(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

(1)

Cabbages are among the products listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 for which standards are to be adopted. Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1591/87 of 5 June 1987 laying down quality standards for cabbages, Brussels sprouts, ribbed celery and spinach (2) has been amended several times. For reasons of clarity, the rules on headed cabbages should be separated from those on other products under Regulation (EEC) No 1591/87 and laid down in a separate Regulation.

(2)

To that end, and in the interest of preserving transparency on the world market, account should be taken of the UN/ECE standard FFV-09 concerning marketing and quality control of headed cabbages recommended by the Working party on agricultural quality standards of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE).

(3)

Packages containing a mixture of types of headed cabbage are becoming more common on the market. Therefore the provision concerning marking of these packages need to be clarified.

(4)

Application of the new standard should remove products of unsatisfactory quality from the market, bring production into line with consumer requirements and facilitate trade based on fair competition, thereby helping to improve profitability.

(5)

The standards are applicable at all marketing stages. Long-distance transport, storage over a certain period and the various processes the products undergo may cause some degree of deterioration owing to the biological development of the products or their perishable nature. Account should be taken of such deterioration when applying the standard at the marketing stages following dispatch.

(6)

Regulation (EEC) No 1591/87 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables,

1.

the title is replaced by the following:

‘Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1591/87 of 5 June 1987 laying down quality standards for Brussels sprouts, ribbed celery and spinach’.

2.

in the first paragraph of Article 1, the first indent is deleted.

3.

Annex I is deleted.

(1)

Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (1), consolidated in a single text the legislation on the free movement of citizens of the Union. Article 17 thereof includes the main elements of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1251/70 of 29 June 1970 on the right of workers to remain in the territory of a Member State after having been employed in that State (2) and amends them by granting beneficiaries of the right to remain a more privileged status, namely that of the right of permanent residence.

(2)

Regulation (EEC) No 1251/70 should therefore be repealed,

(1)

Council Regulation (EC) No 51/2006 of 22 December 2005 fixing for 2006 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in Community waters and for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required (3), lays down quotas for 2006.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2006.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing for that stock and its retention on board, transhipment and landing,

(1)

Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC provides that a Member State may, during a period of 12 years following the notification of that Directive, authorise the placing on the market of plant protection products containing active substances not listed in Annex I of that Directive that are already on the market two years after the date of notification, while those substances are gradually being examined within the framework of a programme of work.

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1490/2002 (3) lay down the detailed rules for the implementation of the second and third stages of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC. For active substances for which a notifier fails to fulfil its obligations under these Regulations no completeness check or evaluation of the dossier shall be performed. For methabenzthiazuron no complete dossier has been submitted within the prescribed time limit. As a consequence, this active substance should not be included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC and Member States should withdraw all authorisations for plant protection products containing this substance.

(3)

For the active substances for which there is only a short period of advance notice for the withdrawal of plant protection products containing such substances, it is reasonable to provide for a period of grace for disposal, storage, placing on the market and use of existing stocks for a period no longer than twelve months to allow existing stocks to be used in no more than one further growing. In cases where a longer advance notice period is provided, such period can be shortened to expire at the end of the growing season.

(4)

For methabenzthiazuron information has been presented and evaluated by the Commission together with Member State experts which has shown a need for further use of the substance concerned. In such cases temporary measures should be provided for to enable the development of alternatives.

(5)

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

(a)

Authorisations for plant protection products containing methabenzthiazuron are withdrawn by 25 October 2006;

(b)

From 26 April 2006 no authorisations for plant protection products containing methabenzthiazuron are granted or renewed under the derogation provided for in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC.

(1)

On 2 May 2005 the Council adopted Joint Action 2005/355/CFSP on the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) (1) (EUSEC RD Congo) and, subsequently on 1 December 2005, adopted Joint Action 2005/868/CFSP amending Joint Action 2005/355/CFSP with regard to setting up a technical assistance project on improving the chain of payments of the Ministry of Defence in the DRC (2).

(2)

The mandate of EUSEC RD Congo expires on 2 May 2006.

(3)

The Political and Security Committee has agreed to the prolongation of the mandate of EUSEC RD Congo until the end of June 2007 and to the adaptation of the structure of the mission to the post transition phase in the DRC.

(4)

Joint Action 2005/355/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

1.

point (b) in Article 3 shall be replaced by the following:

;

2.

in Article 15(1) the date of application shall be replaced by the following:

‘ 30 June 2007 ’.

(1)

Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1244, a process to determine the future status of Kosovo was launched at the beginning of November 2005 with the appointment of the UN Status Envoy, Mr Martti Ahtisaari. The success of this process is essential not only for providing a clearer perspective for the people of Kosovo but also for the overall stability of the region.

(2)

The United Nations will remain fully engaged in Kosovo until the end of UNSCR 1244. However, the UN has indicated that it will no longer take the lead in a post-Status presence. The EU has a vital interest in a positive result of this process, as well as the responsibility and the means to contribute to such an outcome. It is likely that the EU together with other partners will make a major contribution. The EU will thus have to undertake an important role in Kosovo in a complex environment. It could take on responsibility for significant operations, particularly in the police and rule of law area.

(3)

The Stabilisation and Association Process (hereinafter referred to as ‘SAP’) is the strategic framework for the EU's policy towards the Western Balkan region, and its instruments are open to Kosovo, including a European Partnership, political and technical dialogue under the SAP Tracking Mechanism, inter alia, regarding standards in the field of rule of law, and related Community assistance programmes.

(4)

In June 2005 the European Council stressed that Kosovo would, in the medium term, continue to need a civilian and military presence to ensure security and in particular protection for minorities, to help with the continuing implementation of standards and to exercise appropriate supervision of compliance with the provisions contained in the status agreement. In this respect, the European Council stressed the EU's willingness to play a full part, in close cooperation with the relevant partners and international organisations.

(5)

On 7 November 2005 the Council welcomed Ambassador Kai Eide's Comprehensive Review of the situation in Kosovo and expressed its full support for the UN Secretary General's intention to start a political process to determine Kosovo's future status.

(6)

In view of the possibility of the EU enhancing its engagement in Kosovo, the Council on 7 November 2005 also invited the Secretary-General/High Representative (hereinafter referred to as ‘SG/HR’) together with the Commission to continue their work in identifying the possible future EU role and contribution, including in the areas of police, rule of law and the economy, and to submit joint proposals to the Council in the near future.

(7)

On 6 December 2005 the SG/HR and the Commission submitted their report on ‘The Future EU Role and Contribution in Kosovo’ to the Council. The report suggested an outline for the EU's future involvement in Kosovo. It stressed the desire to normalise the EU's relations with Kosovo as far as possible by using all the instruments available within the SAP. In addition it stressed the need to prepare for a future ESDP mission, including by creating and deploying a regular Planning Team soon enough to initiate EU planning for an integrated EU mission inter alia in the areas of rule of law and police.

(8)

On 12 December 2005 the Council reiterated its full support for the political process to determine Kosovo's future status and for Mr Martti Ahtisaari. It also reiterated its determination to participate fully in the definition of the status of Kosovo and its readiness to be closely involved in the negotiations and implementation of Kosovo's future status, through the EU representative to the Kosovo future status process. The Council stressed again the paramount importance of the ongoing implementation of standards now and in the future to help progress towards European standards. In particular, the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government need to make further progress on protection of minorities, full respect for the rule of law, a transparent public administration free from political interference, a climate conducive to returns, and the protection of cultural and religious sites.

(9)

On 12 December 2005 the Council also ‘welcomed the joint report by the SG/HR and the Commission on the EU's future role and contribution in Kosovo. It asked the SG/HR and the Commission to continue the examination of these issues in coordination with other international actors, particularly in the areas of police and the rule of law (including contingency planning for a possible ESDP mission), economic development and fostering Kosovo's European perspective, and to keep the relevant Council bodies actively engaged in order to ensure continuing timely preparation of an EU role in Kosovo.’

(10)

A Joint Council-Commission Fact Finding Mission to Kosovo took place between 19 and 27 February 2006 regarding possible future ESDP and Community engagement in the broader field of the rule of law. In its report, the Fact Finding Mission, recommended, inter alia, that the EU establish a Planning Team tasked to ensure that EU decision-making could be based on a solid and well analysed basis that is in step with the future status process.

(11)

In a letter to the SG/HR on 4 April 2006, the UN SRSG Jessen-Petersen welcomed the EU's engagement in the discussions on the future international engagement in Kosovo and invited the EU to deploy an EU Planning Team for Kosovo (EUPT Kosovo) to Pristina.

(12)

During the Fact Finding Mission and other consultations with the EU, the Provisional Institutions of Self Government indicated that they would welcome an EU Planning Team tasked to take forward contingency planning for a possible ESDP mission in the field of rule of law.

(13)

The establishment of an EUPT Kosovo will not in any way or form prejudge the outcome of the Future Status process or any subsequent decision by the EU to launch an ESDP mission in Kosovo.

(14)

In accordance with the guidelines of the European Council meeting at Nice on 7 to 9 December 2000, this Joint Action should determine the role of the SG/HR, in accordance with Articles 18(3) and 26 of the Treaty.

(15)

Article 14(1) of the Treaty calls for the indication of a financial reference amount for the whole period of implementation of the Joint Action. The indication of amounts to be financed by the general budget of the European Union illustrates the will of the legislative authority and is subject to the availability of commitment appropriations during the respective budget year.

(16)

Recourse should be made to the extent possible to redeployment of equipment left over from other current or terminated EU operational activities, especially EUPOL PROXIMA, EUPAT and EUPM, taking into account operational needs and the principles of sound financial management.

(17)

The mandate of EUPT Kosovo will be implemented in the context of a situation where the rule of law is not fully secured and which could harm the objectives of the Common Foreign and Security Policy as set out in Article 11 of the Treaty,

1.

Initiating a dialogue with the international community, the Kosovo institutions and local stakeholders on their views and considerations regarding operational issues linked to future arrangements.

2.

Following closely and analysing UNMIK planning towards the end of its mandate, and actively providing advice.

3.

Initiating planning to allow the smooth transfer of authority from selected tasks of UNMIK to a future EU crisis management operation, in the field of rule of law and other areas that might be identified by the Council in the context of the future status process.

4.

Initiating work on identifying possible elements for mandates, objectives, specific tasks and programmes and personnel strength for a possible EU crisis management operation, including a draft budget, which can be used as a basis for later decision making by the EU. In this context the EUPT Kosovo shall initiate reflections on the development of exit strategies.

5.

Drafting and preparing all possible aspects of procurement requirements for the possible EU crisis management operation.

6.

Ensuring appropriate logistical support for a possible EU crisis management operation, including through the establishment of a warehouse capacity enabling it to store, maintain and service equipment, including transferred from other present or former EU crisis management operation, where this will contribute to the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the possible EU crisis management operation.

7.

Drafting and preparing threat and risk analysis, under the guidance of the EU SITCEN and the Council Security Office, for the various component parts of a possible EU crisis management operation in Kosovo and devising an indicative budget (drawing on the experience of OMIK and UNMIK) for the cost of security.

8.

Contributing to a comprehensive and integrated EU approach, taking into account assistance in the police and judiciary area provided in the framework of the SAP.

9.

In the context of contingency planning for a possible EU crisis management operation in Kosovo, exchanging, as appropriate, specific assistance with EU crisis management operations or Fact Finding/Preparatory missions for the establishment of EU crisis management operations. Such assistance shall be explicitly agreed upon by the Head of EUPT Kosovo and shall be for a limited period of time.