Blog

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Prime Minister arrives in Ghana on a State Visit


    Download logo

    Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi arrived today in Accra on his State Visit to Ghana. In a special gesture, on arrival at the airport, Prime Minister was received by the President of Ghana, H.E. John Dramani Mahama and accorded a ceremonial welcome. This gesture is reflective of the strong and historic bonds of friendship between the two nations.

    2. Prime Minister’s visit to Ghana is the first such visit in the last three decades. This historic visit would further deepen the partnership between India and Ghana, and underscores India’s commitment to strengthening its engagement with Africa and Global South Partners.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Ministry of External Affairs – Government of India.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Press Release on the recent development in Mali


    Download logo

    The Ministry of External Affairs expresses its deep concern regarding the abduction of three Indian nationals employed at the Diamond Cement Factory in Kayes, Republic of Mali. The incident occurred on 1st July 2025, when a group of armed assailants carried out a coordinated attack at the factory premises and forcibly took three (03) Indian nationals as hostages.

    2. It has come to the knowledge of the Government of India that many military and government installations at multiple locations of western and central Mali were attacked by terrorists on 01 July 2025.

    3. The Embassy of India in Bamako is in close and constant communication with the relevant authorities of the Government of Mali, local law enforcement agencies, as well as the management of Diamond Cement Factory. The Mission is also in touch with the family members of the abducted Indian nationals.

    4. The Government of India unequivocally condemns this deplorable act of violence and calls upon the Government of the Republic of Mali to take all necessary measures to secure the safe and expeditious release of the abducted Indian nationals. Senior officials of the Ministry are closely monitoring the evolving situation and remain engaged at various levels to facilitate safe and early release of Indian Nationals.

    5. The safety, security and welfare of Indian nationals abroad remains a matter of utmost priority for the Government of India. The Ministry advises all Indian citizens currently residing in Mali to exercise utmost caution, remain vigilant and stay in close contact with the Embassy of India in Bamako for regular updates and necessary assistance.

    6. The Ministry shall continue to extend all possible support and remains committed to ensuring the safe return of the abducted Indian nationals at the earliest.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Ministry of External Affairs – Government of India.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya Received New Mandate until June 2027


    Download logo

    On 26 June, the Council of the European Union adopted a Decision to extend the mandate of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) for another two years, from 1 July 2025 until 30 June 2027. The Mission has been allocated a budget of nearly €52 million for this period.

    Under its extended mandate, EUBAM Libya will continue supporting Libyan authorities in enhancing border management and combating cross-border crime, including human trafficking and migrant smuggling. As a civilian, non-executive mission, EUBAM Libya provides tailored technical advice, capacity building, and specialised training to Libyan law enforcement institutions. 

    EUBAM Libya’s principal counterparts include the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Defence, among others. The coordination of Mission activities with Libyan authorities is led by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.

    The Mission was established in 2013, based on the invitation of State of Libya, to support the Libyan authorities to develop capacity for enhancing the security of land, sea and air borders.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of EU Border Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM).

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: South Africa: Communications Committee Puts Conditions to the Approval of Government Communications and Information Systems (GCIS) Budget


    Download logo

    The Portfolio Committee on Communications and Digital Technologies has put conditions on the adoption of its budget vote report on the Government Communications and Information Systems (GCIS).

    The committee’s conditions have been forwarded to the Standing Committee on Appropriations in terms of section 10(5) of the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act 9 of 2009.

    This decision was taken on the basis that the committee felt that the 2025-2030 strategic and 2025/26 annual performance plans of the GCIS as well as the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) lacked clarity and measurable targets.

    The committee also believes that the GCIS’ five-year strategic plan is misaligned to the government’s Medium-Term Development Priorities. The strategy refers to the need to move to evidence-based communication without outlining what impact it will have on the country’s drive for inclusive economic growth and job creation, and how such will be measured.

    The committee stands against a spray-and-pray approach to development communication which has no attendant measurable targets and cogent monitoring and evaluation framework.

    As part of its conditions to the Minister in the Presidency, the committee wants GCIS to, among others, come up with a policy or legislative instrument that is going to ensure alignment, coherence and results-based measurement framework within government communication system.

    The Chairperson of the committee, Ms Khusela Sangoni Diko, said: “The committee is recommending approval of this budget with a proviso that within the course of twelve months there is legislative reform to ensure that there is a policy instrument that guides government communications.”

    Ms Diko further said that GCIS needs to fast-track reform on the laws that govern MDDA, Brand South Africa and government media spent. The committee also wants GCIS to provide quarterly performance reports on the implementation of the government communication policy framework.

    These conditions extend to GCIS’ entity, the MDDA, which must provide clarity on how the it is going to be moving community radio stations to self-transmission. The committee also called on MDDA to provide a fundraising strategy with clear measurable targets.

    The GCIS budget will be debated under vote 4 on Friday, 4 July 2025, in a mini plenary of the National Assembly at the Good Hope Chamber from 13:00 to 15:00

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Statement by the Chairperson of the African Union Commission on the African Union Stabilization Support Mission in Somalia (AUSSOM) Helicopter Crash in Somalia


    Download logo

    The Chairperson of the African Union Commission, H.E. Mahmoud Ali Youssouf expresses his profound sorrow at the tragic loss of five peacekeepers following the crash of an AUSSOM helicopter operated by the Ugandan contingent in Mogadishu, Somalia, on 2 July 2025.

    The Chairperson conveys his deepest condolences to the families of the fallen personnel, to the Government and people of the Republic of Uganda, and to the entire AUSSOM family. He wishes a swift and full recovery to all those injured, including civilians.

    Mr. Youssouf affirms the African Union’s commitment to ensuring that the sacrifice of these brave peacekeepers continues to advance the cause of peace, stability, and security in Somalia.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Union (AU).

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Lubero: United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) supports military justice in trials for sexual violence


    Download logo

    Mobile court hearings conducted by the Butembo Military Court began on Thursday, 26 June, in the town of Lubero, North Kivu. Ninety-two defendants, including 45 Congolese soldiers and 47 civilians, are facing charges of rape, sexual violence, child abduction, and extortion. The crimes were committed between 2021 and 2024. These hearings, expected to last around ten days, are being held with the technical, logistical and financial support of MONUSCO’s Justice Support Section.

    The trials take place in a context of heightened militarization in this area of North Kivu, linked to Sukola I operations against armed groups.Judicial sources report that the prolonged interaction between civilians and military personnel has contributed to a rise in sexual violence, particularly involving minors.

    Formally requested by the Butembo Military Court, MONUSCO is supporting the initiative to ensure justice for victims, combat impunity and bring the judiciary closer to communities.These mobile hearings aim to enable victims to participate in the legal process, reduce prolonged pretrial detention at the Butembo urban prison, and deter future perpetrators of similar crimes.

    This initiative is part of MONUSCO’s strategic plan, which seeks to reduce violence, protect civilians and reinforce the rule of law.MONUSCO is providing technical and logistical support, including the transportation of trial participants, coordination of hearings and legal monitoring.

    The North Kivu Women’s League welcomed the initiative. Its coordinator, Hélène Makule, called it a step forward, while urging for strict enforcement of court rulings. “We want the perpetrators to be punished in accordance with the law. Too often, we are told they are in prison, but they remain at large, which puts human rights defenders at risk.” she said. This partnership between the Congolese military justice system and MONUSCO represents a key pillar in the fight against impunity.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Mission de l’Organisation des Nations unies en République démocratique du Congo (MONUSCO).

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Zimbabwe: Arbitrary detention of journalist an assault on freedom of expression

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Responding to the arrest and detention of Faith Zaba, editor of the weekly Zimbabwe Independent, on allegations of undermining the authority of or insulting the country’s President Emmerson Mnangagwa, Khanyo Farisè, Amnesty International’s Senior Researcher in East and Southern Africa, said:

    “Amnesty International strongly condemns the arrest and detention of Faith Zaba for exercising her constitutionally guaranteed rights as a journalist. This is an assault on the right to freedom of expression and press freedom.

    “Zimbabwean authorities must immediately release Faith Zaba and drop all charges against her as she is detained simply for doing her job. Journalism is not a crime. Authorities must allow journalists to carry out their work freely, safely and without fear of harassment, intimidation or reprisals.

    “The arrest of journalists such as Zaba, and her colleague Blessed Mhlanga who was arbitrarily detained earlier this year simply for doing their job, are part of an ongoing pattern in which the criminal justice system is being misused to target independent media voices to instill fear and curb press freedom.

    Zimbabwean authorities must immediately release Faith Zaba and drop all charges against her as she is detained simply for doing her job. Journalism is not a crime. Authorities must allow journalists to carry out their work freely, safely and without fear of harassment, intimidation or reprisals.

    Khanyo Farisè, Amnesty International’s Senior Researcher in East and Southern Africa

    “These tactics pose a significant threat to a free media in Zimbabwe and the public’s right to information. Authorities must end the growing restriction on civic space in the country and allow everyone to freely exercise their human rights.”

    The arrest of journalists such as Zaba, and her colleague Blessed Mhlanga who was arbitrarily detained earlier this year simply for doing their job, are part of an ongoing pattern in which the criminal justice system is being misused to target independent media voices to instill fear and curb press freedom.

    Khanyo Farisè,

    Background

    Faith Zaba was arrested on 1 July and detained in Harare on allegations of undermining the authority of or insulting the President. According to her lawyer, Chris Mhike, the charge relates to a satirical article published in the weekly’s Muckraker column last Friday. Her bail application has been postponed to 3 July, pending a review of her medical record due to her ill health. Zaba’s arrest comes after the recent arrest and lengthy detention of another journalist from the same outlet, Alpha Media House’s head of news at HSTV, Blessed Mhlanga, who spent 72 days in pretrial detention.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: UK: Banning Palestine Action ‘a disturbing legal overreach’ by UK Government, Amnesty International UK Chief Executive warns

    Source: Amnesty International –

    The House of Commons has voted to proscribe direct action group Palestine Action.

    ‘Instead of taking draconian measures to [proscribe Palestine Action], the Government should be taking immediate and unequivocal action to put a stop to Israel’s genocide and end any risk of UK complicity in it’ – Sacha Deshmukh 

    Responding to news that the House of Commons has voted in support of the Government’s decision to ban Palestine Action as a “terrorist organisation”, Sacha Deshmukh, Amnesty International UK’s Chief Executive, said:  

    “Amnesty International condemns the Government’s decision to ban Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, as an unprecedented legal overreach. 

    “The UK has a deeply flawed and overly broad definition of terrorism which human rights monitors including Amnesty International have been warning about for years. This latest disturbing move only serves to highlight that those warnings were justified. 

    “Terrorism legislation hands the authorities massive powers to arrest and detain people, suppress speech and reporting, conduct surveillance and take other measures that would never be permitted in other circumstances. Using them against a direct-action protest group is an egregious abuse of what they were created for.       

    “Whatever MPs may think about whether Palestine Action’s tactics are appropriate or not, existing criminal laws, accompanied by human rights protections, were more than capable of responding to them. Instead of taking draconian measures to shut down direct action protesters and criminalise anyone who expresses support for their actions, the Government should be taking immediate and unequivocal action to put a stop to Israel’s genocide and end any risk of UK complicity in it.” 

    Proscribing Palestine Action: An abuse of counter-terrorism powers  

    Today (Wednesday 2 July), Westminster MPs voted 385 – 26 in support of a Government motion to proscribe Palestine Action under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000, on the basis that it is ‘an organisation concerned with terrorism’. The House of Lords will vote on the same motion tomorrow. If that vote goes through, the ban is expected to come into force on Saturday (5 July). 

    Counter-terrorism laws must always be treated with the highest degree of caution and restraint, as they exist to authorise interference with due process and other fundamental human rights protections. 

    However, the Terrorism Act 2000 contains a deeply flawed definition of terrorism, which has been criticised by domestic and international human rights monitors for many years. These criticisms are based on the breadth of its wording, which goes well beyond international comparators and recognised best practice and potentially permits disproportionate and unnecessary terrorism designations.  

    Today’s step closer to the proscription of Palestine Action is a clear example of that concern coming to fruition.  

    There is already ample existing criminal law capable of responding to a direct-action protest networks like Palestine Action.  

    A terrorism designation is a major escalation beyond mere criminalisation of direct-action protest activity. Proscription will have major adverse consequences for the freedom of expression rights of others, with implications for respect for the rule of law. As such, the proscription of Palestine Action would breach the UK’s international human rights obligations to use its counter-terrorism powers in a proportionate way and only when strictly necessary to achieve a legitimate aim. 

    Banning Palestine Action not only makes membership of the organisation a criminal offence – through broadly worded speech offences such as ‘expression of support’ and ‘glorification’ – it also puts at risk the free speech rights of many other activists who are deeply concerned about the plight of Palestinians in the context of Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza. 

    ENDS 

    Media contact: Rachel Reilly 

    07909533106 || rachel.reilly@amnesty.org.uk || 

    Out-of-hours: 07721 398984 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: UK: Amnesty International urges UK Government to use the opportunity provided by the Timms Review to establish an independent social security commission

    Source: Amnesty International –

    In response to the Government’s welfare bill passing its second reading in Parliament tonight, Jen Clark, Amnesty International UK’s Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Lead, said

    “The legislative process surrounding this welfare bill has been incredibly harmful to disabled people who depend on social security. It is disappointing that the bill advanced despite the dedicated efforts of campaigners and supportive MPs to abolish it. The rushed timeline restricts proper scrutiny of its remaining elements, particularly those that discriminate against individuals with fluctuating conditions, falling short of international standards.

    “While we are cautiously relieved that some of the most harmful aspects of the bill, specifically the changes to PIP, have been paused, the overwhelming lack of public support for these changes is undeniable. Recent polling by Savanta, commissioned by Amnesty, shows that 75% of respondents believe that removing PIP from people in need is cruel. Although the Government’s concession on this issue is welcome, serious questions still need to be addressed.

    “We are waiting for key details about the Timms review, which must not serve as a smokescreen to evade accountability or scrutiny through statutory consultation. This review presents a vital opportunity to realign social security with its fundamental purpose: ensuring that no one has to live in poverty

    “Amnesty International calls on the UK government to establish a Social Security Commission with statutory powers, drawing inspiration from the Beveridge Report and past Royal Commissions. This Commission should carry out an independent inquiry into the UK social security system, driving comprehensive reform to ensure that all individuals have an adequate standard of living grounded in dignity and human rights.”

    Rick Burgess Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People added, “Kier Starmer has marked his first year in parliament by betraying disabled people. Our lives have been traded through a shambolic, farcical parliamentary process. They have won a small battle but we’ll keep fighting. There’s no peace because there’s no justice.” 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Security: Defense News in Brief: Mine Countermeasures Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MCM USV)

    Source: United States Navy

    Designated on Oct. 8, 2018 as an ACAT II Program of Record, the Mine Countermeasures Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MCM USV) is a long endurance, semi-autonomous, diesel-powered, all-aluminum surface craft that supports the employment of various MCM payloads.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Defense News in Brief: Littoral Combat Ships – Mine Countermeasures Mission Package

    Source: United States Navy

    The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a fast, agile and networked surface combatant optimized for operating in the littorals. The primary missions for the LCS include countering submarine, surface and mine threats to assure maritime access for joint forces.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) – E-001693/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission fully supports the need for a high level of protection of the environment and human health. Gender equality and vulnerable groups receive particular attention during scientific assessments.

    Regulation on the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH)[1] ensures a high level of protection from chemical substances.

    If a substance poses a risk to consumers, such as in menstrual products, a restriction dossier that considers this risk is prepared. For instance, an existing restriction under REACH bans the use of certain hazardous substances (e.g. dioctyltin compounds), in female hygiene products.

    As regards per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a restriction dossier is currently under assessment by the European Chemicals Agency[2].

    The Scientific Committees of the Agency must finalise their opinions before the Commission can decide on restricting PFAS. The Commission aims to tackle PFAS pollution and protect citizens’ health, and the Commission is in favour of banning PFAS in consumer articles.

    Moreover, i n 2023, criteria to identify endocrine disruptors (EDs) were added to the regulation on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures[3].

    Therefore, industry shall classify substances as EDs, where needed. Furthermore, PFAS and EDs are restricted under the EU Ecolabel criteria for products like absorbent hygiene products and reusable menstrual cups[4].

    Several Horizon 2020[5] and Horizon Europe[6] projects are addressing PFAS pollution through monitoring, detection, and remediation.

    Complementing these efforts, the Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals[7] funded by Horizon Europe will launch a pilot project focused on monitoring PFAS and EDs.

    • [1] Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006.
    • [2] See https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18663449b.
    • [3] Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008.
    • [4] Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1809 of 14 September 2023 establishing the EU Ecolabel criteria for absorbent hygiene products and for reusable menstrual cups, OJ L 234, 22.99.2023.
    • [5] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-2020_en.
    • [6] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en.
    • [7] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101057014.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) – E-001693/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission fully supports the need for a high level of protection of the environment and human health. Gender equality and vulnerable groups receive particular attention during scientific assessments.

    Regulation on the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH)[1] ensures a high level of protection from chemical substances.

    If a substance poses a risk to consumers, such as in menstrual products, a restriction dossier that considers this risk is prepared. For instance, an existing restriction under REACH bans the use of certain hazardous substances (e.g. dioctyltin compounds), in female hygiene products.

    As regards per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a restriction dossier is currently under assessment by the European Chemicals Agency[2].

    The Scientific Committees of the Agency must finalise their opinions before the Commission can decide on restricting PFAS. The Commission aims to tackle PFAS pollution and protect citizens’ health, and the Commission is in favour of banning PFAS in consumer articles.

    Moreover, i n 2023, criteria to identify endocrine disruptors (EDs) were added to the regulation on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures[3].

    Therefore, industry shall classify substances as EDs, where needed. Furthermore, PFAS and EDs are restricted under the EU Ecolabel criteria for products like absorbent hygiene products and reusable menstrual cups[4].

    Several Horizon 2020[5] and Horizon Europe[6] projects are addressing PFAS pollution through monitoring, detection, and remediation.

    Complementing these efforts, the Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals[7] funded by Horizon Europe will launch a pilot project focused on monitoring PFAS and EDs.

    • [1] Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006.
    • [2] See https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18663449b.
    • [3] Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008.
    • [4] Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1809 of 14 September 2023 establishing the EU Ecolabel criteria for absorbent hygiene products and for reusable menstrual cups, OJ L 234, 22.99.2023.
    • [5] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-2020_en.
    • [6] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en.
    • [7] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101057014.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) – E-001693/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission fully supports the need for a high level of protection of the environment and human health. Gender equality and vulnerable groups receive particular attention during scientific assessments.

    Regulation on the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH)[1] ensures a high level of protection from chemical substances.

    If a substance poses a risk to consumers, such as in menstrual products, a restriction dossier that considers this risk is prepared. For instance, an existing restriction under REACH bans the use of certain hazardous substances (e.g. dioctyltin compounds), in female hygiene products.

    As regards per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a restriction dossier is currently under assessment by the European Chemicals Agency[2].

    The Scientific Committees of the Agency must finalise their opinions before the Commission can decide on restricting PFAS. The Commission aims to tackle PFAS pollution and protect citizens’ health, and the Commission is in favour of banning PFAS in consumer articles.

    Moreover, i n 2023, criteria to identify endocrine disruptors (EDs) were added to the regulation on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures[3].

    Therefore, industry shall classify substances as EDs, where needed. Furthermore, PFAS and EDs are restricted under the EU Ecolabel criteria for products like absorbent hygiene products and reusable menstrual cups[4].

    Several Horizon 2020[5] and Horizon Europe[6] projects are addressing PFAS pollution through monitoring, detection, and remediation.

    Complementing these efforts, the Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals[7] funded by Horizon Europe will launch a pilot project focused on monitoring PFAS and EDs.

    • [1] Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006.
    • [2] See https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18663449b.
    • [3] Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008.
    • [4] Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1809 of 14 September 2023 establishing the EU Ecolabel criteria for absorbent hygiene products and for reusable menstrual cups, OJ L 234, 22.99.2023.
    • [5] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-2020_en.
    • [6] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en.
    • [7] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101057014.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Brussels’ use of targeted anti-Marine Le Pen advertising during the Dutch election campaign in 2023 – E-001329/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission did not run corporate communication campaigns in 2024 before the European elections. In general, corporate communication campaigns conducted by the Commission are designed to inform and raise awareness among European citizens, without interfering in any electoral process.

    An advertising campaign, launched by the Commission’s Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs to communicate on the proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse submitted in May 2022[1], ran from 15 to 28 September 2023.

    The total amount spent on the advertising campaign, which ran in eight Member States, was EUR 7 496.89 with cost per view of EUR 0.008.

    These advertising expenses were not declared to election authorities. This campaign was unrelated to any national or European elections.

    • [1] COM/2022/209 final.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Brussels’ use of targeted anti-Marine Le Pen advertising during the Dutch election campaign in 2023 – E-001329/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission did not run corporate communication campaigns in 2024 before the European elections. In general, corporate communication campaigns conducted by the Commission are designed to inform and raise awareness among European citizens, without interfering in any electoral process.

    An advertising campaign, launched by the Commission’s Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs to communicate on the proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse submitted in May 2022[1], ran from 15 to 28 September 2023.

    The total amount spent on the advertising campaign, which ran in eight Member States, was EUR 7 496.89 with cost per view of EUR 0.008.

    These advertising expenses were not declared to election authorities. This campaign was unrelated to any national or European elections.

    • [1] COM/2022/209 final.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Comprehensive overview of EU legislation on the manufacturing and importation of medicines – P-001402/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    As regards the regulatory requirements for the manufacturing and importation of medicinal products for human use the main legal acts are: Directive 2001/83/EC[1] on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, Commission Directive (EU) 2017/1572[2] on the principles and guidelines of good manufacturing practice for medicinal products for human use, and Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1252/2014[3] on principles and guidelines of good manufacturing practice for active substances for medicinal products for human use.

    Specific manufacturing rules for investigational medicinal products are established in Regulation (EU) 536/2014[4] on clinical trials and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1569[5] on good manufacturing practices for investigational medicinal products.

    All these legal acts are complemented by guidelines on good manufacturing practice for medicinal products and active substances, published by the Commission on its website (Eudralex volume IV)[6].

    • [1] Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use.
    • [2] Commission Directive (EU) 2017/1572 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the principles and guidelines of good manufacturing practice for medicinal products for human use.
    • [3] Delegated regulation (EU) No 1252/2014 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to principles and guidelines of good manufacturing practice for active substances for medicinal products for human use.
    • [4] Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC.
    • [5] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1569 of 23 May 2017 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying principles of and the guidelines for good manufacturing practice for investigational medicinal products for human use and arrangements for inspections.
    • [6] EudraLex — Volume 4: https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/eudralex/eudralex-volume-4_en.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Institutional communication of the Commission and the situation in Türkiye – P-001397/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    During the High-Level Economic Dialogue between the EU and Türkiye, the Commissioner for Enlargement stressed that adhering to the rule of law and high democratic standards were essential for Türkiye as a candidate country and expressed concerns about recent political developments.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement made clear that while Türkiye is a key partner of the EU and enhancing economic cooperation is a joint ambition, only a relationship based on clear commitments to democratic values and freedoms will unfold its full potential.

    The EU is carefully considering engagement with Türkiye and recalibrate as necessary depending on political developments. This is in line with the November 2023 Joint Communication[1], calling for a progressive, proportionate and reversible approach, which underlines that Türkiye’s own constructive engagement will be instrumental in advancing the various areas of cooperation.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement raised EU concerns bilaterally and cancelled a visit to the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, planned for 11-13 April 2025, as well as a meeting with the Turkish Foreign Minister.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement will continue to raise matters of concern related to the rule of law, as reconfirmed in a speech at the European Parliament’s Plenary on 6 May 2025[2].

    • [1] https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/joint-communication-european-council-state-play-eu-turkiye-political-economic-and-trade-relations-0_en.
    • [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-10-2025-05-06-ITM-014_EN.html.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Institutional communication of the Commission and the situation in Türkiye – P-001397/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    During the High-Level Economic Dialogue between the EU and Türkiye, the Commissioner for Enlargement stressed that adhering to the rule of law and high democratic standards were essential for Türkiye as a candidate country and expressed concerns about recent political developments.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement made clear that while Türkiye is a key partner of the EU and enhancing economic cooperation is a joint ambition, only a relationship based on clear commitments to democratic values and freedoms will unfold its full potential.

    The EU is carefully considering engagement with Türkiye and recalibrate as necessary depending on political developments. This is in line with the November 2023 Joint Communication[1], calling for a progressive, proportionate and reversible approach, which underlines that Türkiye’s own constructive engagement will be instrumental in advancing the various areas of cooperation.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement raised EU concerns bilaterally and cancelled a visit to the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, planned for 11-13 April 2025, as well as a meeting with the Turkish Foreign Minister.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement will continue to raise matters of concern related to the rule of law, as reconfirmed in a speech at the European Parliament’s Plenary on 6 May 2025[2].

    • [1] https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/joint-communication-european-council-state-play-eu-turkiye-political-economic-and-trade-relations-0_en.
    • [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-10-2025-05-06-ITM-014_EN.html.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Institutional communication of the Commission and the situation in Türkiye – P-001397/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    During the High-Level Economic Dialogue between the EU and Türkiye, the Commissioner for Enlargement stressed that adhering to the rule of law and high democratic standards were essential for Türkiye as a candidate country and expressed concerns about recent political developments.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement made clear that while Türkiye is a key partner of the EU and enhancing economic cooperation is a joint ambition, only a relationship based on clear commitments to democratic values and freedoms will unfold its full potential.

    The EU is carefully considering engagement with Türkiye and recalibrate as necessary depending on political developments. This is in line with the November 2023 Joint Communication[1], calling for a progressive, proportionate and reversible approach, which underlines that Türkiye’s own constructive engagement will be instrumental in advancing the various areas of cooperation.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement raised EU concerns bilaterally and cancelled a visit to the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, planned for 11-13 April 2025, as well as a meeting with the Turkish Foreign Minister.

    The Commissioner for Enlargement will continue to raise matters of concern related to the rule of law, as reconfirmed in a speech at the European Parliament’s Plenary on 6 May 2025[2].

    • [1] https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/joint-communication-european-council-state-play-eu-turkiye-political-economic-and-trade-relations-0_en.
    • [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-10-2025-05-06-ITM-014_EN.html.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Clarifications on the application of Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 in relation to the clean-up of the Crotone site of national interest – P-002598/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-002598/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Denis Nesci (ECR)

    During the inter-departmental conference of 24 October 2019 at the Ministry of the Environment, in the presence of Syndial S.p.A. (now ENI Rewind), the Calabria Region, the Municipality of Crotone and other bodies, it was decided that hazardous waste – both technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material (TENORM) and non-TENORM – resulting from the clean-up of the Crotone-Cassano-Cerchiaro site of national interest (SIN) must be disposed of outside Calabria, also as required by the single regional authorisation procedure (PAUR), in order to avoid new environmental risks and the construction of new landfills in Calabria.

    On 16 June 2025, digging work for the SIN area clean-up started, with 40 000 tonnes of waste destined for the Kumla landfill site in Sweden.

    However, ENI Rewind claims that, from May 2026, Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 would make it impossible to ship hazardous waste to other Member States, hampering completion of the clean-up.

    This seems to be a narrow interpretation, as the Regulation aims to strengthen controls and traceability, not prohibit shipments, if they are safe and transparent.

    In light of the above:

    • 1.Does the Commission confirm that the Regulation prohibits such shipments from 2026?
    • 2.Does it believe that the rules could prevent clean-ups that have already been approved?
    • 3.Will it adopt interpretative clarifications to ensure the environment is protected and the law is upheld in local communities?

    Submitted: 26.6.2025

    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Clarifications on the application of Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 in relation to the clean-up of the Crotone site of national interest – P-002598/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-002598/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Denis Nesci (ECR)

    During the inter-departmental conference of 24 October 2019 at the Ministry of the Environment, in the presence of Syndial S.p.A. (now ENI Rewind), the Calabria Region, the Municipality of Crotone and other bodies, it was decided that hazardous waste – both technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material (TENORM) and non-TENORM – resulting from the clean-up of the Crotone-Cassano-Cerchiaro site of national interest (SIN) must be disposed of outside Calabria, also as required by the single regional authorisation procedure (PAUR), in order to avoid new environmental risks and the construction of new landfills in Calabria.

    On 16 June 2025, digging work for the SIN area clean-up started, with 40 000 tonnes of waste destined for the Kumla landfill site in Sweden.

    However, ENI Rewind claims that, from May 2026, Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 would make it impossible to ship hazardous waste to other Member States, hampering completion of the clean-up.

    This seems to be a narrow interpretation, as the Regulation aims to strengthen controls and traceability, not prohibit shipments, if they are safe and transparent.

    In light of the above:

    • 1.Does the Commission confirm that the Regulation prohibits such shipments from 2026?
    • 2.Does it believe that the rules could prevent clean-ups that have already been approved?
    • 3.Will it adopt interpretative clarifications to ensure the environment is protected and the law is upheld in local communities?

    Submitted: 26.6.2025

    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Enhancing EU efforts to combat abuses in online commerce – E-001749/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission has been aware of the challenges posed by the new market entrants and the evolving nature of e-commerce to the effective enforcement of the EU digital rules.

    In order to address these challenges, it adopted in February the communication on a Comprehensive EU Toolbox for Safe and Sustainable E-commerce[1].

    It proposes a series of measures to address challenges posed by e-commerce aiming to bring a level playing field based on effective customs, tax and safety controls and sustainability standards and proper enforcement of EU legislation through a coordinated approach.

    To strengthen the efficiency of the enforcement actions with respect to EU e-commerce rules, the Commission closely cooperates with national authorities as evidenced by the coordinated actions carried out by the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network, under consumer protection rules.[2]

    The enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA)[3] in the area of ecommerce is of high priority for the Commission. In this regard, the Commission initiated proceedings against AliExpress (on 14 March 2024)[4] and Temu (on 31 October 2024).[5]

    The proceedings have developed and on 16 June 2025 the Commission accepted and made binding a series of commitments offered by AliExpress to settle a number of concerns, such as the platform’s transparency on advertising and recommender systems.

    Simultaneously, the Commission preliminarily found AliExpress in breach of its obligation to assess and mitigate risks related to the dissemination of illegal products under the DSA.

    In parallel, the Commission is supervising whether providers of other very large online marketplaces, such as Amazon and Shein, are complying with their obligations under the DSA.

    • [1] COM/2025/37 final.
    • [2] Commission urges Temu to respect EU consumer protection laws.
    • [3] Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market for Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
    • [4] DSA: Commission opens formal proceedings against AliExpress.
    • [5] Commission opens formal proceedings against Temu under the Digital Services Act | Shaping Europe’s digital future.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Public procurement: when Brussels finances Turkish and Iranian companies – E-002575/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002575/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Virginie Joron (PfE)

    Some French people find it difficult to watch their taxes being used to pay for free motorways in Poland, trains in Spain or nursery assistants in Romania. For example, the Commission has earmarked EUR 1.5 billion for the Romanian border[1], EUR 419 million for railway infrastructure in Spain (Almeria)[2] and EUR 448 million for the training of nursery assistants in Romania[3].

    Brussels should ensure a European preference when awarding public contracts.

    In Spain, Romania and Greece, many EU public contracts are awarded or subcontracted to companies from non-EU countries that do not apply reciprocity or are not signatories to the GPA[4]. For example, EU taxpayers finance companies supplying pipes and water pipes manufactured in Türkiye (SMS), China and Iran (Hanyco).

    • 1.How does the Commission ascertain if products used for public contracts benefiting from EU subsidies are made in Europe or in a country with reciprocal access to public contracts?
    • 2.Why does the Commission not publish a list of the countries that have not offered reciprocal access to their public contracts in the last five years?[5]
    • 3.Will the Commission require tenders – regardless of the amount and percentage rule[6] – containing products from third countries that do not apply reciprocity to be excluded, whether or not those countries have signed the GPA?

    Submitted: 25.6.2025

    • [1] Border-Curtici-Simeria railway line. Total budget (2013-2023): €1 809 360 168.12; EU contribution: €1 537 956 142.91 (85 %), https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3095706.
    • [2] Murcia-Almería railway line. Total budget: €523 966 300.00; EU contribution: €1 419 173 142.91 (80 %), https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3159194.
    • [3] ‘Progress in the quality of alternative childcare’. EU contribution: €448 million out of a budget of €530 million, https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3097484.
    • [4] WTO Agreement on Government Procurement, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/memobs_e.htm.
    • [5] Article 86(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU (water, energy, transport and postal services), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0025.
    • [6] Article 85(2): any tender submitted may be rejected where the proportion of the products originating in third countries exceeds 50 % of the total value of the products.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Public procurement: when Brussels finances Turkish and Iranian companies – E-002575/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002575/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Virginie Joron (PfE)

    Some French people find it difficult to watch their taxes being used to pay for free motorways in Poland, trains in Spain or nursery assistants in Romania. For example, the Commission has earmarked EUR 1.5 billion for the Romanian border[1], EUR 419 million for railway infrastructure in Spain (Almeria)[2] and EUR 448 million for the training of nursery assistants in Romania[3].

    Brussels should ensure a European preference when awarding public contracts.

    In Spain, Romania and Greece, many EU public contracts are awarded or subcontracted to companies from non-EU countries that do not apply reciprocity or are not signatories to the GPA[4]. For example, EU taxpayers finance companies supplying pipes and water pipes manufactured in Türkiye (SMS), China and Iran (Hanyco).

    • 1.How does the Commission ascertain if products used for public contracts benefiting from EU subsidies are made in Europe or in a country with reciprocal access to public contracts?
    • 2.Why does the Commission not publish a list of the countries that have not offered reciprocal access to their public contracts in the last five years?[5]
    • 3.Will the Commission require tenders – regardless of the amount and percentage rule[6] – containing products from third countries that do not apply reciprocity to be excluded, whether or not those countries have signed the GPA?

    Submitted: 25.6.2025

    • [1] Border-Curtici-Simeria railway line. Total budget (2013-2023): €1 809 360 168.12; EU contribution: €1 537 956 142.91 (85 %), https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3095706.
    • [2] Murcia-Almería railway line. Total budget: €523 966 300.00; EU contribution: €1 419 173 142.91 (80 %), https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3159194.
    • [3] ‘Progress in the quality of alternative childcare’. EU contribution: €448 million out of a budget of €530 million, https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q3097484.
    • [4] WTO Agreement on Government Procurement, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/memobs_e.htm.
    • [5] Article 86(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU (water, energy, transport and postal services), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0025.
    • [6] Article 85(2): any tender submitted may be rejected where the proportion of the products originating in third countries exceeds 50 % of the total value of the products.
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Hundreds of jobs at risk as a result of sugar factory closure in Spain – E-002549/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002549/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE)

    On 27 May 2025, AB Azucarera Iberia S.L. announced a collective redundancy plan which will affect 251 employees across all its sites in Spain. The plan involves closing the La Bañeza (León) sugar factory and converting the Miranda de Ebro (Burgos) sugar factory into a cane sugar refinery.

    The sugar beet sector in Europe – and in Spain in particular – has been in profound crisis since 2018. High production costs, price volatility, imports and stagnation of sugar production and content as a result of reduced active substances are driving sugar production towards dire straits.

    Considering the above:

    • 1.Will the Commission change its current plant health policy in order to restore productivity and the sugar yield per hectare of sugar beet?
    • 2.Does the Commission intend to improve the safety net and risk management under the common market organisation to avoid a market crisis like the one in 2017-2020?
    • 3.Does the Commission intend to substantially change the preferential quotas under the future EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement to help stabilise the markets?

    Submitted: 25.6.2025

    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Finland’s derogation for mink fur farming and the ban on fur farming throughout the EU – E-002603/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002603/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Maria Ohisalo (Verts/ALE)

    The Commission has added the American mink to the EU list of invasive alien species.[1]However, Finland wants to continue mink fur farming and is therefore going to apply for a derogation to do this.

    To obtain a derogation, it must be demonstrated that there are compelling reasons of public interest for mink fur farming. However, public interest does not come into play in this case because fur farming in Finland is not economically viable, nor is it important for the country’s economy. Fur farming actually poses huge problems in terms of animal rights[2] and pandemic risk[3].

    The vast majority of EU Member States have already banned fur farming either partially or completely. Significant fur farming activities now only take place in Finland, Poland, Greece and Lithuania.

    The European Citizens’ Initiative on a fur-free Europe, which calls for an EU-wide ban on fur farming, has garnered over 1.5 million validated signatures and has been referred to the Commission for consideration. The Commission’s response to the initiative is due by March 2026.[4]

    • 1.Why is the Commission granting problematic derogations to a list of invasive alien species that has already been drawn up on the basis of scientific assessment?
    • 2.Is the Commission planning to propose an EU-wide ban on fur farming?

    Submitted: 27.6.2025

    • [1] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-biodiversity/invasive-alien-species_en
    • [2] https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/new-scientific-report-fur-farming-animal-welfare-needs-cannot-be-met
    • [3] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09007-w
    • [4] https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2022/000002_en
    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – EUR 415 million fine for OPEKEPE’s administrative failures: who ultimately pays the price? – E-002554/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002554/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Galato Alexandraki (ECR)

    The European Commission has fined Greece EUR 415 million for systematic administrative failures in the management of agricultural aid in the period 2009-2023. As the Ministry of Rural Development itself acknowledges, this is not a matter of producer fraud, but rather the result of inadequate checks, a lack of cross-checks with the IAPR, shortcomings in the land register, pasture maps, technical errors by private individuals and numerous years of institutional inaction.

    Although the blame is being attributed to administrative or political persons, not a single charge has been initiated. Meanwhile, the fine is already set to be covered by the state budget. This means that ordinary taxpayers and honest farmers are bearing the consequences of scandals in which they had no part.

    In view of this, can the Commission say:

    • 1.How does it assess the failure of the Greek authorities to identify and punish those actually responsible?
    • 2.Does it intend to request specific names of natural or legal persons responsible for the infringements?
    • 3.Does it consider it fair to impose the fine on farmers and citizens who bear no responsibility for the management collapse of the competent bodies?

    Submitted: 25.6.2025

    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Protection of EU citizens’ right to privacy – E-002538/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002538/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew)

    In its Digital Rights Ireland judgment, the CJEU stated that the general and indiscriminate retention of communication data is a breach of the rights to privacy and data protection.

    What is more, the CJEU has ruled in a number of its decisions – specifically the Prokuratuur and La Quadrature du Net cases – that citizens’ communications data can only be accessed under strict proportionality and legality conditions established in the ePrivacy Directive.

    The Commission’s ‘Impact assessment on retention of data by service providers for criminal proceedings’ initiative, which is currently under public consultation, and the high-level group on access to data for effective law enforcement have raised serious concerns among EU citizens about the safeguarding of rights and freedoms in the European Union, such as privacy, data protection and civil liberties.

    In the light of the above:

    • 1.Does the Commission intend to submit any legislative proposal that involves general and indiscriminate retention of communication data at EU level?
    • 2.Does the Commission intend to submit any legislative proposal to amend the ePrivacy Directive to change the conditions for accessing citizens’ communication data?

    Submitted: 24.6.2025

    Last updated: 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on product safety and regulatory compliance in e-commerce and non-EU imports – A10-0133/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on product safety and regulatory compliance in e-commerce and non-EU imports

    (2025/2037(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the report of 31 March 2022 by the Wise Persons Group on the Reform of the EU Customs Union entitled ‘Putting More Union in the European Customs: Ten proposals to make the EU Customs Union fit for a Geopolitical Europe’,

     having regard to its position of 13 March 2024 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union Customs Code and the European Union Customs Authority, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013[1],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 entitled ‘A comprehensive EU toolbox for safe and sustainable e-commerce’ (COM(2025(0037),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937[2],

     having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859[3],

     having regard to the report of April 2024 by Enrico Letta entitled ‘Much more than a market: Speed, Security, Solidarity – Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’[4],

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee on International Trade,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A10-0133/2025),

    A. whereas e-commerce has transformed how consumers purchase and engage with businesses worldwide, unlocking unprecedented opportunities; whereas e-commerce presents significant challenges to the EU’s competitiveness and raises concerns over consumer rights and health and safety, particularly as certain product categories raise urgent concerns regarding their impact on vulnerable consumer groups; whereas it has an environmental impact, particularly through increased waste generation and carbon emissions resulting from transportation and logistics; whereas e-commerce has an impact on retailers’ attractiveness and therefore contributes to the hollowing out of city centres; whereas e-commerce also has social implications, particularly concerning working conditions in the warehousing and delivery sector;

    B. whereas over 75 % of EU consumers shop online; whereas the continued growth of e-commerce enhances consumer access, quality and price competition; whereas e-commerce lowers market entry barriers for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and entrepreneurs, fosters digital inclusion, supports underserved communities, and contributes to innovation, productivity and economic growth across the single market;

    C. whereas, with the surge in e-commerce imports, mainly coming from China, non-compliant sellers evading regulatory costs and undermining law-abiding businesses through means such as counterfeiting, have intensified unfair competition; whereas there is an urgent need to re-establish a level playing field for all businesses, especially SMEs; whereas it is crucial to ensure that enforcement efforts are adequately funded and equipped at both national and EU level, while avoiding excessive delegation of enforcement responsibilities to private actors;

    D. whereas European companies, namely SMEs, must comply with strict regulations and compete on an unlevel playing field with non-EU e-commerce platforms that avoid these obligations; whereas European companies dedicate material and human resources to ensure regulatory compliance, assuming significant administrative and financial burdens;

    E. whereas certain non-EU companies fail to comply with European data protection regulations, which guarantee a high level of privacy for consumers, by engaging in consumer profiling practices using personal data; whereas enhanced enforcement and cooperation is required to ensure consistent privacy protections for all consumers;

    F. whereas Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, in her 2024-2029 political guidelines, referred to the need to tackle challenges with online platforms to ensure that consumers and businesses alike benefit from a level playing field based on effective customs, tax and safety controls and sustainability standards, and tasked several Executive Vice-Presidents and Commissioners with fulfilling that mission;

    G. whereas the process of adapting the EU acquis to the online environment began several years ago, and numerous laws on products, consumer protection and product safety now include provisions to ensure robust safeguards in the digital landscape; whereas, notwithstanding these efforts, critical shortcomings persist in empowering authorities to hold the full supply chain accountable and ensure consumer protection, which need to be urgently addressed;

    H. whereas the Digital Services Act[5] (DSA), the General Product Safety Regulation[6] (GPSR), the Market Surveillance Regulation[7] (MSR) and the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation (CPC)[8] contribute to a safer and fair e-commerce environment, if well implemented and enforced; whereas, despite these laws, consumer and other organisations, as well as national authorities, have raised concerns over the large number of unsafe products detected in the EU that fail to comply with EU legislation on product safety and environmental and chemical standards; whereas better funding of and coordination among Member States’ enforcement authorities are essential to address these risks effectively;

    I. whereas e-commerce may significantly impact consumers by providing them with unparalleled convenience, access to diverse products and competitive pricing; whereas e-commerce also exposes consumers to risks such as unsafe products, a lack of transparency and manipulative practices that exploit their vulnerabilities;

    J. whereas the protection of consumers is essential to the functioning of the EU’s internal market, as it ensures trust and fairness in commercial practices, thereby enabling sustainable economic growth and innovation; whereas addressing these concerns is important in promoting transparency, fairness and the responsible development of digital services and e-commerce;

    K. whereas people from more disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, including low-income families and children, are more exposed to the risks posed by unsafe products due to their lower prices, aggressive marketing and widespread distribution;

    L. whereas concerns over the suitability of customs procedures under the current Union Customs Code[9] for e-commerce were a significant driver of the Commission’s customs reform package, including the legislative proposals on the revision of the Union Customs Code and establishing an EU Customs Authority (UCC reform), and the removal of the EUR 150 exemption threshold (de minimis) for the payment of customs duties and VAT on imported products;

    M. whereas customs authorities are in need of substantial investments, particularly to ensure a sufficient number of properly trained staff to guarantee the functioning of EU customs systems, which are facing an exponential increase in demand for customs checks; whereas without the necessary investments in staff, digital solutions cannot achieve benefits in terms of efficiency and harmonisation;

    N. whereas advanced screening technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain, could significantly enhance the capacity of customs and market surveillance authorities to flag high-risk shipments and automate compliance checks at scale; whereas investment in such technologies remains fragmented and uneven across Member States; whereas increased EU-level funding, coordination and efforts to ensure interoperability are essential to accelerate their deployment and improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms;

    O. whereas digital tools, such as artificial intelligence and the internet of things, can help track non-compliant products, but must respect consumer privacy and must not lead to the general monitoring of users;

    P. whereas the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 on a comprehensive EU toolbox for safe and sustainable e-commerce, highlights that the volume of e-commerce goods bought by EU consumers on non-EU online platforms is expected to continue growing rapidly, benefiting from the current customs duty exemption for low-value consignments (up to EUR 150);

    The surge in non-compliant goods in e-commerce

    1. Highlights the increasingly high number of purchases being made by EU consumers on non-EU online platforms in business-to-consumer environments and in emerging manufacturer-to-consumer and direct-to-consumer environments; emphasises, as described in the Letta report on the future of the single market[10], that the circulation of harmful products in the single market is escalating and that EU consumers are wasting EUR 19.3 billion per year buying dangerous products that can lead to injuries and that are detrimental to our economies;

    2. Notes that 4.6 billion e-commerce items under the EUR 150 exemption threshold were imported into the EU in 2024, 91 % of which originated from China, amounting to up to 12 million small e-commerce items per day and amounting to almost twice the number recorded in 2023 (2.4 billion) and more than triple the number in 2022 (1.4 billion); notes that this surge has exacerbated compliance challenges, especially in product safety, and that market surveillance authorities and independent investigations have reported alarming non-compliance rates;

    3. Stresses that most unsafe and illegal products are shipped to the EU in large volumes of individual, and often small, parcels sold to EU consumers via online platforms from non-EU countries, in particular China; stresses that such products are difficult to control, in particular for customs authorities at the entry points, which are mostly located at major ports and logistical airports for e-commerce; emphasises that this makes it almost impossible to stop such products from entering the EU and makes it increasingly difficult for market surveillance authorities to detect and remove such products from the internal market and for consumer authorities to do so once the products reach EU consumers;

    4. Stresses that the rapid growth of e-commerce has significant environmental implications due to issues such as a rise in packaging waste, the larger carbon footprint from low-quality and short life cycle products and their shipment, and problems with waste management and non-recyclable materials; underlines, in this respect, the need to ensure compliance with environmental legislation and to encourage sustainable ways of consuming;

    5. Stresses that some non-EU online marketplaces are facing allegations regarding the use of forced labour; underlines, in this respect, that Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 prohibits products made with forced labour from entering the EU market, and that it must be effectively enforced after its application, including for online sales;

    6. Notes that, on 1 December 2025, Regulation No 2023/2411[11] on the protection of geographical indications for craft and industrial products will come into force; notes that, if not accompanied by adequate promotion and protection, especially with respect to the markets of non-EU countries, geographical indications risk remaining ineffective; calls, therefore, on the Commission, together with the customs authorities of the Member States, to strengthen checks aimed at intercepting products that violate the rules on geographical indications;

    7. Is concerned that the prevailing business model of certain major non-EU online platforms is based on the rapid, large-scale production and distribution of fast fashion and ultra-fast fashion products, prioritising speed and low cost over sustainability, safety and quality; regrets that many such products do not comply with EU legislation, yet non-compliant sellers frequently evade meaningful enforcement or sanctions; stresses that such practices constitute a form of social and environmental dumping, resulting in a persistent and unfair competitive advantage for these non-EU platforms, exerting disproportionate pressure on European undertakings, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises; emphasises that this hampers the development of the EU’s textile and clothing sector;

    E-commerce crossroads: navigating compliance challenges

    8. Recognises that the EU has established a robust compliance framework, which also applies to products sold online, but that greater efforts are still needed for the full enforcement of the compliance framework; underlines, in this respect, the importance of the DSA, the DMA, the MSR, the GPSR, consumer protection rules and various product and environmental laws; emphasises that market surveillance authorities face challenges in applying these frameworks to online platforms as evidenced by the Commission’s recently published evaluation report on the implementation of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and, in particular, in cases where large quantities of a product are sold in small consignments; considers that the thorough implementation of the DSA and other regulatory acquis is necessary to combat unsafe, non-compliant and counterfeit products;

    9. Stresses the need to implement the existing compliance framework and evaluate these measures when considering new legislation, including new obligations for online marketplaces;

    10. Notes that conducting physical tests is particularly impractical for small parcels sent directly to the final consumer and that customs authorities will therefore continue to rely primarily on checking the documentation, rather than inspecting the products themselves;

    11. Highlights the significant enforcement gaps caused by the limited resources and insufficient level of digitalisation of customs and market surveillance authorities, the lack of human resources and harmonised and interoperable technological tools across Member States, and the insufficient data sharing and overall lack of cooperation and coordination between customs authorities, platforms and market surveillance entities; acknowledges that physical inspections are unavoidably and inherently limited given the volume of e-commerce parcels entering the EU;

    12. Considers that mystery shopping exercises by market surveillance authorities, as put forward in the Commission communication on e-commerce, are an important tool to verify compliance for products sold through online platforms; stresses, however, that if sellers are based outside the EU or are not traceable and if fake addresses are used for responsible persons, there is no liable legal entity and it is impossible for market surveillance authorities to take enforcement actions;

    13. Considers that EU manufacturers and retailers, particularly SMEs, face unfair competition due to non-EU platforms enabling non-EU manufacturers and their non-compliant products to easily enter the EU market, bypassing applicable regulations and standards; highlights that, while EU manufacturers must comply with strict safety, environmental and quality rules, many low-value products sold through these platforms evade customs and market surveillance checks due to the way they are shipped to the EU; raises concerns that some of these platforms and non-EU traders deliberately exploit this loophole, allowing non-compliant imports to enter the EU single market unchecked, putting European manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers at a disadvantage, weakening their competitiveness and hindering their ability to innovate, which could lead to the closure of many micro-enterprises and small enterprises;

    14. Stresses that EU manufacturers are de facto subject to significantly stricter market surveillance compared to non-EU manufactures that reach EU consumers via e-commerce platforms; deeply regrets the loss of market share and jobs caused by the influx of cheaper products that do not comply with European standards, particularly on safety and quality, as well as other illegal products, shipped from non-EU countries, directly affecting EU SMEs and the strength of EU companies and their capacity to invest and maintain profitability;

    15. Highlights the difference between online platforms acting as intermediaries and those acting as importers; notes, in particular, that the EU e-commerce platforms that act as importers face compliance costs that increase their retail prices up to 40 %, which has an impact on final consumers; underlines that EU-based importers face stricter obligations and higher costs, while intermediary platforms allow non-EU sellers to ship directly to EU consumers without ensuring compliance;

    16. Recognises that e-commerce platforms are subject to various obligations under the DSA and the GPSR and may be held liable under the Product Liability Directive[12] (PLD) in specific circumstances; recalls, in this respect, that online platforms are liable if they do not respect their specific obligations as intermediaries; believes, however, that consumer redress must be ensured in all cases; underlines, in this respect, that where the manufacturer is established outside the EU and no importer, authorised representative, or fulfilment service provider can be identified, online marketplaces should provide adequate and proportionate remedies to consumers where they fail to comply with the DSA, particularly with Articles 30 and 31 or with Article 22 of the GPSR;

    17. Emphasises that online marketplaces are requested to trace their traders (‘know your business customer’) under the DSA, which should discourage traders from selling unsafe or counterfeit goods, and are obliged to comply with the ‘compliance by design’ rules to increase overall traceability; highlights the lack of accountability of online platforms in case of untraceable sellers or sellers based outside the jurisdiction of the EU; notes the considerable level of non-compliance with the ‘know your business customer’ principle and the rise in new selling practices via social media platforms, where this obligation is not effectively applied, allowing non-EU sellers to offer non-compliant goods to EU users directly; stresses, therefore, the need for online platforms to make best efforts to ensure full traceability of sellers and products, preventing listings from appearing without verified product compliance details;

    18. Highlights the fact that the information of a responsible economic operator in the EU under the GPSR, acting on behalf of a non-EU trader or platform, is often wrong or missing; notes that even when this information is available, the responsible person in the EU may not be accountable, particularly when the responsible person is an authorised representative; is concerned that market surveillance authorities report significant difficulties in contacting these non-EU traders and enforcing EU law, and that even when contact is established, enforcing penalties against them is often unfeasible;

    19. Considers that creating a database of the responsible persons in the EU to enable real-time cross-checking for verification, along with establishing an accreditation procedure for them, could enhance transparency and reinforce accountability throughout the e-commerce import supply chain;

    20. Supports research and enforcement actions by consumer organisations and the opening of investigations initiated by consumer authorities in the EU, as part of the CPC network, as well as under the DSA, against non-EU online platforms for potential violations of EU product safety and consumer laws; expresses concern over the slow progress of these investigations and calls for their swift conclusion; underlines the need for enforcement to be a deterrent that includes adequate sanctions to ensure compliance; underlines, in this respect, that particular attention is necessary at national and EU level to address recurrent non-compliance that may have been identified in previous controls of similar products, including via the application of interim measures; stresses that the enforcement and effectiveness of commitments received from online platforms should be closely monitored;

    21. Urges the Commission and CPC authorities to initiate a structured enforcement dialogue with consumer representatives, traders and other stakeholders to identify systemic infringements requiring stronger enforcement;

    22. Notes the complexity for EU authorities to enforce EU laws when the economic operators are established outside the EU; highlights the need for enhanced international cooperation agreements, particularly with major e-commerce exporters;

    Strong enforcement policies to combat non-compliant e-commerce products

    Urgent need for short-term measures

    23. Urges the Member States to increase funding and resources for market surveillance, customs, consumer protection and digital services authorities so that they can better address the challenges posed by unsafe and illicit products; asks the Commission to support stronger cooperation, information sharing and data exchange between competent authorities, including market surveillance and customs authorities, and stresses that cooperation across different sectors should be improved; urges the Member States to ensure effective coordination among different market surveillance authorities in their territories, and to strengthen the powers of the single liaison offices; highlights that the Member States and the EU have the responsibility to ensure that market surveillance and customs authorities are properly resourced, trained and equipped to have the capacity to fulfil their mission, including proper investigative powers;

    24. Calls on market surveillance authorities to invest more resources in joint or coordinated activities with other Member States or relevant authorities and, in particular, to increase the number and the frequency of coordinated enforcement actions such as sweeps, mystery-shopping exercises and peer-reviews; urges relevant authorities to actively participate in these activities and the Commission to make full use of its coordination powers;

    25. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to coordinate the control of customs and market surveillance authorities under priority control areas focused on products from non-EU countries that pose significant safety hazards and a risk of non-compliance; emphasises that this initiative should generate valuable risk profile data, which could be used in further enforcement activities and penalties to non-compliant actors; calls on the Commission to strengthen cooperation within the EU Product Compliance Network and to increase EU funding for customs cooperation under the customs programme and for market surveillance operations under the single market programme; stresses that the lack of adequate resources has hindered the effective deployment of tools, such as the widespread use of mystery shopping activities by market surveillance authorities or the use of trusted flaggers under the DSA; points out to the Commission that, in addition to existing testing facilities for toys and radio equipment, more testing facilities for e-commerce goods are urgently needed, such as for batteries, textiles, cosmetics, electrical appliances and other products; asks the Member States to deploy sufficient resources to guarantee an increased capacity of testing facilities and to increase investments in equipment for the detection of unsafe and illegal goods;

    26. Emphasises that for data and security reasons, Member States should restrict high-risk vendors from operating in their critical infrastructure and border security systems, including for the procurement of security screening and cargo scanning equipment used at airports and ports;

    27. Highlights the fact that, under the GPSR, online marketplaces are obliged to establish a single point of contact, register with the Safety Gate Portal and indicate the information concerning their single contact point on the portal; asks the Commission to effectively enforce this and other obligations of online marketplaces and to support the Member States’ market surveillance authorities in implementing the GPSR and the MSR; notes that the GPSR introduced direct data exchanges between enforcement authorities and e-commerce platforms; believes, however, that in order for the system to work effectively, a direct link with customs authorities should be provided;

    28. Notes that the current system is more reactive than preventive, as authorities intervene only after dangerous products have already been sold to consumers, rather than preventing their distribution; recalls that, under the GPSR, online marketplace providers are encouraged to check products against the Safety Gate Portal before listing them on their interfaces; underlines that random sampling testing can only be efficient if it is conducted regularly;

    29. Emphasises that the swift implementation of the Digital Product Passport (DPP) for several critical products sold online is essential to strengthen the enforcement of existing legislation; urges the Commission to present the necessary secondary legislation on the DPP as soon as possible, in particular for textiles, toys, cosmetics, electronics and other products with high non-compliance rates and associated risks; calls on the Commission to continuously assess the requirements, technical design and operation of the DPP under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation[13] (ESPR) as a priority; calls on the Commission to support businesses, in particular micro-enterprises and SMEs, in the implementation of the DPP;

    30. Proposes a mandatory DPP with early compliance verification for all products imported via e-commerce, including detailed quality and compliance data, to be integrated directly into the EU customs data hub, allowing authorities to pre-screen information on products before they are placed on the single market;

    31. Urges the Member States to make substantial efforts to increase customs controls and improve risk analysis, as the detection and removal of non-compliant goods can reduce the harm to EU consumers and protect the economic interests of EU businesses; underlines that the introduction in the customs risk analysis of a presumption of non-compliance for goods identical to those already found non-compliant could facilitate controls by customs authorities and improve cost efficiency; stresses the importance of reinforcing customs centres so they are better equipped to handle the large volume of small parcels that are difficult to control using traditional methods, including advanced screening technologies to identify suspicious packages at entry points; asks for more rigorous compliance checks, as well as random checks by the authorities on high-tonnage transport; urges the Member States, furthermore, to significantly increase the level of digitalisation of import procedures in customs authorities in order to implement existing legislation and accelerate customs procedures, especially in view of the high numbers of parcels;

    32. Underlines that businesses, particularly SMEs, urgently require clear guidelines from the Commission for the effective implementation of the GPSR, including clarification on its interplay with overlapping legislation, such as the DSA, the MSR, the PLD, and sector-specific laws on toys, cosmetics and detergents; calls on the Commission to issue these guidelines before the end of the first half of 2025 to facilitate businesses’ compliance; considers that the evaluation report on the interaction of the DSA with other legal acts, which is due on 17 November 2025, should take into account different legislation, in particular on product compliance, the obligations of online marketplaces, enforcement rules and possible future improvements on simplification and implementation; calls on the Commission to assess all possible further actions, including the evaluation of sectoral legislation, which is necessary to ensure legal predictability and that no legal loopholes or enforcement gaps are left when it comes to direct imports from non-EU countries via online marketplaces;

    33. Calls on the relevant national authorities to make full use of the existing and recently adopted enforcement toolbox, especially in relation to provisions on e-commerce set out in the MSR, GPSR and DSA, such as takedown orders, prohibition, restriction on the making available of a product on the market or its removal, recalls and sanctions as measures to counter the rise of illegal and non-compliant imports from non-EU countries;

    34. Underlines that regulatory enforcement measures taken against non-compliant actors should not put disproportionate burdens on compliant actors or cause unintentional harm to the second-hand market;

    35. Stresses the need to ensure the protection of intellectual property rights in the light of the increase in non-European counterfeit goods on e-commerce platforms; notes that these practices harm the competitiveness of European companies and pose risks to innovation and the incentives for research and development; calls for stronger measures against the sale of counterfeit goods online; urges the Commission to issue clear guidelines on trusted flaggers and stresses that rights holders should be recognised as eligible trusted flaggers when they meet the criteria outlined in Article 22 of the DSA;

    36. Points out that the Member States should make better use of the available sets of penalties and sanctions against economic operators, as well as other available tools including interim measures, in order to create a deterrent effect to dissuade economic operators from infringing upon the applicable legislation;

    37. Urges the Commission to take effective measures, including legislative measures where legal loopholes are clearly identified, without delay to ensure legal certainty and a level playing field for European companies, placing particular emphasis on SMEs;

    The need for regulatory reforms

    38. Calls for the removal of barriers to enforcing consumer rights, such as legal warranty claims and the right to return items; calls on the Commission to review the CPC Regulation without delay as this will be fundamental for a more effective cross-border enforcement of EU consumer law and the fight against unsafe products; asks the Commission, in this context, to provide for clear measures to further strengthen enforcement powers over non-EU traders and platforms and ensure better coordination of EU and national actions and the exchange of information among authorities, as well as with authorities in non-EU countries; highlights that the structure of the European Competition Network could be used as an example to follow for enforcement and information exchange in the case of suspected violations impacting multiple Member States, especially to combat non-compliant products effectively; stresses the importance of granting the Commission direct powers to investigate and sanction certain high impact breaches of consumer law, thus ensuring more effective, simultaneous and uniform enforcement and sanctions under EU consumer law;

    39. Notes that the CPC Regulation already empowers enforcement authorities to act against non-compliant traders and even gives the possibility for Member States to impose penalties and interim measures such as restricting access to the website; acknowledges, however, that the limitation is that this action must be taken on a country-by-country basis rather than at EU level, with each country applying its own penalties, making the consequences of violations uneven;

    40. Notes that enforcement in the Member States is fragmented, which leads to inefficiencies; calls for better coordination of enforcement and compliance oversight effective information exchange between Member States and for a more uniform application of the EU acquis; calls on the Commission to assess the MSR, particularly the need for an EU Market Surveillance Authority that would ensure consistency and provide operational support to the activities conducted by the relevant national market surveillance authorities and foster cooperation with the new EU Customs Authority (EUCA), as well as the implementation of Article 4 of the MSR, defining the responsible economic operators in the EU for product compliance; stresses that, to date, the designated responsible economic operator often lacks the capacity to provide redress or compensation to consumers, in particular when being an authorised representative;

    41. Supports the Commission’s ambition to swiftly advance the upcoming interinstitutional negotiations with Parliament and the Council on the UCC reform and the two proposals for Council acts on removing the exemption threshold on customs duties for goods valued under EUR 150; urges, therefore, the Member States to accelerate the negotiation procedure in the Council, recognising the urgency of the customs reform for EU competitiveness and the protection of EU consumers; underlines, however, that removing the threshold is a necessary step but not a stand-alone solution, as customs authorities will still only be able to inspect a limited percentage of parcels; stresses that immediate removal of the customs duty exemption is necessary for high-risk imports from product and consumer safety perspectives; emphasises the need for the customs reform to ensure coherence across regulatory frameworks, particularly avoiding duplication or conflicts with the DSA, and highlights the essential role customs authorities play in detecting non-compliant and unsafe products;

    42. Stresses that the UCC reform will provide the necessary tools for customs authorities to better supervise and control the goods entering the EU, help to strengthen the single market and customs union, improve the detection of unsafe and illicit products, and contribute to a level playing field among economic operators; welcomes, in this respect, the proposal under the UCC Regulation to establish the cooperation mechanism with market surveillance authorities that will improve the effectiveness of product controls; emphasises the importance of enhancing customs infrastructure and staffing to manage e-commerce effectively; highlights the need for simplified compliance processes tailored specifically to SMEs; calls on the Member States to introduce automated, forward-looking customs clearing systems, for instance by obliging platforms to enrol and clear customs automatically at the point of sales;

    43. Is concerned that some non-EU traders are circumventing EU customs checks by clearing goods by customs at the point of origin; stresses that those non-EU trading companies often prefer to pay penalties rather than open packages upon arrival at EU customs, aiming to unload shipments and depart immediately; is deeply concerned that customs authorities find that many packages are either undeclared or incorrectly declared and are sometimes fraudulently labelled; highlights that the UCC reform should also address these aspects;

    44. Takes note of the concern expressed by the ECC network regarding the drop-shipping business model, which raises challenges in consumer protection, product safety and regulatory compliance; regrets that consumers often face misleading practices, difficulties in returning products, and unexpected import duties, while a significant share of drop-shipped products fail to comply with EU safety standards; stresses that drop-shipping complicates enforcement due to untraceable businesses and cross-border complexities, while VAT and data protection compliance remain key concerns; notes that when combined with influencer marketing, drop-shipping may exacerbate transparency issues, reputational risks and inconsistent outcomes; calls on the Commission to assess how to address drop-shipping-related issues;

    45. Highlights the fact that the concept of a ‘deemed importer’ aims to ensure a level playing field for both EU and non-EU online platforms; notes that, in the context of an online sale from outside the EU, this measure would relieve customers of non-EU online platforms from being considered importers, as they are under the current UCC, while a non-EU platform or trader would instead be considered the ‘deemed importer’; believes that ‘deemed importer’ responsibilities should be clearly defined and consistent with the provisions of the DSA; emphasises that platforms being responsible for ensuring that VAT and customs duties are collected at the point of sale, rather than upon entry into the EU, will reduce fraud and tax evasion;

    46. Expresses concern about the optional nature of the Import One-Stop Shop (IOSS) scheme for all online operators, which deviates from the original objectives of the VAT in the digital age (ViDA) initiative; underlines the necessity of additional actions to strengthen the system’s robustness and curb potential misuse; urges the Commission to engage closely with stakeholders to establish safeguards for the IOSS against fraudulent practices; recommends that such safeguards be both comprehensive and streamlined to effectively deter fraud while avoiding excessive administrative burdens; stresses the necessity of extending the IOSS applicability to goods beyond the customs duty exemption threshold of EUR 150 to prevent undervaluation and ensure fair competition;

    47. Calls for the establishment of a new EUCA in 2026 to provide expert support to the Member States’ customs authorities; underlines that the EUCA should in its coordination role also map testing and control capabilities of customs and market surveillance authorities in and across the Member States and be mandated to execute unannounced inspections to detect possible unsafe or non-compliant products and issue sanctions in case of non-compliance; notes that the new EU customs data hub will allow for enhanced cooperation between the EUCA and customs and other authorities through data exchange and the interoperability of national IT systems, and thus facilitate coordinated controls and the detection of non-compliant products; considers that it is essential to fully integrate the functionalities of the Customs Single Window into the EU customs data hub; notes in the context of the proposed EUCA, the importance of regularly consulting representatives of various stakeholders to provide early warning to the EUCA;

    48. Stresses that, given the urgency, the entry into force of different obligations planned in the UCC revision should be accelerated, such as the establishment of the EU customs data hub; calls on the Commission to immediately start the preparatory work necessary for the establishment of the EU customs data hub, so as to speed up the preparation of its e-commerce functions in 2026;

    49. Urges the Commission to carry out an impact assessment regarding the idea of e-commerce items being shipped to the EU in bulk and, in turn, the establishment of warehouses in the EU by non-EU traders for such goods before they are put into parcels for delivery to customers; recognises that such shipments of e-commerce items in bulk and their storage in warehouses in the EU might increase the oversight of customs and market surveillance authorities and improve their controls and detection of non-compliant goods compared to single parcel shipments; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider all possible options to incentivise such practices, including a simplified status for trust and check traders and cost-benefit assessments for incentive schemes; further notes that bulk shipping may not be feasible for all non-EU traders, particularly those operating consumer-to-consumer (C2C) or second-hand models; emphasises that this approach should strike a balance between the compliance advantages and the practical requirements of e-commerce operators, ensuring that it avoids creating logistical bottlenecks or placing an undue burden on varying business models;

    50. Acknowledges that the Commission has released a non-paper outlining the introduction of a non-discriminatory handling fee on e-commerce items, to be charged by customs authorities for goods sold in distance sales with the aim of covering the increased supervisory costs of custom authorities, namely the checking of the data, carrying out risk analysis, performing documentary and physical controls and specifically the financing of the EUCA and the data hub; insists that Member States should avoid unilateral fees to avoid a fragmentation of the customs union; underlines that the proposal suggests a flat EUR 2 rate per item delivered directly to the customer or a smaller 50 cent fee for Trust and Check Traders operating a business model of a customs warehouse for distance sales within the EU; calls on the Commission to conduct a proper evaluation of whether the proposed amount complies with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and whether it is sufficient and proportionate to reach the objectives; insists that this handling fee not be incurred by the consumer;

    51. Notes the enormous waste management and product destruction cost arising from the huge amount of non-compliant and unsafe products imported via non-EU country e-commerce; underlines that a large share of these products is non-recyclable, environmentally harmful or non-compliant with applicable chemicals legislation, further driving up environmental costs for public authorities; calls therefore on the Commission to evaluate the necessary measures to mitigate the environmental impact of non-EU countries’ e-commerce activities including the feasibility of a waste management fee on all products sold via non-EU countries’ online marketplaces to ensure that environmental costs are not supported by EU taxpayers;

    52. Stresses that inconsistent penalties and different enforcement strategies for non-compliance in different Member States lead to ‘border shopping’ or ‘customs shopping’; supports the minimum harmonisation of infringements and non-criminal sanctions for non-compliance across the Member States and through the EUCA as this would avoid creating weak entry points in the EU customs territory; stresses that this should entail a common framework for minimum harmonisation to close existing loopholes and thus tackle e-commerce challenges; underlines that Member States can impose additional sanctions tailored to national contexts;

    53. Notes that the Commission is scrutinising certain non-EU online marketplaces for employing manipulative practices, including dark patterns, addictive design features, deceptive influencer marketing, and the dissemination of fake or misleading online reviews; recognises that, according to the Digital Fairness Fitness Check report, unfair commercial practices cost consumers nearly EUR 8 billion annually, and that the use of unfair techniques to pressure consumers, especially vulnerable ones and children, into impulse purchases leads to overconsumption and overspending; calls on the Commission to address these issues in the upcoming Digital Fairness Act, unless they are already covered by existing legislation, with a view to effectively tackling unfair practices and closing existing legal loopholes, while staying consistent with existing legal frameworks and avoiding unnecessary regulatory burdens;

    54. Emphasises the need to ensure that any new initiatives proposed by the Commission in the area of customs enforcement or compliance do not result in additional administrative burdens for European businesses, particularly SMEs;

    55. Stresses the importance of the role of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in the field of cross-border investigations of customs offences, which notably include fraud, for example the illicit undervaluing of the price of products in order to avoid paying the import taxes; emphasises that the large-scale circumvention of customs duties, including fraudulent e-commerce declarations and undervaluation, as well as the avoidance of controls and ‘forum shopping,’ must be effectively combated through criminal law investigations conducted by the EPPO, with the support of customs authorities; stresses that the EPPO’s robust legal framework for cross-border investigations should be leveraged to dismantle the criminal networks behind such operations;

    Additional enforcement actions

    56. Calls on the Commission and the national competent authorities to strongly enforce the DSA with regard to the responsibility of online marketplaces, in particular their obligations in terms of recommender systems, interface design, right to information, the compliance by design rules to increase the overall traceability, and their ‘know your business customer’ obligation; highlights that compliance with these obligations should dissuade non-compliant traders from offering their products in the EU through marketplaces or shopping services of social media falling in this category, and calls on the Commission to provide practical support in tracing traders that do not abide by EU rules; stresses the need for a DSA-based network of trusted flaggers for illegal products and e-commerce to ensure that platforms fulfil their obligations effectively;

    57. Stresses that the enhancement of cooperation and coordination with national competent authorities is crucial; asks for more cooperation among all relevant authorities, such as Member State authorities, customs authorities, and consumer protection authorities, and for stronger coordination among all established expert groups; stresses that, under the DSA, the investigative actions against non-compliant online marketplaces need to yield results and lead to deterrent sanctions in order to prevent the offer of non-compliant products; emphasises the importance of these investigations in addressing systemic risks, compliance failures, illegal content dissemination, addictive design features, dark patterns and the use of influencers for manipulative advertising;

    58. Calls on enforcement authorities to strengthen monitoring and enforcement actions targeting new sales channels; recommends that competent authorities be equipped with adequate resources, technological tools, and cross-border cooperation mechanisms to effectively identify and take action against non-compliant traders operating via social media and other emerging platforms;

    59. Suggests that online marketplace sellers must provide a reshipping address and contact point within the EU to allow consumers to easily return non-compliant goods without undue costs and to allow authorities to inspect goods; believes that online marketplaces should be responsible for checking this and should be held accountable for enforcement;

    60. Calls for an urgent in-depth evaluation of the effectiveness of the provision of the ‘responsible person for products placed on the Union market’, particularly those of non-EU traders, building on the results of the evaluation report on Article 4 of the MSR; calls on the Commission to consider among its future actions the introduction of a mandatory requirement for non-EU traders to appoint a responsible person in the EU with increased legal and financial liability;

    61. Notes that postal and other delivery services are undergoing significant transformations due to the rapid growth of e-commerce; raises concerns that the Universal Postal Union’s terminal dues system in practice does not apply to e-commerce flows; notes that, as a result, Chinese e-commerce businesses, due to shipment volumes, enter into commercial agreements directly with the EU postal operators for exceptionally attractive delivery rates that are lower than those for goods manufactured within the EU, leading to deeper fragmentation of the single market for postal services; urges the Commission to evaluate the impact of e-commerce on postal services and the internal market, and to consider how postal services can contribute to strengthening the single market and benefiting consumers, and to the overall competitiveness of the EU;

    62. Welcomes the approval of the ViDA reforms, which represent a significant step towards modernising VAT collection in the e-commerce sector; emphasises the importance of the Single VAT ID for online marketplaces and for European manufacturers, enabling them to compete on a level playing field by simplifying VAT compliance across the Member States; highlights that this measure can also facilitate in-bulk importation and the warehousing of goods within the EU, reducing reliance on fragmented cross-border shipments and ensuring that value-added services, such as fulfilment and logistics, take place within the single market; stresses that these reforms will enhance tax compliance, reduce administrative burdens, and improve enforcement while supporting fair competition and strengthening EU supply chains; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the effective implementation of these measures to maximise their benefits for European businesses and consumers;

    63. Calls on the Commission to consider measures aimed at reducing the unnecessary regulatory and administrative compliance burden for EU manufacturers, in particular for SMEs, in order to level the playing field and enable them to better compete with global competitors operating under more efficient compliance standards;

    64. Calls on the Commission to enhance international cooperation with other like-minded countries to exchange best practices, identify common challenges and risks and develop joint actions on e-commerce;

    65. Welcomes, in this regard, the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce; notes that the agreement will benefit consumers and businesses by facilitating cross-border electronic transactions, reducing barriers to digital trade and promoting innovation in e-commerce; underlines, however, that the agreement is only a foundation and encourages the Commission to pursue ambitious trade agreements in negotiations with partners to ensure binding provisions on e-commerce;

    Increased use of IT tools

    66. Welcomes the fact that the Commission is preparing a project to streamline existing databases, including the Information and Communication System on Market Surveillance, the EU Safety Gate and the Customs Risk Management System, into a common interoperable system gathering all information on the safety of products, counterfeit product tracking and notifications of accidents and to ensure interoperability with the DPP and the future EU customs data hub; calls on the Commission to publish information regarding the implementation timeline and the resource requirements of this initiative;

    67. Supports the Commission’s aim to provide market surveillance authorities with the e-Surveillance WebCrawler tool to flag reappearing dangerous products; asks the Commission to make available another web crawler for detecting new listings as soon as possible, in order to flag non-compliant products before they reach consumers;

    68. Supports the responsible use of artificial intelligence, blockchain and the internet of things for scanning and analysing product listings on e-commerce platforms, automating customs and market surveillance inspections and risk identification and integrating product compliance databases for real-time checks between market surveillance and customs authorities, in line with EU and national laws; notes, however, that the high implementation costs of these technologies remain a barrier; underlines that the full uptake of these technologies will make handling more efficient, especially for low-value goods, and that the high volume of parcels containing many different items faces limited inspection capabilities;

    69. Demands that the Commission and the Member States exchange best practices and find incentives to provide the necessary funding and support for national authorities in order to increase the responsible use of technological solutions; suggests that artificial intelligence, blockchain and the internet of things could be used to scan and analyse product listings on e-commerce platforms, automate inspections and risk profiling, and integrate product compliance databases for real-time checks by several authorities;

    70. Underlines that Member States should reinforce customs checks in particular with low-value shipments by implementing risk-based assessment systems and digital tracking to prevent non-compliant products from bypassing customs controls; calls on the Member States to increase the level of automated processes, such as automated scans of labels when processing parcels at customs;

    71. Recognises that some online marketplaces also use a number of IT tools to detect and remove unsafe and illicit products that are found on their platforms; highlights, however, the fact that online marketplaces need to further invest in and increase their use of these IT tools to effectively avoid the offer and sale of unsafe and illicit products; calls on the Commission to further incentivise the use of IT tools by online marketplaces in this regard, while ensuring full compliance with Article 8 of the DSA, which provides that there is no general obligation to monitor the information that providers of intermediary services transmit or store;

    72. Suggests that, without prejudice to the principle enshrined in the DSA that providers of intermediary services online should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of general nature, online intermediaries engaged in the sale, promotion or distribution of products within the EU market should consider on their own the use of risk-based digital monitoring systems to identify and prevent the presence of illegal content (presentation, description or offering for sale of illegal or dangerous products); stresses the importance of implementing swift response mechanisms to ensure the permanent removal of specific illegal content as soon as providers of intermediary services online have actual knowledge of such illegal content being presented on their interfaces, as well as the necessity for hosting service providers to take all necessary measures to prevent the reappearance of the same or equivalent illegal content on their platform;

    Improvement of consumer awareness and information

    73. Emphasises that EU consumers and European SMEs engaged in importing activities often lack sufficient information on the possible dangers of potentially unsafe products and the harm they can cause; stresses that consumers are increasingly targeted by traders who, despite their legal obligations, often do not inform consumers that their products are made and shipped from outside of the EU; acknowledges that there is demand among EU consumers for cheaper products, which are purchased on non-EU online marketplaces due to their much lower production costs and uncompetitive conditions for EU businesses and online platforms; stresses that online marketplaces may use manipulative design techniques (dark patterns) to influence purchasing decisions; warns against the risks associated with compulsive purchasing behaviours, financial difficulties and the accumulation of unnecessary goods; calls on the Commission and the Member States to organise information and awareness-raising campaigns on the purchase of unsafe products online and their possible health, privacy, environmental and competitiveness consequences, with a special focus on vulnerable consumers and at peak consumption times;

    74. Recommends fostering second-hand consumption as a sustainable approach to addressing EU consumers’ need for affordable goods; stresses the importance of promoting and incentivising the reuse of second-hand products as an important driver for unlocking the potential of the circular economy;

    75. Asks the Commission and the Member States to strictly enforce the ecodesign requirements for textiles and other products under the ESPR, as well as the provisions of the Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition[14] in order to make sure that consumers are better informed about sustainability aspects, such as environmental impacts, energy use, reparability and durability of products purchased on online marketplaces;

    76. Considers that consumer authorities, organisations, industry associations and chambers of commerce should be encouraged to conduct large, coordinated awareness-raising campaigns on consumer rights, potential risks, including the possibilities for collective redress, and redress mechanisms when purchasing online, in particular on non-EU online platforms; stresses the need to also raise awareness about the environmental, health and social impacts of unsustainable business practices and to alert consumers about the role of new advertising techniques, such as influencers and digital opinion leaders, in shaping perceptions of product safety and reliability; calls on the Commission to take a coordinating role as mentioned in the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 on e-commerce and to explore possibilities to finance cross-border information campaigns developed in cooperation with researchers, civil society and other relevant stakeholders;

    Trade and development considerations

    77. Calls on the Commission to implement its level of ambition in agreements with international partners at the multilateral level, as unsafe products constitute not only a European, but also a global challenge; reiterates that, as set out in Parliament’s position on the UCC revision, the EUCA should establish working arrangements with the authorities of non-EU countries and international organisations; stresses that such arrangements should enable the EUCA to exchange information, including best practices, with non-EU authorities and international organisations, and to carry out joint activities; supports continued engagement in the UN Trade and Development working group on consumer product safety, which plays a crucial role in developing best practices for cross-border enforcement;

    78. Calls on the Commission to step up cooperation with international partners, within forums such as the WTO, the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the G7, to counterbalance China’s influence and ensure reciprocity and rules-based trade; calls on the Commission to explicitly incorporate robust and enforceable obligations addressing forced labour when reviewing and renegotiating current trade and investment agreements; underscores the need for stronger EU-China cooperation mechanisms and transparent certification requirements to ensure compliance;

    79. Highlights the need to consider service and product safety and regulatory compliance provisions when negotiating future EU trade agreements; stresses the importance of specific regulatory dialogues and cooperation through administrative arrangements, improved customs enforcement cooperation, the traceability of shipments to the highest standards and enhanced data-sharing arrangements between customs authorities to effectively tackle non-compliant imports;

    80. Urges the Commission to be proactive and swiftly deploy targeted trade defence instruments, including anti-subsidy investigations, to address the adverse impacts on European businesses; emphasises that such actions must be coordinated closely with key international partners, to ensure effective global enforcement and reciprocal market fairness;

    81. Encourages the Commission to enhance diplomatic efforts and cooperation within international forums, particularly the WTO, the WCO and the G7, to counterbalance China’s strategic expansion into digital governance frameworks, including its Digital Silk Road initiative; stresses the need for open, more transparent and responsible digital trade rules in international standard-setting bodies to prevent internet fragmentation and mitigate the risks posed by restrictive digital governance models;

    82. Welcomes the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce as a vital step towards global digital trade rules; stresses, however, its current limitations, especially regarding customs transparency; urges the Commission to advocate stronger binding provisions to ensure its effective implementation and integration into the WTO legal framework, and to ensure enhanced global compliance standards;

    83. Emphasises the need for international capacity-building initiatives to support the sustainable and compliant participation of developing countries in digital trade; calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with international organisations, especially the WTO, to enhance regulatory frameworks and technical assistance for e-commerce in developing countries;

    °

    ° °

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

    MIL OSI Europe News