applicable national and Union law, particularly regarding the protection of personal data.

               3.5.

               Make use of any relevant core indicators or methods of empirical social research or data collection for monitoring and evaluating progress on a regular basis, particularly at the local level, enabling efficient reporting on the situation of Roma in the Member States with the optional support of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.

      Bodies for the promotion of equal treatment

               3.6.

               Support the work and institutional capacity of bodies for the promotion of equal treatment by granting them adequate resources so that the legal and judicial assistance they provide can effectively benefit Roma victims of discrimination.

               3.7.

               Promote regular dialogue between their National Contact Points for Roma integration and national bodies for the promotion of equal treatment.

      National Contact Points for Roma integration

               3.8.

               Provide their National Contact Points for Roma integration with an adequate mandate and resources appropriate to their role so that they can effectively coordinate the cross-sectoral monitoring of Roma integration policies with a view to their implementation, while respecting the division of responsibilities within each Member State.

               3.9.

               Involve their National Contact Points for Roma integration in decision-making processes regarding the development, funding and implementation of relevant policies. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should facilitate the participation and involvement of Roma civil society in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and local action plans.

      Transnational cooperation

               3.10.

               Encourage the development of, and active participation in, transnational forms of cooperation at national, regional or local level, through policy initiatives, in particular projects and bilateral or multilateral agreements, in order to:

                           (a)

                           coordinate on issues related to the cross-border mobility of Roma within the Union; and

                           (b)

                           support mutual learning and the multiplication of good practices, for example by cooperation between authorities managing structural funds with a view to designing effective Roma integration interventions.

               3.11.

               The transnational cooperation referred to in point 3.10 should supplement the measures taken within national strategies for Roma integration and integrated sets of policy measures within broader social inclusion policies and within the framework of any existing cooperation agreements between Member States such as the Danube Strategy, and of other international organisations such as the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

         4.   REPORTING AND FOLLOW-UP

               4.1.

               Communicate to the Commission any measures taken in accordance with this Recommendation by 1 January 2016.

               4.2.

               Thereafter, communicate to the Commission any new measures taken on an annual basis, at the end of each year, along with information on the progress achieved in implementing their national Roma integration strategies or integrated sets of policy measures within broader social inclusion policies.

         HEREBY INVITES THE COMMISSION TO:

               5.1.

               Ensure that the information provided by the Member States will serve as a basis for the preparation of its annual reports to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and will contribute to the European Semester of the Europe 2020 Strategy through the country specific recommendations.

               5.2.

               On this basis, monitor the situation closely and, by 1 January 2019, assess the need to revise and update this Recommendation.

      Done at Brussels, 9 December 2013.

            For the Council

            The President

         A. PABEDINSKIENĖ

      (1)  Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22).

      (2)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77).

      (3)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470).

      (5)  The ESIF are the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion Fund (CF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF).

      (6)  A child's right to education is enshrined in Article 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

      (7)  See Council Recommendation of 28 June 2011 on policies to reduce early school leaving (OJ C 191, 1.7.2011, p. 1). One of the headline targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy agreed by the European Council is to reduce the proportion of early school leavers to less than 10 % and to ensure that at least 40 % of the younger generation have a tertiary qualification or equivalent.

      (8)  This Recommendation is without prejudice to the provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC, which require citizens of the Union moving within the Union to ‘have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence and have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State’.

      (9)  The ERDF can be used to support infrastructure projects in the health, education and housing sectors.


Avis juridique important

|

E2003C0097

Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority No 97/03/COL of 19 June 2003 concerning a coordinated monitoring programme for 2003 to ensure compliance with maximum levels of pesticide residues in and on cereals and certain other products of plant origin

Official Journal L 227 , 11/09/2003 P. 0045 - 0049

Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityNo 97/03/COLof 19 June 2003concerning a coordinated monitoring programme for 2003 to ensure compliance with maximum levels of pesticide residues in and on cereals and certain other products of plant originTHE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA), and in particular Article 109 and Protocol 1 thereof,Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, and in particular Article 5(2)(b) and Protocol 1 thereof,Having regard to the Act referred to at point 38 in Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 86/362/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on cereals(1)), as last amended and adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular Article 7(2)(b) thereof,Having regard to the Act referred to at point 54 in Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 90/642/EEC of 27 November 1990 on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables(2)), as last amended and adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular Article 4(2)(b) thereof,After consultation of the EFTA Foodstuffs Committee assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority,Whereas:(1) Article 7(2)(b) of Directive 86/362/EEC and Article 4(2)(b) of Directive 90/642/EEC require the EFTA Surveillance Authority, by 31 December each year, to submit to the EFTA Foodstuffs Committee assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority, a recommendation setting out a coordinated monitoring programme to ensure compliance for maximum levels of pesticide residues set out in Annex II to the said directives. Article 1(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 645/2000(3) provides that such recommendations may cover periods of between one and five years.(2) The EFTA Surveillance Authority should progressively work towards a system which would permit the estimation of actual dietary exposure to pesticides, as provided for in the second paragraph of Article 7(3) of Directive 86/362/EEC and the second paragraph of Article 4(3) of Directive 90/642/EEC. To make realistic estimations possible, data on the monitoring of pesticide residues should be available in a number of food products, which constitute major components of the European diet. It is generally recognised that major components of the European diet are constituted by some 20 to 30 food products. In view of the resources available at national level for pesticide residue monitoring, the EFTA States are only able to analyse samples of eight products each year within a coordinated monitoring programme. Pesticide uses show changes within the timescale of the three-year period. Each pesticide should thus generally be monitored in 20 to 30 food products over a series of three-year cycles.(3) Residues of the pesticides acephate, the benomyl group, chlorpyriphos, iprodione, methamidophos, diazinon, metalaxyl, methidathion, thiabendazole, triazophos chlorpyriphos-methyl, deltamethrin, endosulfan, imazalil, kresoxim-methyl, lambda-cyhalothrin, the maneb group, mecarbam, permethrin, pirimiphos-methyl, vinclozolin, azinphos-methyl, captan, chlorothalonil, dichlofluanid, dicofol, dimethoate, folpet, malathion, omethoate, oxydemeton-methyl, phorate, procymidone, propyzamide, azoxystrobine, aldicarb, bromopropylate, cypermethrin, methiocarb, methomyl, parathion and tolylfluanid should be monitored in 2003, as this will allow, using these data, for the estimation of actual dietary exposure to them, since these compounds have already been monitored since 2001.(4) A systematic statistical approach to numbers of samples to be taken in each coordinated monitoring exercise is necessary. Such an approach has been set out by the Commission of the Codex Alimentarius(4). Based on a binomial probability distribution it can be calculated that examination of 459 samples gives a 99 % confidence of detecting one sample containing pesticide residues above the limit of determination (LOD) where 1 % of products of plant origin contain residues above the LOD. At least 459 samples should therefore be taken across the European Economic Area. For the EFTA States it is recommended, on the basis of population and consumer numbers, to take a minimum of 12 samples per product and per year.(5) Draft guidelines concerning Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis have been published by the Commission(5). These draft guidelines should be implemented as far as possible by the analytical laboratories of the EFTA States and should be reviewed continuously in the light of experience gained in the monitoring programmes.(6) Article 4(2)(a) of Directive 90/642/EEC and Article 7(2)(a) of Directive 86/362/EEC require the EFTA States to specify the criteria applied in drawing up their national inspection programmes when sending to the EFTA Surveillance Authority information on their implementation during the following year. Such information should include the criteria applied in determining the numbers of samples to be taken and analyses to be carried out and the reporting levels applied and the criteria by which the reporting levels have been fixed. Details of accreditation under Council Directive 93/99/EEC of 29 October 1993 on the subject of additional measures concerning the official control of foodstuffs(6) of the laboratories carrying out analyses should be indicated.(7) Information on the results of monitoring programmes is particularly appropriate for treatment, storage and transmission by electronic/informatics methods. Formats have been developed for supply of data in diskette form from the EC Member States to the Commission. The EFTA States could use the same format and should therefore be able to send their reports to the EFTA Surveillance Authority in the standard format. The further development of such a standard format is most effectively undertaken by the development of guidelines,HEREBY RECOMMENDS THE EFTA STATES TO:1. Sample and analyse for the product/pesticide residue combinations set out in the Annex to this Recommendation, taking a minimum of 12 samples of each product and reflecting as appropriate, national, EEA and third country share of the EFTA State's market. In addition, to specifically monitor for the combination nitrofen/wheat, with the same sampling frequency.For pesticides possibly posing an acute risk, such as OP-esters, endosulfan and N-methylcarbamates, 10 samples of the products grapes, pepper and cucumber should be subjected to individual analysis of the individual units in the laboratory sample in case such pesticides are detected. Two samples of an appropriate number of units should be taken, where possible the produce of a single producer; if in the first laboratory sample, a detectable level of the pesticide is found, the units of the second sample should be analysed individually.2. Report the results for the part of the specific exercise allocated for 2003 in the Annex to this Recommendation by 31 August 2004, indicating the analytical methods used and reporting levels achieved, in accordance with the quality control procedures set out in the Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis.The report should be produced in a format, including the electronic format, as set out in Annex II and III to the Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority concerning a coordinated monitoring programme for the year 1999(7).3. Send to the EFTA Surveillance Authority and to the EFTA States, by 31 August 2003, all the information as required by Article 7(3) of Directive 86/362/EEC and Article 4(3) of Directive 90/642/EEC concerning the 2002 monitoring exercise to ensure, at least by check sampling, compliance with maximum pesticide residue levels including:(a) the results of their national programmes concerning pesticides listed in Annex II to Directive 86/362/EEC and Annex II to Directive 90/642/EEC, in relation to harmonised levels and, where these have not yet been fixed at EEA level, in relation to the national levels in force;(b) information on their laboratories' quality control procedures and, in particular, information concerning aspects of the guidelines concerning Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis which they have not been able to apply or have had difficulty in applying;(c) information on accreditation in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of Directive 93/99/EEC (including type of accreditation, accreditation body and copy of accreditation certificate) of the laboratories carrying out the analyses;(d) information about the proficiency tests and ring tests in which the laboratory has participated.4. Send to the EFTA Surveillance Authority, by 30 September 2003, their intended national programme for monitoring maximum pesticide residue levels fixed by Directives 90/642/EEC and 86/362/EEC for the year 2004.This Recommendation is addressed to Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.Done at Brussels, 19 June 2003.For the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityNiels FengerDirector(1) OJ L 221, 7.8.1986, p. 37.(2) OJ L 350, 14.12.1990, p. 71.(3) OJ L 78, 29.3.2000, p. 7.(4) Codex Alimentarius, Pesticide residues in foodstuffs, Rome 1994, ISBN 92-5-203271-1; Vol. 2, page 372.(5) Doc. No SANCO/3103/2000 (http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/ fs/ph_ps/pest/index_en.htm).(6) OJ L 290, 24.11.1993, p. 14.(7) OJ L 74, 23.3.2000, Annex II (Quality Control Procedures) p. 25 and Annex III (Working Document/Reporting format) p. 38.ANNEXPesticide/product combinations to be monitored in the specific exercise set out in point 1 of the Recommendation>TABLE>


title: Council Recommendation of 8 March 2005 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) for the financial year 2003

text:
               23.3.2005

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 77/14

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 8 March 2005
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) for the financial year 2003
   (2005/256/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to the Third ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 8 December 1984,
   Having regard to Internal Agreement 86/126/EEC on the financing and administration of Community aid (1), and in particular Article 29(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 11 November 1986 applicable to the Sixth European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) (2), and in particular Articles 66 to 73 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the Sixth EDF as at 31 December 2003 and the Court of Auditors’ Report concerning the financial year 2003 together with the Commission’s replies (3),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 29(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Sixth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council,

               (2)

               The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Sixth EDF during the financial year 2003 has been satisfactory,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS
   that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the Sixth EDF for the financial year 2003.

      Done at Brussels, 8 March 2005.

            For the Council

            The President

         J.-C. JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 86, 31.3.1986, p. 210. Agreement as last amended by Decision 86/281/EEC (OJ L 178, 2.7.1986, p. 13).

      (2)  OJ L 325, 20.11.1986, p. 42.

      (3)  OJ C 293, 30.11.2004, p. 315.


Avis juridique important

|

32002H0077

Council Recommendation of 15 November 2001 on the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in human medicine (Text with EEA relevance)

Official Journal L 034 , 05/02/2002 P. 0013 - 0016

Council Recommendationof 15 November 2001on the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in human medicine(Text with EEA relevance)(2002/77/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 152(4) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Whereas:(1) Antimicrobial agents are substances produced either synthetically or naturally by bacteria, fungi or plants, used to kill or inhibit the growth of micro-organisms including bacteria, viruses and fungi, and of parasites, in particular protozoa.(2) The use of antimicrobial agents has greatly contributed to improvements in health. Such "antimicrobial agents" have been introduced for decades to treat and prevent infectious diseases and infections. However, their use has been accompanied by an increasing prevalence of micro-organisms that have acquired resistance to one or more of these, so-called "antimicrobial resistance". Antimicrobial resistance poses a threat to public health, may prolong the suffering of patients, increase healthcare costs and has economic implications for society. Therefore concerted action is necessary at Community level to contain this problem by encouraging the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in human medicine and better hygiene and infection control.(3) The Council of the European Union on 8 June 1999 adopted a Resolution on antibiotic resistance entitled A strategy against the microbial threat(1). The Resolution highlights that antimicrobial resistance increases morbidity and mortality due to communicable diseases and leads not only to a diminution of quality of life but also to additional health and medical care costs, and that action needs to be taken at Community level.(4) The own-initiative opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the Resistance to antibiotics as a threat to public health(2) identified possible initiatives and action that should be taken at Member State and Community level to address the problem of antimicrobial resistance.(5) There is an association between the growing use of antimicrobial agents and an increase in the prevalence of micro-organisms resistant to those agents, but this relationship is clearly not a simple one. There are many possible factors influencing this relationship, including those related to the organism, to the host and to the mode of use of each drug. However, it is clear that antimicrobial resistance may not necessarily be overcome by the lengthy process of continuously developing new antimicrobial compounds.(6) To develop strategies for prevention of infections and containment of resistant pathogens, accurate surveillance systems generating valid, reliable and comparable data on incidence, prevalence and modes of spread of resistant micro-organisms as well as on prescription and use of antimicrobial agents must be established throughout the Community. They should form an essential component for an overall surveillance strategy to address the problem of antimicrobial resistance and in particular, to assess the potential link between the use of antimicrobial agents and the development of resistance among these pathogens.(7) An important step to avoid, or even reverse, further increases in resistant micro-organisms would be to reduce unnecessary and inappropriate use of antimicrobial agents. General principles and methods for the prudent use of these agents in humans must be identified, defined and implemented.(8) The European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (EARSS) and the European Surveillance of Antibiotic Consumption (ESAC) are Community funded monitoring programmes which aim at collecting standardised, harmonised and comparable data on antibiotic resistance and use.(9) Improved strategies for hygiene, infection control and infection prevention in hospitals and the community will help to limit the spread of resistant micro-organisms and will be an important step to reduce the quantities of antimicrobial agents used.(10) To bring about the necessary changes in prescribers' and patients' behaviour, health professionals and the general public need to be informed on the problem of antimicrobial resistance and associated factors by improved product information, by awareness-raising by adequate information and training during professional education and in-post training, as well as by information measures to the general public and specifically to the patients.(11) Support of research will be essential for tackling the problem of the modes of spread of antimicrobial resistance. Research could include inter alia the evaluation and cost effectiveness of intervention strategies to optimise antibiotic prescribing in hospitals and the community.(12) There is also a relationship between the occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in certain human pathogens and their occurrence in animals and the environment. Coordination between human, veterinary and environment sectors should be ensured and the magnitude of the relationship between the occurrence of antimicrobial resistant pathogens in humans, animals and the environment should be further clarified and therefore this Recommendation does not preclude further initiatives in other areas.(13) Measures taken by the Member States in this area, and the way they have taken into account this Recommendation, should be the object of reports at national and Community level.(14) In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity set out in Article 5 of the Treaty, any new measure taken in an area which does not fall within the exclusive competence of the Community, such as protection of the public against the increase of infectious agents resistant to antimicrobial agents, may be taken up by the Community only if, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, the objectives proposed can be better achieved by the Community than by Member States. Antimicrobial resistance, as is the case with communicable diseases, cannot be confined to a geographical region or Member State. Therefore, coordinated action at Community level is required,HEREBY RECOMMENDS MEMBER STATES:I. to ensure that specific strategies exist and are implemented targeted towards the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in the aim of containing the increase of pathogens resistant to these agents. These strategies should be based on the best available scientific evidence and should comprise measures in relation to surveillance, education, information, prevention and control, and research.These specific strategies should pursue the following objectives:1. establish or strengthen surveillance systems on antimicrobial resistance and the use of antimicrobial agents in order to:(a) gather reliable, comparable data on the susceptibility of pathogens to antimicrobial agents and the infections caused by them. These data should allow time trend analysis and early warnings and monitoring of the spread of resistance at national, regional, and community level;(b) collect data on prescription and use of antimicrobial agents at the appropriate levels to allow monitoring of overall use involving, among others, prescribers, pharmacists and other parties collecting such data.These surveillance systems should be sustainable with clear regulation of data access and ownership. They should comply with the data protection regulations and guarantee the confidentiality and security of data. These systems should build upon existing national and international surveillance systems, using, wherever possible, internationally recognised classification systems and comparable methods;2. implement control and preventive measures to support the prudent use of antimicrobial agents and contribute to limiting the spread of communicable diseases by:(a) restricting systemic antibacterial agents to prescription-only use;(b) setting guidelines for the use of other antimicrobial agents not subject to requirements for prescription-only use;(c) developing evidence-based principles and guidelines on good practice for the management of communicable diseases, to maintain the effectiveness of antimicrobial agents. These practices should include:- assessing the value of clinical and microbiological criteria for diagnosis of infections, including the use of rapid diagnostic tests,- optimising choice of drug, dosage and duration for the treatment and prevention of infections,- promoting optimal prescription practices for antibacterial agents subject to prescription-only use,- assessment of the need for changes in the guidelines for other antimicrobial agents not subject to prescription-only use;(d) establishing and implementing control systems on good practice of marketing of antimicrobial agents to ensure compliance with the evidence-based principles and guidelines on the prudent use of antimicrobial agents for the management of communicable diseases;(e) implementing hygiene and infection control standards in institutions (hospitals, child care facilities, nursing homes etc.) and in the community, and assessing their impact in the prevention of communicable diseases and the need for antimicrobial agents;(f) encouraging national immunisation programmes to progressively eliminate vaccine preventable diseases;3. promote education and training of health professionals on the problem of antimicrobial resistance by:(a) including teaching principles and guidelines on the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents into undergraduate and postgraduate training and in regular continuous training for physicians, infectious diseases clinicians, dentists, pharmacists and nurses and others in the medical professions;(b) enhancing training on hygiene and infection control standards, thereby limiting the spread of micro-organisms and thus eventually reducing the need for antimicrobial agents;(c) training on immunisation programmes and their role in preventing infections, thereby reducing outbreaks of diseases and thus the demand for antimicrobial agents;4. inform the general public of the importance of prudent use of antimicrobial agents by:(a) raising awareness of the problem of antimicrobial resistance and encouraging realistic public expectations for prescribing of antimicrobial agents;(b) launching information initiatives involving the patients on the importance of interventions to reduce the unnecessary use of antimicrobial agents, and on the principles and guidelines on good practice to motivate patients' adherence;(c) highlighting the value of basic hygiene and the impact of vaccination programmes on reducing the need for antimicrobial agents;II. to have in place rapidly and if possible within one year of the adoption of this Recommendation an appropriate intersectoral mechanism for the coordinated implementation of the above strategies as well as for the purposes of information exchange and coordination with the Commission and the other Member States;III. to cooperate with the Commission and the other Member States on:1. the development of indicators to monitor prescribing practices of antimicrobial agents using the evidence-based principles and guidelines on good practice for the management of communicable diseases;2. the evaluation of these indicators once developed with regard to potential improvements of prescribing practices and feedback to prescribers;3. the further development of European surveillance and exchange of information at Community level through the Network on epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases;4. the information and communication on national research initiatives relating to the containment of antimicrobial resistance, with emphasis on:(a) the mechanisms of emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance among humans and from animals to man;(b) the relationship between antimicrobial resistance, resistance mechanisms, clonality, and use of antimicrobial agents;(c) the results of intervention strategies in hospitals and the community to improve the prudent use of antimicrobial agents;(d) the accuracy of diagnostic tools and the development of rapid and reliable diagnostic and susceptibility testing;(e) the development of new modalities for prevention and treatment of infections;(f) the development of alternatives to antimicrobial agents to contain the spread of infections; and(g) the development of new surveillance methods to contain antimicrobial resistancewith a view to enhancing their coordination;5. initiating activities aimed at evaluating and, as necessary, updating the product information (SPC) for antibacterial medicinal products particularly related to indications, dose and dose regimen and prevalence of resistance;IV. to report to the Commission on the implementation of this Recommendation within two years of the adoption of this Recommendation and subsequently on request by the Commission with a view to contributing to the follow-up of this Recommendation at Community level and acting as appropriate in the context of the programmes of action in the field of public health,HEREBY INVITES THE COMMISSION:1. to facilitate mutual information, consultation, cooperation, and action through the procedures and mechanisms available in the Community Network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases (Decision No 2119/98/EC) in the field covered by this Recommendation;2. to establish texts on principles and guidelines of best practice on the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in human medicine having regard to national policies and to the Community requirements for market authorisation and on the quality and content of the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC), which lays the basis for all promotional activities of an antimicrobial agent, having regard, where relevant, to the activities of the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA);3. to propose, where appropriate, common methodology, case definitions and nature and type of data to be collected for the surveillance on the susceptibility of pathogens resistant to antimicrobial agents and the use of these agents;4. to develop a strategy for access to surveillance information and volume of antimicrobial use;5. to keep matters covered by this Recommendation under review, with a view to its revision and updating, and submit regular reports to the Council on the basis of Member States' reports accompanied, as appropriate, by proposals in order to promote the prudent use of antimicrobial agents in human medicine;6. to strengthen participation of applicant countries within the framework of the Network on epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the Community, to ensure that the problems of antimicrobial resistance are properly taken into account by these States;7. to cooperate with the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other relevant international organisations within the fields covered by this Recommendation.Done at Brussels, 15 November 2001.For the CouncilThe PresidentM. Aelvoet(1) OJ C 195, 13.7.1999, p. 1.(2) OJ C 407, 28.12.1998, p. 7.


               5.2.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 45/89

         P7_TA(2013)0180
   UN principle of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’
   European Parliament recommendation to the Council of 18 April 2013 on the UN principle of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (‘R2P’) (2012/2143(INI))
   (2016/C 045/15)

      The European Parliament,

               —

               having regard to the values, objectives, principles and policies of the European Union as, inter alia, enshrined in articles 2, 3 and 21 of the Treaty on European Union,

               —

               having regard to the Charter of the United Nations,

               —

               having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

               —

               having regard to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 9 December 1948,

               —

               having regard to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC),

               —

               having regard to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution A/RES/63/308 of 7 October 2009 on the responsibility to protect,

               —

               having regard to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1674 of April 2006 and UNSC Resolution 1894 of November 2009 on ‘Protection of civilians in armed conflict’ (1),

               —

               having regard to UNSC Resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008) on women, peace and security, to UNSC Resolution 1888 (2009) on sexual violence against women and children in situations of armed conflict, to UNSC Resolution 1889 (2009) aiming to strengthen the implementation and monitoring of UNSC Resolution 1325 (2000), and to UNSC Resolution 1960 (2010), which created a mechanism for compiling data on, and listing perpetrators of, sexual violence in armed conflict,

               —

               having regard to the UNSC Resolution 1970 of 26 February 2011 on Libya referencing the R2P and authorising several non-coercive measures to prevent the escalation of atrocities, and to the UNSC Resolution 1973 of 17 March 2011 on the situation in Libya, which authorised Member States to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas, and contained for the first time in history an explicit reference to the R2P‘s first pillar, followed by similar references in UNSC Resolution 1975 on Côte d‘Ivoire, UNSC Resolution 1996 on the Sudan and UNSC Resolution 2014 on Yemen,

               —

               having regard to the Paragraphs 138 and 139 of the UN 2005 World Summit Outcome (2),

               —

               having regard to the report ‘The Responsibility to Protect’ (2001) by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), the report ‘A more secure world: our shared responsibility’ (3) (2004) by the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, and the report ‘In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all’ (4) (2005) by the UN Secretary-General,

               —

               having regard to the reports of the UN Secretary-General, specifically those on ‘Implementing the Responsibility to Protect’ of 2009 (5), ‘Early warning, assessment and the responsibility to protect’ of 2010 (6), ‘The role of regional and subregional arrangements in implementing the responsibility to protect’ of 2011 (7) and ‘Responsibility to protect: timely and decisive response’ of 2012 (8),

               —

               having regard to the UN Secretary-General’s Internal Review Panel on UN Action in Sri Lanka of November 2012, enquiring into the failure of the international community to protect civilians from large-scale violations of humanitarian and human rights laws and making recommendations regarding future UN action to respond effectively to similar situations involving mass atrocity crimes,

               —

               having regard to the report by the UN Secretary-General on ‘Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution’ of 25 July 2012,

               —

               having regard to the Brazilian initiative submitted to the UN on 9 September 2011 entitled ‘Responsibility while protecting: elements for the development and promotion of a concept’,

               —

               having regard to the EU Programme for the Prevention of Violent Conflicts (Gothenburg Programme) of 2001 and the annual reports on its implementation,

               —

               having regard to the EU’s priorities for the 65th UN General Assembly of 25 May 2010 (9),

               —

               having regard to the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize, which not only honours the EU’s historical contribution to a peaceful Europe and world but also enhances expectations as to its future engagement for a more peaceful world order based on the rules of international law,

               —

               having regard to the European Consensus on Development (10) and the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid (11),

               —

               having regard to its recommendations to the Council, of 8 June 2011 on the 66th session of the UNGA (12) and of 13 June 2012 on the 67th session of the UNGA (13),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2012 on the 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council (14),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 11 May 2011 on ‘the EU as a global actor: its role in multilateral organisations’ (15),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 19 February 2009 on the European Security Strategy and ESDP (16),

               —

               having regard to Rules 121(3) and 97 of its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A7-0130/2013),

               A.

               whereas the UN 2005 World Summit Outcome provides, for the first time, a common definition of the principle of R2P; whereas the principle of R2P, embedded in paragraphs 138 and 139 of the UN 2005 World Summit Outcome, represents an important step forward towards a more peaceful world by establishing the obligation of states to protect their populations against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, as well as the obligation of the international community to help states assume this responsibility and to react should they fail to protect their citizens against these four specified crimes and violations;

               B.

               whereas the principle of R2P is based on three pillars, namely: (i) the state bears the primary responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing; (ii) the international community must assist states in fulfilling their protection obligations; (iii) when a state manifestly fails to protect its population or is in fact a perpetrator of these crimes, the international community has a responsibility to take collective action;

               C.

               whereas, according to the work done on R2P preceding the agreement on the World Summit Outcome Document in 2005 and specifically in the 2001 report on R2P of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), the principle of R2P has been further defined to encompass the components of the responsibility to prevent (R2prevent), the responsibility to react (R2react) and the responsibility to rebuild (R2rebuild), as introduced in the ICISS report;

               D.

               whereas the development of the concept of R2P is welcome since it clarifies and strengthens the existing obligations of states to ensure the protection of civilians; whereas this concept, born from the international community’s failures in Rwanda in 1994, is critical for the survival of the community of nations;

               E.

               whereas in the cases in question legitimate force should only ever be used in a prudent, proportionate and limited manner;

               F.

               whereas the development of the principle of R2P is an important step towards anticipating, preventing and responding to genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and upholding fundamental principles of international law, in particular international humanitarian, refugee and human rights law; whereas the principles should be applied as consistently and uniformly as possible, to which effect it is crucially important that early warning and assessment should be conducted fairly, prudently and professionally and that the use of force should remain the measure of last resort;

               G.

               whereas more than a decade after the emergence of the concept of R2P and eight years after its endorsement by the international community at the UN World Summit in 2005, recent events have again brought to the fore the importance and the challenges of ensuring timely and decisive responses to the four core crimes covered by the concept, as well as the need to further operationalise the principle in order to implement it effectively and prevent mass atrocities;

               H.

               whereas the development of the principle of R2P — particularly its prevention component — can advance global efforts towards a more peaceful world. since many mass atrocity crimes occur during periods of violent conflict and this makes it necessary to create effective capacities for structural and operational conflict prevention, thus minimising the need for the use of force as the last resort;

               I.

               whereas using all tools available under Chapters VI, VII and VIII of the Charter, ranging from non-coercive responses to collective action, is of fundamental importance for the further development and the legitimacy of the principle of R2P;

               J.

               whereas the most effective form of preventing conflict, violence and human suffering is to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, enforcement of the rule of law, good governance, human security, economic development, poverty eradication, inclusiveness, socio-economic rights, gender equality, and democratic values and practices, as well as the reduction of economic inequalities;

               K.

               whereas the military intervention of 2011 in Libya pointed up the need to clarify the role of regional and subregional organisations when applying R2P; whereas such organisations can be both legitimisers and operational agents for the implementation of R2P, but often lack capacities and resources;

               L.

               whereas human rights are of the utmost importance in international relations;

               M.

               whereas there is a need for a shift in the manner in which we approach R2P, which should involve integrating it into all our models of development cooperation, aid and crisis management, as well as building on programmes that already embrace R2P;

               N.

               whereas a more consistent implementation of R2P’s prevention component (R2prevent), including mediation measures and preventive diplomacy at an early stage, could prevent or reduce the potential for conflicts and violence and help avoid their escalation, thus potentially helping prevent international intervention under R2P’s reaction component (R2react); whereas two-track diplomacy is an important instrument in preventive diplomacy which builds upon the human dimension of reconciliation efforts;

               O.

               whereas R2P is primarily a preventive doctrine and military intervention should be the last resort in R2P situations; whereas R2P, wherever possible, is to be carried out first and foremost through diplomatic and long-term developmental activities that focus on capacity-building in the fields of human rights, good governance, the rule of law, the reduction of poverty and emphasis on education and health, conflict prevention through education and the expansion of trade, effective arms control and prevention of illicit arms trading, and the strengthening of early warning systems; whereas, furthermore, there are many non-military coercive alternatives, such as preventive diplomacy, sanctions, accountability mechanisms and mediation; whereas the EU must continue to play a leadership role in the field of conflict prevention;

               P.

               whereas cooperation with regional organisations is an important dimension of R2P work; whereas it is therefore necessary to call for the reinforcement of regional capacities in terms of prevention and the identification of effective policies for preventing the above-mentioned four crimes; whereas the forthcoming EU-Africa summit in 2014 will provide a good opportunity to express our support for AU leadership and promote African ownership of R2P;

               Q.

               whereas the UN Guidelines for Effective Mediation identify the dilemma that arrest warrants issued by the ICC, sanctions regimes and national and international counter-terrorism policies also affect the manner in which some conflict parties may be engaged in a mediation process; whereas the definition in international law of crimes which demand an immediate reaction by the international community has made considerable progress since the establishment of the ICC, although an independent assessment mechanism of when these definitions are met is still, crucially, missing; whereas the implementation of the Rome Statute would enhance the efficiency of the ICC regime; whereas the Rome Statute has not been ratified by all states of the international community;

               R.

               whereas the ICC and R2P are interlinked, since both aim to prevent genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; whereas, on the one hand, R2P bolsters the ICC’s mission to fight impunity by advocating that states honour their judicial responsibility, while, on the other hand, it also reinforces the complementarity principle of the ICC, under which the main responsibility to prosecute lies with states;

               S.

               whereas the ICC plays a fundamental role not only in crime prevention but also in the reconstruction of countries and in mediation processes;

               T.

               whereas the EU has always been an active promoter of R2P on the international stage; whereas it needs to strengthen its role as a global political actor, upholding human rights and humanitarian law and also reflecting that political support in its own policies;

               U.

               whereas EU Member States have also endorsed the R2P principle; whereas only a few of them have incorporated the concept into their national texts;

               V.

               whereas recent experiences relating to specific crises such as those in Sri Lanka, Côte d’Ivoire, Libya and Syria have demonstrated the persistent challenges involved in arriving at a common understanding of how to ensure the timely and effective implementation of the R2P principle, while also generating the common political will and effective capacity to prevent or stop genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, whether committed by national and local authorities or non-state actors, and the consequent multiple civilian casualties;

               W.

               whereas in situations where R2P is applied it is of the utmost importance to maintain the distinction of mandates between military and humanitarian actors, in order to safeguard the perception of the neutrality and impartiality of all humanitarian actors and avoid putting at risk the effective delivery of aid and of medical or any other kind of assistance, access to beneficiaries, or the personal safety of field-based humanitarian personnel;

               X.

               whereas the proposal initiated by Brazil on ‘Responsibility while Protecting’ is a welcome contribution to the necessary development of the criteria to be followed when implementing an R2P mandate, including the proportionality of the scope and duration of any intervention, a thorough balance of consequences, ex ante clarity of the political objectives, and transparency in the intervention’s reasoning; whereas the monitoring and review mechanisms of adopted mandates should be strengthened, including through the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advisors on the Prevention of Genocide and on R2P, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and should be conducted ‘fairly, prudently and professionally, without political interference or double standards’ (17);

               Y.

               whereas the definition in international law of crimes which demand an immediate reaction by the international community has made considerable progress since the creation of the ICC, although independent assessment mechanisms for when those definitions should apply are still, crucially, missing;

               Z.

               whereas the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights plays an important role in awareness-raising on ongoing cases of mass atrocity crimes; whereas the UN Human Rights Council is playing an increasingly important role in implementing R2P, including by authorising fact-finding missions and commissions of inquiry to gather and assess information relating to the four specified crimes and violations, and by its increasing readiness to refer to R2P in crisis situations such as in Libya and Syria;

               AA.

               whereas a narrow but deep approach to implementing R2P should restrict its application to the four mass atrocity crimes and violations specified;

               AB.

               whereas the principle of R2P should not be applied in the context of humanitarian emergencies and natural disasters; whereas humanitarian action should not be used as an excuse for political action, and whereas humanitarian space needs to be respected by all actors involved;

               AC.

               whereas comprehensive assistance has to be offered for post-conflict situations; whereas more efforts are needed to affirm accountability for serious violations of human rights, as well as international humanitarian law and the fight against impunity;

               1.

               Addresses the following recommendations to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission (HR/VP), the EEAS, the Commission, the Member States and the Council:

                           (a)

                           to reconfirm the EU’s commitment to R2P by adopting an interinstitutional ‘Consensus on R2P’, including a common understanding of the implications of R2P for the EU’s external action and the role its actions and instruments can play in situations of concern, to be prepared jointly by the Council, the EEAS, the Commission and Parliament having also taken into account the views of stakeholders, including those of civil society actors and NGOs;

                           (b)

                           to include a chapter in the HR/VP’s annual report to Parliament on the CFSP concerning the EU’s actions on conflict prevention and mitigation in applying the R2P principle; to analyse in this chapter the usefulness of the relevant instruments and administrative structures in implementing R2P, including identifying necessary revisions; to prepare this chapter in cooperation with the EU Special Representative for Human Rights and taking account of the various positions adopted by Parliament on specific issues relating to conflict prevention or human rights protection; and to debate the findings with Parliament;

                           (c)

                           to integrate the R2P principle in the EU’s development assistance; to further professionalise and strengthen the Union’s preventive diplomacy, mediation, crisis prevention and response capacities, with special reference to information gathering and exchange as well as early warning systems; to improve the coordination between the various Commission, Council and EEAS structures regarding all aspects of R2P, and to inform Parliament on a regular basis of the initiatives taken in support of R2P;

                           (d)

                           to ensure sufficient policy planning, operational concepts and capability development goals within the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) to enable the Union to fully implement R2P in close international cooperation within the UN and regional organisations;

                           (e)

                           to further develop the EU’s conflict prevention and mitigation capacities, including the standby capacities of legal experts, police officers and regional analysts and the creation of an autonomous European Institute of Peace intended to provide the EU with advice on and capacities for mediation, two-track diplomacy and exchange of best practices on peace and de-escalation; to strengthen the preventive elements of the EU’s external instruments, in particular of the Instrument for Stability;

                           (f)

                           to strengthen linkages between early warning, policy planning and high-level decision-making in the EEAS and the Council;

                           (g)

                           to include a systematic assessment of the risk factors of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity in regional and country strategy papers, and to include their prevention in dialogues with third countries that are at risk of those crimes and violations;

                           (h)

                           to develop cooperation with and training of the staff of the EU delegations and Member States’ embassies, as well as of civilian and military missions, in the fields of international human rights, humanitarian law and criminal law, including their capacity to detect potential situations involving the four specified crimes and violations, inter alia by regular exchanges with local civil society; to ensure that EU Special Representatives uphold R2P whenever necessary and broaden the mandate of the EU Special Representative on Human Rights to include R2P issues; to identify an EU Focal Point for R2P in the EEAS in the context of the existing structures and resources, to be tasked notably with raising awareness of the implications of R2P and ensuring timely information flows between all concerned actors on situations of concern, while also encouraging the establishment of national focal points for R2P in the Member States; to further professionalise and strengthen preventive diplomacy and mediation;

                           (i)

                           to launch and promote an internal debate within the EU on the reform of the UN Security Council, which is the only internationally legitimate body that can sanction R2P interventions without the consent of the target state;

                           (j)

                           to involve and train representatives of civil society and NGOs, who could play a role in informal or ‘track II’ diplomacy with a view to promoting exchanges of good practice in this field;

                           (k)

                           to strengthen cooperation with regional and subregional organisations, including by improving their prevention, capacity-building and response measures in relation to R2P;

                           (l)

                           to ensure speedy ratification by all EU Member States of the amendments to the ICC Statutes defining the crime of aggression, since the Court can play a central role in the prevention of mass atrocity crimes, as well as in efforts to ensure accountability;

                           (m)

                           to insist on respect for the ICC clause in agreements with third countries. and to consider reviewing agreement with countries failing to comply with ICC arrest warrants;

                           (n)

                           to espouse a dual track-approach, i.e. promoting the universal acceptance of R2P while at the same time encouraging states to support and assist the ICC;

               2.

               Encourages the HR/VP and the Council:

                           (a)

                           to contribute actively to the debate on the R2P principle, building on existing international human rights law and the Geneva Conventions with a view to strengthening the international community’s focus on R2P’s prevention component and the universal application of non-coercive tools, and to develop a concrete action plan to that end which also includes considerations on the responsibility/need to rebuild;

                           (b)

                           to promote the R2P principle at the UN, and to work towards ensuring its universality, as an essential part of a collective security model based on multilateralism and the primacy of the UN and linked to the strengthening of the ICC; to recall that R2P also implies the responsibility to fight impunity;

                           (c)

                           to support the efforts of the UN Secretary-General to reinvigorate and enhance the understanding of the implications of the R2P principle, and to cooperate with other UN members who wish to improve the capacities of the international community to prevent and respond to mass atrocity crimes covered by the R2P principle;

                           (d)

                           to call on the UNSC to take up the Brazilian proposal ‘Responsibility while Protecting’ in order to ensure the most efficient application of the R2P principle that causes the least harm possible, and contribute to the necessary development of the criteria to be followed when acting to implement in particular the third pillar of R2P, including the proportionality of the scope and duration of any intervention, a thorough balance of consequences, ex ante clarity of the political objectives and transparency in the intervention’s reasoning; given that the development of such criteria may provide guarantees which could persuade countries currently reticent about the R2P doctrine of its applicability, to strengthen the monitoring and review mechanisms of adopted mandates, including through the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advisors on the Prevention of Genocide and on R2P, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and to conduct these mechanisms ‘fairly, prudently and professionally, without political interference or double standards’ (18);

                           (e)

                           to draw lessons, in cooperation with the Member States and our international partners, from the experience of R2P in Libya in 2011 and from the current inability to take action in Syria;

                           (f)

                           to propose to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council the adoption of a voluntary code of conduct which would limit the use of the right of veto in cases of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing or crimes against humanity;

                           (g)

                           to engage with the EU’s regional partners in order to spell out more clearly the role of regional and subregional organisations in applying R2P;

                           (h)

                           to work towards establishing R2P as a new norm of international law, within the scope agreed to by the UN’s member states at the 2005 World Summit;

                           (i)

                           to advise the Security Council that enshrining R2P, which is now an emerging standard, as a standard of international law would not limit its decision-making capacity;

                           (j)

                           to help strengthen the framework and capacities at UN level for mediation, two-track diplomacy, exchange of best practice on the peaceful resolution of emerging conflicts, and de-escalation and early warning systems, such as those of the Mediation Support Unit of the Department of Political Affairs; to strengthen the Office of the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Advisor on the Responsibility to Protect; to engage the Human Rights Council in the debate on R2P;

                           (k)

                           to ensure, in cooperation with the EU Member States having a seat on the UN Security Council and all international partners, the full consistency of possible further developments of the R2P concept with international humanitarian law (IHL), and to advocate and monitor full compliance with IHL in future cases where R2P is applied;

                           (l)

                           to address the issue of a single EU seat on the UN Security Council and of a communalised budget for CFSP missions under UN mandate;

                           (m)

                           to integrate women, including women leaders and women’s groups much more in all conflict prevention and mitigation, as well as in resolution efforts in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 1325 and 1820;

                           (n)

                           to work with the UN towards the establishment of a clear link between the implementation of R2P and the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes covered by this concept;

               3.

               Calls on the HR/VP:

                           (a)

                           to present to the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs a concrete plan of action within six months of the adoption of the present Recommendation, on the follow-up of the Parliament’s proposals, notably outlining the steps towards achieving a ‘Consensus on R2P’;

               4.

               Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council and, for information, to the Commission, the HR/VP, the EEAS and the Member States.

      (1)  S/RES/1674.

      (2)  A/RES/60/1.

      (3)  http://www.un.org/secureworld/report3.pdf

      (4)  A/59/2005.

      (5)  A/63/677.

      (6)  A/64/864.

      (7)  A/65/877-S/2011/393.

      (8)  A/66/874/-S/2012/578.

      (9)  10170/2010.

      (10)  OJ C 46, 24.2.2006, p. 1.

      (11)  OJ C 25, 30.1.2008, p. 1.

      (12)  OJ C 380 E, 11.12.2012, p. 140.

      (13)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0240.

      (14)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0058.

      (15)  OJ C 377 E, 7.12.2012, p. 66.

      (16)  OJ C 76 E, 25.3.2010, p. 61.

      (17)  Article 51, ‘Responsibility to protect: timely and decisive response’, Report of the UN Secretary-General, 25 July 2012 (A/66/874-S/2012/578).

      (18)  Article 51, ‘Responsibility to protect: timely and decisive response’, Report of the UN Secretary-General, 25 July 2012 (A/66/874-S/2012/578).