21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/1

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/2

(1)

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice.

(2)

Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions.

(3)

According to the Stockholm Programme — An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens (2), mutual recognition should extend to all types of judgments and decisions of a judicial nature, which may, depending on the legal system, be either criminal or administrative. It also calls on the Commission and the Member States to examine how to improve legislation and practical support measures for the protection of victims. The programme also points out that victims of crime can be offered special protection measures which should be effective within the Union. This Directive forms part of a coherent and comprehensive set of measures on victims’ rights.

(4)

The resolution of the European Parliament of 26 November 2009 on the elimination of violence against women calls on Member States to improve their national laws and policies to combat all forms of violence against women and to act in order to tackle the causes of violence against women, not least by employing preventive measures and calls on the Union to guarantee the right to assistance and support for all victims of violence. The resolution of the European Parliament of 10 February 2010 on equality between women and men in the European Union 2009 endorses the proposal to introduce the European protection order for victims.

(5)

In its Resolution of 10 June 2011 on a Roadmap for strengthening the rights and protection of victims, in particular in criminal proceedings, the Council stated that action should be taken at the level of the Union in order to strengthen the rights and protection of victims of crime and called on the Commission to present appropriate proposals to that end. In this framework, a mechanism should be created to ensure mutual recognition among Member States of decisions concerning protection measures for victims of crime. According to that Resolution, this Directive, which concerns the mutual recognition of protection measures taken in criminal matters, should be complemented by an appropriate mechanism concerning measures taken in civil matters.

(6)

In a common area of justice without internal borders, it is necessary to ensure that the protection provided to a natural person in one Member State is maintained and continued in any other Member State to which the person moves or has moved. It should also be ensured that the legitimate exercise by citizens of the Union of their right to move and reside freely within the territory of Member States, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 21 TFEU, does not result in a loss of their protection.

(7)

In order to attain these objectives, this Directive should set out rules whereby the protection stemming from certain protection measures adopted according to the law of one Member State (‘the issuing State’) can be extended to another Member State in which the protected person decides to reside or stay (‘the executing State’).

(8)

This Directive takes account of the different legal traditions of the Member States as well as the fact that effective protection can be provided by means of protection orders issued by an authority other than a criminal court. This Directive does not create obligations to modify national systems for adopting protection measures nor does it create obligations to introduce or amend a criminal law system for executing a European protection order.

(9)

This Directive applies to protection measures which aim specifically to protect a person against a criminal act of another person which may, in any way, endanger that person’s life or physical, psychological and sexual integrity, for example by preventing any form of harassment, as well as that person’s dignity or personal liberty, for example by preventing abductions, stalking and other forms of indirect coercion, and which aim to prevent new criminal acts or to reduce the consequences of previous criminal acts. These personal rights of the protected person correspond to fundamental values recognised and upheld in all Member States. However, a Member State is not obliged to issue a European protection order on the basis of a criminal measure which does not serve specifically to protect a person, but primarily serves other aims, for example the social rehabilitation of the offender. It is important to underline that this Directive applies to protection measures which aim to protect all victims and not only the victims of gender violence, taking into account the specificities of each type of crime concerned.

(10)

This Directive applies to protection measures adopted in criminal matters, and does not therefore cover protection measures adopted in civil matters. For a protection measure to be executable in accordance with this Directive, it is not necessary for a criminal offence to have been established by a final decision. Nor is the criminal, administrative or civil nature of the authority adopting a protection measure relevant. This Directive does not oblige Member States to amend their national law to enable them to adopt protection measures in the context of criminal proceedings.

(11)

This Directive is intended to apply to protection measures adopted in favour of victims, or possible victims, of crimes. This Directive should not therefore apply to measures adopted with a view to witness protection.

(12)

If a protection measure, as defined in this Directive, is adopted for the protection of a relative of the main protected person, a European protection order may also be requested by and issued in respect of that relative, subject to the conditions laid down in this Directive.

(13)

Any request for the issuing of a European protection order should be treated with appropriate speed, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case, including the urgency of the matter, the date foreseen for the arrival of the protected person on the territory of the executing State and, where possible, the degree of risk for the protected person.

(14)

Where information is to be provided under this Directive to the protected person or to the person causing danger, this information should also, where relevant, be provided to the guardian or the representative of the person concerned. Due attention should also be paid to the need for the protected person, the person causing danger or the guardian or representative in the proceedings, to receive the information provided for by this Directive, in a language that that person understands.

(15)

In the procedures for the issuing and recognition of a European protection order, competent authorities should give appropriate consideration to the needs of victims, including particularly vulnerable persons, such as minors or persons with disabilities.

(16)

For the application of this Directive, a protection measure may have been imposed following a judgment within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments and probation decisions with a view to the supervision of probation measures and alternative sanctions (3), or following a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA of 23 October 2009 on the application, between Member States of the European Union, of the principle of mutual recognition to decisions on supervision measures as an alternative to provisional detention (4). If a decision was adopted in the issuing State on the basis of one of those Framework Decisions, the recognition procedure should be followed accordingly in the executing State. This, however, should not exclude the possibility to transfer a European protection order to a Member State other than the State executing decisions based on those Framework Decisions.

(17)

In accordance with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the person causing danger should be provided, either during the procedure leading to the adoption of a protection measure or before issuing a European protection order, with the possibility of being heard and challenging the protection measure.

(18)

In order to prevent a crime being committed against the victim in the executing State, that State should have the legal means for recognising the decision previously adopted in the issuing State in favour of the victim, while also avoiding the need for the victim to start new proceedings or to produce evidence in the executing State again, as if the issuing State had not adopted the decision. The recognition of the European protection order by the executing State implies, inter alia, that the competent authority of that State, subject to the limitations set out in this Directive, accepts the existence and validity of the protection measure adopted in the issuing State, acknowledges the factual situation described in the European protection order, and agrees that protection should be provided and should continue to be provided in accordance with its national law.

(19)

This Directive contains an exhaustive list of prohibitions and restrictions which, when imposed in the issuing State and included in the European protection order, should be recognised and enforced in the executing State, subject to the limitations set out in this Directive. Other types of protection measures may exist at national level, such as, if provided by national law, the obligation on the person causing danger to remain in a specified place. Such measures may be imposed in the issuing State in the framework of the procedure leading to the adoption of one of the protection measures which, according to this Directive, may be the basis for a European protection order.

(20)

Since, in the Member States, different kinds of authorities (civil, criminal or administrative) are competent to adopt and enforce protection measures, it is appropriate to provide a high degree of flexibility in the cooperation mechanism between the Member States under this Directive. Therefore, the competent authority in the executing State is not required in all cases to take the same protection measure as those which were adopted in the issuing State, and has a degree of discretion to adopt any measure which it deems adequate and appropriate under its national law in a similar case in order to provide continued protection to the protected person in the light of the protection measure adopted in the issuing State as described in the European protection order.

(21)

The prohibitions or restrictions to which this Directive applies include, among others, measures aimed at limiting personal or remote contacts between the protected person and the person causing danger, for example by imposing certain conditions on such contacts or imposing restrictions on the contents of communications.

(22)

The competent authority of the executing State should inform the person causing danger, the competent authority of the issuing State and the protected person of any measure adopted on the basis of the European protection order. In the notification to the person causing danger, due regard should be taken of the interest of the protected person in not having that person’s address or other contact details disclosed. Such details should be excluded from the notification, provided that the address or other contact details are not included in the prohibition or restriction imposed as an enforcement measure on the person causing danger.

(23)

When the competent authority in the issuing State withdraws the European protection order, the competent authority in the executing State should discontinue the measures which it has adopted in order to enforce the European protection order, it being understood that the competent authority in the executing State may — autonomously, and in accordance with its national law — adopt any protection measure under its national law in order to protect the person concerned.

(24)

Given that this Directive deals with situations in which the protected person moves to another Member State, issuing or executing a European protection order should not imply any transfer to the executing State of powers relating to principal, suspended, alternative, conditional or secondary penalties, or relating to security measures imposed on the person causing danger, if the latter continues to reside in the State that adopted the protection measure.

(25)

Where appropriate, it should be possible to use electronic means with a view to putting into practice the measures adopted in application of this Directive, in accordance with national laws and procedures.

(26)

In the context of cooperation among the authorities involved in ensuring the protection of the protected person, the competent authority of the executing State should communicate to the competent authority of the issuing State any breach of the measures adopted in the executing State with a view to executing the European protection order. This communication should enable the competent authority of the issuing State to promptly decide on any appropriate response with respect to the protection measure imposed in its State on the person causing danger. Such a response may comprise, where appropriate, the imposition of a custodial measure in substitution of the non-custodial measure that was originally adopted, for example, as an alternative to preventive detention or as a consequence of the conditional suspension of a penalty. It is understood that such a decision, since it does not impose ex novo a penalty in relation to a new criminal offence, does not interfere with the possibility that the executing State may, where applicable, impose penalties in the event of a breach of the measures adopted in order to execute the European protection order.

(27)

In view of the different legal traditions of the Member States, where no protection measure would be available in the executing State in a case similar to the factual situation described in the European protection order, the competent authority of the executing State should report any breach of the protection measure described in the European protection order of which it is aware to the competent authority of the issuing State.

(28)

In order to ensure the smooth application of this Directive in each particular case, the competent authorities of the issuing and the executing States should exercise their competencies in accordance with the provisions of this Directive, taking into account the principle of ne bis in idem.

(29)

The protected person should not be required to sustain costs related to the recognition of the European protection order which are disproportionate to a similar national case. When implementing this Directive, Member States should ensure that, after recognition of the European protection order, the protected person is not required to initiate further national proceedings to obtain from the competent authority of the executing State, as a direct consequence of the recognition of the European protection order, a decision adopting any measure that would be available under its national law in a similar case in order to ensure the protection of the protected person.

(30)

Bearing in mind the principle of mutual recognition upon which this Directive is based, Member States should promote, to the widest extent possible, direct contact between the competent authorities when they apply this Directive.

(31)

Without prejudice to judicial independence and differences in the organisation of the judiciary across the Union, Member States should consider requesting those responsible for the training of judges, prosecutors, police and judicial staff involved in the procedures aimed at issuing or recognising a European protection order to provide appropriate training with respect to the objectives of this Directive.

(32)

In order to facilitate the evaluation of the application of this Directive, Member States should communicate to the Commission relevant data related to the application of national procedures on the European protection order, at least with regard to the number of European protection orders requested, issued and/or recognised. In this respect, other types of data, such as, for example, the types of crimes concerned, would also be useful.

(33)

This Directive should contribute to the protection of persons who are in danger, thereby complementing, but not affecting, the instruments already in place in this field, such as Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA and Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA.

(34)

When a decision relating to a protection measure falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (5), Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility (6), or the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (7), the recognition and enforcement of that decision should be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the relevant legal instrument.

(35)

Member States and the Commission should include information about the European protection order, where it is appropriate, in existing education and awareness-raising campaigns on the protection of victims of crime.

(36)

Personal data processed when implementing this Directive should be protected in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (8) and with the principles laid down in the 1981 Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data.

(37)

This Directive should respect the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in accordance with Article 6 TEU.

(38)

When implementing this Directive, Member States are encouraged to take into account the rights and principles enshrined in the 1979 United Nations Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

(39)

Since the objective of this Directive, namely to protect persons who are in danger, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(40)

In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the United Kingdom has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Directive.

(41)

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(42)

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application,

(1)

‘European protection order’ means a decision, taken by a judicial or equivalent authority of a Member State in relation to a protection measure, on the basis of which a judicial or equivalent authority of another Member State takes any appropriate measure or measures under its own national law with a view to continuing the protection of the protected person;

(2)

‘protection measure’ means a decision in criminal matters adopted in the issuing State in accordance with its national law and procedures by which one or more of the prohibitions or restrictions referred to in Article 5 are imposed on a person causing danger in order to protect a protected person against a criminal act which may endanger his life, physical or psychological integrity, dignity, personal liberty or sexual integrity;

(3)

‘protected person’ means a natural person who is the object of the protection resulting from a protection measure adopted by the issuing State;

(4)

‘person causing danger’ means the natural person on whom one or more of the prohibitions or restrictions referred to in Article 5 have been imposed;

(5)

‘issuing State’ means the Member State in which a protection measure has been adopted that constitutes the basis for issuing a European protection order;

(6)

‘executing State’ means the Member State to which a European protection order has been forwarded with a view to its recognition;

(7)

‘State of supervision’ means the Member State to which a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, has been transferred.

(a)

a prohibition from entering certain localities, places or defined areas where the protected person resides or visits;

(b)

a prohibition or regulation of contact, in any form, with the protected person, including by phone, electronic or ordinary mail, fax or any other means; or

(c)

a prohibition or regulation on approaching the protected person closer than a prescribed distance.

(a)

the identity and nationality of the protected person, as well as the identity and nationality of the guardian or representative if the protected person is a minor or is legally incapacitated;

(b)

the date from which the protected person intends to reside or stay in the executing State, and the period or periods of stay, if known;

(c)

the name, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address of the competent authority of the issuing State;

(d)

identification (for example, through a number and date) of the legal act containing the protection measure on the basis of which the European protection order is issued;

(e)

a summary of the facts and circumstances which have led to the adoption of the protection measure in the issuing State;

(f)

the prohibitions or restrictions imposed, in the protection measure underlying the European protection order, on the person causing danger, their duration and the indication of the penalty, if any, in the event of the breach of any of the prohibitions or restrictions;

(g)

the use of a technical device, if any, that has been provided to the protected person or to the person causing danger as a means of enforcing the protection measure;

(h)

the identity and nationality of the person causing danger, as well as that person’s contact details;

(i)

where such information is known by the competent authority of the issuing State without requiring further inquiry, whether the protected person and/or the person causing danger has been granted free legal aid in the issuing State;

(j)

a description, where appropriate, of other circumstances that could have an influence on the assessment of the danger that confronts the protected person;

(k)

an express indication, where applicable, that a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, has already been transferred to the State of supervision, when this is different from the State of execution of the European protection order, and the identification of the competent authority of that State for the enforcement of such a judgment or decision.

(a)

the European protection order is not complete or has not been completed within the time limit set by the competent authority of the executing State;

(b)

the requirements set out in Article 5 have not been met;

(c)

the protection measure relates to an act that does not constitute a criminal offence under the law of the executing State;

(d)

the protection derives from the execution of a penalty or measure that, according to the law of the executing State, is covered by an amnesty and relates to an act or conduct which falls within its competence according to that law;

(e)

there is immunity conferred under the law of the executing State on the person causing danger, which makes it impossible to adopt measures on the basis of a European protection order;

(f)

criminal prosecution, against the person causing danger, for the act or the conduct in relation to which the protection measure has been adopted is statute-barred under the law of the executing State, when the act or the conduct falls within its competence under its national law;

(g)

recognition of the European protection order would contravene the ne bis in idem principle;

(h)

under the law of the executing State, the person causing danger cannot, because of that person’s age, be held criminally responsible for the act or the conduct in relation to which the protection measure has been adopted;

(i)

the protection measure relates to a criminal offence which, under the law of the executing State, is regarded as having been committed, wholly or for a major or essential part, within its territory.

(a)

without undue delay, inform the issuing State and the protected person of this refusal and of the grounds relating thereto;

(b)

where appropriate, inform the protected person about the possibility of requesting the adoption of a protection measure in accordance with its national law;

(c)

inform the protected person of any applicable legal remedies that are available under its national law against such a decision.

(a)

impose criminal penalties and take any other measure as a consequence of the breach, if that breach amounts to a criminal offence under the law of the executing State;

(b)

take any non-criminal decisions related to the breach;

(c)

take any urgent and provisional measure in order to put an end to the breach, pending, where appropriate, a subsequent decision by the issuing State.

(a)

the renewal, review, modification, revocation and withdrawal of the protection measure and, consequently, of the European protection order;

(b)

the imposition of a custodial measure as a consequence of revocation of the protection measure, provided that the protection measure has been applied on the basis of a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or on the basis of a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA;

(a)

modify the measures adopted on the basis of the European protection order, acting in accordance with Article 9; or

(b)

refuse to enforce the modified prohibition or restriction when it does not fall within the types of prohibitions or restrictions referred to in Article 5, or if the information transmitted with the European protection order in accordance with Article 7 is incomplete or has not been completed within the time limit set by the competent authority of the executing State in accordance with Article 9(4).

(a)

where there is clear indication that the protected person does not reside or stay in the territory of the executing State, or has definitively left that territory;

(b)

where, according to its national law, the maximum term of duration of the measures adopted in execution of the European protection order has expired;

(c)

in the case referred to in Article 13(7)(b); or

(d)

where a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, is transferred to the executing State after the recognition of the European protection order.

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/19

(1)

On 25 February 2008, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 renewing and strengthening the restrictive measures in respect of Burma/Myanmar.

(2)

In accordance with Council Decision 2011/859/CFSP of 19 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar (2), the information relating to one entity on the list in Annex V to Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 should be updated.

(3)

Annex V to Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 should be updated accordingly,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/20

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 57/2011 of 18 January 2011 fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters (2), lays down quotas for 2011.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2011.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/22

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 57/2011 of 18 January 2011 fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters (2), lays down quotas for 2011.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2011.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/24

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 57/2011 of 18 January 2011 fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters (2), lays down quotas for 2011.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2011.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/26

(1)

In accordance with Article 130 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 to manage imports, the Commission has been given the power to determine the products for which import will be subject to presentation of a licence. When assessing the need for a licence system, the Commission takes account of the appropriate instruments for the management of the markets and in particular for monitoring the imports.

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 376/2008 (2) in its Article 1(2)(a)(i) in conjunction with its Annex II, Part I, point I, provides for a licence obligation for imports of ‘bananas, fresh imported under common customs tariff rate of duty’ falling within CN code 0803 00 19.

(3)

Currently, effective import monitoring can be carried out through other means. In the interest of simplification and for the purpose of alleviating the administrative burden for Member States and operators, the requirement of import licences for bananas should be abolished. Article 1(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2014/2005 of 9 December 2005 on licences under the arrangements for importing bananas into the Community in respect of bananas released into free circulation at the common customs tariff rate of duty (3) limits the validity of licences to the year of issue. It is therefore appropriate to repeal the obligation to obtain import licences as from 1 January 2012.

(4)

Regulation (EC) No 376/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/27

(1)

In order to promote the supply of cereals on the Community market during the first few months of the 2011/2012 marketing year, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 633/2011 (2) suspended customs duties for the import tariff quotas for common wheat of low and medium quality and feed barley opened by Commission Regulations (EC) No 1067/2008 (3) and (EC) No 2305/2003 (4) respectively, until 31 December 2011.

(2)

The outlook for the cereals market of the European Union for the end of the 2011/2012 marketing year would suggest that prices will remain buoyant, given the low stock levels and the Commission’s current estimates regarding the quantities which will actually be available from the 2011 harvest. In order to make it easier to maintain a flow of imports conducive to EU market equilibrium, there is a need to ensure continuity in cereal imports policy by keeping the temporary suspension of customs duties on imports during the 2011/2012 marketing year until 30 June 2012 for the import tariff quotas to which this measure currently applies.

(3)

Moreover, traders should not be penalised in cases where cereals are en route for importation into the EU. Therefore, the time required for transport should be taken into account and traders allowed to release cereals for free circulation under the customs-duty suspension regime provided for in this Regulation, for all products whose direct transport to the EU has started at the latest on 30 June 2012. The evidence to be provided to prove direct transport to the EU and the date on which the transport commenced should also be established.

(4)

In order to ensure effective management of the procedure for issuing import certificates from 1 January 2012, this Regulation must enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

(5)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/29

(1)

An Agreement has been concluded in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union, of the one part, and the Palestinian Authority of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, of the other part, providing further liberalisation of agricultural products, processed agricultural products and fish and fishery products and amending the Euro-Mediterranean Interim Association Agreement on trade and cooperation between the European Community, of the one part, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) for the benefit of the Palestinian Authority of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, of the other part (2) (the Agreement). The Agreement was approved on behalf of the Union by Council Decision 2011/824/EU (3).

(2)

The Agreement provides for a period of 10 years from the date of its entry into force, for enlarged tariff concessions applicable to imports into the European Union of unlimited quantities of products originating in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Moreover, a further possible extension of the enlarged tariff concessions is also envisaged in the Agreement, depending on the future economic development of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

(3)

Since the Agreement provides for a further liberalisation of trade in agricultural products, processed agricultural products and fish and fishery products, it is necessary to suspend the application of the tariff quotas and reference quantities laid down in Annex VIII to Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 for products originating in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, during the application period of the Agreement.

(4)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 of 21 December 1987 fixing conditions for the application of preferential customs duties on imports of certain flowers originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (4), was repealed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 (5).

(5)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 700/88 of 17 March 1988 laying down detailed rules for the application of the arrangements for the import into the Community of certain floricultural products originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (6), was repealed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1227/2006 (7).

(6)

As a result of those repeals Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 providing for non-eligibility for the tariff concessions for fresh cut flowers and flower buds where the price conditions laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 are not observed, has become redundant and should therefore be deleted.

(7)

Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

Since the Agreement enters into force on 1 January 2012, this Regulation should apply from that date.

(9)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,

(1)

the following Article 1a is inserted:

‘Article 1a

Suspension of the application of tariff quotas and reference quantities for products originating in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

The application of the tariff quotas and reference quantities laid down in Annex VIII for products originating in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip shall be temporarily suspended for a period of 10 years from 1 January 2012.

However, depending on the future economic development of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, a possible extension for an additional period could be considered at the latest 1 year before the expiration of the 10 years period as provided by the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters approved on behalf of the Union by Council Decision 2011/824/EU (8).

(2)

Article 2 is deleted.

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/31

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 imposes a prohibition on exports of goods which have no practical use other than for the purpose of capital punishment, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and controls on exports of certain goods that could be used for such purpose. It respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular respect for and protection of human dignity, the right to life and the prohibition of torture and inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment.

(2)

In some recent cases medicinal products exported to third countries have been diverted and used for capital punishment, notably by administering a lethal overdose by means of injection. The Union disapproves of capital punishment in all circumstances and works towards its universal abolition. The exporters objected to their involuntary association with such use of the products they developed for medical use.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to supplement the list of goods subject to trade restrictions to prevent the use of certain medicinal products for capital punishment and to ensure that all Union exporters of medicinal products are subject to uniform conditions in this regard. The relevant medicinal products were developed for, inter alia, anaesthesia and sedation and their export should therefore not be made subject to a complete prohibition.

(4)

It is also necessary to broaden the ban on trade in electric-shock belts to cover similar body-worn devices such as electric shock sleeves and cuffs which have the same impact as electric-shock belts.

(5)

It is necessary to prohibit trade in spiked batons which are not admissible for law enforcement. While the spikes are capable of causing significant pain or suffering, spiked batons do not appear more effective for riot control or self-protection than ordinary batons and the pain or suffering caused by the spikes is therefore cruel and not strictly necessary for the purpose of riot control or self-protection.

(6)

Changes in the numbering of certain parts of the Combined Nomenclature (CN) have occurred after Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 was adopted and the relevant CN codes should be updated accordingly.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products.

(8)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into force immediately,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/35

(1)

Article 70[(4c)] of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (2) allows the EAFRD contribution rate to be increased to a maximum of 95 % for Member States which are facing serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability.

(2)

In order to allow Member States to benefit as soon as possible from the increased co-financing rate, the rules for the calculation of the Union contribution in the context of the EAFRD accounts, provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 883/2006 (3), should be adapted with immediate effect.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 883/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on the Agricultural Funds,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/36

(1)

Union tariff quotas for sheep, goats, sheepmeat and goatmeat should be opened as from 2012. The duties and quantities should be fixed in accordance with the respective international agreements in force in 2012. As a result of the negotiations which led to the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and New Zealand pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (2), the Union undertook to increase the annual volume of New Zealand by 400 tonnes and to incorporate in its schedule an erga omnes annual import tariff quota of meat of sheep and goats of 200 tonnes carcase weight.

(2)

Council Regulation (EC) No 312/2003 of 18 February 2003 implementing for the Community the tariff provisions laid down in the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part (3) has provided for an additional bilateral tariff quota of 2 000 tonnes and an additional 10 % annual increase of the original quantity to be opened for product code 0204 from 1 February 2003. Therefore, 200 tonnes shall be added to the GATT/WTO tariff quota for Chile annually and both quotas should continue to be managed together in the same way.

(3)

Commission Regulation (EU) No 1245/2010 of 21 December 2010 opening Union tariff quotas for 2011 for sheep, goats, sheepmeat and goatmeat (4) opened for the year 2011 Union tariff quotas in accordance with the respective international agreements in force during the year 2011. Those tariff quotas should be maintained and opened annually while taking into account the provisions of the agreements with New Zealand and Chile referred to above. Regulation (EU) No 1245/2010 becomes also obsolete at the end of the year 2011 and should therefore be repealed. This Regulation should also be applicable for more than one year and respond to an objective of simplification by avoiding the adoption of a regulation every year.

(4)

Imports under this Regulation should be managed on a calendar-year basis.

(5)

A carcase-weight equivalent needs to be fixed in order to ensure a proper functioning of the Union tariff quotas.

(6)

Tariff quotas of the sheepmeat and goatmeat products should, by way of derogation from Commission Regulation (EC) No 1439/95 of 26 June 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 as regards the import and export of products in the sheepmeat and goatmeat sector (5), be managed in conformity with Article 144(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. This should be done in accordance with Articles 308a, 308b and 308c(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (6).

(7)

Tariff quotas under this Regulation should be regarded initially as non-critical within the meaning of Article 308c of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 when managed under the first-come, first-served system. Therefore, customs authorities should be authorised to waive the requirement for security in respect of goods initially imported under those tariff quotas in accordance with Articles 308c(1) and 248(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93.

(8)

It should be clarified which kind of proof certifying the origin of products has to be provided by operators in order to benefit from the tariff quotas under the first-come, first-served system.

(9)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

(a)

for live animals: 0,47;

(b)

for boneless lamb and boneless goatmeat of kid: 1,67;

(c)

for boneless mutton, boneless sheep and boneless goatmeat other than of kid and mixtures of any of these: 1,81;

(d)

for bone-in products: 1,00.

(a)

in the case of a tariff quota which is part of a preferential tariff agreement, it shall be the proof of origin laid down in that agreement;

(b)

in the case of other tariff quotas, it shall be a proof established in accordance with Article 47 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 and, in addition to the elements provided for in that Article, the following data:

(c)

in the case of a country whose tariff quota falls under points (a) and (b) and are merged, it shall be the proof referred to in point (a).

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/39

(1)

Annex V to Regulation (EC) No 329/2007 lists persons, entities and bodies who, having been designated by the Council, are covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

On 19 December 2011, the Council decided to amend the list of persons, entities and bodies to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex V should therefore be updated.

(3)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into force immediately.

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/48

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/50

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 620/2009 of 13 July 2009 providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for high-quality beef (3) sets out detailed rules for the submission and issue of import licences.

(2)

Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 provides that in cases where quantities covered by licence applications exceed the quantities available for the quota period, allocation coefficients should be fixed for the quantities covered by each licence application. The applications for import licences submitted pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 620/2009 between 1 and 7 December 2011 exceed the quantities available. Therefore, the extent to which import licences may be issued and the allocation coefficient should be determined,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/51

(1)

Article 19.1 of the Statute of the ESCB provides that the European Central Bank (ECB) may require credit institutions established in Member States to hold minimum reserve on accounts with the ECB and national central banks in pursuance of monetary policy objectives and that regulations concerning the calculation and determination of the required minimum reserves may be established by the Governing Council.

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1745/2003 of the European Central Bank of 12 September 2003 on the application of minimum reserves (ECB/2003/9) (1) establishes, inter alia, the categories of institutions subject to reserve requirements and reserve ratios applicable to certain liability categories.

(3)

On 8 December 2011 the Governing Council decided on additional enhanced credit support measures to support bank lending and liquidity in the euro area money market. As the ECB’s minimum reserve system does not need to be applied to the same extent as under normal circumstances to steer money market conditions, in order to enhance the provision of liquidity to counterparties to Eurosystem monetary policy operations it is necessary to reduce the reserve ratio to 1 %. Regulation (EC) No 1745/2003 (ECB/2003/9) should therefore be amended,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/52

(1)

On 12 December 2005, the Council adopted Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP on establishing a European Union Border Assistance Mission for the Rafah Crossing Point (EU BAM Rafah) (1).

(2)

On 26 May 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/312/CFSP (2) amending Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP and extending it until 31 December 2011.

(3)

On 8 November 2011 the Political and Security Committee (PSC) recommended the technical extension of EU BAM Rafah for further 6 months.

(4)

EU BAM Rafah should be further extended from 1 January 2012 until 30 June 2012 on the basis of its current mandate.

(5)

It is also necessary to lay down the financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2012.

(6)

EU BAM Rafah will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union,

(1)

Article 12 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 12

Security

1.   The Civilian Operation Commander shall direct the Head of Mission’s planning of security measures and ensure their proper and effective implementation for EU BAM Rafah in accordance with Articles 5 and 9, in coordination with the Security Directorate of the European External Action Service (EEAS).

2.   The Head of Mission shall be responsible for the security of EU BAM Rafah and for ensuring compliance with minimum security requirements applicable to EU BAM Rafah, in line with the policy of the Union on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty and its supporting instruments.

3.   The Head of Mission shall be assisted by a Senior Mission Security Officer (SMSO), who shall report to the Head of Mission and also maintain a close functional relationship with the Security Directorate of the EEAS.

4.   EU BAM Rafah staff shall undergo mandatory security training before taking up their duties, in accordance with the OPLAN. They shall also receive regular in-theatre refresher training organised by the SMSO.’;

(2)

in Article 13, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 25 November 2005 to 31 December 2011 shall be EUR 21 570 000.

The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2012 shall be EUR 970 000.’;

(3)

in Article 16, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:

‘It shall expire on 30 June 2012.’.

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/54

(1)

On 14 November 2005, the Council adopted Joint Action 2005/797/CFSP (1) on the European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian Territories (EUPOL COPPS) which was last extended by Council Decision 2009/955/CFSP (2) and expired on 31 December 2010.

(2)

On 17 December 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/784/CFSP (3) continuing as from 1 January 2011 the European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian Territories, and expiring on 31 December 2011.

(3)

On 8 November 2011, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) recommended the technical extension of EUPOL COPPS for further 6 months.

(4)

EUPOL COPPS should be further extended from 1 January 2012 until 30 June 2012 on the basis of its current mandate.

(5)

It is also necessary to lay down the financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUPOL COPPS for the period from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2012.

(6)

EUPOL COPPS will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union,

(1)

Article 12 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 12

Security

1.   The Civilian Operation Commander shall direct the Head of Mission’s planning of security measures and ensure their proper and effective implementation for EUPOL COPPS in accordance with Articles 5, 6 and 9, in coordination with the Security Directorate of the European External Action Service (EEAS).

2.   The Head of Mission shall be responsible for the security of EUPOL COPPS and for ensuring compliance with minimum security requirements applicable to EUPOL COPPS, in line with the policy of the Union on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty and its supporting instruments.

3.   The Head of Mission shall be assisted by a Senior Mission Security Officer (SMSO), who shall report to the Head of Mission and also maintain a close functional relationship with the Security Directorate of the EEAS.

4.   EUPOL COPPS staff shall undergo mandatory security training before taking up their duties, in accordance with the OPLAN. They shall also receive regular in-theatre refresher training organised by the SMSO.’;

(2)

in Article 13, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUPOL COPPS for the period from 1 January 2011 until 31 December 2011 shall be EUR 8 250 000.

The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUPOL COPPS for the period from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2012 shall be EUR 4 750 000.’;

(3)

in Article 16, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:

‘It shall expire on 30 June 2012.’.

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/55

(1)

On 26 April 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar.

(2)

The information relating to one entity on the list in Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be updated.

(3)

Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/56

(1)

On 22 December 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/800/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

(2)

The Council has carried out a complete review of the list of persons and entities, as set out in Annexes II and III to Decision 2010/800/CFSP, to which Articles 4(1)(b) and (c) and 5(1)(b) and (c) of that Decision apply.

(3)

The Council has concluded that the persons and entities listed in Annexes II and III to Decision 2010/800/CFSP should continue to be subject to the specific restrictive measures provided for therein.

(4)

The Council has also concluded that the entry concerning one entity included in Annex II to Decision 2010/800/CFSP should be amended.

(5)

The Council has moreover decided that additional persons and entities should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures as set out in Annexes II and III to Decision 2010/800/CFSP.

(6)

The list of persons and entities set out in Annexes II and III to Decision 2010/800/CFSP should be updated accordingly,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/61

(1)

On 16 February 2011 Kenya requested, in accordance with Article 36 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, a derogation from the rules of origin set out in that Annex for a period of one year. On 20 September 2011 Kenya submitted additional information relating to its request. The request covers a total quantity of 2 000 tonnes of tuna loins of HS heading 1604. The request is made because catches and supply of originating raw tuna have decreased and because of the problem of piracy.

(2)

According to the information provided by Kenya catches of raw originating tuna are unusually low even compared to the normal seasonal variations and have led to a decrease in production of tuna loins. In addition, Kenya has pointed out the risk involved due to piracy during the supply of raw tuna. This abnormal situation makes it impossible for Kenya to comply with the rules of origin laid down in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 during a certain period.

(3)

To ensure continuity of importations from the ACP countries to the Union as well as a smooth transition from the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement to the Agreement establishing a framework for an Interim Economic Partnership Agreement (EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement), a new derogation should be granted with retroactive effect from 1 January 2011.

(4)

A temporary derogation from the rules of origin laid down in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 would not cause serious injury to an established Community industry taking into account the imports concerned, provided that certain conditions relating to quantities, surveillance and duration are respected.

(5)

It is therefore justified to grant a temporary derogation under Article 36(1)(a) of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007.

(6)

Kenya will benefit from an automatic derogation from the rules of origin for tuna loins of HS heading 1604 pursuant to Article 41(8) of the Origin Protocol attached to the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement, when that Agreement enters into force or is provisionally applied.

(7)

In accordance with Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 the rules of origin set out in Annex II to that Regulation and the derogations from them are to be superseded by the rules of the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement, the entry into force or provisional application of which is expected to take place in 2012. The derogation should therefore apply until 31 December 2011. Whilst a derogation is still to be granted in 2011, the overall situation, including the state of ratification of the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement, will be reassessed in 2012.

(8)

In accordance with Article 41(8) of the Origin Protocol attached to the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement, the automatic derogation from the rules of origin is limited to an annual quota of 2 000 tonnes of tuna loins for the countries having initialled the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi). Kenya is the only country in the region that currently exports tuna loins to the Union. It is therefore appropriate to grant to Kenya a derogation under Article 36 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 in respect of 2 000 tonnes of tuna loins, quantity which does not exceed the full annual quota granted to the EAC region under the EAC-EU Interim Partnership Agreement.

(9)

Accordingly a derogation should be granted to Kenya in respect of 2 000 tonnes of tuna loins for a period of one year.

(10)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (2) lays down rules relating to the management of tariff quotas. In order to ensure efficient management carried out in close cooperation between the authorities of Kenya, the customs authorities of the Member States and the Commission, those rules should apply mutatis mutandis to the quantities imported under the derogation granted by this Decision.

(11)

In order to allow efficient monitoring of the operation of the derogation, the authorities of Kenya should communicate regularly to the Commission details of the EUR.1 movement certificates issued.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,

21.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/64

(1)

Decision 2009/470/EC lays down the procedures governing the financial contribution by the Union for programmes for the eradication, control and monitoring of animal diseases and zoonoses.

(2)

Commission Decision 2008/341/EC of 25 April 2008 laying down Community criteria for national programmes for the eradication, control and monitoring of certain animal diseases and zoonoses (2) provides that in order to be approved under the measures provided for in Article 27(1) of Decision 2009/470/EC, programmes submitted by the Member States to the Commission for the eradication, control and monitoring of the animal diseases and zoonoses listed in the Annex to that Decision must meet at least the criteria set out in the Annex to Decision 2008/341/EC.

(3)

Commission Decision 2010/712/EU of 23 November 2010 approving annual and multiannual programmes and the financial contribution from the Union for the eradication, control and monitoring of certain animal diseases and zoonoses presented by the Member States for 2011 and following years (3) approves certain national programmes and sets out the rate and maximum amount of the financial contribution by the Union for each programme submitted by the Member States.

(4)

The Commission has assessed the reports submitted by the Member States on the expenditures incurred for those programmes. The results of that assessment show that certain Member States will not utilise their full allocation for the year 2011 while others will spend in excess of the allocated amount.

(5)

Certain Member States have informed the Commission that, under the current financial situation, additional support to the compensation of owners of culled animals and other measures financed at a level of 50 % is required to ensure the continuity of the EU co-financed veterinary programmes, in order to maintain the positive trend regarding the different diseases.

(6)

The Commission examined the requests for an increased level of funding taking into account the veterinary situation and the availability of funds from the current financial year, and considered appropriate that the eligible measures financed at a level of 50 %, receive reinforced support by modifying the level of funding to 60 %.

(7)

The financial contribution by the Union for a number of national programmes therefore needs to be adjusted. It is appropriate to reallocate funding from national programmes which will not use their full allocation to those that are expected to exceed it. The reallocation should be based on the most recent information on expenditure actually incurred by the concerned Member States.

(8)

In addition, Portugal has submitted an amended programme for the eradication of bovine brucellosis, Latvia has submitted an amended programme for the control of salmonellosis, Romania and Slovakia have submitted amended programmes for the control and monitoring of classical swine fever, Denmark has submitted an amended survey programme for avian influenza in poultry and wild birds, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Spain, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom have submitted amended programmes for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE), bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and scrapie and Romania, Slovenia and Finland submitted amended programmes for the eradication of rabies.

(9)

The Commission has assessed those amended programmes from both the veterinary and the financial point of view. They were found to comply with relevant Union veterinary legislation and in particular with the criteria set out in the Annex to Decision 2008/341/EC. The amended programmes should therefore be approved.

(10)

Decision 2010/712/EU should therefore be amended accordingly.

(11)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

(a)

the programme submitted by Belgium on 26 July 2011;

(b)

the programme submitted by Latvia on 8 March 2011.

(a)

the programme submitted by Romania on 7 October 2011;

(b)

the programme submitted by Slovakia on 21 November 2011.

(a)

the programme submitted by Belgium on 15 June 2011;

(b)

the programme submitted by the Czech Republic on 17 June 2011;

(c)

the programme submitted by Denmark on 8 June 2011;

(d)

the programme submitted by Germany on 14 June 2011;

(e)

the programme submitted by Estonia on 27 June 2011;

(f)

the programme submitted by Ireland on 29 June 2011;

(g)

the programme submitted by Spain on 1 July 2011;

(h)

the programme submitted by France on 13 July 2011;

(i)

the programme submitted by for Italy on 22 June 2011;

(j)

the programme submitted by Cyprus on 30 June 2011;

(k)

the programme submitted by Latvia on 28 June 2011;

(l)

the programme submitted by Luxembourg on 24 June 2011;

(m)

the programme submitted by Hungary on 29 June 2011;

(n)

the programme submitted by the Netherlands on 30 June 2011;

(o)

the programme submitted by Austria on 29 June 2011;

(p)

the programme submitted by Poland on 28 June 2011;

(q)

the programme submitted by Portugal on 29 June 2011;

(r)

the programme submitted by Slovenia on 8 June 2011;

(s)

the programme submitted by Slovakia on 30 June 2011;

(t)

the programme submitted by Finland on 22 June 2011;

(u)

the programme submitted by Sweden on 20 June 2011;

(v)

the programme submitted by the United Kingdom on 28 June 2011.

(a)

the programme submitted by Romania on 23 September 2011;

(b)

the programme submitted by Finland on 15 September 2011.

1.

Article 1 is amended as follows:

2.

Article 2 is amended as follows:

3.

Article 3 is amended as follows:

4.

Article 4 is amended as follows:

5.

Article 5 is amended as follows:

6.

Article 6 is amended as follows: