30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/1

—

recalling its 1993 resolution on Cyprus,

—

recalling its 2009 resolution on Turkey’s progress report,

—

having regard to Rule 123 of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the city of Famagusta in the Republicof Cypruswas captured by the invading Turkish forces in August 1974,

B.

whereas a section of Famagustawas then sealed off and remains uninhabited, under the direct control of the Turkish military,

C.

whereas the return of the Famagusta sealed-off section to its lawful inhabitants would facilitate efforts toward a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprusproblem,

D.

noting the 1979 High Level Agreement and UNSC Resolutions 550(1984) and 789(1992),

E.

noting the 2008 Report of the Committee on Petitions on Petition 733/2004,

1.

Calls on the Government of Turkey to act according to the aforementioned UNSC Resolutions and Report Recommendations and return the Famagusta sealed-off section to its lawful inhabitants, who must resettle under conditions of security and peace;

2.

Urges the EU institutions to coordinate their efforts with Parliament to promote Turkey’s cooperation;

3.

Instructs its President to forward this declaration, with the names of the signatories (1), to the Commission, the Council, the governments of the MemberStates, the UN Secretary General and the Government of Turkey.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/2

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the Euro area (1) (part of the ‘six pack’),

—

having regard to the Commission Green Paper dated 23 November 2011 on the feasibility of introducing stability bonds,

—

having regard to the presentation by Vice-President Rehn in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs on 23 November 2011 and of the exchange of views with the German Council of Economic Experts on the European redemption fund on 29 November 2011,

—

having regard to President Van Rompuy’s Interim Report: Towards a Stronger Economic Union of 6 December 2011,

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas Parliament has requested that the Commission present a report on the possibility of introducing euro-securities, which is an integral part of the agreement between Parliament and the Council on the economic governance package (‘six pack’);

B.

whereas the eurozone is in a unique situation, with the eurozone Member States sharing a single currency without a common fiscal policy and a single bond market;

C.

whereas the issuance of bonds with joint and several liability would require a process of deeper integration;

1.

Is deeply concerned at the continuous strains on the euro area sovereign bond markets reflected in widening spreads, high volatility and vulnerability to speculative attacks over the last two years;

2.

Believes that the euro area, as the issuer of the world’s second international currency, is co-responsible for the stability of the international monetary system;

3.

Stresses that it is in the strategic long-term interest of the eurozone and of its Member States to draw all the possible benefits of issuing the euro, which has the potential to become a global reserve currency;

4.

Notes in particular that the US Treasury market and the total euro area sovereign bond market are comparable in size but not in terms of liquidity, diversity, and pricing; points out that it could be in the interests of the eurozone to develop a common liquid and diversified bond market, and that a stability bond market would offer a viable alternative to the US dollar bond market and establish the euro as a global ‘safe haven’;

5.

Believes also that the euro area and its Member States are responsible for ensuring the long-term stability of the currency used by more than 330 million people and many companies and investors, which indirectly affects the rest of the world;

6.

Points out that stability bonds would be different from bonds issued by federal states such as the USA and Germany and cannot therefore strictly be compared to US treasury bonds and Bundesanleihen;

7.

Welcomes the presentation of the Green Paper, which meets a longstanding request of the European Parliament, and considers it a useful starting point for further reflection; is open and eager actively to discuss all issues – both strengths and weaknesses – relating to the feasibility of introducing stability bonds under different options; encourages the Commission to deepen further its analysis after a broad public debate, to which the European Parliament and the national parliaments should contribute, as well as the ECB, if it deems it appropriate; considers none of the three options presented by the Commission to be a response per se to the current sovereign debt crisis;

8.

Takes note of the Commission’s assessment, which is part of the Commission Green Paper on the feasibility of introducing stability bonds, that stability bonds would facilitate the transmission of euro-area monetary policy and would promote efficiency in the bond market and in the broader euro-area financial system;

9.

Reiterates its position that, for a common issuance of bonds, a sustainable fiscal framework needs to be in place, aimed at both enhanced economic governance and economic growth in the euro area, and that sequencing is a key issue, involving a binding roadmap similar to the Maastricht criteria for introducing the single currency, and drawing on all the lessons thereof;

10.

Takes the view that the objectives underlying the decisions taken at the European Council of 8-9 December 2011 to further enhance the sustainability of public finances also contribute to creating the necessary conditions for the possible introduction of stability bonds;

11.

Believes that stability bonds could be an additional means of incentivising compliance with the stability and growth pact, provided that they address the moral hazard and joint liability issues; notes that further work needs to be undertaken as regards the options presented in the Green Paper on issues such as:

12.

Believes that the prospect of stability bonds can foster stability in the euro area in the medium term; calls on the Commission, however, to come forward rapidly with proposals to address decisively the current sovereign debt crisis, such as the European redemption pact proposed by the German Council of Economic Experts and/or the finalisation and ratification of an ESM treaty and/or eurobills, as well as joint management of sovereign debt issuance;

13.

Points out that this resolution constitutes a preliminary response to the Commission Green Paper, which will be followed by a more comprehensive resolution in the form of an INI report;

14.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Central Bank.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/4

—

having regard to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union,

—

having regard to Article 9 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to Articles 145, 148, 152 and 153(5) of the TFEU,

—

having regard to Article 28 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the European Pact for Gender Equality (2011-2020) adopted by the Council on 7 March 2011,

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 23 November 2011 on the Annual Growth Survey 2012 (AGS) (COM(2011)0815), and the Draft Joint Employment Report annexed thereto,

—

having regard to its resolution of 1 December 2011 on the European Semester for Economic Policy Coordination (1),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 3 March 2010 on Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to its position of 8 September 2010 on the proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States: Part II of the Europe 2020 Integrated Guidelines (2),

—

having regard to Council Decision 2010/707/EU of 21 October 2010 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (3),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 23 November 2010 on an Agenda for new skills and jobs: a European contribution towards full employment (COM(2010)0682),

—

having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2011 on the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs (4),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 16 December 2010 on the European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion: A European framework for social and territorial cohesion’ (COM(2010)0758),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2011 on the European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion (5),

—

having regard to Commission Recommendation 2008/867/EC of 3 October 2008 on the active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market (notified under document number C(2008)5737) (6) and to its resolution of 6 May 2009 thereon (7),

—

having regard to the Social Protection Committee (SPC) Opinion and Report on the Social Dimension of the Europe 2020 Strategy (SPC/2010/10/7 final),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 5 April 2011 on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (COM(2011)0173),

—

having regard to its resolution of 9 March 2011 on the EU strategy on Roma inclusion (8),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 15 September 2010 on Youth on the Move: An initiative to unleash the potential of young people to achieve smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the European Union (COM(2010)0477),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 May 2011 on Youth on the Move: - a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems (9),

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2010 on promoting youth access to the labour market, strengthening trainee, internship and apprenticeship status (10),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 September 2010 on developing the job potential of a new sustainable economy (11),

—

having regard to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (12),

—

having regard to Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (13),

—

having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (14),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0021/2012),

A.

whereas the social consequences of the crisis are far-reaching, now exacerbated by the impact of austerity measures taken in certain countries in response to the sovereign debt crisis, cutting jobs, both in private and public sectors, social benefits and public services, and thus worsening poverty situations across the EU;

B.

whereas unemployment has increased significantly since 2008 and reached the level of 23 million unemployed people in the EU, corresponding to 10 % of the working age population; whereas, in order to meet its employment target, the EU will have to bring an additional 17,6 million people into employment by 2020;

C.

whereas the labour market situation is particularly critical for young people, regardless of their level of education, who often end up with precarious employment contracts and in unpaid traineeships; whereas the difficult situation of young people is partly because of mismatches between acquired skills and labour market demand;

D.

whereas people approaching pension age, long-term unemployed workers, non-EU workers and low-skilled workers are also among those worse hit by the crisis;

E.

whereas the gender dimension is crucial to achieving the EU 2020 headline targets, as women form the greatest reserve of as yet unused labour and form the majority of those living in poverty in the EU; whereas specific attention needs to be paid therefore to both gender mainstreaming and policies targeted at women throughout the European Semester process;

F.

whereas in-work poverty and precariousness are increasing in the EU, in addition to the high numbers of unemployed people and the increased average length of time in unemployment; whereas the crisis has created new categories of people at risk of poverty; whereas the Social Protection Committee (SPC) warns of increasing numbers of people at risk of income poverty, child poverty, severe material deprivation and social exclusion because of the impact of fiscal consolidation measures, where wrongly-targeted and regressive, on social protection systems, and whereas implementation of integrated active inclusion strategies should therefore be a central element of EU and national social policy agendas;

G.

whereas the austerity measures and measures aimed at fiscal consolidation might have a disproportionately negative effect on the position of women in the labour market and on poverty among women, for instance due to cuts in the public sector that affect women or by limiting fiscal benefits for childcare;

H.

whereas, in spite of the urgency of the situation, progress in Member States in delivering on the Europe 2020 objectives is below expectations; whereas commitments set in the National Reform Programmes are insufficient to meet most of the EU-level targets;

I.

whereas the social and employment aspects are grouped into only one of the five priorities of the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) while they represent three out of the five headline targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy;

1.

Urges the European Council to ensure the following messages form part of its policy guidance for the European Semester 2012, and mandates its President to defend this position during the Spring European Council of 1-2 March 2012;

2.

Calls on the European Council to ensure that the yearly policy guidance set out on the basis of the AGS is fully aimed at fulfilling all the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

3.

Calls on the European Council to ensure coherence between the different priorities in its policy guidance, so that guidance on fiscal consolidation is based on social justice and does not increase poverty or hamper efforts to tackle unemployment and mitigate the social consequences of the crisis; believes strongly that the main focus needs to be on integrated reform measures that promote growth in the short term as well as in the medium and long term; stresses, therefore, that budgetary, growth and employment measures need to be taken together as they are all interdependent and jointly constitute prerequisites for recovery;

4.

Calls on the European Council to ensure, in its policy guidelines, that EU funds are earmarked for achievement of the Europe 2020 Strategy’s objectives;

5.

Is deeply concerned about the fact that the current national targets are not sufficient to achieve the Europe 2020 headline targets for employment, education and poverty reduction; urges the European Council to ensure that Member States step up their national targets, and that these are accompanied by concrete and realistic roadmaps for implementation and assessed using clear and consistent indicators drawing on the agreed Joint Assessment Framework, so that the EU is put on a clear and feasible track to achieve all the Europe 2020 objectives and that progress can be transparently measured;

6.

Calls on the European Council to provide the necessary budgetary leeway and encouragement for investments in sustainable and decent job creation in a wide range of sectors, as well as investment in training workers and the unemployed and in poverty reduction;

7.

Calls on the European Council to endorse the policy guidance to shift the tax burden as part of non-wage costs away from labour while encouraging the companies benefiting from those exemptions/reductions to offer decent living wages in return; believes that this would make hiring and retaining employees more attractive and improve the overall labour market situation, particularly that of vulnerable groups; calls on the European Council, in line with the subsidiarity principle, to endorse the guidance on increasing revenue through fair, progressive, redistributive, effective and efficient taxation, and better tax coordination to combat tax evasion, so as to ensure the fairness of the system and preserve social cohesion;

8.

Regrets that policy guidance aimed at making work more attractive does not address the quality of jobs and that too little attention is paid to putting in place the necessary preconditions for increasing labour market participation, notably that of women, people with disabilities and the most deprived, such as the long-term unemployed; calls on the European Council to include guidance on decent work and on efforts to support the reconciliation of work, family and private life by means of affordable care and childcare provision, family-related leave and flexible working arrangements;

9.

Warns that austerity measures and reduction of the administrative burden should not compromise social protection and health and safety standards nor result in lighter conditions or exemptions from EU legislation;

10.

Stresses the importance of not losing the potential of the younger generation, and calls on the European Council to make tackling youth unemployment a priority; calls on Member States to develop comprehensive strategies for young people who are not in employment, education or training, including targeted active labour-market policy measures, measures tackling skills mismatches in the labour market, promotion of entrepreneurship among young people and frameworks securing the transition from education to work, such as ‘dual vocational training’; calls on Member States to introduce, in close cooperation with the social partners, a Youth Guarantee securing the right of every young person in the EU to be offered a job, an apprenticeship, additional training or combined work and training after a maximum period of four months’ unemployment; stresses the importance of reducing precarious forms of employment among young people, such as temporary contracts, part-time jobs and unpaid internships, where these are undesired;

11.

Welcomes the fact that, for the first time, the AGS includes guidance in the field of poverty and social exclusion, and calls on the European Council to endorse this guidance as a priority, while ensuring that combating poverty and social exclusion goes beyond measures aimed at integrating people into the labour market, by putting the emphasis on social protection and active inclusion of vulnerable groups with no or limited links to the labour market;

12.

Emphasises that Article 9 TFEU needs to be mainstreamed throughout the European Semesters, including in the country-specific recommendations, which should be accompanied by ex-ante and ex-post social impact assessments;

13.

Recalls that the increased importance of the European dimension of the economic policies of Member States should go hand in hand with increased democratic legitimacy and appropriate accountability to the European Parliament and national parliaments; considers that, in the absence of a legal basis for ordinary legislative procedure applicable to the AGS, the European Council has a special responsibility to take into account parliamentary comments when endorsing the policy guidance in order to give it democratic legitimacy, and that the sense of urgency in implementing austerity measures and fiscal discipline cannot by any means override the need for a democratic decision-making process;

14.

Calls on the European Council and the Member States to ensure that national and regional parliaments, social partners, public authorities and civil society are deeply involved in the implementation and monitoring of policy guidance under the Europe 2020 Strategy and economic governance process, in order to ensure ownership;

15.

Calls on the Commission to transform the AGS into Annual Sustainable Growth Guidelines in 2013, to present this in a format that allows Parliament to propose amendments and to ensure that a transparent process of inter-institutional decision-making ends in commonly agreed policy guidance;

16.

Calls on Member States to support initiatives that facilitate the development of sectors with the highest employment potential, particularly in the transformation to a sustainable economy (green jobs), health and social services (white jobs) and the digital economy;

17.

Calls on Member States to improve the environment for businesses, especially SMEs, and in particular to promote business start-ups and support existing SMEs in their job creation activities;

18.

Calls on the European Council to reinforce efforts to improve the Single Market, to enhance the digital economy and to focus on smart regulation to reduce unnecessary red tape;

19.

Calls on Member States to increase the coverage and effectiveness of employment services and to adopt effective active labour-market policies – in close cooperation with social partners – mutually supported by activation incentives, such as welfare-to-work programmes, and adequate benefit systems in order to maintain employability, support people back into work and safeguard decent living conditions;

20.

Calls on Member States to support and develop conditions for more flexible working arrangements, especially for older and younger workers, and to promote workers’ mobility; stresses the importance of increasing labour productivity and efficiency across the EU in order to regain Europe’s competitiveness;

21.

Calls on Member States to make full use of the Structural Funds in order to enhance employability and combat structural and long-term unemployment effectively; believes that the Commission should provide the Member States with further assistance and guidance in regard to this goal, especially in these times of recession and social challenges;

22.

Considers that the Europe 2020 headline target for the employment rate can only be achieved if women’s participation in the labour market is increased significantly; calls on the Commission to ensure Member States receive stronger guidance which should aim at putting in place the necessary conditions for higher employment rates among women, such as affordable care and child care, adequate maternity, paternity and parental leave schemes and flexibility in working hours and place of work;

23.

Calls on the European Council to assess the effectiveness of its policy recommendations in supporting labour market participation of all adults in the household, in providing a decent living wage and in facilitating upward transitions for those trapped in low-paid or precarious jobs, as these are the three mechanisms that can reduce in-work poverty; calls on Member States to combat in-work poverty by pursuing labour-market policies which aim at ensuring living wages for those in work;

24.

Calls on the Commission to use gender disaggregated data in their progress reports;

25.

Calls on the Member States to further recognise the real added value that older workers represent within their enterprises and create age-friendly working conditions in order to enable older workers who so choose to participate and remain in the labour market; calls on Member States to do so by combating age discrimination, replacing incentives for older workers to leave the labour market with incentives for an inclusive labour market and by adapting working conditions to the needs of older workers, such as putting in place the right to flexible working time and place of work, the right to training and the right to a flexible exit into retirement, ensuring the adequacy of pension provision for all; believes that promotion of occupational health should ensure active ageing during and after work-life;

26.

Calls on the Member States to ensure that people on temporary or part-time contracts enjoy equal treatment, including with regard to dismissal and pay in accordance with primary and secondary EU law, and that these workers and people who are self-employed have adequate social protection and access to training and lifelong learning and that framework conditions are set to enable them to make a career; calls on the Member States to implement the framework agreements on part-time work and fixed-term employment and to enforce effectively the Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation;

27.

Believes that necessary reforms in the labour market, which aim at increasing productivity and competitiveness, should be implemented in such a way as to ensure social justice and promote job quality, while respecting national traditions of social dialogue;

28.

Calls on Member States to take steps to improve mobility within and across labour markets and to remove all the existing legal and administrative barriers that hamper the free movement of workers within the European Union;

29.

Calls on the European Council to set up a tax on financial transactions to enhance sustainable job creation;

30.

Regrets the insufficient effort made to implement gender mainstreaming in the priorities of the Annual Growth Survey, despite the fact that the European Pact for Gender Equality 2011-2020 asks the Commission to integrate a gender equality perspective into the Annual Growth Survey; calls on the European Council to ensure that the policy guidance will address gender inequalities; calls on Member States to implement gender mainstreaming in the design of National Reform Programmes; calls on the Commission to address country specific recommendations in the case of Member States failing to take the gender dimension into account;

31.

Calls on the Member States to adapt and expand investment in education, training, the promotion of entrepreneurial skills and lifelong learning for all age groups, not only through formal learning but also through the development of non-formal and informal learning which lead to higher growth potential, and warns of the long-term social and economic costs of cuts in education budgets;

32.

Calls on the EU and Member States to bridge skills mismatches and shortages and increase synergies between universities, training institutions, youth organisations and enterprises, by improving anticipation of skills’ needs, adapting education and training systems to the needs of the labour market and endowing the workforce with new skills in order to fight structural unemployment and prepare the workforce for the transition to a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy;

33.

Urges the Member States not to allow austerity measures to compromise growth-friendly policies, and to prioritise growth-friendly expenditure such as education, lifelong learning, research and innovation, ensuring at the same time the efficiency of this spending;

34.

Recalls that, in its ‘Youth on The Move’ flagship initiative, the Commission promised to propose a Quality Framework for Traineeships, and calls on it to submit, without delay, such a Framework;

35.

Encourages vigorous implementation of the National Qualifications Framework as a tool promoting the development of lifelong learning;

36.

Encourages the Commission, the MemberStatesand employers to create more opportunities for female workers in the new technologies sectors in order to strengthen the high-tech sector in accordance with the Europe 2020 Strategy objectives;

37.

Highlights the fact that, according to the November 2011 Eurobarometer, 49 % of European citizens cited tackling poverty and social exclusion as a priority policy that they want to see promoted by the European Parliament, making it their first concern before coordination of economic, budgetary and fiscal policies;

38.

Calls on Member States to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of social protection systems, including access to pension systems with due consideration for gender equality, and to make sure that these continue to act as buffers against poverty and social exclusion;

39.

Calls on the Member States to implement active inclusion strategies and adequate and affordable high-quality services, adequate minimum income support and pathway approaches to quality employment to prevent marginalisation of low-income and vulnerable groups;

40.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to follow-up the SPC’s call for participative National Social Reports to underpin the National Reform Programmes, based on the Social OMC Common Objectives and providing multidimensional poverty solutions promoting access to rights, resources and services;

41.

Calls on the Member States and the Commission to put in place, implement and enforce effective anti-discrimination measures; calls on the Commission to address the lack of progress in implementing and enforcing anti-discrimination measures in the country specific recommendations;

42.

Calls on Member States to specify in their National Reform Programmes how EU funds will be used to support the national poverty targets and other social, employment and education targets, ensuring the achievement of the Europe 2020 targets;

43.

Warns that pension reforms encouraged in the AGS cannot just level up the retirement age to shore up deficits, but, on the contrary, must encompass working years and provide a decent universal coverage, reducing elderly poverty and without placing state-run pension systems in danger;

44.

Calls on the EU and the MemberStatesto ensure that any health system reforms focus on improving quality and ensuring adequacy, affordability and universal access;

45.

Is concerned about the social impact of the crisis on poverty among women; calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that fiscal consolidation is compatible with the social dimension of the Europe 2020 Strategy and the employment guidelines; calls on the Commission to assess also the effects of austerity measures on gender equality and female employment;

46.

Calls on the Commission to develop gender analysis and mainstreaming in regard to the impact of pension reforms on women’s lives in the EU, with the objective of individualising pensions rights and social security and tax systems as well;

47.

Is concerned about the fact that the European Parliament and national parliaments continue to play a limited role in the European Semester; deplores the fact that policy guidance in the AGS initiated by the Commission, and to be endorsed by the European Council, lacks parliamentary involvement and therefore democratic legitimacy;

48.

Notes that five Member States which currently have a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commission, IMF and ECB received no country-specific recommendations in July 2011; calls on the Commission to ensure that the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding is fully compatible with achieving the Europe 2020 objectives on increasing employment and reducing poverty; reiterates its position that the International Labour Organisation (ILO) should be involved in the Commission-IMF-ECB financial assistance programmes; calls on the European Council to give the Member States concerned the necessary encouragement for investments in sustainable job creation, education and training and poverty reduction so as to facilitate their contribution to achieving the EU headline targets in these areas;

49.

Calls on Member States, against the background of the worst economic crisis the European Union has ever known, to implement without delay the necessary national reform programmes;

50.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/12

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 23 November 2011 on the Annual Growth Survey 2012 (COM(2011)0815),

—

having regard to the legislative package on economic governance adopted on 16 November 2011 and, in particular, to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2011 on the Scoreboard for the surveillance of macroeconomic imbalances: envisaged initial design (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 1 December 2011 on the European Semester for Economic Policy Coordination (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2011 on the financial, economic and social crisis: recommendations concerning the measures and initiatives to be taken (4),

—

having regard to the conclusions of the European Council of 9 December 2011,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0018/2012),

A.

whereas the latest statistical evidence highlights rising inequalities and unemployment in the European Union;

B.

whereas most Member States have lost sight of the headline targets of the EU2020 objectives;

1.

Welcomes the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) 2012 as presented by the Commission as a good basis for this year’s European Semester; stresses that the solutions specifically targeting the current sovereign debt and financial crisis, on which all the institutions are working on a daily basis, should go hand in hand with a major focus on medium- and long-term growth-enhancing measures, as well as an overhaul of the general economic framework, in order to improve the sustainability and competitiveness of the European economy and ensure its long-lasting success;

2.

Deems however that the Annual Growth Survey falls short of what is necessary to restore confidence among European households and enterprises as well as financial markets, since it overlooks the need to take urgent action to support short-term activity and employment in investing in the EU 2020 objectives;

3.

Recalls that the Annual Growth Survey 2011 and a number of other initiatives, which need to be implemented through national and European legislation, already contained most of the elements which are necessary to restore confidence, increase competitiveness and promote smart and sustainable growth and job creation;

4.

Recalls its requests addressed to the Council and the Commission in its resolution of 1 December 2011 on the European Semester for Economic Policy Coordination and demands a public response to the elements contained in that resolution;

5.

Deplores the lack of, or unevenness in, the implementation in the Member States of guidelines agreed at the EU level, bearing in mind the necessary margin of discretion which the Member States enjoy to pursue their own policies, which prevents the agreed guidelines from unleashing their full potential to achieve EU 2020 goals; welcomes the fact of this year’s Annual Growth Survey’s emphasis being put on the need for implementation as well as on growth-enhancing actions; underlines the fact that the democratic legitimacy and national ownership of the changes which have been decided in terms of future economic governance need to be substantially increased;

6.

Agrees that the AGS and the official positions taken by the European Parliament and the other European Institutions in this regard set out priorities for action at national and EU level for the next twelve months, including for the achievement of the EU 2020 targets, which should feed into national economic and budgetary decisions, in line with the EU’s country-specific recommendations;

7.

Agrees with the Commission’s analysis that efforts at national and EU level should concentrate on the following five priorities:

8.

Welcomes the evaluation of the progress of the flagship initiatives of the EU 2020 Strategy, but underlines that the fight against social exclusion and poverty should remain a high priority of every policy;

9.

Believes that access to basic banking services remains a key factor for social inclusion and therefore encourages the Commission to take bolder action to guarantee this access;

10.

Acknowledges the interdependence and therefore spill-over effects between Member State economies and fiscal policies; stresses that the growth prospects of all Member States, whether they are currently in the Euro area or not, are highly dependent on how decisively the debt crisis is dealt with and how coordinated economic policies effectively ensure a better focus on investment for sustainable growth and job creation; urges Member States to take the appropriate steps to correct their excessive deficits by the deadlines set by the Council and to reduce their sovereign debts to a sustainable level;

11.

Takes note of the new legislative proposals on economic governance; believes that such proposals should offer the opportunity to enhance the role of the European Parliament regarding the definition and implementation of economic policy surveillance procedures within the European Semester framework in conformity with the provisions of Articles 121 and 136 of the Treaty;

12.

Recalls that, in the current context, where several Member States are confronted with stringent and difficult choices in terms of allocation of public resources it is urgent to ensure the consistency of different economic policy instruments and in particular policies conducive to respect for EU 2020 objectives and headline targets on an equal basis;

13.

Recalls in that perspective the need to explicitly identify, assess and address spill-over effects of Member States’ economic policies as well as to carry out social impact assessments of economic policy instruments included in the EU Semester framework;

14.

Underlines the fact that Member States should pursue differentiated strategies according to their budgetary situations and insists that Member States must keep their public expenditure growth below the rate of medium-term trend GDP growth provided that increased expenditure is not matched by additional discretionary revenue measures; invites the Member States to prioritise, on the expenditure and revenue sides of the budget, growth-friendly policies, such as education, research, innovation, infrastructure and energy, and to ensure the efficiency of such expenditures and revenues; calls for efficient, socially just and sustainable reform:

15.

Welcomes the fact that a major overhaul of regulation and supervision of the financial sector is underway; believes that more diligent and ambitious measures are required in order to enhance the resilience of the EU financial system; stresses that this would enhance the competitiveness of the European Union; stresses that this must be undertaken in a way that discourages regulatory arbitrage and which does not encourage capital flight or the relocation of financial activity from the EU;

16.

Underlines the fact that restoring investor confidence will require a strengthening of the banks’ capital positions and measures to support their access to funding, as far as possible curtailing short-term remuneration systems and inadequate business models; believes that further reform of the regulation and supervision of the financial sector will be necessary in order to reflect heightened risks in the sovereign and private debt markets, which includes a strengthening of the capital positions of systemic banks, although this must not undermine the competitive position of non-systemic financial institutions; stresses that, after having been correctly capitalised, banks should not unduly restrict lending to the real economy and therefore regulatory actions should lay the basis for an increase in their lending capacity; invites the Commission to ensure that the European system of financial supervision maintains bank lending, in particular by those institutions that benefited from crisis-related State aid and the support of ECB liquidity lines; expects the Commission to make its proposals on crisis bank management before Summer 2012; deplores the socialisation of private losses through injections of liquidity in the banking sector and any speculative behaviour by rating agencies and international financial centres;

17.

Supports the creation of project bonds designed to contribute to the financing of key infrastructure projects in order to promote sustainable growth and jobs;

18.

Underlines the key role of the EIB group in supporting the real economy and SMEs in particular and in ensuring investment in long-term infrastructure projects in line with the EU 2020 strategy; believes that the EU should use the existing resources and create innovative financing instruments for those Member States with limited room for financial stimulus;

19.

Is worried by the macroeconomic imbalances within the EU and the fact that many Member States, in particular those under market pressure, are falling behind in terms of productivity; insists on the role of enhanced coordination of economic policies as well as structural reforms in tackling these problems in both deficit and surplus countries in an adequate way; is worried by the fact that the bulk of global growth is expected to come from outside the EU in the coming years, which will necessitate a strengthening of the export capacity of Member States, as well as providing a stable framework for value-creating foreign direct investment destined for the EU’s real economy;

20.

Believes that the structural mismatch between supply and demand for labour will hinder recovery and long-term growth and therefore calls for structural reforms in the labour market, while respecting the subsidiarity principle and ensuring social cohesion; draws attention to the role and responsibilities of the social partners in the design and implementation of structural reforms;

21.

Recalls that the quality of public administration at EU, national, regional and local level is a determining element of competitiveness and an important productivity factor; notes that public-sector reforms are an imperative part of restoring competitiveness; considers that a high quality of public administration needs adequate budgetary resources and reforms while respecting the subsidiarity principle as laid down in Protocol No 26 on Services of General Interest;

22.

Takes note of the Quality Framework on Services of General Interest to enhance clarity and legal certainty as to how EU rules apply to services of general interest (SGI), ensure access to essential services and promote quality;

23.

Regrets the slow pace of the implementation of EU legislation by certain Member States and urges them to deliver the agreed results concerning the quality of statistics; is firmly convinced that the availability of reliable, accurate and up-to-date data provides a key element of the political decision-making process; welcomes the efforts of the Commission to improve the reliability of the data provided by Member States for the Commission (Eurostat); calls on the Member States to implement the recently adopted Council Directive on Requirements for the Budgetary Framework of the Member States as soon as possible;

24.

Calls for more efficiency in the delivery of public services as well as an increase in the transparency and quality of public administration and the judiciary, and further encourages reductions in the unnecessary administrative burden and red tape; underlines the importance of monitoring and evaluating civil service performance in conformity with the subsidiarity principle;

25.

Encourages the Commission, considering that the AGS covers much more than just economic elements, to develop programmes for specific policy sectors, such as defence, where joint management or joint ownership between multiple Member States would provide economies of scale, which would bring added value and financial savings to the Member States involved;

26.

Underlines, in the current economic context, the even more crucial role played by EU-funded programmes and encourages the Commission to put forward a proposal to fund EU 2020 strategy actions through the transfer of unused payment appropriations;

27.

Deplores the fact that the involvement of the European Parliament in the elaboration of the BEPG (Broad Economic Policy Guidelines)/AGS is not formally provided for by the Treaty, whilst Parliament’s contribution to employment topics is made under the consultation procedure (Article 148(2) TFEU); recalls that the AGS should be subject to a codecision procedure that should be introduced by the next treaty change; wishes to step up dialogue between EU and national institutions, in particular parliamentary institutions, where appropriate and with mutual respect and consent;

28.

Recalls that the European Semester is now part of EU secondary legislation (see Article 2(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011) (6);

29.

Recalls that the economic governance legal framework (the ‘six pack’) provides the tool of economic dialogue: ‘in order to enhance the dialogue between the Union institutions, in particular the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, and to ensure greater transparency and accountability, the competent committee of the European Parliament may invite the President of the Council, the Commission and, where appropriate, the President of the European Council or the President of the Eurogroup to appear before the committee to discuss decisions taken… The competent committee of the European Parliament may offer the opportunity to the Member State concerned by such decisions to participate in an exchange of views’; calls for this tool, which enables economic cooperation and mutual understanding, to be utilised as much as possible;

30.

Notes that the 2012 edition of the European Semester is the first under the agreed enhanced economic governance legal framework (the ‘six pack’), which includes strengthened rules for the Stability and Growth Pact and national fiscal rules, as well as new procedures for monitoring and correcting macroeconomic imbalances;

31.

Invites the Commission to present future surveys under the title ‘Annual Sustainable Growth Guidelines’;

32.

Urges the Commission to provide a detailed assessment of the implementation by Member States of the country-specific recommendations that it will make public before the June 2012 European Council;

33.

Asks the Commission to work in close cooperation with the Council in order to develop a genuine and common budget and accounting nomenclature;

34.

Recalls the fact that the Council should explain its position publicly as part of the economic dialogue in Parliament when it diverges significantly from Commission recommendations and proposals;

35.

Stresses in this regard that the Commission recommendations and proposals must respect and preserve Member State policy discretion required for implementation in conformity with the principle of subsidiarity and the provisions of Article 126 TFEU, as several means can be conducive to the attainment of the goals and targets recommended;

36.

Urges the Commission to explain thoroughly the reason why it assessed negatively the National Reform Programme (NRP) or Stability and Convergence Programme (SCP) and any other document the Member States have submitted in the economic governance framework; expects that, in doing so, the Commission will provide the Member State concerned with its detailed methodology and the working hypothesis underpinning its assessment;

37.

Recalls that the new legal framework stipulates that the European Parliament is to be duly involved in the European Semester in order to increase the transparency and accountability of the decisions taken, in particular by means of the economic dialogue as specified in the relevant secondary legislation;

38.

Applauds the Commission for having published its Annual Growth Survey by the end of November and expects this schedule to be made permanent so that Parliament has time enough to express its views before annual guidelines are decided upon by the Spring European Council;

39.

Underlines the fact that the President of the Council, the Commission, in accordance with Article 121 TFEU, and, where appropriate, the President of the Eurogroup are to report annually to the European Parliament and the European Council on the results of multilateral surveillance;

40.

Urges the Commission, the Council and the European Council to agree with Parliament on a streamlined timetable for the European Semester in order to make it as effective, transparent and legitimate as possible;

41.

Mandates its President to defend this position during the Spring European Council (1-2 March 2012);

42.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Council.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/18

—

having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities’ own resources (1),

—

having regard to Decision 2012/5/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 amending the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management as regards the multiannual financial framework, to address additional financing needs of the ITER project (2),

—

having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2010, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

—

having regard to Rules 23 and 79 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0030/2012),

A.

whereas the ceiling for Heading 5 of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the EU’s budget in 2013 is EUR 9 181 million in current prices (4);

B.

whereas Croatia’s accession will have an impact on the 2013 budget, namely as regards resources for new Members and staff recruitment across the institutions;

C.

whereas in a context of a heavy burden of public debt and of restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts the European Parliament, and all institutions, should show budgetary responsibility and self-restraint; noting the letter dated 23 January 2012 from Commissioner Lewandowski to the Presidents of the European Institutions;

D.

whereas at this stage of the annual procedure, Parliament is awaiting the other institutions’ estimates and its own Bureau’s proposals for the 2013 budget;

1.

Believes that the institutions, in the context of continued challenging economic circumstances, should freeze their administrative budgets; emphasises, however, the need to respect legally binding obligations and possible subsequent increases;

2.

Calls on the institutions to reinforce their interinstitutional cooperation with a view to sharing best practices, looking for savings and thus modernising their policies on human resources, organisation, technology and buildings;

3.

Highlights the importance of interinstitutional cooperation to make Croatia’s accession as smooth as possible;

4.

Emphasises the importance of strengthening non-discrimination policies which facilitate the access, recruitment and integration of people with disabilities;

5.

Stresses the need for an effective environmental policy across the institutions;

6.

Recalls the significant savings which were achieved in the 2012 budget thanks to structural changes and reorganisation; encourages the continuation of structural and organisational reforms and supports innovation in other areas; considers that real savings can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budgetary lines; requests, therefore, a detailed report from the Secretary-General to the Committee on Budgets containing a clear overview of budget lines that were under-implemented in 2011 and an objective analysis of the reasons for this;

7.

Believes that the real and biggest saving could be made by having a single seat for the European Parliament; encourages therefore that the situation be evaluated without further delay;

8.

Believes that, in order to make significant long-term savings, an independent evaluation of the EP budget should be considered; believes the setting up of a working group should be considered; calls on the Secretary-General and the Bureau to come forward with concrete proposals on the establishment of such a group as soon as possible and to propose possible savings by no later than the end of 2012; also calls for the speedy implementation of any conclusions reached by the group.

9.

Welcomes the enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Budgets and the Bureau during the annual budget procedure; strongly encourages a further strengthening of cooperation between the Secretary-General, the Bureau, and the Committee on Budgets throughout the year to ensure a smooth budgetary process and effective implementation of the budget; expects the Bureau to present prudent needs-based draft estimates that take account of possible subsequent increases arising from legally binding obligations; takes the view that every effort should be made to ensure that any other targeted increases are counterbalanced by savings identified in other areas;

10.

Calls for a freeze on budget lines related to all travel in 2013 and no indexation of any of the Members’ individual allowances until the end of the legislature; awaits with interest the Secretary-General's report on travel, due to be delivered to the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets by the 31 March 2012;

11.

Believes that savings should not jeopardise the legislative activity of the EP; is convinced that Members’ legislative activities can be enhanced by the completion of the knowledge management system (KMS); welcomes the information provided by the Administration, requests updated information on the state of play of the project and expects the system to be fully operational and accessible to EU citizens; calls for increased efforts to speed up the implementation of this project; recalls its request for information regarding how savings can be made following the implementation of the KMS;

12.

Recalls the Parliament’s budgetary resolutions, including its most recent resolution of 26 October 2011 (5), calling for early information, dialogue and a transparent decision-making process in the field of building policy; asks for precise information on the progress in buildings projects and its financial implications to be provided every six months; states that no new unforeseen building projects should be undertaken during the current legislature;

13.

Encourages all institutions to look for further savings to maintain budgetary discipline and to freeze their budgets whilst bearing in mind legal obligations and new financial challenges such as the Croatian enlargement;

14.

Takes note of the European Court of Justice’s (Section IV) request to amend its Statute in a way which will have a direct impact on the budget; considers that the necessary financing shall be ensured in order to guarantee the smooth running of the institution and consequently a proper judicial protection of EU citizens;

15.

Understands the challenges that faced the EEAS in drawing up its first budget for 2011; calls for sound financial budgeting for this new institution and asks the Service to explore opportunities which could create greater budgetary synergies with Member States, where applicable;

16.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions, the European Ombudsman, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the EEAS.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/20

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2009)0189) and to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0010/2009),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication to Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665),

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 43(2) thereof,

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 17 March 2010 (1),

—

having regard to its position adopted at first reading on 23 November 2010 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multi-annual plan for the western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel and the fisheries exploiting that stock (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 February 2010 on the Green Paper on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (3),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 13 July 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2011)0425),

—

having regard to the oral questions to the Commission and to the Council concerning the state of play regarding the proposed multi-annual plan for Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel and the fisheries exploiting that stock (O-000308/2011 – B7-0023/2012, O-000309/2011 – B7-0024/2012),

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas, under the terms of the Plan of Implementation adopted at the United Nations World Summit in Johannesburg in 2002, the European Union is committed to maintaining or restoring fish stocks to levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield, with the aim of achieving the goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis and where possible not later than 2015;

B.

whereas the Common Fisheries Policy, according to Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), seeks to ensure exploitation of living aquatic resources that provides sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions;

C.

whereas the western stock of horse mackerel is economically the most important stock of horse mackerel inhabiting Union waters;

D.

whereas in April 2009 the Commission proposed a management plan (COM(2009)0189) based on the preparatory work in the Pelagic Regional Advisory Council and the advice given by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF);

E.

whereas multi-annual plans are a cornerstone of the CFP and a fundamental conservation tool establishing general provisions necessary for the pursuit of the objectives of the CFP, and must therefore be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, in accordance with Article 43(2) TFEU;

F.

whereas the biological information on the western stock of horse mackerel is not sufficient for a full stock assessment; whereas, however, the STECF advice indicates that a harvest control rule based on the trend in egg abundance would provide for sustainable stock management; whereas the harvest control rule should be equally based on the precautionary advice given for average recruitment conditions and on recent total allowable catches adjusted by a factor that reflects trends in the stock abundance as measured through egg production;

G.

whereas the establishment and allocation of fishing opportunities within the Common Fisheries Policy has a direct impact on the socio-economic situation of the fishing fleets of the Member States, notably for small-scale coastal fleets;

H.

whereas the Council cannot reserve for itself the power to adapt unilaterally the parameters defined in the proposal for setting the total allowable catches, as they are key components of the proposed long term plan;

I.

whereas Parliament, in its position at first reading, introduced some flexibility for the Council in the mode of calculation of the total removal, in accordance with the scientifically based harvesting rules, with the aim of facilitating a compromise solution and contributing to a constructive and positive approach regarding this legislative proposal;

J.

whereas the biological references and parameters forming part of the harvest rule should follow the most recent scientific advice and the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts pursuant to Article 290 TFEU in respect of modifications of certain biological references and parameters built into the harvest rule and in order to be able to react quickly to changes;

1.

Underlines that the plan's objective is to maintain the biomass of western horse mackerel at a level that ensures its sustainable exploitation, and to provide the highest long-term yield;

2.

Believes that the harvest control rule should be based in equal parts on precautionary advice and on recent total allowable catches, adjusted by a factor that reflects the recent trend in the stock abundance as measured through egg production;

3.

Stresses that the harvest control rules are core elements of the multi-annual plans that must be decided under the ordinary legislative procedure;

4.

Underlines that long-term management plans applying to as many fish stocks as possible are key for the conservation of fish stocks, as stressed by the Commission in its proposal for a reformed Common Fisheries Policy;

5.

Stresses that the existing interinstitutional deadlock must be resolved for the benefit of a sustainable fish stock and to allow fishing operators better forward planning of their activities;

6.

Urges the Commission to take more initiatives to foster a political dialogue between the three institutions aimed at clarifying their respective roles in the decision-making process and at addressing the issue of the future architecture of multi-annual management plans;

7.

Urges the Commission to act swiftly, as indicated and promised on several occasions, in order to prevent other interinstitutional blockages in relation to future long-term management plans,

8.

Urges the Council to submit its position on the proposed multi-annual plan for western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel in order to allow the Parliament to start its second reading and make progress on this matter;

9.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission for information.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/22

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the common fisheries policy (1),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020’ (COM(2011)0244),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘Rio+20: towards the green economy and better governance’ (COM(2011)0363),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘Europe 2020’ (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (Directive 2008/56/EC) (2),

—

having regard to the common fisheries policy reform package submitted by the Commission on 13 July 2011,

—

having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982,

—

having regard to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, adopted on 31 October 1995,

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas fishing is one of the oldest human activities, and whereas fish is an important and indispensable element of human nutrition whose availability should be guaranteed and whose significance should be duly recognised and valued under the common fisheries policy (CFP);

B.

whereas the fisheries sector, which covers both the catching of wild fish and aquaculture, involves activities which contribute to the production of indispensable common goods through three main strands, fishing, processing and marketing; whereas healthy fish stocks, healthy marine ecosystems and the preservation of marine biodiversity constitute important common goods which must be preserved;

C.

whereas sustainable aquaculture, whether marine or freshwater, inshore or offshore, is an important part of the fisheries sector;

D.

whereas small-scale fisheries play a particularly important role in economic, social, environmental and cultural life, which must be duly recognised and valued under the CFP; whereas coastal communities have been hard hit by the decline in the fisheries sector as a whole, which has severely affected small fishing ports throughout the EU;

E.

whereas the reformed CFP should guarantee the environmental, social and economic sustainability of the fisheries sector in the various hydrographic basins, also through the introduction of the decentralised management model which brings decision-making centres closer to the actual areas of activity and increases the responsibilities of stakeholders;

F.

whereas the fisheries sector involves activities dependent on functioning ecosystems, in that abundant fish stocks and marine ecosystems with good environmental status are essential to the long-term sustainability of the extraction, processing and marketing of fisheries products;

G.

whereas the European fisheries sector contributes to social development, by creating jobs directly and indirectly, and to economic growth in Europe, by providing 6.4 million tonnes of fish each year;

H.

whereas the multifunctionality of the fisheries sector is reflected in different areas, for example through the impact it has on socio-economic, historical, cultural, scientific and environmental issues;

I.

whereas fisheries activities have an impact mainly on coastal areas and islands, contributing to their effective management and to their social and economic dynamics; whereas this is particularly important for their communities, which are frequently disadvantaged as a result of the scarcity of jobs and the weakness of local economies;

J.

whereas the reformed CFP should be closely linked to other key EU initiatives in the area of maritime affairs, in particular those outlined in the Commission communication entitled ‘An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union’ (COM(2007)0575), which states that the European fisheries sector can also trigger and enhance a vast array of scientific studies that deepen our knowledge of oceanographic dynamics, ecosystems and the biology of the aquatic species directly or indirectly involved in fisheries activity;

K.

whereas a dynamic, well-managed fisheries sector could make an increasing contribution to European society and the European economy and thus play a significant role in the Europe 2020 Strategy;

1.

Emphasises that the fisheries sector is an important EU industry which provides EU citizens with high-quality food and creates economic and social added value for the European Union; takes the view, therefore, that the reformed CFP needs to guarantee the sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources and the preservation of fish stocks at a healthy level, so that fishing activities can continue in their traditional areas and communities in the long term;

2.

Considers that environmental, economic and social sustainability are important objectives of the CFP, and emphasises that the CFP’s top priority should be the establishment of a sustainable fisheries sector in order to ensure that current and future generations continue to enjoy the environmental, social and economic benefits of fishing;

3.

Emphasises that fisheries, if properly managed, could make a greater contribution to European society, in terms of food security, employment, and the maintenance of dynamic fishing communities, and in many other ways; stresses that the existence of healthy fish stocks, healthy marine ecosystems and the preservation of marine biodiversity are in themselves common goods which are only produced if fish stocks are managed in a sustainable way and any unnecessary negative impact on the environment is minimised;

4.

Considers it crucial to recognise seas – which cover more than two-thirds of surface of our planet – as a resource which plays a crucial role in producing other natural resources (e.g. fisheries); also considers it strategically essential that the CFP should incorporate clear and precise measures in order to ensure that it can fulfil its strategic role through an eco-systemic approach;

5.

Emphasises that the CFP contributes to the achievement of the targets of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy and of the EU’s aim of halting biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystem services by 2020 by adopting measures to secure sustainable fisheries, by taking precautionary measures to eliminate destructive fishing, by ensuring the recovery of over-exploited fish stocks and by taking measures to protect species not targeted by fisheries;

6.

Recalls that, at an economic level, the fisheries sector (including aquaculture) is estimated to generate EUR 34,2 billion in annual earnings and that, at a social level, it creates more than 350 000 jobs, including upstream and downstream in the fishing, fish processing and marketing sectors, in particular in coastal areas, remote regions and islands;

7.

Stresses that the fisheries sector has a multifunctional dimension and, that beyond its three traditional areas of activity and its visible impact at an economic, environmental and social level, it also plays a relevant role in a number of other areas, such as the environment, culture, recreation and tourism, science, energy and education, and emphasises in particular the importance in this regard of the small-scale fisheries sector;

8.

Calls on the Commission to take due account of the fact that the fisheries sector plays an important role in the following areas:

9.

Emphasises that, by virtue of its multifunctional dimension, the fisheries sector provides communities with common goods which benefit EU citizens in general, and not only those directly or indirectly involved in fisheries, a contribution which must be acknowledged and valued; notes, further, that considerable numbers of EU citizens, in particular those living in coastal areas, benefit from the multifunctionality of fisheries activities; considers that the multifunctionality of the fisheries sector should be fully taken into account in the financing of the CFP; stresses that the production of these additional public goods must not be used as an excuse to delay necessary reforms of the CFP;

10.

Urges the Commission to assist small fishing ports which have been badly affected by a decline in landings as a result of overfishing;

11.

Stresses that the fisheries sector (which covers both sustainable wild fisheries and aquaculture) is one of the most important pillars of food security in the European Union and that as such its sustainability and stability must be guaranteed by the CFP reform, so that, in the future, it can provide fisheries products of sufficient quality and in sufficient quantity to satisfy demand from more than half a billion EU citizens;

12.

Emphasises the potential of sustainable marine and freshwater aquaculture to complement the role of fisheries in making an important contribution to food security in EU; stresses that a specific policy is needed to guarantee the environmental sustainability of the aquaculture sector; calls on the Commission to establish general qualitative criteria for aquaculture which should be met throughout the EU and which take into account the environmental and social impact of aquaculture; calls, further, on the Commission to ensure that imported aquaculture products have been produced in accordance with the relevant EU sustainability and quality standards, i.e. environmental or animal welfare standards;

13.

Notes that recreational fishing was not tackled in the Commission proposals presented on 13 July 2011; stresses that it should be addressed separately as part of the CFP reform process;

14.

Emphasises that further diversification of activities directly or indirectly linked to fisheries could help to slow down the exodus of workers from the sector, keep regional customs and traditions alive, and halt the depopulation of some coastal areas;

15.

Stresses that fisheries management is increasingly based on scientific data, which stimulates applied research in this area, promoting knowledge and fostering technological development and innovation, in line with the EU 2020 Strategy for promoting smart growth;

16.

Stresses that the fisheries sector depends on the health of stocks and on the balance of the ecosystem, so that the CFP reform must shift the focus back to the sector’s role as the guardian and manager of marine resources with a view to creating a more efficient, greener and more competitive economy, in line with the EU 2020 Strategy for promoting sustainable growth;

17.

Stresses that fishing activities, when all their dimensions are considered, including sustainable aquaculture, their direct and indirect impact and the common goods produced by means of fishing activities, guarantee social and territorial cohesion and promote vocational training and social and economic dynamism, in line with the EU 2020 Strategy for promoting inclusive growth;

18.

Stresses that the fisheries sector, both on its own and through the Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP), must contribute to achieving the Rio+20 goals for an open economy, and also to creating jobs and eradicating poverty;

19.

States that fishing activities play an important role in the wider context of the IMP and represent a key element in maritime spatial planning policies and in the framework of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund;

20.

Asks the Commission to acknowledge the multifunctionality of the fisheries sector and the value of its production of a wide range of common goods;

21.

Asks the Commission to ensure in its future policy proposals and decisions that the CFP contributes to overarching policy aims, such as the EU 2020 strategy; takes the view that this crucial process of CFP reform must recognise the CFP as a source of development in the context of the European Growth Project and create the conditions which enable it to develop its full potential; asks the Commission to take the specific characteristics of fisheries and coastal regions into account when developing and implementing these policies;

22.

Asks the Commission to integrate the concept of ‘conditionality’, which is already employed in the common agricultural policy, into the reformed CFP in order to ensure positive discrimination for environmentally-friendly fishing practices, for example through better access to funds;

23.

Asks the Commission, in order to promote the development of parallel activities, to find a legal solution which enables fishermen to develop other sources of income within the wide range of ‘fishery-linked activities’ without being financially penalised;

24.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/27

—

having regard to Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Articles 49, 56, 114, 167 and 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which are concerned with respect for and the promotion and protection of fundamental rights,

—

having regard to the Basic Law of Hungary, adopted on 18 April 2011 by the National Assembly of the Hungarian Republic, which entered into force on 1 January 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the new Constitution’), and the Transitional Provisions of the Basic Law of Hungary, adopted on 30 December 2011 by the National Assembly (hereinafter referred to as the Transitional Provisions),

—

having regard to Opinions Nos CDL(2011)016 and CDL(2011)001 of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) on the new Hungarian Constitution and the three legal questions arising from the process of drafting the new Hungarian Constitution,

—

having regard to its resolutions of 10 March 2011 on the media law in Hungary (1) and the European Parliament resolution of 5 July 2011 on the Revised Hungarian Constitution (2),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union entitled ‘Respect for and promotion of the values on which the Union is based’ (COM(2003)0606),

—

having regard to the establishment of a high-level group on Media Freedom and Pluralism by European Commission Vice-President Neelie Kroes in October 2011,

—

having regard to the Council and Commission statements in the plenary debate of the European Parliament on 18 January 2012 on the recent political developments in Hungary, as well as to the hearing held on 9 February 2012 by the Committee for Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs,

—

having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 17 January 2012 to launch accelerated infringement proceedings against Hungary over the independence of its central bank and data protection authorities as well as over measures affecting the judiciary,

—

having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the European Union is founded on the values of democracy and the rule of law, as stipulated in Article 2 TEU, on unequivocal respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the ECHR, and on the recognition of the legal value of said rights, freedoms and principles, which is further demonstrated by the EU’s forthcoming accession to the ECHR;

B.

whereas the Member States, current and acceding, and the EU have a duty to ensure that the contents and processes of Member States’ legislation are in conformity with EU laws and values, as enshrined particularly in the Copenhagen Criteria, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the ECHR, and that the letter and spirit of adopted legislation do not contradict these values and instruments;

C.

whereas Hungary adopted a new constitution on 18 April 2011, the adoption and certain provisions of which were criticised by the European Parliament in its resolution of 5 July 2011 which called on the Hungarian Government to address the issues and concerns raised by the Venice Commission and called on the European Commission to conduct a thorough review and analysis of the new Constitution and of the cardinal laws set out thereby in order to check that they are consistent with the letter and the spirit of the acquis communautaire and in particular with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

D.

whereas the adoption of the cardinal laws raised concerns in a number of fields, notably the independence of the judiciary, the independence of the central bank, the independence of the data protection authority, fair conditions of political competition and political alternation, as well as the so-called stability law subjecting the income tax system to a two-thirds majority and the cardinal laws giving exclusive right to the current majority to appoint officials for an unusually long term, thus affecting the ability of future governments to govern;

E.

whereas the new head of the National Judicial Authority and the Chief Prosecutor will have the right to assign cases to tribunals, thereby infringing the principle of the right to access to court and to a fair trial and of the independence of the judiciary;

F.

whereas, according to the new Constitution and its Transitional Provisions, the Supreme Court was renamed the ‘Kúria’, and the 6-year-long mandate of the former Chairman of the Supreme Court was ended prematurely after 2 years;

G.

whereas the new Constitution stipulates lowering the mandatory retirement age of judges and prosecutors from the previous 70 years to 62 years of age, except for the President of the Kúria and the Chief Prosecutor, which may be discriminatory and will lead to the retirement of approximately 300 judges, which is a serious intrusion into the independent functioning of the judiciary;

H.

whereas, according to the provisions of the new Constitution, the previous system of four parliamentary commissioners has been downgraded to one, terminating prematurely the 6-year-long mandate of the Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information and transferring its powers to a newly founded authority, which is a serious intrusion into his independence;

I.

whereas the Hungarian Parliament has adopted several retroactive laws, thereby contravening one of the basic principles of European law, namely that of not adopting retroactive laws;

J.

whereas the recently-adopted law on churches and religious denominations contains unusually restrictive rules on the registration of churches and makes registration subject to parliamentary approval with a two-thirds majority;

K.

whereas, under the provisions of the constitution, the powers of the Hungarian Constitutional Courtto review budget-related laws have been substantially diminished;

L.

whereas the significant number of matters relegated, for detailed regulation, to cardinal laws requiring a two-thirds majority, including issues which should be left to the ordinary political process and which are usually decided by simple majority, raises concerns, as expressed by the Venice Commission report;

M.

whereas Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the European Commission, underlined the intention of the European Commission to verify whether the new organisation of the judicial system in Hungary affects the independence of the judiciary; whereas Vice- President of the European Commission Neelie Kroes and the leader of the High-Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism, Vaira Vike Freiberga, have repeatedly expressed their concerns over the freedom and pluralism of the media in Hungary;

N.

whereas the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, underlined on 18 January 2012 that, apart from the legal aspects, concerns have also been expressed regarding the quality of democracy in Hungary, and appealed to the Hungarian authorities to respect the principles of democracy and freedom and to implement them not only in principle but also in practice and in political and social life in Hungary;

O.

whereas on 17 January 2012 the European Commission started infringement procedures against Hungary on three subjects: the independence of the Hungarian Central Bank, the lowering of the mandatory retirement age of judges enshrined in the Basic Law of Hungary, and the independence of the data protection authority, and also asked the Hungarian authorities for further information on the issue of the independence of the judiciary;

P.

whereas the European Parliament, in its resolution of 15 December 2010 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2009) – effective implementation after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon (3), called for a ‘follow-up to the 2003 Communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union to define a transparent and coherent way to address possible violations of human rights and make relevant use of Article 7 TEU on the basis of the new fundamental-rights architecture’;

Q.

whereas the Hungarian Government, and notably the Hungarian Prime Minister in his letter to the Commission and addressing the European Parliament, signalled his readiness to address the problems that triggered the infringement procedures, amend the legislation in question and further cooperate with the European Institutions beyond the legal proceedings;

R.

whereas the European Parliament has a role in monitoring respect for fundamental rights, freedoms and principles in all the 27 Member States, as enshrined in the European acquis;

1.

Expresses serious concern at the situation in Hungary in relation to the exercise of democracy, the rule of law, the respect and protection of human and social rights, the system of checks and balances, equality and non-discrimination;

2.

Calls, in the joint interest of Hungarian citizens and the European Union, on the Hungarian Government to comply with the recommendations, objections and demands of the European Commission, the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission regarding the aforementioned issues and amend the laws concerned correspondingly, respecting the basic values and standards of the European Union;

3.

Takes note of the commitment of the European Commission, the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission thoroughly to examine the compliance of Hungarian legislation with not only the letter but also the spirit of European law;

4.

Calls on the European Commission as guardian of the Treaties to monitor closely the possible amendments and the implementation of the said laws and their compliance with the letter and spirit of the European Treaties and to conduct a thorough study to ensure:

5.

Calls on the European Commission to request the opinion of the Venice Commission on the legislative package consisting of the new Constitution, the Transitional Provisions and the cardinal laws as a whole and continue working together on these matters with the Council of Europe;

6.

Instructs the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, in cooperation with the European Commission, the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission, to follow up the issue of whether and how the recommendations of the Commission and the European Parliament set out in point 4 of this resolution have been implemented and to present its findings in a report;

7.

Instructs the Conference of Presidents, in the light of the report described in point 6, to consider whether to activate necessary measures, including measures pursuant to Article 74e of the Rules of Procedure and Article 7(1) TEU;

8.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Council of Europe, the governments and parliaments of the MemberStates, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the OSCE and the UN Secretary General.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/30

—

having regard to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation, which entered into force in 1997 and has been extended pending its replacement by a new agreement,

—

having regard to the ongoing negotiations for a new agreement providing a new comprehensive framework for EU-Russia relations, as well as to the Partnership for Modernisation initiated in 2010,

—

having regard to its resolutions on Russia, in particular its resolutions of 14 December 2011 on the upcoming EU-Russia Summit on 15 December 2011 and the outcome of the Duma elections on 4 December 2011 (1) and of 7 July 2011 on preparations for the Russian State Duma elections in December 2011 (2),

—

having regard to the OSCE/ODIHR Final Observation Report of 12 January 2012 on the State Duma elections of 4 December 2011,

—

having regard to the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly’s (PACE) final observation report of 23 January 2012 on the Russian parliamentary elections and to its statement on the post-election delegation visit to Russia of 21 January 2012,

—

having regard to the EU-Russia Consultations on Human Rights, in particular the latest meeting held in this context on 29 November 2011,

—

having regard to the statement of 6 December 2011 by EU High Representative Catherine Ashton on the Duma elections in the Russian Federation, and to her speeches of 14 December 2011 in Strasbourg on the EU-Russia Summit and of 1 February 2012 on the political situation in Russia,

—

having regard to the statement made on 15 December 2011 by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, following the EU-Russia Summit,

—

having regard to Rule 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas enhanced cooperation and good-neighbourly relations between the EU and Russia are of crucial importance for the stability, security and prosperity of Europe; whereas the development of a strategic partnership between the EU and the Russian Federation can only be founded on shared values;

B.

whereas there remains concern about developments in the Russian Federation with regard to compliance with and protection of human rights and compliance with commonly agreed democratic principles, electoral rules and procedures; whereas the Russian Federation is a full member of the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and has therefore committed itself to upholding the principles of democracy and human rights;

C.

whereas on 12 April 2011 the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the cumbersome registration procedures for political parties in Russia, which do not comply with the election standards set by the Council of Europe and the OSCE; whereas limiting the registration of political parties and candidates restricts political competition and pluralism in Russia;

D.

whereas, despite the recent limited steps to improve election laws, the general rules remain overly complex, and whereas inconsistent application of the rules discriminates against the opposition;

E.

whereas on 22 December 2011, in an address to the Duma, President Medvedev announced a number of changes to the political system, including the formation of a new independent public television service, simplified procedures for parties and presidential candidates, the reintroduction of direct elections for regional governors, and an investigation into electoral fraud;

F.

whereas, according to the OSCE/ODIHR final observation report, the Duma elections of 4 December 2011 did not fully comply with free and fair election standards and were marked by the convergence of the state and the governing party and by a lack of independence of the election administration, partiality of the media and state interference at different levels; whereas, according to the report, the Duma elections were characterised by a high number of procedural violations, instances of apparent manipulation and serious cases of ballot box stuffing;

G.

whereas the domestic election observation organisation Golos stated in its final report that ‘the election […] was neither free nor fair, nor did it meet the demands of the Russian electoral code and international electoral standards’ and that ‘the fundamental principles of elections were not adhered to, namely true competition and the equal rights of all sides involved, a neutral administration, independent election commissions, a vote conforming to the law and a correct vote-counting process’;

H.

whereas in a number of mass demonstrations since the Duma elections of 4 December 2011 the Russian people have expressed their desire for more democracy including free and fair elections and a comprehensive reform of the electoral system, particularly the ‘white ribbon’ demonstrators;

I.

whereas political pluralism is a cornerstone of democracy and modern society and a source of political legitimacy; whereas the preparations for presidential elections need to guarantee a free and fair process with equal opportunities for all candidates; whereas the registration procedures once again prevented certain candidates from taking part in the elections;

J.

whereas relations between the EU and Russia have been developing over the past decades, leading to a deep and comprehensive interdependence which is bound to increase still further in the future; whereas the conclusion of a Strategic Partnership Agreement between the EU and the Russian Federation remains of the utmost importance for the further development and intensification of cooperation between the two partners;

K.

whereas Russia has twice prevented the UN Security Council from adopting a resolution on the Syrian crisis calling for support for the Arab League plan which also has the backing of the EU;

1.

Notes the OSCE/ODIHR and PACE reports on the Duma elections, which state that the elections did not meet election standards as defined by the OSCE and were marked by the convergence of the state and the governing party, by procedural violations, apparent manipulation and a lack of independence of the election administration;

2.

Is concerned that the outcome of the elections (the composition of the Duma) will not bring improvements as regards the role and influence of the Duma within Russia’s political system;

3.

Calls on its Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee to consistently raise the issue of democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law with the Russian counterparts; calls, furthermore, for an assessment of the activities of the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, and the intensification of the dialogue with the non-parliamentary opposition and civil society;

4.

Notes the recent calls for the annulment of the State Duma elections, and calls on the Russian authorities to continue to investigate comprehensively and transparently all reports of fraud and intimidation, with a view to punishing those found responsible, and to rerun the voting where irregularities are proven; stresses that Russia’s electoral legislation provides for appeal and rectification; points out, however, that the handling of complaints by the Central Election Committee has lacked transparency and has not addressed complaints effectively and in a timely manner; regrets the fact that almost 3 000 challenges regarding cases of electoral malfeasance, fraud and violations in individual districts have been rejected by the relevant courts and a few are still pending;

5.

Notes President Medvedev’s announcement of comprehensive changes to the political system, including a much-needed simplification of the rules governing the registration of political parties; calls for a serious commitment also to be made to addressing the problems of media freedom and freedom of assembly and expression; reiterates the EU’s readiness to cooperate with Russia, including within the framework provided by the Partnership for Modernisation, in order to improve compliance with human and fundamental rights and the effectiveness of an independent rule of law system in Russia;

6.

Calls on the Russian Government to introduce a package of legislative proposals, in compliance with the OSCE recommendations, aimed at developing a truly democratic political system and including reforms to facilitate registration for both political parties and presidential candidates, and to address the restrictive application of registration rules, so as to allow genuinely free and fair elections as soon as possible;

7.

Stresses that the peaceful demonstrations in Russia are an expression of the Russian people’s desire for free and fair elections; calls on the Russian authorities to view the recent rallies as an opportunity to take steps to bring about the reforms required for more democracy, political involvement and the rule of law, including the reform of electoral laws, in compliance with Council of Europe and OSCE standards; urges the Russian authorities to comply with those standards in practice, in order to guarantee free and democratic presidential elections in March with equal opportunities for all candidates;

8.

Condemns the crackdown by the police on peaceful demonstrations held in protest at election irregularities and fraud reported by international observers and documented by videos recorded by ordinary citizens; calls on the Russian authorities to fully uphold freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in compliance with the constitution of the Russian Federation;

9.

Recalls that the restrictions on political pluralism during the preparations for the Duma elections was one of the key flaws of those elections; expresses its concern regarding the barring of opposition candidates from standing in the presidential elections on 4 March 2012, which is once more undermining political competition and pluralism;

10.

Urges the Russian authorities to engage in dialogue with the opposition, and regrets the decision to deny registration for the presidential election campaign to Grigory Yavlinsky, which is also preventing his party from fielding observers;

11.

Calls on the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to follow up on the investigations into irregularities, as well as to closely monitor the preparations for the presidential elections and enforcement of the electoral rules, as already agreed by the Russian authorities;

12.

Notes that some 600 international observers are expected to monitor the Russian presidential election (there will be observers from the OSCE/ODIHR, the PACE, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the CIS); stresses that international and national election observation missions should be fully deployed, in order to ensure efficient monitoring of the electoral process, in accordance with OSCE/ODIHR and Council of Europe standards; calls on the Russian authorities to avoid the interference and hindrance that was reported in the case of the Duma elections;

13.

Reiterates its call on the Investigative Committee to lead a comprehensive and thorough investigation into the death of Sergei Magnitsky, with no taboo areas, to promptly present concrete conclusions and to take all steps required to bring those responsible to justice; calls, in the event of further inaction by the Russian authorities, for the Council to take into consideration actions such as an EU-wide travel ban and a freeze on the financial assets of those found guilty of the torture and death of Sergei Magnitsky, as well as of covering up the case;

14.

Expresses its deep concern about the misuse of anti-extremism legislation involving the illegal implementation of criminal laws against civil society organisations such as Memorial and religious minorities such as Jehova’s Witnesses and Falun Dafa and the improper banning of their materials on grounds of extremism;

15.

Strongly condemns the adoption by the Legislative Assembly of St Petersburg of a law against propaganda on sexual orientation; equally condemns similar laws adopted in the Ryazan, Arkhangelsk and Kostroma regions; calls on all Russian authorities to stop restricting freedom of expression in relation to sexual orientation or gender identity, in line with the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; calls on the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative to convey the European Union’s opposition to these laws;

16.

Strongly urge Russia to join the international consensus to and to allow the Security Council to act on the basis of the Arab League proposals with a view to solving the Syrian crisis; stresses that, as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council, Russia needs to take its responsibility for international peace and security seriously; calls on Russia immediately to halt all arms and military equipment sales to the Syrian Government;

17.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government and Parliament of the Russian Federation, the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/34

—

having regard to the Barcelona Declaration of 28 November 1995, which established a partnership between the European Union and the southern Mediterranean countries,

—

having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part,

—

having regard to the Council decision of 14 October 2005 authorising negotiations with Morocco on the reciprocal liberalisation of trade in agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products,

—

having regard to the Council decision of 14 December 2011 authorising negotiations with Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia with a view to establishing ‘deep and comprehensive’ free trade areas as part of the existing Euro-Mediterranean association agreements with those countries,

—

having regard to the Joint Communication from the Commission to the European Council, the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 8 March 2011 on ‘A Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity with the Southern Mediterranean’ (COM(2011)0200),

—

having regard to the Joint Communication from the Commission to the European Council, the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 25 May 2011 on ‘A new response to a changing Neighbourhood’ (COM(2011)0303),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on corporate social responsibility in international trade agreements (1),

—

having regard to the consent procedure pursuant to Article 207 (4) first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in relation to the draft Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning reciprocal liberalisation measures on agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products, the replacement of Protocols 1, 2 and 3 and their Annexes and amendments to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’) (15974/2010),

—

having regard to Rule 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the evolving political landscape in the southern Mediterranean following the events of the Arab Spring has necessitated a strong, effective and rapid response from the EU;

B.

whereas the strengthening of trade relations and balanced and progressive trade liberalisation with the southern Mediterranean countries are important components of that response;

C.

whereas trade and investment are engines for growth and help to reduce poverty, bring peoples together, consolidate ties between nations and contribute to political stability;

D.

whereas Article 16 of the EU-Morocco Association Agreement, which has been in force since 1 March 2000, provides that the European Community and Morocco will gradually implement greater liberalisation of their reciprocal trade in agricultural products, processed agricultural products, fish and fishery products;

E.

whereas the EU runs a significant surplus in trade in goods with Morocco, which reached EUR 5,4 billion in 2010;

F.

whereas the EU has a substantial agricultural and fisheries trade surplus with the southern Mediterranean countries of over EUR 4 billion, but a bilateral agricultural, fisheries and processed food goods trade deficit with Morocco which amounted to EUR 871 million in 2010; whereas trade in agricultural and fisheries products accounts for around 18 % of Moroccan exports;

G.

whereas agriculture accounts for between 15 % and 20 % of Morocco’s GDP, 12 % of Moroccan exports and 38 % of the Moroccan workforce, with peaks of 75 % in rural areas; whereas this demonstrates that the stability and expansion of this sector is extremely important for the country’s political stability;

H.

whereas the proposed agreement liberalises with immediate effect 55 % of tariffs on Morocco's agricultural and fisheries products (rising from 33 %) and 70 % of tariffs on the EU's agricultural and fisheries products within 10 years (rising from 1 %);

I.

whereas the monitoring of sensitive products and the strict application of quotas are fundamental to the balanced functioning of the agreement;

J.

whereas all agricultural goods from all third countries imported into the EU must comply with the Union’s sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) rules;

K.

whereas Morocco is one of the four southern Mediterranean countries for which the Council has approved negotiating directives for a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA); whereas trade in agricultural products will form part of those negotiations;

1.

Believes that the opening-up of markets and progressive integration into the EU’s internal market can be powerful instruments for the development of the southern Mediterranean countries and help alleviate the widespread poverty and unemployment which are at the root of economic, migratory and security problems in the region; considers that, if this potential is to be realised, the EU must be prepared to make sufficient trade concessions;

2.

Recalls the commitment given by the EU following the Arab Spring to assist the southern Mediterranean countries with their transition to democracy by using trade and economic instruments to create greater freedom and economic opportunities; considers that Morocco has taken significant steps to consolidate democracy by reforming its constitution and conducting fair elections; in that connection, welcomes the agreement as a positive step in supporting political stabilisation and mutual sustainable economic development;

3.

Considers it essential that trade and investment initiatives should seek to benefit all sections of society and be targeted more specifically at SMEs and small farmers; in that connection, notes that over 80 % of Morocco’s farmers hold less than five hectares of land, and therefore welcomes the support of the Confédération marocaine de l'agriculture et du développement rural (Comader - Moroccan Federation for Agriculture and Rural Development) for the agreement; recalls that food security has social, environmental and cultural dimensions, in addition to its economic aspects;

4.

Stresses that, given the importance and influence of the agricultural sector in Morocco, particularly in providing employment, the agreement will play a key role in the country’s economic development and its political stabilisation, since it offers new opportunities for exports to the EU, which is the major market for Moroccan products; considers that it will also provide opportunities for the EU’s agricultural industry, particularly in the area of processed foods; points out that EU exporters will eventually benefit from the removal of Moroccan import tariffs for 70 % of agricultural and fisheries product lines, a measure which will save an estimated EUR 100 million per year in customs duties once fully implemented;

5.

Welcomes the additional non-tariff measures included in the agreement, such as future negotiations to provide extra protection for European GIs, enhanced safeguard mechanisms and SPS measures; recalls, further, that the EU and Morocco have agreed a dispute-settlement mechanism which enables either party to gain redress if the other fails to respect the terms of the agreement;

6.

Highlights the concerns expressed by certain EU sectors at increased duty-free quotas for sensitive fruit and vegetable imports; calls, therefore, on the Commission to present an assessment of the impact on European producers, and particularly on farmers’ incomes, and to keep Parliament regularly informed;

7.

Is concerned at the constant complaints from European industry groups alleging fraud in the entry-price system, and asks for guarantees that the increased tariff quotas under the agreement will be properly regulated by the EU and that there will be no misinterpretation of the rules governing the implementation of the entry-price mechanism; emphasises that European operators have made complaints to OLAF and to Parliament’s Committee on Petitions and that that committee has asked the Commission to change the entry-price system in order to put a stop to fraud; in that connection, notes the proposals to bring the rules governing implementation of the entry-price system into line with the Community Customs Code as part of the latest reform of the common agricultural policy; considers that this must be accompanied by changes to the implementing regulation on the common organisation of agricultural markets to introduce effective control measures;

8.

Considers that the agreement lays down specific institutional arrangements and mechanisms, such as cooperation to prevent market disruption, expert groups established by the Commission with third countries, including Morocco, the Subcommittee on Agricultural Trade set up in the context of the management of the Association Agreement, exchanges of information on policies and production, and the safeguard clause under Article 7 of the Protocol; calls on the Commission to make use of the mechanisms when appropriate;

9.

Emphasises that access to the EU's internal market should be contingent on compliance with sanitary, phytosanitary and environmental standards and welcomes the positive Food and Veterinary Office report issued in 2011; welcomes the emphasis in the agreement on SPS measures, and calls for technical assistance to be central to the negotiations on a DCFTA; asks the Commission to promote equivalency of measures and controls between Morocco and the European Union in the area of environmental and food safety standards, in order to guarantee fair competition between the two markets;

10.

Welcomes the reforms in the Moroccan agriculture sector, namely the ‘Plan Vert’ (‘Green Plan’) designed specifically to support small farmers by giving them access to modern technology and investment; calls for continued EU support for the improvement of production methods, through the sharing of best practice, and for Morocco’s efforts in the area of water conservation;

11.

Recognises that Morocco has ratified most of the relevant International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions and recently adopted legislation to outlaw child labour; emphasises, nevertheless, that there is still room for improvement regarding freedom of association and child labour; considers that the provisions of the DCFTAs should include assistance with the implementation of ILO conventions and the ratification of unsigned core ILO conventions, e.g. No 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, and initiatives on corporate social responsibility as part of the sustainable development chapter;

12.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that the agreement is fully consistent with international law and benefits all the local population groups affected;

13.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, its Delegation for relations with the Maghreb Countries, the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean and the Government and Parliament of Morocco.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/37

—

having regard to its previous resolutions on Syria,

—

having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council’s conclusions on Syria of 10 October, 14 November and 1 December 2011 and 23 January 2012 and to the European Council conclusions of 23 October and 9 December 2011,

—

having regard to the statements by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) on Syria of 8 October, 3 and 28 November and 2 December 2011 and 1 and 4 February 2012,

—

having regard to Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP of 1 December 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Syria and repealing Decision 2011/273/CFSP (1), and to the Council’s decision following the Foreign Affairs Council meeting of 23 January 2012 to reinforce the EU’s restrictive measures against the Syrian regime,

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 of 18 January 2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria and repealing Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (2),

—

having regard to the Arab League’s statements on the situation in Syria of 27 August, 16 October and 12, 16 and 24 November 2011 and 22 January and 12 February 2012, its Action Plan of 2 November 2011, and its sanctions against Syria adopted on 27 November 2011,

—

having regard to the UN Security Council (UNSC) Presidential Statement of 3 August 2011,

—

having regard to the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly Third Committee on the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic of 22 November 2011,

—

having regard to the report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the SyrianArabRepublicof 23 November 2011,

—

having regard to the resolution of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic of 2 December 2011,

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

—

having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, to all of which Syria is a party,

—

having regard to Rule 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas since the start of the violent crackdown on peaceful protesters in Syria in March 2011 the systematic killings, violence and torture have been dramatically escalating and the Syrian army and security forces have continued to respond with targeted killings, torture and mass arrests; whereas cities and towns throughout Syria are being kept under siege and bombarded by government-led forces; whereas access to food and medical supplies has been extremely difficult; whereas many Syrians are facing a deteriorating humanitarian situation as a result of the violence and displacements;

B.

whereas the UN estimates that the death toll in Syria has exceeded 5 400 in the course of the 11 month-long uprising, although up-to-date figures are very difficult to obtain because some areas, such as parts of Homs, are completely sealed off; whereas thousands more have been injured, at least 69 000 have been detained, of whom about 32 000 have subsequently been released, and about 12 400 have fled to neighbouring countries; whereas the UN Children’s Fund reports that hundreds of children have been killed and hundreds more arbitrarily arrested and tortured and sexually abused whilst in detention;

C.

whereas residents inside the besieged city of Homs are under massive continuous bombardment and fear that the regime is preparing to make a final deadly ground assault; whereas on 12 February 2012 Arab media reported that Syrian tanks and artillery were heavily bombarding the city of Hama, alongside the continued assault on Homs; whereas, at the same time, the Syrian authorities insist that they are confronting ‘terrorist groups’ and will continue until ‘order’ is restored;

D.

whereas the numerous promises of reforms and amnesties by President Bashar al-Assad have never been honoured and the regime has lost all credibility and legitimacy, which has led to widespread calls in the international community for the President to resign;

E.

whereas a French journalist has been killed and a Dutch journalist wounded carrying out the vital role of providing independent information on the events in Syria; whereas the Syrian authorities are denying international journalists any further access to the country; whereas testimonials from Syrian refugees, citizen reports from inside Syria and images uploaded from mobile phones through standalone satellite connections continue to be the main source of information coming out of the country;

F.

whereas the Arab League decided to seek the support of the UNSC for a political solution in Syria; whereas on 4 February 2012 the Russian Federation and China vetoed a UNSC resolution that backed the Arab League call for an inclusive and peaceful Syrian-led political process; whereas on 28 January 2012 the Arab League monitoring mission in Syria was suspended due to the critical deterioration of the situation;

G.

whereas on 18 January 2012 additional EU restrictive measures against the Syrian regime entered into force, including a prohibition on the export of telecommunications monitoring equipment for use by the Syrian regime, a prohibition on participation in certain infrastructure projects and investment in such projects, and additional restrictions on transfers of funds and the provision of financial services;

H.

whereas on 23 January 2012 the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to EU restrictive measures was extended by adding 22 persons responsible for human rights violations and eight entities financially supporting the regime;

I.

whereas in response to the increasing violence and serious security concerns the United States has closed its embassy in Syria; whereas France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, Germany and Belgium have recalled their ambassadors; whereas the Gulf Cooperation Council and Tunisia have recalled their ambassadors and decided to expel Syrian ambassadors from their capitals;

J.

whereas tens of thousands of Syrian refugees have sought refuge in Turkey since March 2011; whereas Turkey is playing an increasingly important role internationally in opposing the violence in Syria;

K.

whereas the dire situation in Syria is already having a negative impact on the situation in Lebanon, with fears of an imminent spillover across the border, and will consequently affect the whole region, with unpredictable implications and consequences;

L.

whereas Russia continues to sell weapons and other military material to the Syrian regime and has a naval base in Syria; whereas the EU has an embargo in force on military equipment for Syria and whereas a Russian ship was intercepted in Cyprus and then according to the Cypriot authorities proceeded to Syria under false pretences; whereas the circumstances of this incident have never been officially and publicly clarified by the office of the High Representative;

M.

whereas the UN Human Rights Commissioner called for Syria to be referred to the ICC over allegations of crimes against humanity following December’s Special Session of the UNHRC on Syria based on the findings of the report of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry, while the UN Secretary-General stated on 15 January 2012 that the path of repression is a dead end;

1.

Deplores the fact that Russia and China have exercised their veto in the UN Security Council to block the draft resolution on Syria, thus voting against the peaceful transition proposal by the Arab League, which was perceived by the Assad regime as licence to intensify the means of repression on the ground, using heavy weapons and indiscriminate force against unarmed civilians; reiterates its call on the UNSC members, in particular Russia and China, to uphold their responsibility to ensure that the violent repression of the Syrian people ceases immediately; continues to support the efforts of the EU and its Member States in this field;

2.

Calls on the VP/HR to do her utmost to secure the adoption of a UNSC resolution, working with both Russia and China;

3.

Calls on Russia, the Syrian Government’s largest overseas arms supplier, to immediately stop its arms shipments to Syria, and calls on the EU to draw up a black list of companies that deliver arms to Syria; calls on all EU actors in this context to fully respect the European Union code of conduct on arms exports, which is intended to prevent the export of equipment which might be used for internal repression or contribute to regional instability;

4.

Condemns once again in the strongest terms the brutal repression carried out by the Syrian regime against its population, in particular in the city of Homs; expresses its deepest concern at the gravity of the human rights violations perpetrated by the Syrian authorities, including mass arrests, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, torture and ill treatment of detainees, including children; stresses that medical attention must not be withheld from those injured in the violence;

5.

Is concerned at the fact that, according to the UNICEF appeal of 7 February 2012 and to the report of 23 November 2011 of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, almost 400 children have died since the beginning of the violence in Syria in March 2011, and almost 380 – some of them under the age of 14 – have been arbitrarily arrested and suffered torture and sexual violence during detention; strongly condemns all violations of human rights, including children’s rights, committed by the Syrian military and security forces and calls on the Syrian Government to put an end to all violations of children’s and other human rights;

6.

Conveys its sincere condolences to the families of the victims; commends the courage and determination of the Syrian people and strongly supports their aspirations to secure full respect for democracy, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms and a guarantee of better economic and social conditions;

7.

Reiterates its call for President Bashar al-Assad and his regime to step aside immediately, so as allow a peaceful and democratic transition to take place in Syria;

8.

Urges the Assad regime to end the violence against the Syrian people, to remove troops and tanks from cities, and to release all detained protesters, political prisoners, human rights defenders, bloggers and journalists, and afford full access to the country to international humanitarian and human rights organisations, as well as international media;

9.

Reiterates its call for prompt, independent and transparent investigations into the widespread, systematic and gross violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms by the Syrian authorities and military and security forces, with the aim of ensuring that all those responsible for these acts, which may amount to crimes against humanity, are held to account by the international community; takes the view that clear mechanisms for accountability must be at the heart of the UNSC’s efforts to end the Syrian crisis, while endorsing once again the call by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for Syria to be referred to the ICC;

10.

Recalls its support for the Arab League’s efforts to end the violence and to promote a political solution in Syria; welcomes the Arab League’s decision to step up cooperation with the UN; notes the Arab League’s decision to suspend its observer mission to Syriain response to the worsening violence on the part of the authorities;

11.

Welcomes the VP/HR’s support for the setting up a ‘Friends of the Syrian People’ contact group of countries for democratic change in Syria, including Turkey and members of the Arab League; welcomes the VP/HR’s announcement that she will be taking part in the first meeting of this contact group in Tunisia on 24 February 2012;

12.

Calls on the Council to take a joint decision on recalling all ambassadors from Syria and freezing diplomatic contacts with Syrian ambassadors in EU Member States; urges the VP/HR to reinforce the EU Delegation in Damascus with humanitarian capacity, and to do the same wherever else it is necessary;

13.

Welcomes the EU commitment to continue to press for increased international pressure on the Syrian regime; supports the Foreign Affairs Council’s decision of 23 January 2012 to put in place new restrictive measures against the Syrian regime, and calls for further targeted sanctions;

14.

Welcomes the Commission’s decision of 3 February 2012 to provide humanitarian assistance (EUR 3 million) to alleviate the suffering of people both inside Syriaand in neighbouring countries;

15.

Welcomes and encourages the ongoing efforts by the Syrian opposition to unify outside and within the country, to continue to engage with the international community, in particular the Arab League, and to work on a shared vision for the future of Syria and the transition to a democratic system; urges the EU to step up its political, technical, communication and humanitarian support for the opposition;

16.

Calls for a peaceful and genuine transition to democracy which meets the legitimate demands of the Syrian people and is based on an inclusive dialogue involving all democratic forces and components of Syrian society with a view to launching a process of deep democratic reform that takes account of the need to ensure national reconciliation and is therefore committed to ensuring respect for the rights of minorities; calls on the EU to support all attempts by the Syrian opposition to unite and establish a clear agenda for a democratic Syria;

17.

Is seriously concerned that intimidation by Syrian authorities may be extending to exiled opposition activists;

18.

Welcomes the strong support shown by Turkey for the Syrian population, including by accepting refugees along the Syrian-Turkish borders and allowing the Syrian opposition to organise; urges the VP/HR to make every effort to start discussions with Turkey, the Arab League and the Syrian opposition about arrangements for setting up humanitarian corridors at the Syrian-Turkish borders;

19.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government and Parliament of the Russian Federation, the Government and Parliament of the People's Republic of China, the Government and Parliament of the Republic of Turkey, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States and the Government and Parliament of the Syrian Arab Republic.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/41

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all UN human rights conventions and optional protocols thereto (1),

—

having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights,

—

having regard to its previous resolutions on the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), in particular that of 10 March 2011 on the priorities of the 16th session of the UN Human Rights Council and the 2011 review (2),

—

having regard to the delegation from the Subcommittee on Human Rights of the European Parliament which travelled to Geneva during the sixteenth session of the UNHRC and to its report to the Subcommittee, and to the joint delegation from the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Subcommittee on Human Rights to the 66th session of the UN General Assembly,

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2011 on EU external policies in favour of democratisation (3),

—

having regard to UNHRC Resolution 16/21 of 25 March 2011 on the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council,

—

having regards to its resolution of 11 May 2011 on the EU as a global actor: its role in multilateral organisations (4),

—

having regard to the forthcoming 7th cycle of the UNHRC, in particular the 19th session to be held from 27 February to 23 March 2012, and to the 13th and 14th sessions of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) to be organised in the course of 2012,

—

having regard to the previous regular and special sessions of the UNHRC, as well as the first cycle of the UPR which was completed in December 2011,

—

having regard to the Joint Communication of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the European Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 12 December 2011 on Human Rights and Democracy at the Heart of EU External Action – Towards a more effective approach (COM(2011)0886),

—

having regard to Articles 2, 3(5), 18, 21, 27 and 47 of the Treaty on European Union,

—

having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas respect for, and the promotion and safeguarding of, the universality of human rights is part of the European Union’s (EU) ethical and legal acquis and one of the cornerstones of European unity and integrity (5);

B.

whereas the ongoing review of the EU’s human rights policy should contribute to making its external policy a more active, coherent and effective force in the world;

C.

whereas the EU and its Member States should guarantee respect for human rights in their own policies, in order to increase coherence between internal and external policies and thus enhance the credibility of the EU in the UNHRC;

D.

whereas all international actors must work for the elimination of double standards and the avoidance of selectivity and politicisation in the consideration of human rights issues;

E.

whereas the UNHRC is a unique platform specialising in universal human rights and a specific forum dealing with human rights within the UN system; whereas it is entrusted with the important task of strengthening the promotion, protection and respect of human rights around the globe;

F.

whereas the implications of the work being done in the Third Committee of the General Assembly and in the UNHRC for the debate in the UN Security Council should be taken into consideration;

G.

whereas a delegation from Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights will travel to Genevaduring the 19th session of the UNHRC, as has been the case in previous years for the sessions of the UNHRC;

1.

Takes note of the ongoing process to confirm EU priorities for the 19th Session of the UNHRC, and welcomes the designation of Burma/Myanmar, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Syria, Libya and Iranas key issues;

2.

Welcomes the fact that on the agenda of the 19th regular session there are, among others, panel discussions on human rights mainstreaming, freedom of expression on the internet, freedom of religion or belief and conscience, discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity, human rights and HIV/AIDS, and the Declaration of the Rights of Minorities, as well as extensive meetings on the rights of the child, and on torture, human rights and counter-terrorism, disappearances and arbitrary detention; calls on Member States to contribute constructively to these debates, and make clear that universal and indivisible human rights apply to people regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity;

3.

Welcomes this session’s nominations for the mandates of Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Syria and Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan; takes note of the reports to be presented by the Special Rapporteurs on, among others, the situation of human rights in the DPRK, Iran and Burma/Myanmar, and those on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, on the situation of human rights defenders and on the freedom of religion or belief; calls on the Member States to actively contribute to these debates;

4.

Welcomes the increased mainstreaming of human rights in the work of the UN, as evidenced by, for example, the considerable increase in appearances before the Security Council of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – including by its very ably led representation at Assistant Secretary-General level in New York – or by the organisation of a yearly panel discussion by the UNHRC to interact with the heads of governing bodies and secretariats of the UN agencies and funds, as mandated by the outcome of the review process; strongly encourages the UNSC member states to request on a more regular basis briefings by the HRC, with a view to effectively addressing human rights violations that are at the root of numerous conflicts addressed by the UNSC;

5.

Reiterates once more its call to EU Member States to actively oppose any attempt to undermine the concept of universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights, and to actively encourage the UNHRC to pay equal attention to the question of discrimination on all grounds, including gender, race, age, sexual orientation and religion or belief; takes the view that UNHRC Resolution 17/19 of 17 June 2011 on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity should be followed up tangibly and durably;

6.

Reiterates once more its call to EU Member States to further lead by example in supporting the universality of the work of the Human Rights Council, notably in ratifying all international human rights instruments which it has established; regrets in particular that no EU Member State has ratified the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, that several Member States have not yet adopted and/or ratified the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and that only one Member State has ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and reiterates its call to all EU Member States to ratify them;

7.

Remains concerned, while recognising modest improvements, with the persistence of ‘bloc politics’, which continue to dominate at times, affecting the selection of countries and situations receiving UNHRC attention and thus having a negative impact on its authority and credibility;

8.

Regrets the fact that the review process has not led to the development of further-reaching membership criteria as regards commitments and performance on human rights issues; reiterates its call for competitive elections for all regional groups and recommends that the EU and its Member States state their clear opposition to the practice of regional groups putting forward ‘clean slates’, and to lead by example on this matter;

9.

Takes note of the restoration of Libya’s membership of the UNHRC and encourages the country’s reintegration; regrets, however, that the opportunity was not seized to draw up strong and transparent criteria for reinstating suspended members, which should logically be based on the initial criteria required for election; urges the UNHRC to draw up such criteria for future reference without further delay and with the scope for consistent evaluation of a state’s suitability to be present in the UNHRC based on its human rights record;

10.

Welcomes the presentation by the independent, international Commission of Inquiry on Libya, pursuant to the outcome of the 15th special session, of its first report at the UNHRC on September 2011; supports the extension of its mandate and looks forward to the final written report, to be presented at the 19th session; encourages the implementation of the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry and strongly supports its call for exhaustive, impartial and public investigations to be conducted into all alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law during the conflict, regardless of who committed them, with full respect for judicial guarantees; considers that the human rights situation in Libya remains an area of concern, notably regarding the conditions of detention and the treatment of detainees held by various militias without effective control by the Interim Government over these brigades, and requires increased vigilance and sustained assistance by the international community, as stated by the High Commissioner for Human Rights before the UN Security Council on 25 January 2012;

11.

Condemns in the strongest terms the widespread brutal repression and systematic violations of human rights by the Syrian regime against its population, including children, and calls on the Syrian authorities to bring an immediate end to violence and to comply with their obligations under international human rights law in order to allow a peaceful and democratic transition;

12.

Welcomes the organisation of the 16th, and 17th and 18th special sessions, pursuant to initiatives by the United States, Poland and the EU respectively, on the situation of human rights in Syria; supports the recommendations of its November report and looks forward to the update to be presented at, and the interactive dialogue to be held during, the 19th session;

13.

Welcomes the decision to establish the mandate of Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Syria once the Commission of Inquiry’s mandate ends; expresses, in particular, its full support for the call by the Commission of Inquiry, the High Commissioner and all Special Procedures mandate holders to the Syrian authorities to cooperate fully with the investigations, with a view to ensuring full accountability and avoiding impunity; welcomes all the diplomatic efforts undertaken by the EU’s HR/VP Baroness Ashton and its Member States towards China and Russia in the UN Security Council with a view to the immediate adoption of a resolution on Syria; deeply regrets that, due to the renewed veto of the Russian Federation and China, the Security Council was unable to support the call of the League of Arab States for an inclusive, Syrian-led political process conducted in an environment free from violence;

14.

Reiterates its concern at the human rights situation in Bahrain and calls on EU Member States to work towards the establishment of a resolution on the human rights situation in Bahrain at the UNHRC; stresses the need to follow up at the UNHRC the question of the fight against impunity in Yemen following the 2011 anti-government protests, and considers that amnesties are in breach of international human rights law if they prevent the prosecution of individuals who may be responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and gross violations of human rights;

15.

Welcomes the statements made during 2011 by UN Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay urging the Egyptian authorities to end the excessive and brutal use of force against protesters in Tahrir square and elsewhere in the country, including the apparent improper use of tear gas, rubber bullets and live ammunition, as well as her calls for independent investigations to be launched regarding diverse demonstrations and events;

16.

Calls on the EU and the EU Member States, on the occasion of the second cycle of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on Algeria, to focus on the issue of enforced disappearances and to highlight the lack of follow-up by Algeria to the recommendations adopted by the Treaty bodies on this matter; calls for the setting-up of a specific follow-up mechanism in this regard; calls, at the same time, on the EU and the EU Member States to express their serious concerns about the recent adoption of five laws, in particular a repressive Associations Law and a discriminatory Law on Women;

17.

Stresses the need for international monitoring of the human rights situation in Western Sahara, not least through recourse to Special Rapporteurs from the HRC;

18.

Welcomes the decision to appoint a Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran; welcomes the interim report presented by the Special Rapporteur to the UNGA Third Committee, and looks forward to the consideration of his report at the 19th session; urges the Iranian authorities to cooperate with the Special Rapporteur’s investigations, inter alia by allowing access to the country; calls for an extension of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate, in the light of the dire human rights situation in Iran;

19.

Commends the Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights in the DPRK and on the situation of human rights in Burma/Myanmar for their continued efforts in the conduct of their mandates, and calls for the extension thereof; welcomes the preliminary positive changes in Burma/Myanmar’s attitude towards greater cooperation with the Special Procedures and reiterates its call for the release all remaining prisoners of conscience as well as for tangible steps to be taken on the fight against impunity in Burma, notably on the crimes against humanity committed in the ethnic areas;

20.

Reiterates its call to the HR/VP and the EU Member States to work towards a strong EU common position on the follow-up to the Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict, publicly demanding the implementation of its recommendations and accountability for all violations of international law, regardless of the alleged perpetrator, through the conduct of independent, impartial, transparent and effective investigations; takes the view that there can be no efficient Middle East peace process without accountability and justice;

21.

Expresses its support for the recent establishment of the mandate of an independent expert on the situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire to follow up on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, and looks forward to the consideration of his report at the 19th session;

22.

Stresses the need to further support efforts to strengthen the accountability process in Sri Lanka and continue to call for the establishment of a UN commission of inquiry into all crimes committed, as recommended by the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts on Sri Lanka; invites the Sri Lankan Government to send an invitation to the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression;

23.

Is alarmed by the deteriorating human rights situation in Kazakhstan; takes the view that the report by the General Prosecutor's Office on the events in Zhanaozen and Shetpe (West Kazakhstan) does not sufficiently deal with the role of the Kazakh state forces in the brutal repression of protests by striking oil workers, their sympathisers and supporters on 16-18 December 2011, which left at least 17 people dead; is outraged by the subsequent arrests of leading figures of the opposition parties, human rights defenders and journalists; calls for an independent, international inquiry into the events and for the immediate release of all political prisoners, including the oil workers’ lawyer Natalia Sokolowa; stresses the need to discuss the human rights situation in Kazakhstan at the forthcoming session of the UNHRC;

24.

Commends the work of the OHCHR on the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and stresses the need for the reestablishment of the mandate of an independent expert to monitor the human rights situation in the DRC and to engage with the authorities on the implementation of the recommendations made by international human rights mechanisms;

25.

Requests the EU delegation and EU Member States to seek a HRC resolution on the situation in Eritrea, given the country’s deplorable and deteriorating track records with respect to freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief and conscience;

26.

Welcomes the report of the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights on the situation in Afghanistan, which derives from the work her office undertakes within UNAMA; calls on EU Member States to support it publicly and to engage in the debate on this report in support of its recommendations on the strengthening of the rule of law, the fight against impunity, on women’s rights and on the work of the Afghan Human Rights Institution; supports the establishment of a Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan;

27.

Notes that the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has made good progress in UN bodies such as the UNSC, the UNGA, and the UNHRC; emphasises that R2P is an encompassing concept, which comprises more than just military intervention; takes note of a new interpretation also emerging (‘Responsibility while protecting’), primarily generated by some BRICs countries, in particular Brazil, following the Libyan crisis; encourages further debate on how the United Nations bodies, in particular the Security Council, could potentially utilise this concept in ensuring greater cooperation between member states in the face of crisis; underlines in particular the preventive role played by the International Criminal Court, notably of its Office of the Prosecutor, and the merits of the recourses to the ICC through the UN Security Council, in this respect;

28.

Stresses the need for international monitoring of the human rights situation in China and calls on EU Member States to actively engage in establishing it in light of the failure of the EU-China dialogue on human rights to achieve significant and tangible results;

29.

Reiterates that freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to change or abandon one’s religion or belief, is a fundamental human right; commends the work of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and regrets that many individuals and communities worldwide have been denied this right; regrets that freedom of religion and expression is being constantly violated on the territory of historical Tibet, and that as a consequence an increasing number of Tibetans have recently committed self-immolation as an extreme form of protest against the suppression of their rights and freedoms;

30.

Condemns the recent statement by the Japanese Minister of Justice on a possible resumption of the use of death penalty; welcomes Mongolia’s decision of 5 January 2012 to abolish the death penalty, following on from the moratorium on the use of death penalty of January 2010 and encourages the UNHRC and the UN General Assembly to continue to work for a moratorium and abolition of the death penalty in the world;

31.

Welcomes the decision taken by the Guatemalan Parliament to ratify the Rome Statute;

32.

Welcomes the work of the UN Gender Entity (UN Women), which should have an impact on the implementation and defence of the ‘Beijing acquis’, including with regard to sexual and reproductive rights, as well as on the implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325 on the role of women in peace and security, which are all key issues for the EU;

33.

Welcomes the confirmation in the UNHRC review outcome that the second cycle of the UPR should focus on, inter alia, the implementation of the accepted recommendations of the first cycle, but emphasises that those recommendations which were not accepted by the State under review should not be excluded from the process; calls on states participating in the UPR to focus their assessment of third countries in particular on their follow-up and the implementation of the recommendations of UN treaty bodies and Special Procedures, as a significant political support provided to these valuable expert-based contributions;

34.

Encourages EU Member States to provide technical assistance in order to help UPR recommendations to be implemented, in line with the commitments undertaken in the UNHRC’s institution-building package and the outcome of the review process; points to the Voluntary Fund for Financial and Technical Assistance for the Implementation of the UPR as a useful tool in this regard, and encourages the other Member States to follow the British and German examples in contributing to the Fund;

35.

Believes that the EU should seek to raise the profile of the UPR process by embedding recommendations in bilateral and multilateral dialogues with UN member states;

36.

Welcomes the enhanced role given, in compliance with the Paris Principles, to national human rights institutions, which are now entitled to intervene immediately after the State under review during the adoption of the UPR outcome by the plenary; reiterates its support for human rights NGOs and greater civil society and expert involvement in the UPR;

37.

Welcomes the fact that the UNHRC review outcome provides for the submission of a voluntary mid-term update on the follow-up to accepted recommendations, and encourages EU Member States to lead by example;

38.

Reaffirms its view that Special Procedures lie at the core of the UN human rights system and that the credibility and effectiveness of the UNHRC rest on the Procedures’ full implementation and the Council’s cooperation with the mandate holders;

39.

Welcomes the fact that the UNHRC review process has reaffirmed the integrity and independence of the mandate holders as essential characteristics of the Procedures;

40.

Welcomes the steps undertaken in the UNHRC review to enhance transparency in the selection and appointment process of mandate holders; welcomes, too, the enhanced role in this selection process played by ParisPrinciple-compliant national human rights institutions;

41.

Regrets that the Special Procedures’ early-warning capacity was not further strengthened by providing for a mechanism allowing them to automatically trigger the consideration of a situation by the UNHRC; regrets that there is no mechanism to follow up on the implementation of recommendations of Special Procedures;

42.

Welcomes the announced increase of EIDHR funds and stresses that these additional funds should also be used to increase the support to the UNHRC; welcomes the financial contributions that have been provided to the OHCHR since 2007 via the EIDHR; expects that, given the scope of new challenges that have emerged in recent times, the Commission might want to increase the amount of its annual contribution;

43.

Reiterates its strong support for the EU’s active participation in the work of the UNHRC, through the co-sponsoring of resolutions, the issuing of statements and its intervention in interactive dialogues and debates;

44.

Reiterates its call to the EU and its Member States to ensure that human rights are also fully respected in internal policies, in order to avoid double standards and to increase consistency between internal and external policies and to enhance their moral authority on the international scene; calls on HR/VP Baroness Ashton to address the question of complicity of EU companies in human rights abuses outside of the EU and to work on the implementation of a system of sanctions towards these companies or at least to keep track of such cases and to make sure that these companies do not get EU subsidies or any kind of help of the EEAS;

45.

Emphasises once more the primordial importance of the formulation of strong EU common positions, in order to harness the collective weight of the EU and its Member States; takes note, in this light, of the development of the capacity of the Council Working Group on Human Rights (COHOM) and the efforts to identify key priorities as well as efforts to clarify the division of labour which will help developing cross regional outreach and collaboration and on lobbying all moderate States including between Geneva and New York; welcomes the de facto COHOM based in Brussels and the proposal to have a yearly meeting of the COHOM in Geneva; supports the efforts to put across ‘one message, with many voices’, but deplores the fact that the search for common ground too often leads to an acceptance of the lowest common denominator, particularly in final Council Conclusions and calls for bolder, more ambitious action; in this connection, encourages the EEAS, particularly the EU’s delegations in Geneva and New York, to increase its coherence, based on timely and substantive consultation, and the visibility of the EU’s action in order to enhance its credibility in the world;

46.

Welcomes the HR/VP’s commitment to develop an annual approach to the identification of priorities at the UN across all human rights-related meetings in Geneva, as well as in New York, and points to the need for close cooperation between HR/VP and the Commissioner on Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection, as their dossiers especially on human rights are strongly interlinked;

47.

Welcomes the adoption by the UN General Assembly of Resolution 65/276 on the participation of the EU in the work of the UN as a modest start to the greater endeavour of upgrading the role of the Union in the human rights work of this organisation; considers that the EU must now vigorously insist on exercising its rights and pursue an ambitious strategy to further enhance its status at the UN;

48.

Welcomes the constructive role played by the EU and its Member States in the review of the UNHRC, especially in defence of the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and in their backing for Special Procedures and country mandates; recalls the need for sufficient funding to keep regional OHCHR offices open;

49.

Emphasises the fact that the EU’s capacity for outreach must urgently be improved, including through the development of strong alliances with key regional partners and all moderate states, as well as through a mechanism to enlist the support of the HR/VP to lobby third country capitals;

50.

Warmly welcomes the HR/VP’s statement to Parliament on 13 December 2011, following up on Parliament’s longstanding call for the creation of an EU Special Representative on Human Rights; stresses that the mandate holder should be an expert-level appointee with a proven track record on human rights; urges that this appointment be made as swiftly as possible and should be sufficiently resourced to ensure that such a mandate can be fulfilled;

51.

Mandates its delegation to the 19th session of the UNHRC to voice the concerns and views expressed in this resolution; calls on the delegation to report to the Subcommittee on Human Rights regarding its visit; considers it indispensable to continue the practice of sending an EP delegation to relevant UNHRC and UNGA sessions;

52.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the UN Security Council, the UN Secretary-General, the President of the 66th General Assembly, the President of the UN Human Rights Council, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the EU-UN Working Group established by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/49

—

having regard to Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to the questions of 13 January 2012 to the Council and the Commission on Petition 0924/2011 by Dan Pescod (British), on behalf of European Blind Union (EBU)/Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB), on access by blind people to books and other printed products (O-000005/2012 – B7-0029/2012 and O-000006/2012 – B7-0030/2012),

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas blind and visually impaired people in the European Union have severely restricted access to books and other printed products because 95 % of all published works are never converted to ‘accessible formats’ such as Braille, large print or audio;

B.

whereas globally there is at present no international legal standard for a targeted exception to copyright rules for cross-border distribution of formats adapted for print-disabled persons;

C.

whereas the Copyright Committee of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) is considering an international treaty to improve access to books for blind and other visually impaired people;

D.

whereas European Union representatives have consistently opposed a legally binding text, favouring non-binding recommendations;

E.

whereas in its resolution of 12 May 2011 on ‘Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries’ (1) the European Parliament called on the EU to back a binding WIPO treaty;

F.

whereas the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, in particular Articles 21 and 30, and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights establish the principles applicable to the prohibition of discrimination against persons with disabilities;

1.

Calls on the Council and Commission to support a binding WIPO treaty with regard to copyright on books and printed products for blind and visually impaired people;

2.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/50

—

having regard to its resolutions of 27 October 2005 on the Barcelona Process revisited (1) and 25 November 2009 on the Euro-Mediterranean economic and trade partnership ahead of the 8th Euromed Ministerial Conference on Trade (2),

—

having regard to the Barcelona Declaration of 28 November 1995, which established a partnership between the European Union and the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries (SEMCs), and the work programme adopted at that conference,

—

having regard to the Joint Communication of the Commission to the European Council, the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 8 March 2011 on ‘A Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity with the Southern Mediterranean’ (COM(2011)0200),

—

having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Trade Roadmap till 2010 and Beyond, as adopted by the Eighth Trade Ministerial of the Union for the Mediterranean in 2009,

—

having regard to the Commission’s Joint Communication to the European Council, the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 25 May 2011 on ‘A new response to a changing Neighbourhood’ (COM(2011)0303),

—

having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Tunisia (3), Israel (4), Morocco (5), Jordan (6), Egypt (7), Lebanon (8) and Algeria (9), of the other part, and to the Euro-Mediterranean Interim Association Agreement on Trade and Cooperation between the European Community and the Palestine Liberation Organization for the benefit of the Palestinian Authority (10),

—

having regard to Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the Customs Union (96/142/EC),

—

having regard to the sustainability impact assessment (SIA) of the Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area drawn up by Manchester University's Institute for Development Policy and Management,

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 March 2007 on the construction of the Euro-Mediterranean free-trade zone (11) and the relevant considerations addressed in that resolution,

—

having regard to the conclusions of the Euro-Mediterranean Ministerial Conferences and Sectoral Ministerial Conferences which have taken place since the launch of the Barcelona Process, and, in particular, the conclusions of the Ninth Union for the Mediterranean Trade Ministerial Conference of 11 November 2010,

—

having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Justice of 25 February 2010 in Case C-386/08, Brita GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen,

—

having regard to the EU Declaration for the Fourth Meeting of the EU-Israel Association Council held in Brussels on 17-18 November 2003,

—

having regard to EU-Israel technical arrangement concerning Protocol 4 to the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the Commission’s notice to importers entitled ‘Imports from Israel into the Community’ (12),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process adopted at the 2985th Foreign Affairs Council meeting, Brussels, 8 December 2009,

—

having regard to the Commission notice concerning the date of application of the protocols on rules of origin providing for diagonal cumulation between the European Union, Algeria, Egypt, the Faeroe Islands, Iceland, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Norway, Switzerland (including Liechtenstein), Syria, Tunisia, Turkey and the West Bank and Gaza Strip (13),

—

having regard to the Agreement between the European Community, of the one part, and the Government of Denmark and the Home Government of the Faroe Islands, of the other part (14),

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the pan-Euromed zone of diagonal cumulation of origin is based on a multitude of bilateral protocols on rules of origin that are too complex for businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, and countries to take advantage of;

B.

whereas in October 2007 the Lisbon Euromed Trade Ministerial gave the green light for the drafting of a convention that brings together all the protocols for the Pan-Euro Mediterranean area in one, simplified instrument, thus facilitating the use of Pan-Euromed cumulation of origin; whereas this convention was endorsed by the Ninth Union for the Mediterranean Trade Ministerial Conference of 11 November 2010;

C.

whereas the geographical scope of this convention has been broadened to include the participants in the Stabilisation and Association Process, effectively multiplying the benefits of Pan-Euromed cumulation of origin;

D.

whereas, although these are very positive steps, the result is that any abuse or circumvention of the rules on cumulation of origin would also have a wider geographical impact;

E.

whereas the EU has Association Agreements with both Israel and Palestine, both of which include a Free Trade Agreement containing separate and distinct provisions concerning preferential commercial treatment;

F.

whereas in its conclusion on the Middle East Peace Process on 8 December 2009 the Council of the European Union reiterates ‘that settlements are illegal under international law, constitute an obstacle to peace and threaten to make a two-state solution impossible’;

G.

whereas the EU’s position is that products from places brought under Israeli administration since 1967 are not entitled to preferential tariff treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement;

H.

whereas Israel's application of the EU-Israel Association Agreement to the Occupied Territories has resulted in the improper implementation of EU law, which, as confirmed by the Court of Justice in the Brita GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen case, does not permit Member States’ customs authorities to grant preferential treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement to products from Israeli-occupied territories;

I.

whereas European citizens have clearly expressed their will concerning products from Palestinian occupied territories;

J.

whereas the EU has been encountering a variety of problems when enforcing the rules of origin with regard to products originating in settlements in occupied territories; whereas in its Declaration for the Fourth Meeting of the EU-Israel Association Council in 2003 the EU stressed ‘the importance of solving the bilateral issue of rules of origin before the origin protocol is amended’ so that Pan-Euromed cumulation of origin could be applied; whereas, in the absence of such a solution, the Commission has sought to address these problems by concluding a legally non-binding bilateral technical arrangement with Israel pursuant to which Israel includes on each proof-of-origin document the postal codes of the places in which the products it covers have been produced, thereby enabling EU customs authorities immediately to impose non-preferential duties on products produced in Israeli settlements;

K.

whereas this technical arrangement exists between the EU and Israel, on the one hand, and between the EFTA countries and Israel, on the other; whereas the proposed Convention does not in any way extend this arrangement to the geographical territory it covers or bind the other Parties;

L.

whereas the rules of the technical arrangement already require Israel and its exporters to apply the distinction between production operations carried out in the territories brought under Israel’s administration in 1967 and production carried out in the internationally-recognised territory of the State of Israel;

M.

whereas the Convention as it stands will not provide additional legal remedies to the European Union or any Contracting Party in cases where rules on cumulation are not deemed to have been appropriately fulfilled;

N.

whereas it is the customs authorities of the individual EU Member States which are responsible for checking the validity of claims regarding the preferential origin of products imported into the EU; whereas the customs authorities, despite their best endeavours, cannot possibly check and control each and every proof-of-origin document and every consignment preferentially imported from Israel into the EU; whereas the Convention may compound this logistical challenge by expanding the number of partner countries that cumulate working or processing with materials exported by Israel when exporting products under their agreements with the EU;

O.

whereas, although the problem of determining the real origin of products exported by Israelneeds to be more adequately addressed, this issue should not hold back the social and economic integration of the region as a whole;

P.

whereas the Arab Spring has highlighted the need for fair and just rules that allow the people of each Mediterranean state and country to reap the full benefits of their own economic efforts and for the EU to clearly support those efforts; whereas in the wake of the Arab Spring the EU has reiterated its commitment to establishing closer commercial ties with Arab countries;

Q.

whereas in its Joint Communication of 8 March 2011 on ‘A Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity with the Southern Mediterranean’ the Commission lists the adoption of the Convention as one of the tools to maximise the impact of trade and investment in the region;

R.

whereas the Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area failed to materialise by 2010; whereas one of the major reasons for this failure has been the lack of South-South social, trade and economic integration among southern Mediterranean countries;

S.

whereas the country and regional impact of this agreement could be very substantial;

1.

Believes that international trade can be a vehicle for economic growth, economic diversification and the reduction of poverty, all of which are necessary components of the democratisation of the Mediterranean region; supports the Commission’s endeavours to give preferential access to the EU internal market to goods produced and cumulated in the Mediterranean region;

2.

Welcomes the initiative to simplify use of the system of cumulation of rules of origin in the pan-Euro-Mediterranean zone; believes that the regional Convention for pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin is a major step towards trade facilitation and social and economic integration in the Southern Neighbourhood;

3.

Is concerned about the state of play regarding the establishment of the Euromed Free Trade Area, which was supposed to be in place by 2010 and has failed to materialise; regrets the fact that no real progress has been made by the various actors in creating the necessary conditions; encourages the development of South-South bilateral and multilateral economic cooperation, which would produce tangible benefits for the citizens of the countries involved and improve the political climate in the region; acknowledges that the lack of intra-regional trade among southern Mediterranean countries has been a major stumbling block to the project; insists that the establishment of the Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area should remain one of the goals of the EU and its southern partners; regards this Convention as a major step towards the establishment of the Free Trade Area and as a possible incentive for South-South trade;

4.

Hopes that the new democracies that will emerge in the region following the Arab Spring will promote human and social rights and deepen the political dialogue, which should create an environment more friendly to intra-regional trade, as one reason for the lack of trade was the policies implemented by the previous dictatorial leaderships; encourages these new democracies to work closely together in Agadir Group and to make full use of this Convention; asks the Commission to provide these new democracies with technical assistance to enable them to make full use of the commercial instruments available to them, including this Convention;

5.

Welcomes the fact that the Convention is a single instrument which not only creates the necessary legal framework for diagonal cumulation among the traditional southern Mediterranean partners, but also includes the participants in the Stabilisation and Association Process and the EFTA countries, thus giving a wider geographical scope to cumulation and creating a larger market for cumulated exports;

6.

Regrets the fact that the Convention is not supplemented by a dispute settlement mechanism to deal with issues concerning verification of proof of origin; believes that the Joint Committee set up by the Convention will not be a viable instrument for addressing these issues; notes that these issues will therefore have to be dealt with by means of bilateral dispute settlement mechanisms, where these exist;

7.

Takes the view that the Convention would have been greatly enhanced by the inclusion of a single, efficient dispute-settlement mechanism that would make for speedy and satisfactory resolution of disputes concerning the origin and the cumulation of products; invites the Commission to assess the possibility of integrating such a mechanism into the Convention when it is revised in the future;

8.

Regrets the fact that the text of Convention does not provide for any revision or review procedure in the future; believes that an instrument as complex and wide-ranging as the Convention would benefit from a revision in due course; therefore asks the Commission to consider incorporating a review clause into the Convention;

9.

Emphasises how important it is that the conclusion of the Convention should be accompanied, as soon as possible, by a revision of the rules of origin applicable to the parties to the Convention and that such a revision should be carried out in such a way that the rules of origin for the southern Mediterranean countries are brought into line with those proposed in the new regulation on the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP); believes that less advantageous rules of origin would undermine the full potential of the Convention and put the Southern Neighbourhood at a disadvantage;

10.

Is seriously concerned about the practices employed by certain companies which persist in exploiting the terms of the EU-Israel Association Agreement by exporting goods produced in the Occupied Territories; deplores this practice and considers that it flies in the face of the EU’s international policies and represents an abuse of the extensive opportunities for legitimate preferential access to the Union's internal market; therefore calls on the Commission to draw up a blacklist of companies which persist in employing these practices and to inform the Member States;

11.

Recalls that in its judgment in the Brita GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen case the European Court of Justice confirmed that the customs authorities of importing Member States must refuse preferential treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement to products exported to the EU which originate from Israeli-occupied territories and for which the Israeli authorities fail to provide sufficient information to enable their real origin to be determined;

12.

Takes the view that the implementation of the Convention should not perpetuate or create a situation which facilitates or encourages this abuse of the rules; stresses that the Convention should, as it states in its preamble, not lead overall to a less favourable situation than under the previous relationship between free trade partners which apply diagonal cumulation; asks the Commission to work together with the European Parliament so that the two institutions can put their political will and weight behind the efforts to find a solution to this abuse of the internal market rules; invites the Commission to put forward new proposals for a more watertight solution to this problem;

13.

Notes that the EU and EFTA member states each have a Technical Arrangement with Israel which deals with the issue of territoriality and which, to a limited extent, offers some solutions; takes the view that the solutions offered by these Technical Arrangements are not satisfactory; points out, moreover, that these Technical Arrangements do not bind the other parties to the regional Convention; is worried, therefore, that the regional Convention might give rise to a proliferation of situations in which other Contracting Parties encounter difficulties in securing cumulation under their agreements with the EU when working and processing in their own territories products imported under their agreements with Israel;

14.

Calls on the Commission to review and, if necessary, renegotiate the Technical Arrangement with the intention of making it more effective and simple; asks the Commission to seek a solution that would also be applicable to goods imported from third parties that have cumulated working or processing in their own territory with materials imported under their agreements with Israel; asks the Commission to promote the incorporation of provisions conducive to the uniform application of the principle of territoriality by all contracting parties as part of any future revision of the regional Convention;

15.

Notes that pursuant to the procedures provided for under the Technical Arrangement currently in force between the EU and Israel, on the one hand, and between EFTA and Israel, on the other, Israel’s customs authorities and exporters already make a distinction between production operations carried out in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories and production carried out in the internationally-recognised territory of the State of Israel; notes that these procedures do not provide for the communication of the outcome of the distinctions made by Israel's authorities and exporters so as to enable the EU customs authorities to apply the same distinctions correctly, simply and efficiently; calls on the Commission to work together with the customs authorities of the Member States to find a solution aimed at turning this technical arrangement into a simple, efficient and reliable mechanism;

16.

Considers that a simple, efficient and reliable mechanism to replace the existing technical arrangement should be agreed with Israel, pursuant to which Israel’s exporters and customs authorities would apply the same distinction and clearly and appropriately indicate when they have assigned originating status to products on the basis of production operations carried out in territories brought under Israel’s administration in 1967;

17.

Urges the Member States to ensure that their customs authorities effectively apply the Technical Arrangement and the spirit of the judgment of the European Court of Justice to Israeli cumulated products entering the EU under the diagonal cumulation provided for in the regional Convention; believes that the Commission should take the lead in coordinating such EU-wide efforts and should also take steps to create awareness among the customs authorities of the individual EU Member States as to how the Technical Arrangement should be applied to Israeli cumulated products; believes that the EU customs authorities should scrutinise the application of the Technical Arrangement more effectively in order to prevent abuse of the system of preferences;

18.

As no such provision exists in the text of the Convention, asks the Commission to carry out an impact assessment after three years in order to evaluate, inter alia, the benefits created by the adoption of the Convention and the impact of the cumulation brought about by the Convention on the practices of certain companies referred to above;

19.

Emphasises the need to increase awareness of the opportunities offered by cumulation as simplified by the new Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Convention, particularly in the business communities of the southern Mediterranean countries; supports the Commission in taking initiatives designed to create such awareness;

20.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the parties to the regional Convention on Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Rules of Origin and the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM).

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/56

—

having regard to the Commission’s communication of 30 November 2011 on the European Earth Monitoring Programme (GMES) and its operations (from 2014 onwards) (COM(2011)0831),

—

having regard to the Commission’s communication of 29 June 2011,‘A Budget for Europe 2020’ (COM(2011)0500),

—

having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2012 on a space strategy for the European Union that benefits its citizens (1),

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions of 31 May 2011 entitled ‘Towards a space strategy for the European Union that benefits its citizens’,

—

having regard to the oral question to the Commission on the future of GMES (O-000325/2011 – B7-0027/2012),

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) programme is one of the European Union’s two flagship space initiatives and plays a key role in earth observation, which is a vital tool in combating climate change and environmental degradation, in civil protection and security, sustainable development, mobility and crisis management, and in offering important economic opportunities by developing downstream services and fostering innovation;

B.

whereas GMES is politically, strategically and technically of major importance for Europe and offers very substantial value for money in terms of economic, social and technological benefits;

C.

whereas GMES has been set up as a Union programme, financed through the EU budget, totalling approximately EUR 3,2 billion up to 2013, under the management and responsibility of the EU;

D.

whereas lack of a credible financing plan providing long-term and stable financial support would probably lead to higher costs in the longer term, disparity of access to resulting information and benefits for European citizens, and an interruption or even a suspension of the programme and its data provision, and could ultimately mean that the investment made to date has been fruitless and that Europe would lose its independence and technological advancement in this important space infrastructure;

E.

whereas the Council requested on 31 May 2011 that the EU budget continue to fund the GMES programme in line with Union responsibilities, whereas several Member States have already indicated their objection to the funding of GMES being regulated by an intergovernmental agreement, and whereas the proposed GMES Fund will therefore probably not generate the necessary financing;

1.

Regrets the fact that on 30 November 2011 the Commission published only a communication and did not come forward with a legislative proposal on GMES, given that the current Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 covers only initial operations and will expire by the end of 2013;

2.

Disagrees with the direction that the Commission indicated in its communication as regards the future financing and government of GMES, the aim being intergovernmental funding of the project; is concerned that this direction will be hugely detrimental to the future development of the programme, cause the programme to lose its European dimension, contradict the principles of transparency and full, open and equal access for all, and be seen as a sign of disengagement by the EU from this flagship initiative;

3.

Does not believe that financing GMES outside the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) – with the funding and governance structure that the Commission proposed in its communication – is a viable option;

4.

Points out that uncertainty about the future of the GMES programme and its financing is hugely detrimental to the development and market uptake of GMES services and applications, which are expected to generate economic growth and wellbeing for European citizens;

5.

Calls, therefore, on the Commission to speedily table a legislative proposal for the long-term governance, funding and operation of the GMES programme, financed under the MFF, with the aim of securing the proper deployment and operation of the programme and achieving its objective of being fully operational as from 2014;

6.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

30.8.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 249/57

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 December 2009 on Belarus (1) and to its other resolutions on that subject, in particular those of 15 September 2011 (2), 12 May 2011 (3), 10 March 2011 (4) and 20 January 2011 (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 October 2010 on the World Day against the Death Penalty (6) and to its previous resolutions on the abolition of the death penalty, in particular that of 26 April 2007 on the initiative for a universal moratorium on the death penalty (7),

—

having regard to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 65/206 of 21 December 2010 calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, as well as to its previous resolutions of 2007 and 2008 on the death penalty,

—

having regard to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly resolution of 6-10 July 2010 on the death penalty,

—

having regard to Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Resolution 1857 (2012) of 25 January 2012 on the situation in Belarus,

—

having regard to the statement of 1 December 2011 by EU High Representative Catherine Ashton on the death sentences in Belarus,

—

having regard to EP President Martin Schulz’s statement of 24 January 2012 condemning the death sentences handed down to Dzmitry Kanavalau and Uladzislau Kavalyou,

—

having regard to the EU Foreign Affairs Council decision of 23 January 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus,

—

having regard to Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Summit adopted in Prague on 7-9 May 2009 and the Declaration on the situation in Belarus adopted on the occasion of the Eastern Partnership Summit in Warsaw on 30 September 2011,

—

having regard to Rule 122(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas Belarus remains the only country in Europe that exercises the death penalty and still carries out executions;

B.

whereas in July 2011 Aleh Hryshkautsou and Andrei Burdyka were executed when their cases were still pending before the UN Human Rights Committee and whereas, according to human right activists, around 400 people have been executed in Belarus since 1991;

C.

whereas the most recent death sentences were handed down on 30 November 2011 against Dzmitry Kanavalau and Uladzislau Kavalyou by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus for allegedly committing terrorist attacks in 2005 in Vitebsk, in 2008 in Minsk, and in the Minsk metro in April 2011;

D.

whereas, according to credible reports (FIDH, Human Rights Watch), there are arguments showing that prosecutors and the Belarus Supreme Court held an unfair trial and that the investigation was marred by serious human rights abuses and intentional disregard of important evidence indicating the innocence of the two men and whereas, according to observers of the trial, there were serious procedural violations during the preliminary investigation and the judicial examination of the case;

E.

whereas Dzmitry Kanavalau and Uladzislau Kavalyou were denied access to lawyers, whereas credible reports indicate the use of torture in order to extract confessions during interrogations, whereas there is no forensic evidence linking either of the men to the explosion, and whereas no traces of explosive material were found on the clothes or bodies of the men;

F.

whereas all the important evidence that the prosecution referred to during the trial was destroyed immediately after the Supreme Court announced its decision;

G.

whereas, under Article 14, Section 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the Republic of Belarus, ‘everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal’;

H.

whereas Mr Kanavalau’s parents have been intimidated and put under surveillance by secret service officers, and men in plain clothes have been permanently stationed near their home, so that the family has for months been deprived of the opportunity to communicate with the outer world;

I.

whereas the death penalty still remains a ‘state secret’ in Belarus and, according to the Belarusian Criminal Executive Code, the dates of the executions are unknown to death row inmates, the families of the convicted and the public; whereas the death penalty is carried out in private by shooting, the body of an executed person is not given for burial to his or her relatives, and the place of burial is not communicated;

J.

whereas the executions of Mr Kanavalau and Mr Kavalyou may be carried out very soon;

K.

whereas the decision of the Supreme Court on the case is final, without appeal; whereas under Belarusian law a petition for mercy can be considered by the president of the country; whereas Uladzislau Kavalyou has asked Alyaksandr Lukashenka for pardon, denying all the charges and demanding to be released from criminal responsibility, but has received no response so far;

L.

whereas the Belarusian authorities have signed the Prague Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Summit, in which they committed themselves to ‘the principles of international law and to fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law and the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms’;

1.

Reiterates that the European Union and other international institutions have repeatedly urged the Belarusian authorities to abolish the death penalty;