DOCSLIB.ORG

Informal Consolidated Factual Part of EMIS Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Informal Consolidated Factual Part of EMIS Report European Parliament Committee of Inquiry into Emission Measurements in the Automotive Sector 19.12.2016 FACTUAL PART OF THE EMIS REPORT Rapporteurs: Jens Gieseke, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION NOTE: This document is meant purely as a documentation tool for ease of consultation. EMIS REPORT - FACTUAL PART - INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION 2 / 71 EMIS REPORT - FACTUAL PART - INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION NOTE This document provides, for ease of consultation, an informal consolidated version of the “factual part” that is part of the report of the Committee of Inquiry into Emission Measurements in the Automotive Sector. At the draft report stage, the 7 chapters and 5 appendices making up the “factual part” are subdivided into 12 official working documents.1 This “factual part” sets out the methodology of the inquiry and collects and analyses the factual evidence that the committee gathered in order to reach the conclusions. The draft conclusions of the inquiry and the draft recommendations for the future are respectively included in a separate draft report and in a separate draft motion for a European Parliament recommendation.2 1 List of working documents making up the factual part of the report: – Chapter 1: Introduction (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.071) – Chapter 2: Technical background (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.072) – Chapter 3: Laboratory tests and real-world emissions (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.073) – Chapter 4: Defeat devices (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.074) – Chapter 5: Type-approval and in-service conformity (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.075) – Chapter 6: Enforcement and penalties (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.076) – Chapter 7: Powers and limitations of the committee of inquiry (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.077) – Appendix A: The mandate of the committee of inquiry (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.078) – Appendix B: The committee of inquiry (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.079) – Appendix C: Activities of the committee of inquiry (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.080) – Appendix D: Timeline (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.081) – Appendix E: Glossary (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&reference=PE594.082) 2 The documents are linked on the committee’s home page: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/EMIS/home.html 3 / 71 EMIS REPORT - FACTUAL PART - INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.1. The committee of inquiry and its mandate .................................................................. 5 1.2. Working methods ........................................................................................................ 6 1.3. Structure of the report .................................................................................................. 7 2. Technical background ................................................................................................... 10 2.1. Analysis of the evidence gathered ......................................................................... 10 3. Laboratory tests and real-world emissions .................................................................... 12 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 12 3.2. Analysis of the evidence gathered ......................................................................... 12 4. Defeat devices ............................................................................................................... 20 4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 20 4.2. Analysis of the evidence gathered ......................................................................... 20 5. Type-approval and in-service conformity ..................................................................... 26 5.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 26 5.2. Analysis of the evidence gathered ......................................................................... 27 6. Enforcement and penalties ............................................................................................ 30 6.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 30 6.2. Analysis of the evidence gathered ......................................................................... 30 7. Powers and limitations of the committee of inquiry ......................................................... 34 7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 34 7.2 Analysis of the experience of the committee ............................................................. 35 Appendix A. The mandate of the committee of inquiry ...................................................... 39 Appendix B. The committee of inquiry ............................................................................... 42 Appendix C. Activities of the committee of inquiry ............................................................ 46 C.1. Overview ................................................................................................................... 46 C.2. Activities .................................................................................................................... 46 Appendix D. Timeline .................................................................................................... 55 Appendix E. Glossary ................................................................................................... 67 4 / 71 EMIS REPORT - FACTUAL PART - INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION 1. Introduction 1.1. The committee of inquiry and its mandate On 17 December 2015, the European Parliament decided to set up a committee of inquiry to investigate alleged contraventions or maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to emission measurements in the automotive sector, without prejudice to the jurisdiction of national or Union courts. The concerns that led to the setting up of the committee of inquiry trace their origin to the Notice of Violation of the Clean Air Act issued on 18 September 2015 by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Volkswagen group. The notice alleged that the group installed software on certain diesel vehicles to detect when the vehicle is undergoing emissions testing, and that the software turns on full emissions controls only during the test but reduces their effectiveness during normal driving. The result is that cars that meet emissions standards in the laboratory emit nitrogen oxides at levels up to 40 times the standard during normal operation. According to the EPA, this software is a “defeat device” and is prohibited under the US Clean Air Act. In the EU, emission standards for light duty vehicles are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 on type-approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6). The general context is provided by the framework Directive 2007/46/EC on type-approval, which sets out the safety and environmental requirements that motor vehicles have to comply with before being placed on the EU market. Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 requires that “the components likely to affect emissions are designed, constructed and assembled so as to enable the vehicle, in normal use, to comply” with the emission standards and prohibits “the use of defeat devices that reduce the effectiveness of emission control systems” (except where the device is justified by the need to protect the engine or for safety). The findings of the US EPA spurred several investigations across the European Union on the possible use of prohibited defeat devices and in general on the discrepancies between pollutant emissions measured in the laboratory during the type-approval process and the same emissions measured in real world conditions. Since 2010-2011, several studies, including reports published by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre, showed large discrepancies in nitrogen oxides emissions of diesel cars sold on the EU market. On 27 October 2015, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on emission measurements in the automotive sector, calling inter alia for “a thorough investigation regarding the role and responsibility of the Commission and of Member State authorities, bearing in mind inter alia the problems established in the 2011 report of the Commission’s Joint Research Centre”. Following up on its resolution, on 17 December 2015 Parliament set up a committee of inquiry consisting of 45 members, with the brief of carrying out such an investigation. In summary, the 5 / 71 EMIS REPORT - FACTUAL PART - INFORMAL CONSOLIDATED VERSION mandate adopted by Parliament – which is included in full in Appendix A – required
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany
    University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM UVM Honors College Senior Theses Undergraduate Theses 2018 Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany William Peter Fitz University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses Recommended Citation Fitz, William Peter, "Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany" (2018). UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 275. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses/275 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in UVM Honors College Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REACTIONARY POSTMODERNISM? NEOLIBERALISM, MULTICULTURALISM, THE INTERNET, AND THE IDEOLOGY OF THE NEW FAR RIGHT IN GERMANY A Thesis Presented by William Peter Fitz to The Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of The University of Vermont In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements For the Degree of Bachelor of Arts In European Studies with Honors December 2018 Defense Date: December 4th, 2018 Thesis Committee: Alan E. Steinweis, Ph.D., Advisor Susanna Schrafstetter, Ph.D., Chairperson Adriana Borra, M.A. Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter One: Neoliberalism and Xenophobia 17 Chapter Two: Multiculturalism and Cultural Identity 52 Chapter Three: The Philosophy of the New Right 84 Chapter Four: The Internet and Meme Warfare 116 Conclusion 149 Bibliography 166 1 “Perhaps one will view the rise of the Alternative for Germany in the foreseeable future as inevitable, as a portent for major changes, one that is as necessary as it was predictable.
    [Show full text]
  • Romanian Political Science Review Vol. XXI, No. 1 2021
    Romanian Political Science Review vol. XXI, no. 1 2021 The end of the Cold War, and the extinction of communism both as an ideology and a practice of government, not only have made possible an unparalleled experiment in building a democratic order in Central and Eastern Europe, but have opened up a most extraordinary intellectual opportunity: to understand, compare and eventually appraise what had previously been neither understandable nor comparable. Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review was established in the realization that the problems and concerns of both new and old democracies are beginning to converge. The journal fosters the work of the first generations of Romanian political scientists permeated by a sense of critical engagement with European and American intellectual and political traditions that inspired and explained the modern notions of democracy, pluralism, political liberty, individual freedom, and civil rights. Believing that ideas do matter, the Editors share a common commitment as intellectuals and scholars to try to shed light on the major political problems facing Romania, a country that has recently undergone unprecedented political and social changes. They think of Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review as a challenge and a mandate to be involved in scholarly issues of fundamental importance, related not only to the democratization of Romanian polity and politics, to the “great transformation” that is taking place in Central and Eastern Europe, but also to the make-over of the assumptions and prospects of their discipline. They hope to be joined in by those scholars in other countries who feel that the demise of communism calls for a new political science able to reassess the very foundations of democratic ideals and procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of Roll-Call Votes of 2 April 2019
    Committee on Industry, Research and Energy Results of roll-call votes of 2 April 2019 Table of Contents 1. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination - 2018/0224(COD) - Rapporteur: Dan Nica - Vote on the partial agreement resulting from interinstitutional negotiations ...................................................................... 2 2. Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation - 2018/0225(COD) - Rapporteur: Christian Ehler - Vote on the partial agreement resulting from interinstitutional negotiations ................................................................................................................ 3 Key to symbols: + (in favour), - (against), 0 (abstention). 1. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination - 2018/0224(COD) - Rapporteur: Dan Nica - Vote on the partial agreement resulting from interinstitutional negotiations 49 + ALDE Fredrick Federley, Gesine Meissner, Lieve Wierinck ECR Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Rupert Matthews, Evžen Tošenovský EFDD Rosa D'Amato, Rolandas Paksas ENF Angelo Ciocca GUE/NGL Jaromír Kohlíček, Paloma López Bermejo,
    [Show full text]
  • Brussels, 18 December 2015 Dear High Representative
    Brussels, 18 December 2015 Dear High Representative, After 16 years of exile in the Netherlands, Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, president of the Unified Democratic Forces FDU-Inkingi, a coalition of Rwandan opposition parties, returned to Rwanda to run for presidential elections scheduled for August 2010. On 14th October she was arrested after weeks of police harassment, intimidation and media lynching, charged with genocide ideology, genocide denial, and conspiracy against the regime. Charges commonly used to silence any opposition in a country where freedom of expression is severely curtailed. After a flawed trial, condemned among others by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Foundation Jean Jaurès, she was sentenced in first 8 years in prison. On appeal, the sentence was increased to 15 years. Yet, the Supreme Court had invalidated some of the evidences used to convict her in the first place. Having lost all confidence in the justice of her country led by an authoritarian regime, she filed an application with the African Court of Human Rights and Peoples based in Arusha, Tanzania. Nominated for Sakharov Prize in 2012, the fate of this mother, nicknamed by her followers as the Rwandan Aung San Suu Kyi, should challenge us. Pursuant to the resolution of our Parliament 2013/2641 (RSP) of 25 may 2013, we ask the European Commission to officially request the immediate release of Madam Ingabire. In the meantime, we urge the Commission to take action to improve her prison conditions by ensuring, among others, a free and easy access to legal counsel and her recognition as a political prisoner.
    [Show full text]
  • TTIP-Letter-To-Schul
    Mr. Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament European Parliament Bât. Paul-Henri Spaak, 09B011 60, rue Wiertz B-1047 Bruxelles 7 July 2016 Dear Mr. Schulz, In anticipation of the 14th round of negotiations between the EU and US for the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) planned to start on 11 July in Brussels, we are writing to you on behalf of over 65 organisations representing consumers, farmers, not-for-profit health insurers, environmental and general public interest groups to express our serious concerns that the European Commission is failing to respect the European Parliament’s 2015 Resolution on TTIP. 1 Today, we released new analysis, which demonstrates that the European Commission continues to ignore critical aspects of the European Parliament’s Resolution on TTIP, in particular regarding recommendations related to protecting public health, the environment, and democracy. 1. Negotiating on and affecting EU chemicals and pesticides rules The European Parliament has called on the European Commission not to negotiate on issues “where the EU and the US have very different rules” and not to allow regulatory cooperation to affect future standards in such areas. However, the European Commission has continued to negotiate on issues that will affect legislation on chemicals, pesticides, and cosmetic products, whether directly or through regulatory cooperation. This is particularly worrying because the European Commission is already lowering current EU standards of protection (such as on limits to pesticide residues in food) in order to remove barriers to trade. 2. Respect for the EU regulatory system The European Parliament has called on the European Commission “to fully respect the established regulatory systems on both sides of the Atlantic”.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Firearms Proposal Committee Members
    Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/imco/home.html NB - You can “Click” on the MEP’s name to be taken to their profile page on the EU Website which contains more information such as Facebook pages and Twitter feeds. PLEASE - ONLY USE THIS LIST TO EMAIL POLITE AND SENSIBLE COMMENTS TO THESE MEP’S DO NOT USE IT TO SEND SPAM OR DEROGATORY OR RUDE EMAILS - WE WANT TO KEEP OUR FIREARMS, NOT ANNOY THE PEOPLE WITH THE POWER TO HELP US. Photo Name/Position/Country Email Address Vicky FORD [email protected] Chair European Conservatives and Reformists Group United Kingdom Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT [email protected] Vice-Chair Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) Sweden Robert ROCHEFORT [email protected] Vice-Chair Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe France Catherine STIHLER [email protected] Vice-Chair Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament United Kingdom Nicola DANTI [email protected] Vice-Chair Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament Italy Dita CHARANZOVÁ [email protected] Member Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Czech Republic Carlos COELHO [email protected] Member Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) Portugal Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI [email protected] Member Group
    [Show full text]
  • Report on an Aviation Strategy for Europe
    European Parliament 2014-2019 Plenary sitting A8-0021/2017 2.2.2017 REPORT on an Aviation Strategy for Europe (2016/2062(INI)) Committee on Transport and Tourism Rapporteur: Pavel Telička Rapporteur for the opinion (*): Ole Christensen, Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (*) Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure RR\1116370EN.docx PE589.131v02-00 EN United in diversity EN PR_INI PE589.131v02-00 2/40 RR\1116370EN.docx EN CONTENTS Page MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION ............................................ 4 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT ............................................................................................ 16 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS (*) ...... 24 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY ....................................................................................................................... 31 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE INTERNAL MARKET AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ......................................................................................................................... 35 RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE ........................................... 40 (*) Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure RR\1116370EN.docx 3/40 PE589.131v02-00 EN MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION on an Aviation Strategy for Europe (2016/2062(INI)) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission communication of 7 December 2015 entitled ‘An Aviation Strategy for Europe’
    [Show full text]
  • A Look at the New European Parliament Page 1 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMITTEE (INTA)
    THE NEW EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT KEY COMMITTEE COMPOSITION 31 JULY 2019 INTRODUCTION After several marathon sessions, the European Council agreed on the line-up for the EU “top jobs” on 2 July 2019. The deal, which notably saw German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU, EPP) surprisingly designated as the next European Commission (EC) President, meant that the European Parliament (EP) could proceed with the election of its own leadership on 3 July. The EPP and Renew Europe (formerly ALDE) groups, in line with the agreement, did not present candidates for the EP President. As such, the vote pitted the S&D’s David-Maria Sassoli (IT) against two former Spitzenkandidaten – Ska Keller (DE) of the Greens and Jan Zahradil (CZ) of the ACRE/ECR, alongside placeholder candidate Sira Rego (ES) of GUE. Sassoli was elected President for the first half of the 2019 – 2024 mandate, while the EPP (presumably EPP Spitzenkandidat Manfred Weber) would take the reins from January 2022. The vote was largely seen as a formality and a demonstration of the three largest Groups’ capacity to govern. However, Zahradil received almost 100 votes (more than the total votes of the ECR group), and Keller received almost twice as many votes as there are Greens/EFA MEPs. This forced a second round in which Sassoli was narrowly elected with just 11 more than the necessary simple majority. Close to 12% of MEPs did not cast a ballot. MEPs also elected 14 Vice-Presidents (VPs): Mairead McGuinness (EPP, IE), Pedro Silva Pereira (S&D, PT), Rainer Wieland (EPP, DE), Katarina Barley (S&D, DE), Othmar Karas (EPP, AT), Ewa Kopacz (EPP, PL), Klara Dobrev (S&D, HU), Dita Charanzová (RE, CZ), Nicola Beer (RE, DE), Lívia Járóka (EPP, HU) and Heidi Hautala (Greens/EFA, FI) were elected in the first ballot, while Marcel Kolaja (Greens/EFA, CZ), Dimitrios Papadimoulis (GUE/NGL, EL) and Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI, IT) needed the second round.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee Coordinators in the European Parliament
    #THEUEBERSICHT COMMITTEE COORDINATORS EPP S&D ECR ALDE GUE/NGL GREENS/ EFDD EFA IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AFET DEVE INTA BUDG CONT ECON EMPL ENVI ITRE IMCO CRISTIAN DAVOR IVO DANIEL JOSÉ MANUEL PETRI BURKHARD DAVID PETER KRIŠJĀNIS ANDREAS DAN PREDA STIER CASPARY FERNANDES SARVAMAA BALZ CASA LIESE KARIŅŠ SCHWAB Romania / EPP Croatia / EPP Germany / EPP Portugal / EPP Finland / EPP Germany / EPP Malta / EPP Germany / EPP Latvia / EPP Germany / EPP Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: Deputies: Deputies: Deputy: RÓŻA GRÄFIN VON ARNAUD DANJEAN BOGDAN BRUNON WENTA CHRISTOFER FJELLNER JAN MARIAN OLBRYCHT MONICA MACOVEI PABLO ZALBA BIDEGAIN HEINZ K. BECKER IVO BELET PAUL RÜBIG THUN UND HOHENSTEIN ELISABETH KÖSTINGER CHRISTIAN EHLER RICHARD NORBERT DAVID EIDER GARDIAZÁBAL INÉS AYALA PERVENCHE JUTTA EVELYNE HOWITT NEUSER MARTIN RUBIAL SENDER BERÈS STEINRUCK MATTHIAS DAN GEBHARDT United Kingdom / S&D Germany / S&D United Kingdom / S&D Spain / S&D Spain / S&D France / S&D Germany / S&D GROOTE NICA Germany / S&D Germany / S&D Romania / S&D CHARLES NIRJ EMMA BERND RYSZARD KAY ANTHEA ANDRZEJ TANNOCK DEVA MCCLARKIN KÖLMEL CZARNECKI SWINBURNE MCINTYRE JULIE MAREK JÓZEF DUDA United Kingdom / ECR United Kingdom / ECR United Kingdom / ECR Germany / ECR Poland / ECR United Kingdom / ECR United Kingdom / ECR GIRLING GRÓBARCZYK Poland / ECR Deputy: Deputy: Deputy: DAVID CAMPBELL United Kingdom / ECR Poland / ECR BAS BELDER KAROL KARSKI BANNERMAN GÉRARD MICHAEL SYLVIE MARIAN Deputy: DITA DEPREZ THEURER GOULARD HARKIN GERBEN-JAN EVŽEN TOŠENOVSKÝ
    [Show full text]
  • (1) Email from Julia REDA to the Cabinet of the Commisioner Maryia Gabriel (Copyright Academic Studies), 08/08/2017, (Ref. Ares(
    Ref. Ares(2017)5138443 - 20/10/2017 ANNEX 1 (1) Email from Julia REDA to the Cabinet of the Commisioner Maryia Gabriel (copyright academic studies), 08/08/2017, (Ref. Ares(2017) 3952025) (3) Email from Julia REDA to the Commisioner Maryia Gabriel, 20/08/2017 (Ref. Ares(2017) 4911834) with attachment: (a) Better regulation for copyright - Collected submissions by the academics (Pdf Format) available at https://juliareda.eu/events/better-regulation-for-copyright/ 1 Doc.1 Ref. Ares(2017)3952025 - 08/08/2017 From: REDA Julia <[email protected]> Sent: 08 August 2017 10:13 To: CAB GABRIEL CONTACT Cc: REDA Julia (EP) Subject: Copyright- academic studies overview Dear Commissioner Gabriel, dear Team, following your discussion with Ms Reda, I'm sending you the academic studies evaluating different parts of the European Copyright reform proposal. Kind regards, Eszter Bakó *General - EU copyright reform An academic perspective on the copyright reform Stalla-Bourdillon, Sophie, Rosati, Eleonora, Turk, Karmen, Angelopoulos, Christina, Kuczerawy, Aleksandra, Peguera, Miquel and Husovec, Martin http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0267364916302394/1-s2.0-S0267364916302394-main.pdf?_tid=77e880e0-7b52- 11e7-b15e-00000aab0f26&acdnat=1502098158_4c1e2fb3827d46003b80f52612adeafc *article 11 **A publisher’s intellectual property rightImplications for freedom of expression, authors and open content policies Prof. dr. Mireille M.M. van Eechoud, Institute for Information Law, Faculty of Law, University of Amsterdam http://www.openforumeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/OFE-Academic-Paper-Implications-of-
    [Show full text]
  • Addressing the Dissemination of Terrorist Content Online
    BRIEFING EU Legislation in Progress Addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online OVERVIEW Dissemination of terrorist content is one of the most widespread and most dangerous forms of misuse of online services in the field of internal security. In line with the 2015 European agenda on security, and taking into account the impact of this propaganda on the radicalisation, recruitment and training of terrorists, the European Commission launched a voluntary system for tackling terrorism online, based on guidelines and recommendations. However, given the limitations of self-regulation, in September 2018 the Commission proposed a regulation on preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online through the removal of such content within one hour of being posted. While the Council rapidly reached a position on the proposal, the European Parliament adopted its first-reading position in April 2019. Following the European elections, and the appointment of a new rapporteur, interinstitutional trilogue negotiations on the proposal began in autumn 2019. The trilogue meetings were delayed several times, because of the coronavirus pandemic among other reasons. After a new series of terrorist attacks hit Europe in autumn 2020, Parliament and Council reached political agreement on 10 December 2020. The most contentious issues related to the cross- border effect of withdrawal orders and to the use of automated filters to detect terrorist content online. After the Council adopted the text on 16 March 2021, Parliament adopted it in plenary
    [Show full text]
  • High-Level Statement1
    HIGH-LEVEL STATEMENT1 We made promises which we intend to keep. We promised that women and girls would be at the center of many of the Sustainable Development Goals which the world came together to agree in 2016. America’s Global Gag Rule breaks that promise as it has a chilling effect on health services for the world’s most vulnerable women and girls. It will imperil millions of women and girls’ lives by increasing unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions. It will also reverse decades of progress on reproductive, maternal and child health by putting critical health and family planning services and supplies out of reach for those who most need them. There are currently 225 million women in developing countries who want to avoid pregnancy but are not using modern contraception. Maternal mortality is the second‐leading cause of death for girls aged 15 to 19 years old, and the burden of unsafe abortion also falls overwhelmingly on the poorest. The evidence shows that access to contraception is transformative for girls, women and their families and communities. It is linked to greater gender equality, educational attainment and economic development. Health providers around the world face a painful choice between losing their US funding and losing the freedom to offer a full range of reproductive health services. We’ve been here before. Since its inception in 1984, the Global Gag Rule has been put into place at the start of every Republican administration and promptly rescinded under each Democratic administration. It’s time to take politics out of gender rights.
    [Show full text]