title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2018/1149 of 10 August 2018 on non-binding guidelines for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas and other supply chain risks under Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council

text:
               17.8.2018

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 208/94

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2018/1149
      of 10 August 2018
      on non-binding guidelines for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas and other supply chain risks under Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council
      THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
      Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  Natural mineral resources hold great potential for development but can, in conflict-affected or high-risk areas, be a cause of dispute where their revenues fuel the outbreak or continuation of violent conflict, undermining endeavours towards development, good governance and the rule of law. In those areas, breaking the nexus between conflict and illegal exploitation of minerals is a critical element in guaranteeing peace, development and stability.

                  (2)

                  To address such concerns, Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) lays down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas; which will apply from 1 January 2021 (hereinafter the ‘Regulation’).

                  (3)

                  Conflict-affected and high-risk areas for the purposes of that Regulation are defined as areas in a state of armed conflict or fragile post-conflict as well as areas witnessing weak or non-existent governance and security, such as failed states, and widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses.

                  (4)

                  Article 14(1) of that Regulation sets out that in order to create clarity and certainty for and consistency among the practices of economic operators, in particular SMEs, the Commission, in consultation with the European External Action Service and the OECD, is to prepare non-binding guidelines for economic operators, explaining how best to apply the criteria for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas (hereinafter the ‘Guidelines’).

                  (5)

                  That Article also sets out that these Guidelines are to be based on the definition of conflict-affected and high-risk areas set out in the Regulation and are to take into account the OECD Due Diligence Guidance in this field, including other supply chain risks triggering red flags as defined in the relevant supplements to that Guidance.

                  (6)

                  These Guidelines, to be effective, should set out the general concept of due diligence in supply chains of minerals and metals associated with conflict-affected and high-risk areas and the steps companies should take to identify and address the risks in this regard relating to the sourcing of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold.

                  (7)

                  It should be recalled that the Regulation's requirements for Union importers do not only relate to metals and minerals originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, but also to associated risks along the upstream chain with regard to, e.g. trading, handling and exporting.

                  (8)

                  These Guidelines should also explain the key principles of the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas for the specific purpose of implementing the Regulation, while the definition and explanation of such areas are without prejudice to the Union's position on what may constitute conflict-affected and high-risk areas outside the context of that Regulation.

                  (9)

                  Reference to relevant open-source information that economic operators can use in identifying conflict-affected and high-risk areas should be a central part of these Guidelines, while recalling that relevant sources are updated with varying periodicity and should be complemented with other sources as appropriate.

                  (10)

                  Other supply chain risks triggering red flags addressed by these Guidelines should relate to location, suppliers and unusual circumstances of trading operations and should be based on the OECD's work in this field.

                  (11)

                  Article 14(2) of the Regulation sets out that the Commission is to call on external expertise that will provide an indicative, non-exhaustive, regularly updated list of conflict-affected and high-risk areas. That forthcoming list is to be based on the external experts' analysis of these Guidelines and other existing information from, inter alia, academics and supply chain due diligence schemes.

                  (12)

                  These Guidelines are non-binding and Union importers maintain their responsibility to comply with the due diligence obligations under the Regulation, while the services of the Commission ensure that these Guidelines remain relevant over time,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

                  1.

                  Union importers with obligations under Regulation (EU) 2017/821 should follow the non-binding guidelines provided in the Annex to this Recommendation. Following these Guidelines will help them to identify conflict-affected and high-risk areas and red flags adequately so as to properly meet the requirements of that Regulation when they apply from 1 January 2021. The guidelines can be followed also by other entities applying due diligence to their mineral supply chain.

                  2.

                  This Recommendation will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

         Done at Brussels, 10 August 2018.

               For the Commission

            Cecilia MALMSTRÖM

               Member of the Commission

         (1)  Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (OJ L 130, 19.5.2017, p. 1).

         ANNEX
         1.   OBJECTIVE OF THESE GUIDELINES

         Regulation (EU) 2017/821 (hereinafter ‘the Regulation’) entered into force on 8 June 2017 and applies to Union importers (1) (including but not limited to smelters and refiners) as from 1 January 2021. As set out in its first Article, the Regulation is designed to provide transparency and certainty as regards the sourcing practices of Union importers sourcing from conflict-affected and high-risk areas.
         According to Article 14(1) of the Regulation, the European Commission is tasked with the preparation of non-binding guidelines in the form of a handbook for economic operators, explaining how best to apply the criteria for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas. This Article also sets out that the guidelines are to take into account the OECD Due Diligence Guidance (2) in this field, including other supply chain risks triggering the so-called ‘red flags’, as defined in the relevant supplements to that Guidance.
         In these guidelines,

                     —

                     SECTION 2 sets out the general concept of due diligence in supply chains of minerals originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas and the steps companies should take to identify and address the risks associated with sourcing of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold.

                     —

                     SECTION 3 explains the key elements of the definition of conflict-affected and high-risk areas for the purposes of the Regulation.

                     —

                     SECTION 4 lists open source information to help companies identify conflict-affected and high-risk areas and other risks.

                     —

                     SECTION 5 provides information on other indicators of potential risks (or ‘red flags’) in the mineral supply chain in relation to location, suppliers, and unusual circumstances of trading operations.

               These guidelines are designed to help EU importers carry out their supply chain due diligence. They are without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2017/821 and are not legally binding.
         Furthermore, it should be noted that pursuant to Article 14(2) of the Regulation, the European Commission will (subsequently) call upon external expertise that will provide an indicative, non-exhaustive, regularly updated list of conflict-affected and high-risk areas. That list will be based on the external experts' analysis of these guidelines and existing information from, inter alia, governments, international organisations, academics and supply chain due diligence schemes.
         2.   DUE DILIGENCE IN THE MINERAL SUPPLY CHAIN — GENERAL CONCEPT AND STEPS

         2.1.   The concept of risk-based due diligence

         In conflict-affected and high-risk areas, companies involved in mining, processing and trade in minerals have the potential to generate income, growth and prosperity, sustain livelihoods and foster local development. In such situations, companies may also be at risk of contributing to or being associated with significant adverse impacts associated with their activities or sourcing decisions, including armed conflict and serious human rights abuses. In this perspective, to ensure that companies do not intentionally or unintentionally contribute to or become (or continue to be) associated with these adverse impacts, they should conduct risk-based due diligence as part of an on-going, proactive and reactive process firmly integrated into their management system.
         Generally, risk-based due diligence refers to the steps companies should take to identify and address actual or potential risks in their mineral supply chain in order to prevent or mitigate any contribution to adverse impacts related to the extraction, production, trading, processing, handling and export of minerals associated with conflict-affected and high-risk areas. Risks are defined in relation to the potentially adverse impacts of a given company's operations, which result from the company's own activities or which may be directly linked to operations, products or services by its business relationships with third parties, including suppliers and other entities in the supply chain. Adverse impacts may include harm to people (i.e. external impacts), reputational damage or legal liability for the company (i.e. internal impacts), or both.
         Companies may face risks in their mineral supply chains because the circumstances of mineral extraction, production, trading, handling or export by their very nature carry a higher risk of having significant adverse impacts, such as financing conflict or fuelling, facilitating or exacerbating conditions of conflict as outlined in Annex II of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance and its supplements.
         Because of these risks, companies should make good faith efforts to identify and assess location, supplier or circumstantial-related risks and put in place due diligence measures adapted to the specific requirements of such risks. Due diligence can also help companies ensure they observe international law and comply with domestic laws, including those governing illicit trade in mineral resources as well as UN sanctions and EU Decisions based on the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular restrictive measures pursuant to Article 215 TFEU.
         The overall objective of the Regulation, which is based on the principles set forth in the OECD Guidance, is to enable the development of secure, transparent and verifiable supply chains of minerals and to ensure, facilitate and promote the responsible importation into the EU of minerals and metals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas without contributing to armed conflict and associated human rights abuses, thereby contributing to economic development and the livelihood of local communities.
         2.2.   Due diligence — five-step framework

         Risk-based due diligence as recommended by the OECD Due Diligence Guidance is structured around the following five steps, all of which are also enshrined in the Regulation.
         Companies along the supply chain should:

                     —

                        Establish a strong management system and adopt and clearly communicate to suppliers and the public their policy for the minerals and metals potentially originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. This includes the identification of the factual circumstances involved in the extraction, transport, handling, trading, processing, smelting, refining, and alloying, manufacturing, or selling of products that contain minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. (Article 4 of the Regulation)

                     —

                        Identify and assess any actual or potential risks in the supply chain (3). (Article 5(1)(a) of the Regulation)

                     —

                        Design and implement a strategy to respond to the identified risks in order to prevent or mitigate them by adopting and implementing a risk management plan. This may result in deciding to continue trade throughout the course of the risk mitigation efforts, temporarily suspend trade while pursuing ongoing risk mitigation, or disengage with a supplier either after failed attempts at mitigation or if the supplier is committing serious human rights abuses (e.g. worst forms of child labour, forced labour, and torture) or providing direct or indirect support to non-state armed groups. (Article 5(1)(b) of the Regulation)

                     —

                        Carry out or obtain an independent third-party audit of the company's activities, processes and systems used to implement supply chain due diligence at identified points in the supply chain, in particular regarding the due diligence practices of smelters and refiners. (Article 6 of the Regulation)

                     —

                        Publicly report on supply chain due diligence policies and practices in order to generate public confidence in the measures companies are taking. (Article 7 of the Regulation).

               3.   UNDERSTANDING THE DEFINITION OF CONFLICT-AFFECTED AND HIGH-RISK AREAS

         The definition of conflict-affected and high-risk areas applied in the Regulation is in line with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance as to what characterises such areas and is without prejudice to the EU's position on what may constitute conflict-affected and high-risk areas outside the context of the Regulation. It is solely provided for the purpose of supply chain due diligence with regard to the metals and minerals in scope of the Regulation and it is designed to be practical, thorough and easily understood by companies.
         Definition of conflict-affected and high-risk areas in the Regulation (Article 2(f)):

            ‘Areas in a state of armed conflict or fragile post-conflict as well as areas witnessing weak or non-existing governance and security, such as failed states, and widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses.’

         This definition follows some key principles set out in international law, including ‘state of armed conflict’, ‘fragile post-conflict’ and ‘failed states’. These principles are further illustrated and explained below to facilitate their practical understanding as part of the responsible supply chain management by companies.
         Moreover, these key principles should allow for easy matching with open source information on the situation on the ground in conflict-affected and high-risk areas, and assist companies with the broader identification of risks in their supply chain and the potential impact of their operations (cf. section 4).
         It should be recalled that the supply chain due diligence foreseen in the Regulation — as well as in the OECD Due Dilignce Guidance — is tied to identifying and assessing the risks of adverse impacts of certain business operations and relationships relating to metals and minerals originating in or being transported through conflict-affected and high-risk areas (which can be sub-national). Country-related information can provide contextual information to identify the general level of diligence needed.

                     Key element of the definition

                     Explanation

                     State of armed conflict

                        Presence of armed conflict, widespread violence or other risks of harm to people as decribed under international humanitarian law, which regulates the conduct of armed conflict by combatants. Armed conflict may take a variety of forms, such as a conflict of international or non-international character, which may involve two or more states, or may consist of wars of liberation, or insurgencies, civil wars, etc.
                     Specific guidance on the ‘state of armed conflict’ is provided in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and includes all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more Parties, even if the state of war is not recognised by one of them; all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance. Pursuant to Protocol II (1977) additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, they do not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts of a similar nature.

                     Fragile post-conflict areas
                     Areas witnessing weak or non-existent governance and security, such as failed states, and widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses.

                        Fragile post-conflict areas are areas witnessing cessation of active hostilities and that are in a state of fragility, meaning that the region or state has a weak capacity to carry out basic governance functions and lacks the ability to develop mutually constructive relations within society due to the prior conflictual state. Such areas are more vulnerable to internal or external shocks such as economic crises or natural disasters. In such cases, as in cases covered by the subsequent paragraph of the definition (i.e. areas witnessing weak or non-existing governance and security), economic operators need to ascertain that there is either institutional weakness or lack of governance and widespread and systematic violations of international law and human rights abuses in order to make a determination that the area is a conflict-affected and high-risk area. Thus, the condition of the violations of international law is a cumulative one to the conditions of fragile post-conflict areas and areas witnessing weak or non-existing governance and security. On the latter, the absence of a formal mining licensing procedure would for instance constitute evidence of lack of governance.

                     Failed states

                     A ‘failed state’ is an illustration of a situation of extreme institutional weakness. A failed state involves an implosion of structures of power and authority, a collapse of law and order and the absence of institutions capable of representing the state.

               4.   OPEN SOURCE INFORMATION TO IDENTIFY CONFLICT-AFFECTED AND HIGH-RISK AREAS

         This section includes an indicative, non-exhaustive list of relevant open-source information to help companies identify conflict-affected and high-risk areas. By understanding the national and regional context as well as the potential risks involved in areas they operate in or source from, companies will be in a position to better tailor their due diligence efforts accordingly. Such more general country specific information can also be beneficial in assessing the plausibility of allegations of misconduct.
         The listed open-source information is grouped according to the key elements set out in the definition of conflict-affected and high-risk areas (cf. section 3):

                     —

                     CONFLICT — allowing for the assessment of whether an area is in a ‘state of armed conflict’ or is a ‘fragile post-conflict’ area.

                     —

                     GOVERNANCE — allowing for the assessment of the extent to which areas witness weak or non-existent governance and security.

                     —

                     HUMAN RIGHTS — allowing for the assessment of whether an area is affected by widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses (4).

               In addition, the list provided in section 4.2 includes information sources on mineral resources, for context.
         4.1.   How to best use the information sources

         The listed information sources are of a non-commercial nature, i.e. not requiring subscription fees or any financial contribution. Companies should consider whether that sources provide updated information while using them. The Regulation sets out that in addition to these guidelines, the European Commission is to call upon external expertise that will provide an indicative, non-exhaustive, regularly updated list of conflict-affected and high-risk areas. The European Commission's services will together with such external expertise ensure to update as appropriate the list of information sources to ensure its continued relevance.
         Additional sources of a more general nature (some of which are not explicitly mentioned in the list below) that are useful to consult include geological surveys with information on mineral resources (British and U.S. Geological Surveys), the European Commission's Raw Material Information System, the websites of leading organisations on this issue such as the U.S. State Department Country Reports (Governance and Human Rights), reports published by the different UN agencies (including the Human Rights Council, UNHCR, OHCHR, UNICEF, UNDP, ILO, and IOM) and other relevant civil society organisations, for instance Amnesty International, Global Witness, Human Rights Watch and IMPACT (the former Partnership Africa Canada). The websites of other organisations and information sources such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, Natural Resource Governance Index, Global Peace Index, etc. may also be consulted by companies for more topical, news-based information.
         It would also be useful to consult national or regional sources. Although sometimes more difficult to access, national/regional sources allow for a more in-depth review of the situation in a specific area compared with aggregate country information.
         Companies consulting these sources can proceed as follows:

                     1.

                     On the basis of the supply chain information retained in their management system (step 1 of the five-step framework, cf. section 2), companies should first seek to identify their geographical areas of mineral sourcing, trading, handling and transportation with a view to understanding the context in which the mining and trading activities take place and identify the related risks.

                     2.

                     To this end, companies can consult the open sources (i.e. analytical sources, maps/tables and news items) listed below covering the three key elements of the definition of conflicted-affected and high-risk areas (i.e. conflict, governance and human rights) to understand the political and security context, and identify and assess the potential risks of adverse impacts of their supply chain against their supply chain policy which are to be consistent with Annex II of the OECD Guidance, and the ‘red flags’ set out in its supplements.

                     3.

                     In case the sources listed below provide contradictory or inconclusive information, companies should exercise caution before dismissing an area from enhanced due diligence procedures. It should be stressed again that the responsibility of due diligence is tied to identifying and addressing actual or potential risks in order to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts of operations in particular sourcing, trade and business relationships as well as other circumstances associated with companies' activities and not only to the country or area of origin of the mineral.

                     4.

                     The sources listed below are updated with varying periodicity and while being relevant may not always be fully accurate. They should therefore be used in combination and with the addition of complementary sources as appropriate. Once the abovementioned indicative, non-exhaustive, regularly updated list of conflict-affected and high-risk areas to be provided by external expertise is available, it will provide an addition source of information.

               4.2.   List of open information sources

                     Issue for assessment

                     Coverage

                     Open sources

                     Content of the sources

                     CONFLICT

                     Global

                     Analytical sources

                     Heidelberg Conflict Barometer
                     http://www.hiik.de/?lang=en/

                     Analysis of the most recent global conflict events in the form of texts and graphics; separate regional and individual country chapters.

                     Geneva Academy Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts
                     http://www.rulac.org/

                     Database and analysis reporting on the implementation of international law in armed conflicts around the world (global coverage and brief overviews).

                     Assessment Capacities Project — Global Emergency Overview
                     https://www.acaps.org/countries/

                     World map and country specific analysis providing overview and analysis of countries in ‘situation of concern’, ‘humanitarian crisis’, and ‘severe humanitarian crisis’.

                     Maps or tables

                     Uppsala Conflict Data Programme — Georeferenced Event Dataset
                     http://www.ucdp.uu.se/ged/

                     Interactive map of events of organised violence based on news sources; including fatalities, type of violence (state-based, non-state, one-sided), the user can zoom to a level of unique events.

                     CrisisWatch
                     http://www.crisisgroup.org

                     State of play in most significant global situations of conflict/potential conflict; interactive map and database allowing to assess the situation in selected country cases 2003-2018.

                     Global Peace Index
                     http://www.visionofhumanity.org

                     Interactive map that measures global peace according to qualitative and quantitative indicators (security officers and police, political instability, organised conflict, armed services personnel, etc.).

                     Major Episodes of Political Violence
                     http://www.systemicpeace.org

                     Maps and tables listing e.g. episodes of armed conflict (including casualties) in the world from 1946-2017.

                     Regional

                     Armed Conflict Location and Event Data
                     http://www.acleddata.com/

                     Conflict trend reports and analysis including monthly updates on political violence in Africa, Middle East and Asia based on real-time data, and analysing current and historical dynamics in specific states.

                     International Peace Information Service — Conflict Mapping
                     http://ipisresearch.be/

                     Maps of Democratic Republic of Congo (conflict/conflict minerals), Central African Republic, Sudan-South Sudan (contested areas, incidents, natural resources, education, community violence, intrastate and interstate violence); analysis of maps is provided.

                     International Tin Association
                     https://www.internationaltin.org/
                     http://www.itsci.org/

                     Tin Supply Chain Initiative (iTSCi) provides assessment reports of the security situation of mines sites in Rwanda, Eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi and Uganda.

                     Mining Conflicts in Latin America
                     http://ejatlas.org/featured/mining-latam

                     The environmental justice atlas documents and catalogues social conflict around environmental issues for contextual information.

                     GOVER-NANCE

                     Global

                     Worldwide Governance Indicators
                     http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi

                     Dataset of updated aggregate and individual governance indicators for specific countries, six dimensions of governance; country data reports summarise indicators per country.

                     Fragile States Index
                     http://ffp.statesindex.org

                     Index focusing on indicators of risk, based on news articles and reports.

                     Corruption Perception Index
                     http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview

                     Index of the perceived corruption in countries.

                     National Resource Governance Institute
                     https://resourcegovernance.org/

                     Country specific information and comparative analysis on issues relating to governance of natural resources.

                     HUMAN RIGHTS

                     Global

                     United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSC)
                     http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions

                     UNSC Resolutions provide a useful description of the political and security situation in countries of concern on an annual basis.

                     United Nations Human Rights Council
                     http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/AboutCouncil.aspx

                     Universal, periodic reviews.

                     Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
                     http://www.ohchr.org/EN/pages/home.aspx

                     Country specific information on human rights issues.

                     United Nations Development Programme — International Human Development Indicators — Country Profiles
                     http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries

                     Annual country reports of country-specific human rights practices, global coverage.

                     Amnesty International
                     https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/

                     Global Witness
                     https://www.globalwitness.org/en-gb/

                     Human Rights Watch
                     https://www.hrw.org/

                     Mines and Communities
                     http://www.minesandcommunities.org/

                     News articles and analyses of global mining and its impacts; classified by theme, country, company, minerals.

                     MINERAL RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION

                     Global

                     British Geological Survey
                     https://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/statistics/worldStatistics.html

                     Country reports on international minerals statistics and information.

                     U.S. Geological Survey
                     http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/country/

                     Country reports on international minerals statistics and information.

                     EU Raw Materials Information System
                     http://rmis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

                     Information on production, trade flows and policy relating to raw materials.

               In addition to the abovementioned open information sources, it is expected that the OECD will provide additional information of relevance to identify conflict-affected and high-risk areas (http://www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/mining.htm). Risks related to humanitarian crises and disasters can also provide contextual information and point to areas where armed conflicts may emerge. In this regard, INFORM is a useful source (a collaborative project between the Inter-Agency Standing Committee and the European Commission; http://www.inform-index.org). Another useful tool in this regard is the Global Conflict Risk index (an open-source evidence base to support decision-making on long-term conflict risks developed by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission; http://conflictrisk.jrc.ec.europa.eu/).
         Moreover, the European Commission will make available support to SME's in their efforts to put in place and implement policies on responsible sourcing of minerals through the COSME programme, which is expected to partly relate to the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas under Regulation (EU) 2017/821.
         5.   RISK ASSESSMENT OF MINERAL SUPPLY CHAINS — ‘RED FLAGS’ FOR ENHANCED DUE DILIGENCE

         5.1.   Introduction to red flags and general considerations

         The due diligence process set out by the Regulation and the OECD Due Diligence Guidance is not limited to the identification and mitigation of risks in relation to the origin and transportation of minerals in conflict-affected and high-risk areas. Indeed, companies are to consider and provide information on the risks pursuant to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance in relation to the trading, handling and exporting of minerals along the upstream supply chain, and unusual circumstances.
         To this end, supplements of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance provide a list of the so called ‘red flag’ situations that trigger the need for enhanced due diligence, including the collection of additional information through the company's management system, in particular in the following situations:

                     A.

                        Red flag locations of minerals origin and transit

                                 —

                                 Where minerals originate from or have been transported via conflict-affected and high-risk areas;

                                 —

                                 Where minerals are claimed to originate from a country in which minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas are known or reasonably suspected to transit;

                                 —

                                 Where minerals are claimed to originate from a country that has limited known mineral resources or stocks, likely resources or expected production levels of the mineral in question (i.e. the declared volumes of minerals from that country are out of keeping with the known mineral resources or expected production levels).
                                 In each of these location-based ‘red flags’, in particular in situations of weak or non-existing governance, the risk is increased when anti-money laundering laws, anti-corruption laws, customs controls and other relevant governmental oversight laws are weakly enforced; when informal banking systems operate, and when cash is extensively used.

                     B.

                        Supplier red flags

                                 —

                                 Where a company's suppliers or other known upstream companies operate in one of the abovementioned ‘red-flag’ locations of mineral origin and transit, or have shareholders or other interests in suppliers of minerals from one of the abovementioned ‘red-flag’ locations of mineral origin or transit.

                                 —

                                 Where a company's suppliers or other known upstream companies are known to have sourced minerals from a ‘red-flag’ location of mineral origin and transit in the last twelve months.

                                 —

                                 For gold: where the gold is claimed to originate from recyclable/scrap or mixed sources and has been refined in a country where gold from conflict-affected and high-risk areas is known or reasonably suspected to transit.

                     C.

                        Red flag circumstances

                                 —

                                 Where anomalies or unusual circumstances are identified through the information collected by the company's management system which give rise to a reasonable suspicion that the minerals may contribute to conflict or serious abuses associated with their extraction, transport or trade.

               5.2.   Identifying specific red flags and ensuring appropriate due diligence

         Following the identification of the ‘red-flags’ set out in section 5.1 as part of the company's risk assessment, companies should undertake an in-depth review of the context of all these ‘red-flags’ by collecting additional information through their company's management system and ensuring that the corresponding risks are duly taken into account.
         As highlighted in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, due diligence is a risk-based and progressive approach whereby companies must put in place adequate management systems and processes, map the factual circumstances along the supply chain and identify the risks that may lead them to undertake enhanced due diligence.
         The following guidance should assist companies to obtain the relevant information on ‘red flag’ situations and tailor their due diligence appropriately. It should be noted that the information sources provided are updated with varying periodicity and while being relevant may not always be fully accurate. They should therefore be used in combination and with the addition of complementary sources as appropriate.

                     A.

                        Red flag locations of minerals origin and transit

                                 —

                                    Red flag: Minerals originating from or transported via conflict-affected and high-risk areas

                                 Enhanced due diligence is triggered when minerals originate from or have been transported via conflict-affected and high-risk areas. The identification of such areas is discussed in section 4 of these guidelines.

                                 —

                                    Red flag: Minerals claimed to originate from a country in which minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas are known or reasonably suspected to transit.

                                 Companies should assess the extent to which the following issues are applicable:

                                             —

                                                ‘Governance and other country issues’ need to be reviewed in order to identify the extent to which countries or areas are in control of their borders and have adequate internal enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure credible and documented traceability of the minerals trade to counteract the risks related to transit in case of weak governance.

                                                         Indicators

                                                         Information sources (5)

                                                                     —

                                                                     The declared country of origin has porous borders or weak customs enforcement for goods.

                                                                     —

                                                                     United Nations Security Council Resolutions (cf. section 4)

                                                                     —

                                                                     Information provided by Local Embassies, EU or other Delegations

                                                                     —

                                                                     Anti-corruption laws are weakly enforced and reported instances of corruption in mining and trade exist.

                                                                     —

                                                                     Anti-money laundering or banking oversight laws are not or insufficiently in place or weakly enforced.

                                                                     —

                                                                     Economies are mostly cash-based, in particular for the minerals trade.

                                                                     —

                                                                     Financial Action Task Force (FATF)
                                                                     http://www.fatf-gafi.org/countries/

                                                                     —

                                                                     Corruption Perception Index by Transparency International
                                                                     http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview

                                                                     —

                                                                     Worldwide Governance Indicator by the World Bank
                                                                     http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi

                                                                     —

                                                                     Global Financial Integrity reports
                                                                     http://www.gfintegrity.org/

                                                                     —

                                                                     Cf. section 4 on ‘governance’ of these guidelines

                                             —

                                                ‘Direct proximity, regional and historical issues’ provide information on the likelihood of misrepresentation of origin by smuggling from neighbouring countries, countries with historical ties, or countries providing tax incentives.

                                                         Indicators

                                                         Information sources

                                                                     —

                                                                     The declared country of origin directly borders areas where illegal armed groups, public security forces or criminal organisations are involved in the mineral production and trade.

                                                                     —

                                                                     The declared country of origin has economic ties to conflict-affected and high-risk areas and their associated illicit mineral trade.

                                                                     —

                                                                     United Nations Security Council Resolutions

                                                                     —

                                                                     Local Embassies, EU Delegations

                                                                     —

                                                                     Cf. section 4 on ‘conflict’ of these guidelines

                                                                     —

                                                                     The country of origin's tax policy leads to incentives to smuggle minerals to transit countries where material exports are not taxed, or taxed at much lower rates.

                                                                     —

                                                                     OECD database for restrictions on exports of raw materials
                                                                     http://www.oecd.org/tad/benefitlib/export-restrictions-raw-materials.htm

                                 —

                                    Red flag: Minerals claimed to originate from a country that has limited known resources/stocks or expected production levels

                                 The below checklist sets out ‘Mineral and supply chain-specific issues’. As part of their due diligence exercise companies should in particular verify whether a claimed country of origin actually has known geological resources or expected production levels of the mineral concerned. Similarly, companies should reasonably assess whether the declared origin makes sense from an economic perspective — such as the presence of nearby and attractive markets.

                                             Indicators

                                             Information sources

                                                         —

                                                         The declared country of origin has limited known mineral resources or stocks, likely resources or expected production levels of minerals, as well as specific characteristics of minerals.

                                                         —

                                                         The declared country of origin has a large informal or artisanal and small-scale mining sector where associated risks are normally higher.

                                                         —

                                                         British Geological Survey:
                                                         https://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/statistics/worldStatistics.html

                                                         —

                                                         USGS U.S. Geological Survey:
                                                         http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/country/

                                                         —

                                                         National Geological Services in EU Member States

                                                         —

                                                         Geological Service of the alleged country of origin

                     B.

                        Supplier red flags

                                 —

                                    Red flag: Where a company's suppliers or other known upstream companies operate in one of the abovementioned ‘red-flag’ locations of mineral origin and transit, or have shareholders or other interests in suppliers of minerals from one of the abovementioned ‘red-flag’ locations of mineral origin or transit and where company's suppliers or other known upstream companies are known to have sourced minerals from a ‘red-flag’ location of mineral origin and transit in the last twelve months.

                                 This supplier-specific information should mainly result from the data collected by companies through the implementation of their due diligence system. Once the identity of a company's supplier or other know upstream company is available, companies should seek to verify if the supplier is operating in a red-flag location by:

                                             —

                                             Browsing internet for generic information on the said supplier/upstream company, including governments and international organisations reports (in particular UN Group of Experts reports) and reports from international and local media and civil society organisations more broadly.

                                             —

                                             Checking corporate websites, and any available due diligence report (for instance, filing to the US Security Exchange Commission).

                                             —

                                             Checking smelter/refiner lists of existing due diligence schemes; and once available the European Commission's forthcoming list of global responsible smelters and refiners;

                                             —

                                             Browsing national register of commerce that can provide indications on the localisation of the headquarters and possibly operational subsidiaries.

                                       Companies could also consult beneficial ownership registries where available, as well as country Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) reports (which contain an increasing amount of information on beneficial ownership of companies involved in the extractive industry).

                     C.

                        Red flag circumstances

                                 —

                                    Red flag: Where anomalies or unusual circumstances are identified through the information collected by the company's management system that give rise to a reasonable suspicion that the minerals may contribute to conflict or serious abuses associated with their extraction, transport or trade.

                                 This operation-specific information is almost entirely the result of the data collected by companies through due diligence implementation.
                                 Anomalies/unusual circumstances may take a variety of forms. The OECD Due Diligence Guidance Supplement on gold provides the example that if jewellery worn in a country typically is 14k (58 %), an offer claimed to be recycled jewellery with 90 % gold content should be questioned.
                                 Other examples include a situation where an upstream supplier (e.g. a local exporter) is inexplicably able to increase the volume of exported material over a short period of time, and reports of frequent mineral resources theft in a region where the European importer has reason to believe he is sourcing from
                                 Other examples of ‘unusual circumstances’ specifically with regard to gold (and other precious metals can be found in paragraph 111 of the Financial Action Task Force's Risk-based guidance for dealers in precious metals and stones (6) as well as in the Financial Transaction and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada's report on Risk-based approach workbook for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones (7), e.g.:

                                             —

                                             A previously unknown customer requesting that a refiner turns gold into bullion.

                                             —

                                             Gold purity, weight, origin and value are misclassified on customs declaration forms.

                                             —

                                             Unlicensed persons or businesses producing and commercialising gold.

                                             —

                                             Bullion that has physical characteristics inconsistent with industry standards.

            (1)  As set out in Article 2(l) of Regulation (EU) 2017/821 ‘Union importer’ means any natural or legal person declaring minerals or metals for release for free circulation within the meaning of Article 201(1) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1) or any natural or legal person on whose behalf such declaration is made, as indicated in data elements 3/15 and 3/16 in accordance with Annex B to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 of 28 July 2015 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards detailed rules concerning certain provisions of the Union Customs Code (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 1).

            (2)  The OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (Second Edition, OECD 2013) is the framework to conduct supply chain due diligence pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2017/821.

            (3)  Risks as set out in Annex II of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, including risks triggered by ‘red flags’ as defined in its supplements.

            (4)  For the definition of human rights, see the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf

            (5)  Information should be updated regularly, as appropriate.

            (6)  http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/RBA%20for%20Dealers%20in%20Precious%20Metal%20and%20Stones.pdf

            (7)  http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/guidance-directives/compliance-conformite/rba/rba-dpms-eng.asp


               16.3.2018

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 101/166

         P8_TA(2016)0317
   71st session of the UN General Assembly
   European Parliament recommendation to the Council of 7 July 2016 on the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly (2016/2020(INI))
   (2018/C 101/15)

      The European Parliament,

               —

               having regard to the proposal for a recommendation to the Council on the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly by Andrey Kovatchev, on behalf of the PPE Group (B8-1374/2015),

               —

               having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Articles 21, 34 and 36 thereof,

               —

               having regard to the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly,

               —

               having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 June 2015 on the EU priorities for the 70th UN General Assembly,

               —

               having regard to the Charter of the United Nations,

               —

               having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to the UN human rights conventions and the optional protocols thereto,

               —

               having regard to the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on the participation of the European Union in the work of the United Nations (1), which grants the EU the right to intervene in the UN General Assembly, to present proposals and amendments orally which will be put to a vote at the request of a Member State, and to exercise the right to reply,

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on the 10th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security (2),

               —

               having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 18 April 2013 on the UN principle of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) (3),

               —

               having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 2 April 2014 on the 69th session of the United Nations General Assembly (4),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2015 on the role of the EU within the UN — how to better achieve EU foreign policy goals (5),

               —

               having regard to its resolutions of 21 January 2016 on the EU’s priorities for the UNHRC sessions in 2016 (6) and of 17 July 2014 on the crime of aggression (7),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 4 February 2016 on the systematic mass murder of religious minorities by the so-called ‘ISIS/Daesh’ (8),

               —

               having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2016 on the situation of women refugees and asylum seekers in the EU (9),

               —

               having regard to the Paris agreement of 12 December 2015,

               —

               having regard to the documents of 13 June 2012‘Plan of Action to enhance EU CSDP support to UN peacekeeping’ (10) and of 23 March 2015‘Strengthening the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management: Priorities 2015-2018’ (11),

               —

               having regard to the ‘Oslo’ Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief of November 2007,

               —

               having regard to the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) and the Security Council’s recent Resolution 2242 (2015) on Women, Peace and Security,

               —

               having regard to the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on Enforcement and Remedial Assistance Efforts for Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by the United Nations and Related Personnel in Peacekeeping Operations,

               —

               having regard to the first UN report on antibiotic resistance produced by WHO in April 2014 that qualifies antimicrobial resistance as a ‘serious threat’ to global public health,

               —

               having regard to the recent revelations concerning the activities of the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca and to the related initiatives for closer international cooperation to combat tax evasion,

               —

               having regard to Rules 134(3) and 113 of its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A8-0146/2016),

               A.

               whereas the EU’s commitment to effective multilateralism and good global governance, with the UN at its core, is an integral part of the EU’s external policy and is rooted in the conviction that a multilateral system founded on universal rules and values, which must be respected and upheld, is best suited to address global crises, challenges and threats;

               B.

               whereas the EU should play a proactive part in building a United Nations that can effectively contribute to global solutions, peace and security, development, human rights, democracy and a rule-of-law-based international order;

               C.

               whereas EU Member States need to make every effort to coordinate their action in the organs and bodies of the United Nations system in accordance with the mandate contained in Article 34(1) TEU;

               D.

               whereas the global and regional security environment is rapidly deteriorating, becoming more complex, and blurring the lines between internal and external security; whereas the UN retains a key role in ensuring global security and stability;

               E.

               whereas careful rethinking of the tools of effective multilateralism in the framework of the UN is necessary as a result of shifting global power configuration and diffusion; whereas such tools need to be more inclusive of all stakeholders, state and non-state alike, including in conflict prevention and crisis management processes;

               F.

               whereas the EU and its Member States are collectively the single largest financial contributor to the UN system, providing about one third of the UN’s regular budget, close to two-fifths of the UN’s peacekeeping budget and about one half of all contributions to UN funds and programmes;

               G.

               whereas the EU works for environmental sustainability, especially in the fight against climate change by promoting international measures and actions to preserve and improve the quality of the environment and the sustainable management of natural resources;

               H.

               whereas the EU is one of the most dedicated defenders and promoters of human rights, fundamental freedoms, cultural values and diversity, democracy and the rule of law;

               I.

               whereas the EU’s security environment is increasingly unstable and volatile owing to a large number of longstanding or newly emerging challenges, including violent conflicts, terrorism, organised crime, unprecedented migration waves and climate change, which are impossible to address at national level and require regional and global responses;

               J.

               whereas new challenges including hybrid and information warfare, cyber threats, bio-engineering, lethal autonomous systems, nanotechnology, weapon miniaturisation, and the proliferation of dual-use technologies requires the development of multilateral agreements for which the UN framework is the most appropriate;

               K.

               whereas recent developments in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their vehicles are making arms control and disarmament increasingly difficult and eroding global security and stability; whereas the UN is a suitable framework to promote efforts for a new generation of arms control and disarmament measures alongside like-minded partners;

               1.

               Addresses the following recommendations to the Council:

         Peace and security

               (a)

               to take active steps to ensure that all parties directly or indirectly involved in armed conflicts and their organisations comply in full with their international obligations and the standards laid down in international law and make efforts to secure peaceful, diplomatic solutions to conflicts of all kinds; to urge that this should also cover the obligation to grant people in need access to humanitarian aid;

               (b)

               to continue to support multilateral attempts to find lasting political and peaceful solutions to on-going conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa; to continue to support the work of the Special Envoy of the UN Secretary-General for Syria, the Special Representative and Head of the UN Support Mission in Libya, the Special Envoy of the UN Secretary-General for Yemen, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Western Sahara; to call for continued humanitarian, financial and political assistance from the international community in order to address the humanitarian situation, and to work towards the immediate cessation of violence; to condemn unilateral, uncoordinated actions in any crisis area;

               (c)

               to support the Intra-Syrian Talks that are guided by UN Security Council resolution 2254 (2015); to support the work of the task forces created by the International Syria Support Group that are overseeing the delivery of much needed humanitarian aid to thousands of Syrians in besieged and other hard-to-reach areas, as well as a cessation of hostilities that was endorsed by UN Security Council resolution 2268 (2016); to strongly condemn the widespread human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law in Syria and to support the work of civil society organisations documenting evidence of war crimes, crimes against humanity and other human rights violations; to underline the need to find a political solution to the conflict and to ensure the inclusion of women in the peace talks; to urge all UN Member States to make all necessary financial and human resources available to assist the local population and the refugees;

               (d)

               to make certain the UN General Assembly provides, in cooperation with the EU and the USA, all instruments to ensure that a two-state solution, on the basis of the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital of both states and with a secure State of Israel, with secure and recognised borders, and an independent, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security, is sustainable and effective; to act in line with the Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process adopted on 18 January 2016, which regard the continuous expansion of settlements as an ongoing obstacle to peace;

               (e)

               to underline the need for coordinated humanitarian action in Yemen under UN leadership; to urge all parties to allow the entry and delivery of urgently needed food, medicine, fuel and other necessary assistance through UN and international humanitarian channels in order to address the urgent needs of civilians affected by the crisis, in accordance with the principles of impartiality, neutrality and independence; to call for a humanitarian pause to allow life-saving assistance to reach the Yemeni people as a matter of urgency; to call for an impartial and independent investigation into all alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including the latest attacks targeting humanitarian infrastructure and personnel; to call on all parties to respect the human rights and freedoms of all Yemeni citizens, and to stress the importance of improving the security of all those working on peace and humanitarian missions in the country, including aid workers, doctors and journalists; to encourage a policy of rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran in order to defuse regional tensions and as a path towards conflict resolution in Yemen and elsewhere;

               (f)

               to continue to call for the full respect of internationally-recognised borders and the territorial integrity of Eastern European and South Caucasus countries, including Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, in light of the violations of international law in these areas, and for their free and sovereign choice to pursue a European path; to support and reinvigorate diplomatic efforts for a peaceful settlement of these on-going and frozen conflicts; to urge the international community to implement fully the policy of non-recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea; to actively increase pressure on Russia, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, in order to resolve the conflict in Ukraine;

               (g)

               to call for increased support for the efforts of the international community and regional organisations to manage security crises on the African continent, in particular in Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Mali, Nigeria, Burundi and the Great Lakes Area in general; to encourage UN Member States to step up support for the increasing role and own capacities of the African Union in mediation and crisis management while striving for complementarities with the efforts of the UN Peace Building Support Office; to support the efforts deployed by the AU, EAC, and the UN to prevent further escalation of the crisis in Burundi and to work towards the promotion of an urgent inter-Burundi inclusive and genuine dialogue between the government and the opposition; to support the deployment of independent international inquiry which has been investigating all alleged violations of human rights and helping those responsible be held accountable and to be brought to justice;

               (h)

               to support the ongoing comprehensive efforts to strengthen UN peace operations and the organisation’s ability to address conflict; to explore new prospects for and encourage strengthened cooperation between the EU and the UN in the context of reshaping their strategic visions on security, through, on the one hand, the new EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy and, on the other, the UN’s revision of its peace operations, peacebuilding architecture, and women, peace and security agenda (Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000)) and synergies between them; to ensure that the review process of the UN peacebuilding architecture promotes the principle of Responsibility to Protect and the role of women in peacebuilding;

               (i)

               to welcome the adoption and support the implementation of the UN Security Council’s recent Resolution 2242 (2015) making women a central component in all efforts to address global challenges and to call for additional efforts to integrate the women, peace and security agenda in all the different dimensions of peacekeeping; to stress the importance of women’s equal, full and active participation in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in the peace negotiation and peacebuilding process; to ensure that all necessary safe medical assistance is provided to female war rape victims;

               (j)

               to promote a culture of prevention within the UN system in order to improve its capacity to respond more quickly to emerging crises and potential threats to peace and security, in particular through more effective preventive diplomacy, confidence-building and mediation efforts; to strive to enhance early warning systems and early communication and further develop procedures for crisis consultation between the UN, the EU and other regional and sub-regional organisations, which play an increasingly important role in international peace and security, in order to better coordinate their crisis response, avoiding unnecessary duplication; to cooperate with the UN in strengthening the role and capacity of regional and sub-regional organisations in peacekeeping, conflict prevention, civilian and military crisis management, and conflict resolution;

               (k)

               to increase Member State support for UN peacekeeping and peacebuilding operations that include a human rights component and clear exit strategies, in particular by contributing personnel and equipment, and to enhance the EU’s facilitating role in this respect; to further develop procedures for the use of EU Common Security and Defence Policy in support of UN operations, including through the deployment of EU Battlegroups, or through capacity building and Security Sector Reform initiatives, while paying sufficient attention to issues such as human rights, sustainable development and the root causes of mass migration;

               (l)

               to promote a broad definition of the human security concept, bringing it closer to gender equality and human rights, and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle and to continue to support the efforts to further the operationalisation of R2P; to support the UN in continuing to play a critical role in assisting countries in the implementation of R2P, in order to uphold the rule of law and international humanitarian law; to promote the Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, committing UN Member States to support action by the Security Council aimed at preventing or ending such crimes and not to vote against a corresponding Security Council resolution;

         Fight against terrorism

               (m)

               to reiterate its unequivocal condemnation of terrorism and its full support for actions aimed at the defeat and eradication of terrorist organisations, in particular, the so-called ‘ISIS/Daesh’, which poses a clear threat to regional and international security, while recalling that these actions should always fully respect international human rights law; to support the promotion of all aspects of Security Council Resolution 2178 (2014) on countering threats posed by foreign terrorist fighters and of the Madrid Guiding Principles on stemming the flow of foreign terrorist fighters;

               (n)

               to step up efforts to clamp down on recruitment and fight terrorist propaganda, through social media platforms but also through networks of radicalised hate preachers; to support counter-radicalisation and de-radicalisation policies in line with the UN Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism;

               (o)

               to continue to work with the UN in combating the financing of terrorism, including the use of existing mechanisms to designate terrorist individuals and organisations and strengthen asset-freezing mechanisms worldwide while upholding international standards on due process and the rule of law;

               (p)

               to provide support to the UN Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force in order to ensure coordination and coherence in the implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, using the resources and expertise of 25 UN system entities and of Interpol, always recalling that efforts to fight terrorism must not be used as a pretext for repressing internal dissent or violating the rights of the people;

               (q)

               to promote a coordinated international effort to counter the growing threat posed by Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), in particular by developing an understanding of the Counter-IED/Counter-Terrorism nexus, using the resources and expertise of UN system entities and of Interpol in order to enable greater law enforcement and military cooperation;

               (r)

               to reiterate, in the context, the need for an adequate mix of security, law enforcement, human rights, socio-economic instruments that offers more adequate options for responding to the changing nature of terrorism and violent extremism as posed by Daesh, al-Qaeda, Al-Shabaab, Boko Haram and others;

               (s)

               to support an enhanced EU contribution to UN capacity building initiatives concerning the fight against foreign terrorist fighters and violent extremism;

         Non-proliferation and disarmament

               (t)

               to support UN efforts to prevent non-state actors and terrorist groups from developing, manufacturing, acquiring or transferring weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems and to contribute to the comprehensive review of Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004) in 2016; to insist on full compliance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention, and on finishing the ratification process of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty; to encourage all UN Member States to sign and ratify the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction; to welcome the establishment of an Open-Ended Working Group (OEWP), as a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly, aimed at taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations, and for all EU Member States to participate actively in its proceedings; to request UN Members to take active steps towards global disarmament, taking due account of both the security dimension and the humanitarian dimensions of nuclear weapons;

               (u)

               to urge Member States to support the UN General Assembly resolution ‘Effects of the use of arms and ammunitions containing depleted uranium’ at the 71st session, and to develop an EU common position that better reflects Parliament’s repeated calls for a precautionary global moratorium and the developing global consensus on the potential civilian health risks, complex post-conflict radioactive waste management burden and financial costs associated with the use of such weapons; to include depleted uranium assessment and clearance projects in the EU’s funding instruments for mine action;

               (v)

               to promote the full implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and encourage all UN Member States to sign or accede to the ATT;

               (w)

               to work towards more effective action against the diversion of and illicit trade in weapons and ammunitions, including Small Arms and Light Weapons, in particular by developing a weapons tracking system;

               (x)

               to promote a policy response at global level on the use of armed drones, aimed at keeping their use strictly within the limits of international human rights and humanitarian law; to promote a ban on the development, production and use of fully autonomous weapons which enable strikes to be carried out without human intervention; to make sure that human rights are part of all dialogues with third countries on counter-terrorism;

               (y)

               to further support on-going UN efforts at exploring the development of norms for responsible and safe behaviour in cyberspace, including a multilateral framework against cyber-attacks, with a view to ensuring the application of existing international law and human rights law;

         Migration

               (z)

               to promote greater support for the work of UNHCR in implementing its international mandate to protect refugees, paying particular attention to vulnerable groups such as women and children; to stress the high funding gap between UNHCR’s budgetary needs and funds received and to demand greater global solidarity; to call for greater UN regular budget funding of the UNHCR core functions in order to safeguard its functioning;

               (aa)

               to recall that enhanced coherence and coordination is required between the external and internal dimensions of migration policy and the development and external affairs agendas;

               (ab)

               to demand that greater efforts be made to prevent irregular migration and to fight people smuggling and human trafficking, in particular by combating criminal networks through timely and effective exchange of relevant intelligence, while respecting international human rights law; to improve methods to identify and protect victims and to reinforce cooperation with third countries with a view to tracking, seizing and recovering the proceeds of criminal activities in this sector; to insist at the UN level on the importance of the ratification and full implementation of the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime and the Protocols thereto against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air and to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children; to support the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants;

               (ac)

               to support the high-level plenary meeting of the UN General Assembly on addressing large movements of refugees and migrants, scheduled for 19 September 2016, and demand that it focus on the root causes of migration, paying due attention to poverty eradication and the realisation of human rights and stability;

         Human rights, democracy and the rule of law

               (ad)

               to reiterate clearly and firmly that all human rights agreed under UN conventions are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated and that respect for these rights must be enforced; to draw attention to human rights violations and abuses worldwide; to call for the defence of the freedoms of opinion and expression; to emphasise the importance of a free press in a healthy society, and the role of every citizen therein, and to defend the freedoms of association and assembly;

               (ae)

               to continue to advocate for freedom of religion or belief; to urge greater efforts to protect the rights of religious and other minorities; to call for greater protection of religious minorities against persecution and violence; to call for the repeal of laws criminalising blasphemy or apostasy that serve as a pretext for the persecution of religious minorities and non-believers; to support the work of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief; to actively work for a UN recognition of the genocide against minorities committed by so-called ISIS/Daesh, and for referral to the ICC of cases of suspected crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide;

               (af)

               to continue to actively promote equality and non-discrimination; to urge the UN to actively support gender mainstreaming initiatives in its activities and programmes and to continue to support the work of UN Women; to support measures strengthening leadership and participation by women at all levels of decision-making; to fight against violence and discrimination against individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression; to call for the repeal of legislation in UN member states that violates the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons; to welcome the first ever UN Security Council meeting on LGBTI rights in 2015; to call for the UN member states to implement the recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

               (ag)

               to promote children’s rights, in particular by contributing to ensuring children’s access to water, sanitation, healthcare and education, including in conflict zones and refugee camps, and eliminating child labour, torture, trafficking, child marriage and sexual exploitation; to support and strengthen international efforts through the UN to end the use of children in armed conflict, as well as to address more effectively the impact of conflict and post-conflict situations on women and girls; to support a human-rights-based approach to disability in situations of risk and emergency, in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;

               (ah)

               to urge all States, including the EU Member States to swiftly ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant of Economic Social and Cultural Rights establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms;

               (ai)

               to contribute to a successful outcome of the work of the Intergovernmental Working Group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights; to support further implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights by UN member states; to encourage UN member states to develop and implement national action plans; to support the Accountability and Remedy Project of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights aimed at enhancing domestic law remedies, in particular in cases of gross human rights abuses in the business sector; to call on the UN member states to raise the issue of human rights with international and national sports bodies;

               (aj)

               to continue to advocate for zero tolerance for the death penalty and to further work towards its universal abolition, leading the way towards the adoption of the next UN General Assembly resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty; to denounce the increase in the handing down of the death sentence for drug-related offences and to call for the exclusion of the use of capital punishment for such offences;

               (ak)

               to recall the obligation of the General Assembly, when electing the membership of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), to take into account candidates’ respect for the promotion and protection of human rights, the rule of law and democracy; to call for the establishment of clear human rights performance based criteria for membership of the UNHRC and, in view of the tenth anniversary of the UNHRC, to call for an assessment of the Council’s working methods and impact;

               (al)

               to strengthen the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in its role of ending impunity for perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community and providing justice for the victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide; to provide political, diplomatic, financial and logistical support to the day-to-day operation of the ICC; to call on all UN member states to join the Court by ratifying the Rome Statute, and to encourage the ratification of the Kampala amendments; to foster strong cooperation with the Court by the UN and its bodies and agencies and the expansion of its relationship with the Security Council; to call for a UN Security Council referral of the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the ICC;

               (am)

               to engage with the public and a comprehensive debate with all members of the UN General Assembly on the importance of respecting constitutional limits in presidential mandates worldwide;

               (an)

               to call on the UN to address the legal shortfalls in the term ‘climate refugee’, including its possible international definition;

         Development

               (ao)

               to work towards the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; to work towards improving the lives of future generations and to encourage and support countries to take ownership and establish national frameworks for the achievement of the 17 goals; to encourage UN member states to meet their commitments on development aid spending and to call for the adoption of a solid framework of indicators and the use of statistical data to monitor progress and ensure the accountability of all; to insist that the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) on sustainable development should become the main decision-making body competent for ensuring the follow-up and review of the implementation of the SDGs and to present a common EU position on the implementation of Agenda 2030 ahead of the HLPF in 2016;

               (ap)

               to ensure that the ‘acquis’ of the Beijing Platform for Action regarding access to education and health as a basic human right is not undermined; to enhance access to sexual and reproductive health services, as this contributes to reducing infant and maternal mortality; to promote family planning, maternal health, easy access to contraception and access to the full range of sexual and reproductive health services as important elements in saving women’s lives and helping them rebuild their lives if they have been victims of rape; to place these policies at the core of development cooperation with third countries;

               (aq)

               to insist on the need to strengthen policy coherence for development within the UN working structures in order to effectively integrate all dimensions of sustainable development; to highlight the importance of a universal, rule-based, open, transparent, non-discriminatory, inclusive and equitable multilateral trade system and the need to bring about the conclusion of the WTO Doha Development Round; to recall that development is not possible without peace, nor peace without development, stressing the importance of the SDG 16 on peace, justice and governance, which should be one of the priorities in development cooperation financing; to call on the UN to systematically integrate capacity-building and good governance into long-term development strategies;

               (ar)

               to welcome the UN General Assembly adoption of the landmark resolution 68/304 of 9 September 2014, which recognised ‘the sovereign right of any State to restructure its sovereign debt, which should not be frustrated or impeded by any measure emanating from another State’, and noted ‘with concern that the international financial system does not have a sound legal framework for the orderly and predictable restructuring of sovereign debt’ and launched a process to adopt ‘a multilateral legal framework for sovereign debt restructuring processes’; to call on the UN system as a whole to fully support this process; calls on the EU and its Member States to actively engage in this process;

               (as)

               to develop a much more efficient and strategic approach to the UN agencies in particular regarding programming of the external financial instruments to ensure stronger visibility of EU aid on the ground;

               (at)

               to take active steps to improve political oversight in the area of sustainable development, by strengthening the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and to take up the proposal to establish an International Criminal Court for environmental crimes with the aim of enforcing environmental law more effectively worldwide;

               (au)

               to work towards the reinforcement of international fiscal cooperation, supporting the creation of an international tax body within the UN system; to counter tax evasion and money laundering through worldwide automatic exchange of information on tax issues and the creation of a common global black list of tax havens;

               (av)

               to launch a global plan to fight antimicrobial resistance, in order to prevent the further spreading of resistant superbacteria;

         Climate change

               (aw)

               to ensure that the EU remains at the forefront of the fight against climate change and cooperates further with the UN in this area; to ensure swift implementation of the decisions taken at the 2015 UN Climate Change Conference in Paris;

         EU and reform of the UN system

               (ax)

               to support a comprehensive reform of the United Nations Security Council on the basis of a broad consensus, in order to better reflect the new world reality and to ensure that the Council is able to deal effectively with threats to international peace and security; to work towards the long-term goal of the EU having a seat in a reformed UN Security Council; to urge Security Council members to refrain from using their right of veto in cases when crimes against humanity are being committed;

               (ay)

               to promote the revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly, and improved coordination and coherence of the action of all UN institutions, which should enhance the efficiency, effectiveness, legitimacy, transparency, accountability, capacity and representativeness of the system; to support and build on the increased transparency in the process for the selection of the next UN Secretary-General, with candidates’ presentations being made in the General Assembly; in the course of the identification and appointment of the best candidate, to promote equal and fair opportunities based on gender and geographical balance and to support the selection of a woman as the next Secretary-General if candidates have similar outstanding qualifications;

               (az)

               in view of the 2015 UN report and recent sexual child abuse allegations against French and UN troops in the Central African Republic, to make sure that the UN, EU Member States and the EU’s CSDP organs investigate, prosecute and sentence any UN, national and EU personnel who committed acts of sexual violence without delay and with firmest resolve;

               (ba)

               to invite the European Court of Auditors to strengthen its cooperation with the respective oversight institutions of the United Nations Secretariat, in particular the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), the Independent Audit Advisory Committee (IAAC) and the Board of Auditors (BoA) with a view of increasing transparency and mutual understanding of funding and functioning;

               (bb)

               to establish an effective system of protection for UN whistle-blowers;

               (bc)

               in view of the recent case of conflict of interest of the UN Special Representative for Libya to initiate a binding code of conduct that obliges office holders to maintain impartiality as laid down in the UN Guidance on effective mediation;

               2.

               Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the EUs special representative for Human Rights, the European External Action Service, the Commission and, for information, the United Nations General Assembly and the Secretary General of the United Nations.

      (1)  A/RES/65/276 of 3 May 2011.

      (2)  OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 56.

      (3)  OJ C 45, 5.2.2016, p. 89.

      (4)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0259.

      (5)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0403.

      (6)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0020.

      (7)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2014)0013.

      (8)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0051.

      (9)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0073.

      (10)  EEAS 01024/12, Council document 11216/12.

      (11)  EEAS 458/15, Council document 7632/15.