Tag Archives: Information system

TRACES system

Leave a reply

TRACES system

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about TRACES system

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Veterinary checks animal health rules food hygiene

TRACES system

Document or Iniciative

Commission Decision 2003/623/EC of 19 August 2003 concerning the development of an integrated computerised veterinary system known as TRACES.

Summary

The trade control and expert system (TRAde Control and Expert System – TRACES) created a single central database for monitoring the movements of animals and products of animal origin both within the European Union (EU) and those coming from outside of the EU.

Features

The main features of TRACES are:

  • electronic transmission of information;
  • centralised management of the statutory reference data;
  • interoperability with other information systems;
  • multilingualism.

Objectives

The aims of the TRACES system are as follows to:

  • improve the quantity and quality of information on animal movements;
  • improve the exchange of information between the national and European authorities;
  • provide a system of electronic veterinary certificates which enables commercial operations to obtain information on-line;
  • produce lists of establishments from countries outside of the EU which are authorised to export products of animal origin to the EU;
  • manage consignments rejected at EU borders;
  • target controls on public and animal health and animal welfare (particularly during their transport, etc.);
  • centralise the evaluation of potential risks of an epidemic;
  • overcome linguistic difficulties by making information from other countries more accessible;
  • integrate all the operators concerned by putting in place a system for implementing operations related to exchanging documents between economic operators and competent authorities.

Functioning

Economic operators may be integrated into TRACES, subject to being registered by the competent authority to which they are linked. When they wish to transport animals, they must fill in an electronic form in a standardised format which contains all the appropriate information concerning the animal or product of animal origin, the destination and any stages.

In the case of intra-European trade in animals or products of animal origin, the information will be forwarded to the competent authority of the Member State of origin. After having checked the content of the form, the authority may reject or validate the transport. Where appropriate, it will issue the health certificate and the route plan relating to the animals’ welfare in the official languages of the Member State of origin and of destination. The private operator may only carry out the transport if they have received authorisation.

In the case of import or transit of animals or products of animal origin from outside of the EU, it is the official at the border inspection post who checks the animals or products and the veterinary import documents is responsible for entering the relevant information in the TRACES database, including the decision on whether to grant entry or refuse access to EU territory, and for issuing a Common Veterinary Entry Document (CVED).

All this information is sent to the veterinary authority of the Member State of destination, to the central veterinary authority of the country or countries of transit and to all appropriate control points. It can then be consulted during checks carried out en route and/or at the destination. This information may also be consulted by the economic operators registered in the database. The system is available to users free of charge.

Context

The TRACES system replaces several previously separate systems, notably ANIMO and SHIFT. ANIMO was established to monitor the movements of live animals and to exchange information between the national and Community authorities. In order to improve the health security of imported animals and products of animal origin from outside of the EU, an information system called SHIFT was established. SHIFT was composed of two other systems: the SML system for generating list of establishments authorised to export to the EU and the RCS system for managing the consignments refused entry at the EU border. Replacing these different systems with the single TRACES system will avoid duplication, whilst also simplifying the monitoring of animal movements and making it more efficient.

The European Commission is responsible for controlling the TRACES system, for developing and maintaining it, whereas the ANIMO system was based on a contract between the Member States and a private company. The Court of Auditors asked the Commission to take on this responsibility in the wake of problems encountered during the classical swine fever crisis in 1997.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Decision 2003/623/EC

28.08.2003

–

OJ L 216, 28.08.2003

MISSOC – Mutual information system on social protection

Leave a reply

MISSOC – Mutual information system on social protection

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about MISSOC – Mutual information system on social protection

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Employment and social policy > Social protection

MISSOC – Mutual information system on social protection

Document or Iniciative

MISSOC programme: Mutual information system on social protection, launched in March 1990.

Summary

MISSOC (the Mutual Information System on SOCial protection) was established in 1990 and has become a prime source of information on the status of social protection in Europe. MISSOC now covers all 25 Member States of the European Union (EU), the three other States of the European Economic Area — Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway — since 2000, and Switzerland since 2002.

The MISSOC programme depends on close co-operation between the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs and a network of representatives of the participating States. A secretariat appointed by the DG Employment and Social Affairs is responsible for coordinating the network, arranging meetings, collecting information, managing the IT system and preparing and distributing the publications.

Each participating State is represented by one or two correspondents in national ministries or institutions responsible for social protection, who supply the information and make sure that what is published is accurate. The MISSOC network meets twice a year (May and October) in the Member State holding the Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

Work carried out

MISSOC is based on information supplied by the ministries and authorities responsible for social protection. It produces regularly updated comparative tables covering all areas of social protection and MISSOC info bulletins on specific topics such as people with disabilities, health care, the elderly and the main changes in the social protection systems.

Information on social protection legislation in the Central and Eastern European countries was compiled in the MISSOC II project. The aim was to obtain information in a manner consistent with the MISSOC Tables.

Recovery and information system for money wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy

Leave a reply

Recovery and information system for money wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Recovery and information system for money wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Recovery and information system for money wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy

Document or Iniciative

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006 of 14 December 2006 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy and the organisation of an information system in this field and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 595/91.

Summary

This Regulation aims to improve the Community’s response to irregular practices. It requires Member States to submit a quarterly report to the Commission listing all irregularities they have detected (and with an impact of more than EUR 10 000). Member States are required to inform the Commission of national procedures to impose administrative or criminal sanctions and – if the Commission requests them to do so – to provide details of any progress made in recovering money from beneficiaries who have committed irregularities with a detrimental effect on EAGF and EAFRD Community funding.

Quarterly report to the Commission

Within two months following the end of each quarter, Member States must report to the Commission any irregularities which have been the subject of a primary administrative or judicial finding. This report should be accompanied by information concerning the type and the amount of expenditure, the practices used to commit the irregularity, the identity of those implicated and the progress of administrative and legal proceedings. If some of this information is not available when the initial report is submitted, Member States must communicate it in subsequent quarterly reports.

Reporting to other Member States

Each Member State has to report to the Commission and the other Member States concerned any irregularities which it is feared may very quickly have repercussions outside its territory or which show that a new malpractice has been employed.

The Cocolaf

Once a year, the Commission provides the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention (Cocolaf) with a summary report of its work under this Regulation.

Key terms in the Act
  • Irregularity: defined in Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 as any infringement of a provision of Community law resulting from an act or omission by an economic operator which has, or would have, the effect of prejudicing the general budget of the Communities either by reducing or losing revenue accruing from own resources collected directly on behalf of the Communities, or by an unjustified item of expenditure.
  • Primary administrative or judiciary finding: defined in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as the first written assessment of a competent authority, either administrative or judicial, concluding on the basis of actual facts that an irregularity has been committed, without prejudice to the possibility that this conclusion may subsequently have to be adjusted or withdrawn as a result of developments in the course of the administrative or judicial procedure.
  • Suspected fraud: defined in Article 1a point (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 as an irregularity which has been subject of a primary administrative or judicial finding giving rise to the initiation of proceedings at national level in order to establish the presence of intentional behaviour, in particular fraud as is referred to in Article 1(1) point (a) of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union.
  • Economic operator: defined in Article 1a point (2) of Commission Regulation No 1681/94 as any natural or legal person or other entity benefiting from a financing from the EAGF or the EAFRD, with the exception of Member States exercising their prerogatives as a public authority, or receiving such assistance, or having to pay an assigned revenue within the meaning of Article 34(1) points (b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006

18.12.2006

–

OJ L 355, 15.12.2006

Computerised reservation systems

Leave a reply

Computerised reservation systems

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Computerised reservation systems

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Transport > Mobility and passenger rights

Computerised reservation systems

Document or Iniciative

Regulation (EC) No 80/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 January 2009 on a Code of Conduct for computerised reservation systems and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 2299/89.

Summary

This Regulation aims to establish a harmonised code of conduct regarding the use of computerised reservation systems in order to ensure fair competition and to protect consumers’ rights.

Scope

This Regulation shall apply to:?

  • any computerised reservation system (CRS) * used or offered for use in the Community for air transport services;
  • rail-transport products * used or offered for use in the Community and which are incorporated alongside air-transport products into the principal display of a CRS.

RULES OF CONDUCT FOR SYSTEM VENDORS

Relationship with transport providers

A system vendor * may not:

  • impose unfair or discriminatory conditions in contracts concluded with participating carriers or their subscribers;
  • prevent a participating carrier from using other reservation systems.

Distribution facilities

All system vendors shall apply the same treatment to all participating carriers with regard to distributing their transport products and shall inform them of changes to their distribution facilities or loading procedures. Furthermore, a system vendor shall ensure that its distribution facilities * are clearly separated from the management and marketing facilities of participating carriers.

Displays

The presentation of data related to the transport products offered shall not mislead the consumer.

Flights operated by air carriers banned from operating in the Community shall be displayed in a clear and distinctive manner. The system vendor shall enable users to clearly identify the operating air carrier.

System vendors from third countries have an obligation to treat Community carriers in a manner that is equivalent to their treatment of national carriers. The Commission shall ensure that in third countries, Community air carriers are not treated in a discriminatory manner by system vendors. Should this be the case, the Commission may require system vendors operating in the Community to treat air carriers from third countries in a similar manner.

RULES OF CONDUCT FOR TRANSPORT PROVIDERS

Participating carriers shall submit accurate data to a CRS in such as way as to enable it to comply with the rules on displaying data.

A parent carrier, subject to reciprocity, shall not discriminate against a competing CRS by refusing, for example, to provide the latter with the same information on its own transport products that it provides to its own CRS.

A parent carrier shall not directly or indirectly favour its own CRS by obliging a subscriber to use a particular CRS to sell its transport products.

PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA

All system vendors shall be responsible for processing personal data. Personal data shall only be processed for the purpose of making reservations or issuing tickets for transport products.

AUDIT

System vendors shall submit an independently audited report every four years or upon request from the Commission.

INFRINGEMENTS AND PENALTIES

Where the Commission finds that there is an infringement of this Regulation, it may require the undertakings or associations of undertakings concerned to bring such an infringement to an end and impose on the latter fines not exceeding 10 % of the total turnover. The Commission shall first issue to the undertakings or associations of undertakings concerned a statement of objections.

This Regulation repeals Regulation (EEC)n° 2299/89.

Key terms of the Act
  • Transport product: the carriage of a passenger between two airports or rail stations;
  • Computerised reservation system or ‘CRS’: a computerised system containing information about, inter alia, schedules, availability and fares, of more than one air carrier, with or without facilities to make reservations or issue tickets, to the extent that some or all of these services are made available to subscribers;
  • System vendor: any entity and its affiliates which is or are responsible for the operation or marketing of a CRS;
  • Distribution facilities: facilities provided by a system vendor for the provision of information about air carriers’ and rail-transport operators’ schedules, availability, fares and related services and for making reservations and/or issuing tickets, and for any other related services.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 80/2009

29.3.2009

–

OJ L 35 of 4.2.2009

?

European Legislation Identifier

Leave a reply

European Legislation Identifier

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about European Legislation Identifier

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Judicial cooperation in civil matters

European Legislation Identifier (ELI)

Document or Iniciative

Council conclusions inviting the introduction of the European Legislation Identifier (ELI) [Official Journal C 325 of 26.10.2012].

Summary

The Council conclusions provide for the introduction of a European Legislation Identifier (ELI), aimed at providing simple access to information relating to European Union (EU) and Member State legislation.

What is the role of the European Legislation Identifier (ELI)?

The exchange of data relating to legislation has grown considerably at European level. In the main, these data come from regional, national and European bodies. However, the exchange of data is hindered by disparities between legal systems at Member State and European Union level.

The creation of ELI will enable European and national legislation to be referenced in a harmonised and stable way. This will result in a faster and more efficient search and data exchange system which is accessible to citizens or specific users such as legislators, judges and legal professionals.

How does ELI work?

ELI is based firstly on the use of unique identifiers, called URIs (Uniform Resource Identifier), and secondly on a set of structured metadata for the referencing of European and national legislation. Finally, in order to benefit fully from the advantages of the semantic web, ELI is based on the implementation of a specific language for exchanging this information.

However, Member States have the option to continue managing legislative information as they wish.

What should Member States do in order to introduce ELI?

The introduction of ELI is optional. Member States and the European Union can decide to introduce this identifier on a voluntary and gradual basis. ELI has already been introduced in some Member States and at European level. To introduce ELI, Member States are required to:

  • apply ELI to European and national legislation published in Official Journals, or in databases and legal information systems operated by Member States;
  • provide pieces of legislation with a unique identifier and some of the metadata, which could include the type of legislation, subject, territorial application and document date;
  • appoint an ELI coordinator;
  • share and disseminate information on ELI;
  • discuss annually the progress made with the introduction of ELI and metadata for national and European legislation.

European e-Justice Strategy

Leave a reply

European e-Justice Strategy

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about European e-Justice Strategy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Judicial cooperation in criminal matters

European e-Justice Strategy

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee of 30 May 2008 – Towards a European e-Justice Strategy [COM(2008) 329 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

This Communication presents a strategy for e-Justice, which is to improve judicial cooperation on both the national and European levels. e-Justice refers to the judicial systems’ application of information and communication technologies (ICT) in their administrative procedures. It enhances these systems’ functional and financial effectiveness, the collaboration between legal authorities, as well as citizens’ access to justice. With this strategy, the Commission aims to encourage the operational priority projects, the decentralisation of the ICT architectures and the implementation of the existing legal instruments.

Several projects that improve the diffusion of information have already been established at national and European levels. To strengthen the exchange of best practices resulting from these projects, the Commission intends to create an e-Justice sub-group within the Justice Forum, which will enhance cooperation among national judicial systems as well as among legal professionals.

In order to also promote European Union (EU) judicial action, with a view to making it more understandable, accessible and efficient, the Commission intends to support Member States in developing appropriate tools. In addition, the Commission intends to develop electronic tools that aim to improve access to justice and collaboration among the relevant stakeholders, as well as to attain a higher level of system interoperability and economies of scale.

The EU’s priorities for action consist of providing citizens with easier access to judicial information and of boosting judicial cooperation. With regard to the first, the Commission will create an e-Justice portal, which will have a minimum of three functions:

  • giving access to information concerning judicial systems and procedures, as well as to practical information concerning the competent authorities and methods of obtaining legal aid;
  • referring users to the Internet sites of European legal institutions, networks and registers;
  • providing a direct access to selected European procedures; in the long-term the judicial procedures could be fully electronic.

5. For judicial cooperation, the Commission will develop electronic tools on the basis of the existing legal networks and Eurojust. Information and training on these tools will be developed in collaboration with the competent national and European training establishments, such as the European judicial training network. More specifically, to improve judicial cooperation, the Commission intends to:

  • continue the work on interconnecting the criminal records of Member States;
  • develop the existing instruments to create a secure network for judicial authorities to share and exchange information of confidential nature;
  • promote the use of videoconferencing in cross-border civil or criminal judicial proceedings by endorsing efforts made at national level, while coordinating at European level to ensure interoperability;
  • providing aid with regard to translation by developing automated translation tools, establishing a database of qualified legal translators and interpreters and creating standardised online forms for automatic translation.

A draft action plan that provides a timetable for the Commission’s priority actions is annexed to this Communication. The development of the e-Justice related projects will be covered by the Civil Justice and Criminal Justice financial programmes. The Commission will be responsible for coordinating the actions and for promoting the exchange of best practices among Member States.

The Internal Market Information System

Leave a reply

The Internal Market Information System

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about The Internal Market Information System

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Internal market: general framework

The Internal Market Information System (IMI)

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 6 November 2008 “Delivering the benefits of the single market through enhanced administrative cooperation” [COM(2008) 703 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

The internal market information system (IMI) is an electronic tool designed to support administrative cooperation in the field of legislation relating to the internal market. The IMI helps competent authorities in Member States to overcome practical difficulties related in particular to differences in administrative culture, the use of different languages and the identification of partners in other Member States.

The IMI is a secure internet application, available to all administrations in the thirty countries of the European Economic Area (EEA). It is available in all European Union languages.

Principles

The IMI is based on three key principles:

  • it does not impose additional obligations on Member States in terms of administrative cooperation;
  • it is flexible enough to adapt to the diverse administrative structures and cultures in Europe;
  • it is a single system, designed to be able to integrate many pieces of Internal Market legislation which avoids a proliferation of information systems.

Benefits

The system offers many benefits. In particular Member States are able to manage a single relationship with the network instead of 29 separate bilateral relationships, communicate using a clear working method by joint agreement, reduce language problems, save resources and time, and improve service quality through increased transparency and predictability.

Data protection

As IMI is used for the exchange of personal data, relevant legislation fully applies to the system in terms of data protection. Moreover, Commission Decision 2008/49/EC lays down the functions, rights and obligations of IMI users.

Context

The creation of the IMI was motivated by the importance of administrative cooperation in setting up a dynamic single market, in accordance with the Lisbon Strategy. The IMI should also contribute to strengthening the application of Community law at national level, and therefore the implementation of the “Better Regulation” programme. It is also part of the i2010 eGovernment Action Plan.

A first pilot project was launched in November 2007 for four professions referred to in Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications. The system will be progressively extended to other professions.

A second pilot project was launched in January 2009 on the basis of the ‘Services’ Directive. It should last until 28 December 2009, at which date the Directive should be fully transposed by the Member States. The aim is to prepare the implementation of an operational IMI system, covering all service activities by the end of 2009. In the future, the IMI could also be used to strengthen administrative cooperation in other sectors covered by internal market legislation.

Related Acts

Commission Recommendation of 26 March 2009 on data protection guidelines for the Internal Market Information System (IMI) [Official Journal L100 of 18.4.2009].
This Recommendation invites Member States to take measures to implement the guidelines in the Annex. The guidelines concern data protection, the safeguards built into the system and the risks associated with its use.

National IMI coordinators are also encouraged to make contacts with their national data protection authorities with a view to implementing these guidelines in accordance with national law.

The European Commission is to be informed of the implementation of these guidelines not later than nine months after the adoption of this Recommendation.

Maritime safety: Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

Leave a reply

Maritime safety: Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Maritime safety: Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Transport > Intelligent transport and navigation by satellite

Maritime safety: Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

Document or Iniciative

Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC [See amending act].

Summary

This directive is part of the action taken in line with the Commission’s second communication on maritime safety following the Erika disaster (the Erika II package).

Setting up a European Union (EU) vessel traffic monitoring and information system should help to prevent accidents and pollution at sea and to minimise their impact on the marine and coastal environment, and on the economy and health of local communities.

All ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards are covered, whether or not they carry dangerous goods, except for:

  • warships;
  • fishing vessels, traditional ships and recreational craft less than 45 metres in length;
  • bunkers below 5 000 tons.

Ship reporting and monitoring

The operator of a ship bound for a port of an EU country must notify certain information (ship identification, total number of persons on board, port of destination, estimated time of arrival) to the port authority at least twenty-four hours in advance, where this is feasible.

The directive stipulates that ships built on or after 1 July 2002 and calling at a port of an EU country must be fitted with:

  • an automatic identification system (AIS), as well as
  • a voyage data recorder (VDR) system (“black box”) to facilitate investigations following accidents.

EU countries have until the end of June 2007 to provide themselves with appropriate equipment and staff to utilise the AIS and VDR information and until the end of June 2008 to coordinate their national systems with those of the other EU countries.

The process of building up all necessary equipment and shore-based installations for implementing this directive must be completed by the end of 2007.

Notification of dangerous or polluting goods on board ships

In respect of the carriage of dangerous or polluting goods on board ships:

  • the shipper is required to deliver a declaration containing certain information (correct technical names of the dangerous or polluting goods, address from which detailed information on the cargo may be obtained) to the master or operator prior to taking the goods on board;
  • the operator, agent or master of a ship must also notify the general information, such as the ship identification and the information provided by the shipper, to the competent authority.

Monitoring of hazardous ships and intervention in the event of incidents and accidents at sea

EU countries which have been notified of the presence of hazardous ships (ships which have been involved in incidents or accidents at sea, have failed to comply with notification and reporting requirements, have deliberately discharged pollutants or have been refused access to ports) must transmit the information they have to the EU countries concerned.

EU countries must take all appropriate measures consistent with international law to deal with incidents or accidents at sea and to require the parties concerned (the operator, the master of the ship and the owner of the dangerous or polluting goods carried on board) to cooperate fully with them with a view to minimising the consequences of the incident.

In addition, the master of a ship must immediately report:

  • any incident or accident affecting the safety of the ship;
  • any incident or accident which compromises shipping safety;
  • any situation liable to lead to pollution of the waters or shore of a EU country;
  • any slick of polluting materials and containers or packages seen drifting at sea.

The directive provides for the possibility of ships being prevented from leaving or entering port in the event of poor weather conditions and obliges EU countries to set up places of refuge to accommodate ships in distress.

The Commission will look into the possibility of setting up a system to compensate ports accommodating ships in distress.

Accompanying measures

Ships entering the area of competence of a vessel traffic service must comply with any International Maritime Organisation (IMO) approved ships’ routing systems, which cover sensitive areas, areas with a high traffic density and areas dangerous for shipping, and must use the vessel traffic services. EU countries must ensure that these facilities have the requisite human and technical resources to accomplish their tasks.

EU countries will have to cooperate to ensure the interconnection and interoperability of their national information systems, in order that the requisite information on the ship or its cargo can be exchanged electronically at any time.

Each EU country must designate the competent authorities, port authorities and coastal stations to which the notifications required by the directive are to be made.

Cooperation must be arranged between the Commission and the EU countries with a view to the future development of the European monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic. It will cover the development of telematic links between coastal stations and port authorities, and extension of the coverage of the European monitoring system. Efforts must also be made to improve the management of shipping information, which is one of the tasks of the European Maritime Safety Agency.

To ensure the directive is being implemented satisfactorily, EU countries must make regular checks on the operation of their information systems and must introduce a system of financial penalties to act as a deterrent against failure to comply with the directive’s requirements regarding notification and the carrying of equipment.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for implementation in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2002/59/EC

5.8.2002

5.2.2004

OJ L 49 of 24.2.2011
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2011/15/EU

16.3.2011

16.3.2012

OJ L 49 of 24.2.2011

Intellectual property rights: enhancing their enforcement

Leave a reply

Intellectual property rights: enhancing their enforcement

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Intellectual property rights: enhancing their enforcement

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Businesses in the internal market > Intellectual property

Intellectual property rights: enhancing their enforcement

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 September 2009 – Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market [COM(2009) 467 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

This Communication presents measures aimed at safeguarding intellectual property rights (IPR) and combating counterfeiting and piracy within the internal market.

European Observatory

The European Commission is establishing a European Observatory, the aim of which is to gather, monitor and report information and data related to IPR.

This Observatory requires collaboration between Member States and the private sector.

The main functions of the Observatory are:

  • the collection and use of independent, reliable information and data;
  • the dissemination of best practice amongst public authorities;
  • the dissemination of successful private sector strategies;
  • the assessment and identification of solutions for specific geographical areas.

The Observatory should be based on existing European Commission structures, and the Commission will provide the central administrative resource. It will however be possible, where necessary, to make use of external expertise.

The Commission has asked the Member States to appoint a national representative for the Observatory and has requested the participation of the private sector including a broad range of national and pan-European bodies representing the different economic sectors most involved in the fight against piracy and counterfeiting. European consumers are also represented and invited to play an active role.

Administrative cooperation across Europe

It is necessary to improve cross-border cooperation between different enforcement authorities in view of the international nature of IPR infringements.

Cooperation between the Commission and Member States should also be consolidated in the context of a borderless internal market. In this regard, the creation of a network of contact points across the European Union would be a relevant solution.

As the national centres of IPR expertise, National Intellectual Property Offices also have a role to play. They can contribute to developing strategic approaches and the dissemination of best practices.

National bodies should improve transparency in respect of the activities that they carry out in the field of IPR protection. The Commission, on the basis of information collected from Member States, is responsible for analysing the structures that Member States have put in place and drafting a report to map existing strategies, frameworks and best practices.

Stakeholders in European cooperation in the field of IPR should have access to an electronic network for the exchange of information on infringements that have been committed. This network will need to:

  • support ‘real-time’ exchanges of information on goods and services infringing IPR;
  • put in place an effective system of alerts concerning specific products or potential threats;
  • facilitate communication between the parties involved, particularly to overcome language barriers;
  • raise consumers’ awareness of the growing threat of counterfeiting and piracy and the associated risks.

Voluntary arrangements between stakeholders

The Commission wishes to encourage rights holders and the other parties involved to engage in dialogue and to share their common interests in combating IPR infringements. In this regard, voluntary arrangements seem to be the most appropriate solution, since this type of agreement allows for rapid adaptation to new technologies and may be extended beyond the European Union (EU).

The sale of counterfeit goods over the Internet has developed considerably in recent years. The Commission considers this sector as a priority for action where the method of dialogue and cooperation agreements could be applied effectively.

Brand owners and Internet companies alike have therefore committed themselves to developing a collaborative method. This involves a Memorandum of Understanding dealing with prevention, identification and removal of infringing offers and sellers from Internet platforms.

The Commission envisages legislative solutions if voluntary arrangements cannot be implemented.

Context

IPR infringements, particularly counterfeiting and piracy, cause widespread economic harm and even pose a threat to public health and consumer safety. The Commission therefore considers it necessary to protect IPR in order to foster economic growth, innovation and creativity.

Mutual information mechanism for national asylum and immigration measures

Leave a reply

Mutual information mechanism for national asylum and immigration measures

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Mutual information mechanism for national asylum and immigration measures

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Free movement of persons asylum and immigration

Mutual information mechanism for national asylum and immigration measures

Document or Iniciative

Council Decision 2006/688/EC of 5 October 2006 on the establishment of a mutual information mechanism concerning Member States’ measures in the areas of asylum and immigration.

Summary

The mutual information mechanism (MIM) provides for exchanges of information between the Commission and European Union (EU) countries concerning national laws on asylum and immigration.

EU countries are required to transmit through a web-based network, and using the report form annexed to the decision, the measures they intend to take or have recently taken. Such information should be transmitted as soon as possible and at the latest when it becomes publicly available.

EU countries are required to communicate to the Commission and the other EU countries only measures that are likely to have a significant impact:

  • in other EU countries;
  • at the level of the EU as a whole.

The Commission is responsible for the development and management of the network. In setting up the network, it will make use of the existing technical platform of the trans-European telematic network for the exchange of information between EU country authorities (CIRCA). The network has a specific functionality that allows the Commission and EU countries to request from one or more countries additional information on measures communicated.

Any specific national measure notified in this way may give rise to an exchange of views between EU country experts and the Commission. In addition to these technical discussions, the Commission will prepare each year a report summarising the most relevant information transmitted by EU countries. The report will be submitted to the European Parliament and the Council for use as the basis of ministerial discussions on national asylum and immigration policies.

The Commission will evaluate the functioning of the mechanism two years after the entry into force of the decision and regularly thereafter.

Background

National measures in the areas of immigration and asylum are likely to have an impact on other EU countries. This is due to the absence of border checks in the Schengen area, the close economic and social relations between EU countries and the development of common visa, immigration and asylum policies.

The EU has been striving to draw up a common asylum and immigration policy since the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1999. Although a large number of common measures have already been taken in these areas at the EU level, the national authorities continue to play an important role, notably in the areas not yet covered by EU rules. They are constantly adopting new measures (e.g. important changes to asylum and immigration policies, setting quotas, large-scale regularisation measures or concluding readmission agreements) that may have implications for other EU countries or for the EU as a whole.

Therefore, this decision proposes the establishment of a formal information procedure between EU countries and the Commission, with the aim of improving the coordination of immigration and asylum policies between EU countries.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision 2006/688/EC

3.11.2006

–

OJ L 283 of 14.10.2006

Related Acts

Report from the Commission of 17 December 2009 pursuant to Article 4 and 5 of the Council Decision of 5 October 2006 on the establishment of a mutual information mechanism concerning Member States’ measures in the areas of asylum and immigration [COM(2009) 687 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
This report contains a summary of the most relevant information transmitted by EU countries and an evaluation on the functioning of the MIM during its first operational period.
From the beginning of the MIM becoming operational in April 2007 until 30 September 2009, only 16 EU countries had transmitted information via the MIM on only 45 measures:

  • 21 on adopted legislation;
  • 4 on draft legislation;
  • 9 on policy intentions and long-term programming;
  • 7 on administrative decisions affecting a large group of non-EU country nationals or having a general nature;
  • 4 on other measures.

No communications were made on final decisions of the highest courts or tribunals.
The format in which the communications were made was rarely homogenous. The reporting form annexed to the decision was not always used, which resulted in the ineffective reception of information in that the essence of the measures or their impact remained unidentifiable. In addition to this, at times only the English title and the text in the original language were provided, resulting in problems of comprehension. There were also differences in the contents of the reporting forms submitted: some were fairly comprehensive, while others only provided a cursory description without indication of the nature of the measure.
The MIM cannot be deemed as fulfilling its objectives since the quantity of information submitted was nominal. The rate of information exchanges varied somewhat, reaching an all-time low in 2009 with only 4 communications.
Yet, there is no evidence that the unsatisfactory application of the decision is caused by its provisions. In addition, since the MIM has only been operational for a short period, the Commission does not yet consider it relevant to propose amendments to the decision.