Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Air2030: Radar sensors of the Air Force: Fourth system in operation after modernisation

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport

    The radar sensors of the air surveillance and central dispatching system of the Swiss Air Force have been modernised. On 20 March 2025, armasuisse handed over the fourth and last completely rebuilt system of the Armed Forces for operational deployment. The conversion, which is being carried out as part of the “Radar” project, took place step by step at each location. The modernisation of the radar sensors was approved in the 2016 armament programme.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Latest news – 24-27 March: Committees and Political Groups

    Source: European Parliament

    In the week of 24 of March, Members’ work is split between meetings in Parliamentary Committees and political groups.

    DEVE Committee members will participate in the Nutrition for Growth Summit in Paris on 27 and 28 March to support the Team Europe efforts towards ending malnutrition

    In addition, a Public Hearing on “The actors in the agricultural supply chain and their role in price formation: problems and perspectives will take place.

    And the Special Committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union will host a conference on affordable housing, addressing the housing crisis in the European Union.

    Follow the links below to discover this week’s highlights.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland – A10-0036/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland

    (10005/2024 – C10‑0103/2024 – 2024/0052(NLE))

    (Consent)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the draft Council decision (10005/2024),

     having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 (10057/2024),

     having regard to the draft Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 (10146/2024),

     having regard to the draft Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway (10149/2024),

      having regard to the draft Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland (10148/2024),

     having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 217 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10-0103/2024),

     having regard to Rule 107(1) and (4), and Rule 117(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A10-0036/2025),

    1. Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreements and protocols;

    2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    The European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement allows Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway to participate fully in the single market. As provided for in the Agreement, and since its entry into force in 1994, these three countries have therefore financially contributed to the alleviation of economic and social disparities in the EEA. In addition, Norway has contributed through a separate financial mechanism.

    As the most recent financial mechanisms expired in 2021, the Commission opened negotiations in 2022 with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway on an agreement on their future financial contributions. In parallel, a review of the Protocols to the Agreements between the European Economic Community (EEC) and Iceland and Norway related to imports into the European Union (EU) of certain fish and fishery products, was opened as provided for in the revision clauses of the Free Trade Agreements with these countries. 

    The negotiations were concluded at negotiators’ level, with the initiating in November 2023 of:

     an Agreement between the EU, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028;

     an Agreement between Norway and the EU on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028;

     an Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the EEC and Norway; and

     an Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the EEC and Iceland.

    The EEA Financial Mechanism Agreement and the Norway Agreement will together provide a financial contribution to economic and social cohesion in the EEA of EUR 3.268 billion for the period May 2021 – April 2028. The Protocols with Iceland and Norway will provide for new concessions for the period May 2021 – April 2028. Flexibility will be provided concerning the carry-over of unexhausted quotas at the end of the period. Norway will also renew the fish transit arrangement for EU vessels landing catches in its territory.

    The rapporteur raises its concerns regarding the limits and imbalances of the fisheries-related Protocol between the EEC and Norway, but nonetheless gives the consent of the conclusion of the four arrangements as one package.

    The rapporteur calls on the Commission to take the concerns raised seriously and address the imbalances in the EU fishing sector adequately and swiftly.

    On 25 June 2024, the Council adopted the Decision on the signing, on behalf of the EU, and on the provisional application of the Agreements and Protocols.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    Ministry of Regional Development and European Union Funds of Republic of Croatia

    Mission of Norway to the European Union

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021 – April 2028, the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland

    References

    10005/2024 – C10-0103/2024 – 2024/0052(NLE)

    Date of consultation or request for consent

    18.9.2024

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Committees asked for opinions

     Date announced in plenary

    PECH

    7.10.2024

     

     

     

    Not delivering opinions

     Date of decision

    PECH

    19.2.2025

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Željana Zovko

    30.9.2024

     

     

     

    Discussed in committee

    30.1.2025

    20.2.2025

     

     

    Date adopted

    20.3.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    33

    7

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Christophe Bay, Brando Benifei, Anna Bryłka, Udo Bullmann, Benoit Cassart, Markéta Gregorová, Bart Groothuis, Céline Imart, Karin Karlsbro, Bernd Lange, Ilia Lazarov, Thierry Mariani, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Ştefan Muşoiu, Daniele Polato, Majdouline Sbai, Lukas Sieper, Dominik Tarczyński, Francesco Torselli, Kathleen Van Brempt, Jörgen Warborn, Iuliu Winkler, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Mika Aaltola, Nicolas Bay, Markus Buchheit, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Danilo Della Valle, Borja Giménez Larraz, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Marina Mesure, Martin Schirdewan, Kris Van Dijck

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Hildegard Bentele, Mélanie Disdier, Niels Geuking, Chloé Ridel, Romana Tomc, Matthieu Valet

    Date tabled

    21.3.2025

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America – A10-0034/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council  amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America

    (COM(2025)0027 – C10‑0007/2025 – 2025/0012(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0027),

     having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10‑0007/2025),

     having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A10-0034/2025),

    1. Adopts its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal;

    2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

    3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    Despite the title, this legislative proposal does not relate to the current trade tension between the US administration and the EU. The objective of the proposal is simply to introduce a limited, targeted and technical amendment to Regulation (EU) 2018/196 by including a de minimis threshold for the imposition of retaliation against the United Stated for a WTO case the US lost in 2003.

     

    The case relates to the United States’ Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (‘CDSOA’, or the Byrd Amendment). The CDSOA mandates the yearly distribution of the anti-dumping and countervailing duties collected during the previous fiscal year to US companies. The CDSOA was found incompatible with the United States’ WTO obligations in January 2003.

     

    Given that the United States failed to bring itself into compliance with its obligations under the WTO agreements, the Union was authorised to impose an additional import duty on a list of US products covering on a yearly basis a total value of trade not exceeding the amount of 72 % of the CDSOA disbursement from duties collected on imports from the Union. The Byrd Amendment was repealed in 2006, but the US created a transitional period whereby disbursements would continue as long as they concerned duties collected before 1 October 2007.

     

    In 2024 the amount of the EU authorised retaliation was negligible (USD 34,98) but the Commission was still required to adopt a delegated regulation to set the rate of duty to 0%. Retrieving USD 34,98 would have had no trade impact and would have imposed a disproportionate administrative cost to the Union. INTA did not oppose the proposed Delegated Act.

     

    It is expected that in the future the authorised level of retaliation will continue to remain low and will go towards exhaustion. For that reason, the Commission suggests setting a threshold at USD 30 000 of disbursements made by US authorities in relation to Union imports in one fiscal year (which would correspond to an authorised level of retaliation of USD 21 600) under which no EU duties would apply. In the unlikely event that sums disbursed by the US exceeded the USD 30 000 sum, the EU would be entitled to apply retaliation. 

     

    The legal basis for this Regulation Amendment is Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This limited amendment to the basic act should be adopted by the end of April, so as to avoid initiating the yearly Delegated Act procedure.

     

    Given the limited, targeted and technical nature of the amendment in question, the Chair, as Standing Rapporteur for trade relations with the US, suggested that the proposal be adopted via the Simplified Procedure under Rule 52 (1) of the Rules of Procedure (approval without amendments).

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America

    References

    COM(2025)0027 – C10-0007/2025 – 2025/0012(COD)

    Date submitted to Parliament

    3.2.2025

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    INTA

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Bernd Lange

    19.2.2025

     

     

     

    Simplified procedure – date of decision

    19.2.2025

    Discussed in committee

    19.3.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    19.3.2025

     

     

     

    Date tabled

    21.3.2025

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 as regards the revision of the suspension mechanism – A10-0035/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 as regards the revision of the suspension mechanism

    (COM(2023)0642 – C9‑0392/2023 – 2023/0371(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0642),

     having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2), point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0392/2023),

     having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A10-0035/2025),

    1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

    2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

    3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

     

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (1a) Visa-free travel brings significant benefits to the Union and third countries alike. Economic, social and cultural relations with third countries create prosperity and establish the Union as an open and free bloc. The Union’s common visa policy, in that regard, is a cornerstone of its engagement with third countries. At the same time, the evolving geopolitical context has brought new challenges linked to visa-free travel. Abuse of, and security risks resulting from, visa-free travel to the Union require a swift and adequate response. It is imperative that the Union be equipped to deal with those challenges accordingly.

    Amendment  2

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (2) The mechanism for the temporary suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of a third country listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 (‘the suspension mechanism’) should be strengthened for the Union to have at its disposal a more efficient safeguard aimed at preventing a wider range of irregular migration, public policy and security risks arising from the third countries listed in that Annex II, as well as the abuse of the visa exemption through the operation of investor citizenship schemes by those third countries.

    (2) In order to address the new challenges linked to visa-free travel, the mechanism for the temporary suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of a third country listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 (‘the suspension mechanism’) should be strengthened for the Union to have at its disposal a more efficient safeguard aimed at preventing a wider range of risks arising from the third countries listed in that Annex II, as well as the abuse of the visa exemption through the operation of investor citizenship schemes by those third countries.

    Amendment  3

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (3) In particular, the use of the suspension mechanism should be facilitated by broadening the possible grounds for suspension, adapting the relevant thresholds and procedures, and strengthening the Commission’s monitoring and reporting obligations.

    (3) In particular, the use of the suspension mechanism should be facilitated by broadening the possible grounds for suspension, making the relevant procedures more precise and strengthening the Commission’s monitoring and reporting obligations. Furthermore, the Commission should assess the overall impact of visa suspensions, including on reciprocity.

    Amendment  4

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (4) The Union has concluded a number of agreements on the short-stay visa waiver with countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 which may include different grounds for suspension or different procedures than the ones set out in the suspension mechanism, and may conclude further of those agreements in the future. As the Union respects international agreements and, thus, is bound by these agreements, the relevant different provisions set out in those agreements should be applied instead of the relevant provisions of the suspension mechanism.

    (4) The Union has concluded a number of agreements on the short-stay visa waiver with countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 which may include different grounds for suspension or different procedures than the ones set out in the suspension mechanism. It should be possible for the Union to suspend the visa-free regime established by those agreements by means of a generally applicable legal act of the Union. For that reason, the relevant grounds for suspension set out in those agreements should be included in the suspension mechanism. However, the use of the grounds for suspension set out in a short-stay visa waiver agreement should be limited to the scope of application of that agreement.

    Amendment  5

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (5) In its conclusions of 22 October 2021, the European Council invited the Commission to propose any necessary changes to the Union’s legal framework and concrete measures to ensure an immediate and appropriate response to hybrid threats in line with Union law and international obligations. Therefore, it should be possible to trigger the suspension mechanism in case of risks or threats to the public policy or internal security of the Member States arising from hybrid threats such as situations of state-sponsored instrumentalisation of migrants aimed at destabilising or undermining society and key institutions.

    (5) Due to a need to ensure an immediate and appropriate response to hybrid threats in line with Union law and international obligations, it should be possible to trigger the suspension mechanism in case of risks or threats to the public policy or internal security of the Member States arising from hybrid threats such as situations of state-sponsored instrumentalisation of migrants, as referred to in Regulation (EU) 2024/1359, which aim to destabilise or undermine society and key institutions.

    Amendment  6

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (6) Investor citizenship schemes operated by third countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 allow visa-free travel to the Union to third-country nationals that would otherwise be visa required. Under an investor citizenship scheme, citizenship is granted in return for pre-determined payments or investments without any genuine link to the third country concerned. While the Union respects the right of sovereign countries to decide on their own naturalisation procedures, visa-free third countries should be deterred from using visa-free access to the Union as a tool for leveraging individual investment in return for their citizenship. To prevent visa-free access to the Union being used for this purpose, it should be possible to suspend the visa exemption for a third country which chooses to operate such investor citizenship schemes, whereby citizenship is granted without any genuine link to the third country concerned.

    (6) Investor citizenship schemes operated by third countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 allow visa-free travel to the Union to third-country nationals that would otherwise be visa required. Under an investor citizenship scheme, citizenship is granted in return for pre-determined payments or investments without any genuine link to the third country concerned. While the Union respects the right of sovereign countries to decide on their own naturalisation procedures, visa-free third countries should be deterred from using visa-free access to the Union as a tool for leveraging individual investment in return for their citizenship. In addition, a lack of comprehensive security checks, vetting procedures and due diligence by such third countries with regard to investor citizenship schemes pose several serious security risks for Union citizens, such as those stemming from money laundering and corruption. To prevent visa-free access to the Union being used for this purpose, it should be possible to suspend the visa exemption for a third country which chooses to operate such investor citizenship schemes, whereby citizenship is granted without any genuine link to the third country concerned.

    Amendment  7

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 7

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (7) Where the visa policy of a third country listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 is not aligned with the visa policy of the Union as regards the list of third countries whose nationals are required to be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States, this could result in irregular migration to the Union, in particular where the concerned third country is in close geographic proximity to the Union. Therefore, it should be possible to trigger the suspension mechanism where, following an assessment, the Commission concludes that there is a risk of a substantial increase in the number of third-country nationals, other than nationals of that third country, who arrive legally in the territory of that third country and then irregularly enter the territory of the Member States.

    (7) Where the visa policy of a third country listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 is not aligned with the visa policy of the Union as regards the list of third countries whose nationals are required to be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States, this could result in irregular migration to the Union, in particular where the concerned third country is in close geographic proximity to the Union. Therefore, it should be possible to trigger the suspension mechanism where, following an assessment, the Commission concludes that there is a substantial increase in the number of third-country nationals, other than nationals of that third country, who arrive legally in the territory of that third country and then irregularly enter the territory of the Member States.

    Amendment  8

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 7 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (7a) Refusing or failing to process readmission applications could include cases of a third country failing to assist, in a timely manner, in identifying third country nationals for whom a Member State has submitted readmission applications to that third country or otherwise creating persisting practical obstacles regarding the enforcement of readmission decisions.

    Amendment  9

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 8

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (8) The thresholds to trigger the suspension mechanism in case of a substantial increase in the number of nationals of a third country refused entry or found to be staying in the Member State’s territory without a right to do so, or in the number of asylum applications from the nationals of that third country for which the recognition rate is low, or in the number of serious criminal offences linked to the nationals of that third country, should be subject to a case-by-case assessment by the Commission. In particular, the Commission should be able to assess whether there are specific circumstances, in the cases notified by Member States or under its own analysis, which would justify the application of lower or higher thresholds than those indicated in relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2018/1806. The Commission’s assessment should take into account, for example, the number of unauthorised crossings of the external borders of the Member States, unfounded asylum applications or criminal offences in proportion to the number and size of Member States affected and the impact of those numbers on the overall migratory situation, functioning of the asylum systems or internal security of the Member States affected, as well as actions taken by the third country concerned to remedy the situation.

    (8) The thresholds to trigger the suspension mechanism in case of a substantial increase in the number of nationals of a third country refused entry or found to be staying in the Member State’s territory without a right to do so, or in the number of asylum applications from the nationals of that third country for which the recognition rate is low, should be clearly set out in order to avoid diverging interpretations and the risk of inconsistent practices. In particular, the Commission should assess whether there are specific circumstances, in the cases notified by Member States or under its own analysis, which would justify the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2018/1806. Additionally, taking into account the impact that a suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement might have on relations with the third country concerned and on the rights of its nationals, the Commission should thoroughly assess the necessity, proportionality and consequences of such a suspension before adopting the relevant act.

    Amendment  10

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 8 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (8a) For the purpose of determining whether a recognition rate of asylum application is low, it is important that the Commission carry out a case-by-case assessment, taking into account the latest available yearly Union-wide average Eurostat data, the way in which relevant Union law on asylum is being implemented, and the specific circumstances of the third country concerned.

    Amendment  11

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 8 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (8b) It should be possible to trigger the suspension mechanism in the event of serious breaches by a third country of the principles set out in the Charter of the United Nations or in the event of grave violations of the obligations deriving from international human rights law or international humanitarian law, violations of bilateral agreements between the Union and that third country, non-compliance or non-alignment with relevant Union sanctions, or hostile acts towards the Union or Member States which aim to destabilise or undermine society and key institutions for the public policy and internal security of the Member states and the Union. Such hostile acts could result from foreign interference in political processes, economic coercion, cyber operations, economic espionage or the sabotage of critical infrastructure.

    Amendment  12

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 8 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (8c) Where the Commission considers suspending an exemption from the visa requirement on its own accord or following a notification by a Member State, the Commission should take into account, in its evaluation, the impact of the proposed suspension on the principles of visa reciprocity and non-discrimination and whether the proposed suspension represents an appropriate measure to remedy the situation. Special attention should be given to civil society, in particular where the human rights situation in the third country concerned has deteriorated.

    Amendment  13

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (9) For the purpose of notifying to the Commission the circumstances that may amount to a ground for suspension, Member States should be able to take into account reference periods longer than two months in order to identify not only sudden changes in the relevant situation, but also longer-term trends that may justify the use of the visa suspension mechanism.

    (9) For the purpose of notifying to the Commission the circumstances that may amount to a ground for suspension, Member States should take into account reference periods between two and twelve months in order to identify sudden changes in the relevant situation that may justify the use of the visa suspension mechanism. The suspension mechanism should only be triggered where the reasons for relying on the relevant ground are sufficient and clear. The Commission should fully and immediately inform the European Parliament and the Council of notifications it receives and decisions it takes as a result.

    Amendment  14

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (10) Whenever it considers it necessary, or upon request by the European Parliament or by the Council, the Commission should report on the outcome of its systematic monitoring of the visa-free regimes with all the third countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806. The report should focus on those third countries which, according to the Commission’s analysis, present specific problems that, if not addressed, may lead to trigger the suspension mechanism. In particular, the Commission should consider reporting on countries which have been newly listed in Annex II without undergoing a visa liberalisation dialogue, where it considers it necessary and in particular in the first years following the entry into force of the visa exemption for those countries.

    (10) Whenever it considers it necessary, or upon request by the European Parliament or by the Council, the Commission should report on the outcome of its systematic monitoring of the visa-free regimes with all the third countries listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806. The report should focus on those third countries which, according to the Commission’s analysis, present specific problems that, if not addressed, may lead to trigger the suspension mechanism. In particular, the Commission should report on countries which have been newly listed in Annex II without undergoing a visa liberalisation dialogue, where it considers it necessary and in particular in the first years following the entry into force of the visa exemption for those countries.

    Amendment  15

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (10a) In light of the far-reaching consequences that the temporary suspension of an exemption from the visa requirement might have on the nationals of the third country concerned, the Commission should favour a targeted approach, applying the suspension first and foremost to selected individuals holding positions of responsibility, such as members of that third country’s official delegations, members of local, regional and national governments, members of parliaments or high-ranking public or military officials, while making every effort to minimise the adverse consequences on the general population of that third country. The Commission should continuously monitor whether the triggering of the suspension mechanism has achieved the intended result and regularly report thereon to the European Parliament and to the Council.

    Amendment  16

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 11

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (11) Where a decision to temporarily suspend the visa exemption for a third country has been taken, there should be an adequate timeframe for the enhanced dialogue between the Commission and the concerned third country aimed at remedying the circumstances that led to the suspension. For this purpose, the duration of the temporary suspension decided by a Commission implementing act should be 12 months in a first phase, with a possibility to extend it by a further 24 months with a delegated act in a second phase. Where no solution is found before the end of the period of validity of the delegated act and the Commission presents a legislative proposal to transfer the concerned third country from Annex II to Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2018/1806, the Commission should adopt a delegated act extending the temporary suspension until the entry into force of the adopted proposal.

    (11) Where a decision to temporarily suspend the visa exemption for a third country has been taken, there should be an adequate timeframe for the enhanced dialogue between the Commission and the concerned third country aimed at remedying the circumstances that led to the suspension. For this purpose, the duration of the temporary suspension decided by a Commission implementing act should be 12 months in a first phase, with a possibility to extend it by a further 24 months with a delegated act in a second phase. Where no solution is found before the end of the period of validity of the delegated act and the Commission presents a legislative proposal to transfer the concerned third country from Annex II to Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2018/1806, the Commission should adopt a delegated act extending the temporary suspension for a further six months or until the entry into force of the adopted proposal, whichever comes first.

    Amendment  17

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (12) The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts where, in duly justified cases related to the triggering of the suspension mechanism, imperative grounds of urgency require expedited action, in particular to prevent any abuse of visa-free travel causing a mass influx of third-country nationals arriving irregularly in the territory of the Member States or a serious damage to the public policy or internal security of Member States.

    (12) The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts where, in duly justified cases related to the triggering of the suspension mechanism, a serious threat to public policy or internal security of a Member State requires immediate action, in particular to prevent any abuse of visa-free travel causing a mass influx of third-country nationals arriving irregularly in the territory of the Member States or a serious damage to the public policy or internal security of Member States.

    Amendment  18

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 13

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (13) The temporary suspension should be lifted at any time where the circumstances that led to the suspension are remedied before the end of the period of the suspension. To this end, the Commission should adopt, respectively, an implementing act before the end of the period of suspension set out in the relevant implementing act, and a delegated act before the end of the period of suspension set out in the relevant delegated act.

    (13) The temporary suspension should be lifted at any time where the circumstances that led to the suspension are remedied before the end of the period of the suspension or where the suspension turns out to be ineffective for the purpose of remedying the situation. To this end, the Commission should adopt, respectively, an implementing act before the end of the period of suspension set out in the relevant implementing act, and a delegated act before the end of the period of suspension set out in the relevant delegated act.

    Amendment  19

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 14

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (14) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, points B, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC23.

    (14) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, points B and C, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC23.

    __________________

    __________________

    23 Council Decision 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31).

    23 Council Decision 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31).

    Amendment  20

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

     

    Present text

    Amendment

     

    (-1) In Article 7 point (d) is replaced by the following:

    (d) the Commission shall, when considering further steps in accordance with point (e), (f) or (h), take into account the outcome of the measures taken by the Member State concerned with a view to ensuring visa-free travel with the third country in question, the steps taken in accordance with point (b), and the consequences of the suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the external relations of the Union and its Member States with the third country in question;

    “(d) the Commission shall, when considering further steps in accordance with point (e) or (h), take into account the outcome of the measures taken by the Member State concerned with a view to ensuring visa-free travel with the third country in question, the steps taken in accordance with point (b), and the consequences of the suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the external relations of the Union and its Member States with the third country in question;”

    Amendment  21

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. In cases where an agreement on the short-stay visa waiver between the Union and a third country listed in Annex II includes provisions on different grounds or procedures for suspension, those provisions shall be applied instead of Articles 8a, 8e and 8f of this Regulation.

    2. In cases where an agreement on the short-stay visa waiver between the Union and a third country listed in Annex II has been concluded, Articles 8a, 8e and 8f of this Regulation shall apply without prejudice to the relevant provisions on grounds for suspension and procedures set out in the agreement.

    Amendment  22

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The suspension mechanism may be triggered on the following grounds:

    The suspension mechanism may be triggered by any of the following grounds:

    Amendment  23

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 1 – point d – point i

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (i) a substantial increase in serious criminal offences, linked to the nationals of that third country, substantiated by objective, concrete and relevant information and data provided by the competent authorities;

    (i) a substantial increase in serious criminal offences, linked to the nationals of that third country, substantiated by objective, concrete and relevant information and data provided by the competent authorities; or

    Amendment  24

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 1 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (f) the non-alignment of the visa policy of a third country listed in Annex II, where, in particular because of the geographic proximity of that third country to the Union, there is a risk of a substantial increase in the number of third-country nationals, other than nationals of that third country, who enter irregularly the territory of the Member States after having stayed on, or transited through, the territory of that third country;

    (f) the non-alignment of the visa policy of a third country listed in Annex II, where, in particular because of the geographic proximity of that third country to the Union, there is a substantial increase in the number of third-country nationals, other than nationals of that third country, who enter irregularly the territory of the Member States after having stayed on, or transited through, the territory of that third country;

    Amendment  25

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (ga) a deterioration in the Union’s external relations with a third country listed in Annex II caused by:

     

    (i) serious breaches by that third country of the principles set out in the Charter of the United Nations;

     

    (ii) grave violations by that third country of the obligations deriving from international human rights law or international humanitarian law;

     

    (iii) violations by that third country of bilateral agreements between it and the Union;

     

    (iv) that third country carrying out hostile acts against the Union or Member States with the aim of destabilising or undermining society or institutions which are key for the public policy and internal security of the Union or the Member States;

     

    (v) non-compliance or non-alignment by that third country with relevant Union sanctions.

    Amendment  26

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, points (a), (b) and (d)(i), of this Article a substantial increase shall mean an increase exceeding a threshold of 50%, unless the Commission in accordance with Article 8b(4) or Article 8c(2) concludes that a lower or higher increase is applicable in the particular case.

    2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, points (a), (b) and (d)(i), and paragraph 4 of this Article a substantial increase shall mean an increase exceeding a threshold of 40 %, unless the Commission in accordance with Article 8b(4) or Article 8c(2) concludes that a lower or higher increase is applicable in the particular case. The Commission shall duly justify any such conclusion.

    Amendment  27

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (b), of this Article a low recognition rate shall mean a recognition rate of asylum applications of less than 4%, unless the Commission in accordance with Article 8b(4) or Article 8c(2) concludes that a higher recognition rate is applicable in the particular case.

    deleted

    Amendment  28

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (c), a decrease in cooperation on readmission with a third country listed in Annex II shall mean a substantial increase, substantiated by adequate data, in the refusal rate of readmission applications submitted by a Member State to that third country for its own nationals or, where a readmission agreement concluded between the Union or that Member State and that third country so provides, for third-country nationals having transited through that third country.

    4. For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (c), a decrease in cooperation on readmission with a third country listed in Annex II shall mean a substantial increase, substantiated by adequate data, in the refusal rate of readmission applications submitted by a Member State to that third country for its own nationals, or, where a readmission agreement concluded between the Union or that Member State and that third country so provides, for third-country nationals having transited through that third country, provided that it can be duly justified that the decrease in cooperation is the result of the action or inaction of that third country and is not attributable to the Member State that submitted the readmission applications.

    Amendment  29

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) refusing or failing to process readmission applications in due time;

    (a) refusing or failing to process readmission applications;

    Amendment  30

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) failing to issue travel documents in due time for the purposes of returning within the deadlines set out in the readmission agreement or refusing to accept European travel documents issued following the expiry of the deadlines set out in the readmission agreement;

    (b) failing to issue travel documents to its own nationals or persons recognised by the third country as having a right of residence in its territory for the purposes of returning within the deadlines set out in the readmission agreement or refusing to accept European travel documents issued following the expiry of the deadlines set out in the readmission agreement;

    Amendment  31

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. A Member State may notify the Commission if it is confronted, over a period of at least two months, compared with either the same period in the preceding year or the last two months prior to the implementation of the exemption from the visa requirement for nationals of a third country listed in Annex II, with one or more of the circumstances amounting to the grounds for suspension referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c), and (d)(i).

    1. A Member State may notify the Commission if it is confronted, over a period between two and twelve months, compared with either the same period in the preceding year or the last two months prior to the implementation of the exemption from the visa requirement for nationals of a third country listed in Annex II, with one or more of the circumstances amounting to the grounds for suspension referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c), and (d)(i).

    Amendment  32

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    1a. A Member State may notify the Commission of the existence of any of the grounds for suspension referred to in Article 8a(1), points (d)(ii), (e), (f), (g) and (ga).

    Amendment  33

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The notification referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall state the reasons on which it is based and shall include relevant data and statistics as well as a detailed explanation of the preliminary measures that the Member State concerned has taken with a view to remedying the situation. In its notification, the Member State concerned may specify the categories of nationals of the third country concerned which are to be covered by an implementing act under Article 8e(1), specifying the detailed reasons for doing so.

    2. The notification referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article shall state the reasons on which it is based. Where relevant, that notification shall include relevant data and statistics as well as a detailed explanation of the preliminary measures that the Member State concerned has taken with a view to remedying the situation. In its notification, the Member State concerned may specify the categories of nationals of the third country concerned which are to be covered by an implementing act under Article 8e(1), specifying the detailed reasons for doing so.

    Amendment  34

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 4 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. The Commission shall examine any notification made pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, taking into account:

    4. The Commission shall examine any notification made pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article, taking into account:

    Amendment  35

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 4 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) whether any of the circumstances amounting to the grounds referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c), or (d)(i) exist;

    (a) whether any of the circumstances amounting to the grounds referred to in Article 8a(1) exist;

    Amendment  36

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8b – paragraph 4 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    4a. As part of its examination pursuant to paragraph 4, the Commission shall also assess the necessity, proportionality and consequences of a suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement.

    Amendment  37

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8c – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Where the Commission, taking into account the relevant data, reports and statistics, has concrete and reliable information on the existence of any of the grounds referred to in Article 8a(1) it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of its analysis, and Article 8e and Article 8f shall apply.

    2. Where the Commission, taking into account the relevant data, reports and statistics, including data, reports and statistics from any relevant Union institution, body, office or agency, and after having carried out an assessment as referred to in Article 8b(4a), has concrete and reliable information on the existence of any of the grounds referred to in Article 8a(1) it shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of its analysis, and Article 8e and Article 8f shall apply.

    Amendment  38

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8d – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the monitoring conducted in accordance with Article 8c(1) with regard to the third countries which have been listed in Annex II as a result of the successful conclusion of a visa liberalisation dialogue conducted between the Union and that third country, at least once a year and for a period of seven years after the date of entry into force of visa liberalisation for those third countries, and thereafter whenever the Commission considers it to be necessary, or upon request by the European Parliament or by the Council. The report shall focus on the third countries which the Commission considers, based on concrete and reliable information, as no longer complying with certain specific requirements, which are based on Article 1 and which were used to assess the appropriateness of granting visa liberalisation.

    1. The Commission shall periodically report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the monitoring conducted in accordance with Article 8c(1) with regard to the third countries which have been listed in Annex II, ensuring that each of those third countries is reported on at least once within a four-year period.

     

    1a. The Commission shall report on an annual basis for a period of seven years after the date of entry into force of visa liberalisation for those third countries which have been listed as a result of the successful conclusion of a visa liberalisation dialogue conducted between the Union and that third country.

     

    1b. Whenever the Commission considers it necessary, it shall report on the third countries which it considers, based on concrete and reliable information, as no longer complying with certain specific requirements, which are based on Article 1 and which were used to assess the appropriateness of granting visa liberalisation.

    Amendment  39

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Where, on the basis of the examination referred to in Article 8b(4), or the analysis referred to in Article 8c(2), and taking into account the consequences of a suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the overall external relations of the Union and its Member States with the third country concerned, while working in close cooperation with that third country to find alternative long-term solutions, the Commission decides that action is needed, or where a simple majority of Member States have notified the Commission of the existence of circumstances referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c) or (d)(i), the Commission shall adopt an implementing act temporarily suspending the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of the third country concerned for a period of 12 months.

    Where, on the basis of the examination referred to in Article 8b(4), or the analysis referred to in Article 8c(2), and taking into account the consequences of a suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement for the overall external relations of the Union and its Member States with the third country concerned, while working in close cooperation with that third country to find alternative long-term solutions, the Commission decides that action is needed, or where a simple majority of Member States have notified the Commission of the existence of circumstances referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c) or (d), the Commission shall adopt an implementing act temporarily suspending the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of the third country concerned for a period of 12 months.

    Amendment  40

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Notwithstanding Article 6(1), point (a), where the Commission has adopted an implementing act under this paragraph which temporarily suspends the exemption from the visa requirement for nationals of the third country concerned who hold diplomatic passports, service/official passports or special passports, the Member States shall not provide for exceptions therefrom.

    Amendment  41

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) receiving the notification from a simple majority of Member States of the existence of grounds referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c) or (d)(i).

    (c) receiving the notification from a simple majority of Member States of the existence of grounds referred to in Article 8a(1), points (a), (b), (c) or (d).

    Amendment  42

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 11(4), temporarily suspending the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of the third country concerned for a period of 12 months.

    2. On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, where a significant risk or imminent threat to public policy or internal security of a Member State as set out in Article 8a(1), point (d), requires immediate action, the Commission may adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 11(4), temporarily suspending the exemption from the visa requirement for the nationals of the third country concerned for a maximum period of 12 months.

    Amendment  43

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    In cases as referred to in the first subparagraph, the Commission shall comprehensively and consistently inform the European Parliament and the Council throughout the procedure.

    Amendment  44

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8e – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. During the period of suspension, the Commission shall establish an enhanced dialogue with the third country concerned with a view to remedying the circumstances in question.

    3. During the period of suspension, the Commission shall establish an enhanced dialogue with the third country concerned with a view to remedying the circumstances in question and shall regularly report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress and outcome of the dialogue and on the effectiveness of the suspension.

    Amendment  45

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 1 a new

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    1a. The delegated act referred to in paragraph 1 shall be accompanied by a report to the European Parliament and to the Council detailing the outcome of the enhanced dialogue with the third country concerned, the measures adopted by that third country and by the Member States concerned, and the reasons for considering that the circumstances leading to the temporary suspension have not been remedied. 

    Amendment  46

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 1 b new

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    1b. Notwithstanding Article 6(1), point (a), where the Commission has adopted a delegated act under paragraph 1 of this Article the Member States shall not provide for exemptions as regards nationals of the third country concerned who hold diplomatic passports, service/official passports or special passports.

    Amendment  47

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Without prejudice to the application of Article 6, during the period of suspension, the nationals of the third country concerned shall be required to be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States.

    2. Without prejudice to the application of Article 6 and paragraph 1b of this Article, during the period of suspension, the nationals of the third country concerned shall be required to be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States.

    Amendment  48

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. A Member State which, in accordance with Article 6, provides for new exemptions from the visa requirement for a category of nationals of the third country covered by the act suspending the exemption from the visa requirement shall communicate those measures in accordance with Article 12.

    3. A Member State which, in accordance with Article 6(1), points (b) to (f), Article 6(2) or Article 6(3), provides for new exemptions from the visa requirement for a category of nationals of the third country covered by the act suspending the exemption from the visa requirement shall communicate those measures in accordance with Article 12.

    Amendment  49

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Before the end of the period of validity of the delegated act adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council.

    Before the end of the period of validity of the delegated act adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the temporary application of the visa suspension, on the dialogue between the Commission and the third country concerned and on the measures taken to remedy the circumstances having led to the temporary suspension of the visa exemption.

    Amendment  50

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The report may be accompanied by a legislative proposal to amend this Regulation in order to transfer the reference to the third country concerned from Annex II to Annex I. In that case, the Commission shall adopt a further delegated act in accordance with Article 10, amending Annex II to extend the period of suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement from the end of the period of validity of the delegated act adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article until the entry into force of the amendment transferring the third country concerned to Annex I. The footnote shall be amended accordingly.

    The report may be accompanied by a legislative proposal to amend this Regulation in order to transfer the reference to the third country concerned from Annex II to Annex I. In that case, the Commission shall adopt a further delegated act in accordance with Article 10, amending Annex II to extend the period of suspension of the exemption from the visa requirement set by the delegated act adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article by a period of six months or until the entry into force of the amendment transferring the third country concerned to Annex I, whichever comes first. The footnote shall be amended accordingly.

    Amendment  51

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

    Regulation (EU) 2018/1806

    Article 8f a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 8fa

     

    Suspension of the possibility to provide for exceptions from the visa requirement as regards countries listed in Annex I

     

    1. In the event of a deterioration in the Union’s external relations of the kind referred to in Article 8a(1), point (ga), of this Regulation with a third country listed in Annex I to this Regulation[, and provided that that deterioration is of a significant and abrupt nature], or following the adoption of an implementing decision pursuant to Article 25a(5) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, the Commission may adopt an implementing act to suspend any exceptions from the visa requirement provided for by Member States pursuant to Article 6(1) of this Regulation as regards holders of diplomatic passports, service/official passports or special passports.

     

    2. The Commission shall continuously assess whether it is possible to achieve a substantial and sustained improvement in the Union’s external relations with the third country concerned or in the level of cooperation of the third country concerned as regards the readmission of irregular migrants. On the basis of that assessment, the Commission may adopt an implementing act to repeal or amend the implementing act referred to in the first paragraph.

     

    3. The implementing acts referred in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 11(2).

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    1. Background

     

    One of the basic pillars of the EU visa policy is the Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 of the European Parliament and of the Council listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders of the Member States and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement for stays of no more than 90 days in any 180-day period.

     

    It determines the basic principles for granting visa liberalisation, sets the so-called “positive” or visa exempt third countries and “negative” or visa required third countries lists, and it provides for safeguards when visa free regime could be suspended via two basic mechanisms, namely the reciprocity mechanism and the suspension mechanism, as well as the procedures for their triggering.

     

    Following the calls from both co-legislators on the need to revise the suspension mechanism in order to be more adapt to the emerging challenges, the European Commission presented in October 2023 targeted proposal for the revision of the suspension mechanism with the aim to strengthen and improve several elements of it. The proposed revision concerns the revision of Article 8 and includes several substantive amendments related to the possible grounds for suspension as well as to the procedures.

     

    This suspension mechanism was first introduced in 2013[1] with the main purpose to enable a temporary suspension of the visa exemption in case of a sudden and substantial increase in irregular migration. The mechanism was subsequently revised in 2017[2] by making it easier for Member States to notify circumstances leading to a possible suspension and by enabling the Commission to trigger the suspension mechanism on its own initiative.

     

    2. The proposed amendments to the suspension mechanism

     

    In its latest proposal, the Commission makes several changes to the current mechanism. New suspension ground are proposed related to hybrid threats such as situations of state-sponsored instrumentalisation of migrants aimed at destabilising or undermining society and key institutions, as well as new grounds specifically addressing investor citizenship schemes, which are currently operated by number of visa exempt third countries.

     

    A new suspension ground is also added to cover cases where the lack of visa policy alignment of a third country listed in Annex II with the visa policy of the Union, could lead to situations where third-country nationals, other than nationals of that third country, arrive legally in the territory of that third country and then enter irregularly the territory of the Member States.

     

    Also new with this proposal is the possibility for the Commission to consider different thresholds when deciding whether to suspend a visa exemption in cases of a substantial increase in irregular migration, unfounded asylum applications or serious criminal offences linked to the nationals of that third country, following a case-by-case assessment.

     

    The proposal also makes changes to the procedure and conditions for a Member State’s notification to the Commission when it is confronted by one or more circumstances amounting to a ground for suspension, and the procedure for the Commission’s examination of such a notification. It also modifies the reference period for identifying the existence of the circumstances which may lead to the suspension.

     

    The Commission will also have the obligation to monitor on a regular basis the existence of the grounds for suspension with regard to all third countries listed in Annex II, and the procedure to trigger the suspension mechanism based on the Commission’s own analysis of the existence of such grounds.

     

    This procedure is further amended by increasing the duration of the temporary suspension of the visa exemption from nine months to 12 months (for the first phase) and from 18 months to 24 months (for the second phase), as well as a new urgency procedure is introduced when the situation requires immediate action by the Commission.

     

    3. Position of the Rapporteur

     

    The expansion of the visa-free travel to several new third countries in recent years, as well as constantly new emerging challenges and crisis occurring around the world, the Rapporteur considers that the European Union needs effective and sufficient tools to respond to such challenges, including in the area of visa policy.

     

    The Rapporteur in that respect therefore largely supports the aim of the Commission and the need to strengthen and improve the visa suspension mechanism. It is worth noting that since its introduction in 2013, the suspension mechanism has only been triggered once. Namely in the case of Vanuatu due to EU’s concerns of its operation of investor citizenship schemes, for which a partial suspension has been adopted by the Council in March 2022, following by a full suspension in October of 2022, which is still in place.

     

    Due to ever changing world and evolution of the EU policies as well as the visa free regime, the Rapporteur believes that the revision of the suspension mechanism ought to look at the EU visa policy holistically considering all aspects.

     

    The Rapporteur therefore believes that there is an inherent gap between the conditions for the exemption from EU visa requirements, which are based on a case-by-case assessment of a variety of criteria, and the grounds allowing for the suspension from the said exemption. The Rapporteur considers as well that a discrepancy exists particular in relation to the Union’s external relations with the relevant third countries, including considerations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

     

    In that regard, the Rapporteur is of the opinion that grounds for suspension of visa free regime with a third country must include considerations relating to Union’s or in certain cases Member States’ external relations with the relevant third country.

     

    Those grounds for suspension should include, among others: a) breaches or suspension of bilateral and multilateral agreements between the European Union or the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and the relevant third countries, on the other; b) serious breaches of international law and standards, including international humanitarian law, by the relevant third country, including non-compliance with the international court decisions and rulings; c) hostile acts or aggression against one or more Member States or the Union by the relevant third country; d) serious human rights violations, including criminalisation of abortion, LGBTQ+ persons, as well as the introduction or the use of death penalty by the relevant third country; and e) the non-compliance with the relevant EU sanctions.

     

    The Rapporteur also believes that the regular evaluation is needed of the continue fulfilment of the basic grounds for third countries benefiting from visa liberalisation which was not a result of the successful conclusion of a visa liberalisation dialogue. In that respect, the Rapporteur supports the Commission’s proposal as regards the monitoring the existence of the grounds for suspension for all third countries, however their consideration must undoubtedly include considerations relating to Union’s or in certain cases Member States’ external relations with the relevant third country.

     

    Since the current parliamentary term is quickly coming to an end, the Rapporteur wishes to quickly proceed with the adoption of the European Parliament’s negotiating mandate in order to secure a progressive text which should be reflected also in the EU visa policy going forward.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Security: More than 300 arrests as African countries clamp down on cyber threats

    Source: Interpol (news and events)

    24 March 2025

    LYON, France — Authorities in seven African countries have arrested 306 suspects and seized 1,842 devices in an international operation targeting cyber attacks and cyber-enabled scams.

    The arrests were made as part of Operation Red Card (November 2024 – February 2025) which aims to disrupt and dismantle cross-border criminal networks which cause significant harm to individuals and businesses. In particular, the operation targeted mobile banking, investment and messaging app scams. The cases uncovered during the operation involved more than 5,000 victims.

    As part of the crackdown, Nigerian police arrested 130 people, including 113 foreign nationals, for their alleged involvement in cyber-enabled scams such as online casino and investment fraud. The suspects, who converted proceeds to digital assets to conceal their tracks, were recruited from different countries to run the illegal schemes in as many languages as possible. Nigerian authorities have established that some of the people working in the scam centres may also be victims of human trafficking, forced or coerced into criminal activities. Overall, the investigation led to the seizure of 26 vehicles, 16 houses, 39 plots of land and 685 devices.

    In a significant case from South Africa, authorities arrested 40 individuals and seized more than 1,000 SIM cards, along with 53 desktops and towers linked to a sophisticated SIM box fraud scheme. This setup, which reroutes international calls as local ones, is commonly used by criminals to carry out large-scale SMS phishing attacks.

    In Zambia, officers apprehended 14 suspected members of a criminal syndicate that hacked into victims’ phones. The scam involved sending a message containing a malicious link which, when clicked, installed malware to the device. This allowed hackers to take control of the messaging account, and ultimately the phone, giving them access to banking apps. The hackers were also able to use the victim’s messaging apps to share the malicious link within conversations and groups, enabling the scam to spread.

    During the operation, Rwandan authorities arrested 45 members of a criminal network for their involvement in social engineering scams that defrauded victims of over USD 305,000 in 2024 alone. Their tactics included posing as telecommunications employees and claiming fake ‘jackpot’ wins to extract sensitive information and gain access to victims’ mobile banking accounts. Another method involved impersonating an injured family member to ask relatives for financial assistance towards hospital bills. Overall, USD 103,043 was recovered and 292 devices were seized.

    Neal Jetton, INTERPOL’s Director of the Cybercrime Directorate, said:

    “The success of Operation Red Card demonstrates the power of international cooperation in combating cybercrime, which knows no borders and can have devastating effects on individuals and communities. The recovery of significant assets and devices, as well as the arrest of key suspects, sends a strong message to cybercriminals that their activities will not go unpunished.”

    Ahead of the operation, countries exchanged criminal intelligence on key targets. This intelligence was enriched by INTERPOL with insights into criminal modus operandi using data from its private sector partners—Group-IB, Kaspersky and Trend Micro.

     The seven participating countries were Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Togo and Zambia.

    The operation was delivered through INTERPOL’s African Joint Operation against Cybercrime (AFJOC), an initiative funded by the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Video: UK E-petition debate relating to the UK joining the European Union – Monday 24 March

    Source: United Kingdom UK Parliament (video statements)

    The Petitions Committee has scheduled a debate relating to the UK joining the European Union.

    Paul Davies MP has been asked by the Committee to open the debate. The Government will send a Minister to respond.

    Read the petition:
    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700005

    Find petitions you agree with, and sign them: https://petition.parliament.uk/

    What are petition debates?

    Petition debates are ‘general’ debates which allow MPs from all parties to discuss the important issues raised by one or more petitions, and put their concerns to Government Ministers.

    Petition debates don’t end with a vote to implement the request of a petition. This means that MPs will not vote on the issues raised in the petition at the end of the debate.

    The Petitions Committee can only schedule debates on petitions to parliament started on petition.parliament.uk

    Find out more about how petition debates work: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/326/petitions-committee/content/194347/how-petitions-debates-work/

    Stay up-to-date
    Follow the Committee on Twitter for real-time updates on its work: https://www.twitter.com/hocpetitions

    Thumbnail image ©UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJdFBSAvAhU

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Scottish Anti-Illicit Trade Group relaunches to combat counterfeit crime

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Scottish Anti-Illicit Trade Group relaunches to combat counterfeit crime

    The Scottish Anti-Illicit Trade Group (SAITG) has relaunched this month, with the aim of combating counterfeiting and intellectual property crime in Scotland.

    Supported by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO), the group brings together law enforcement, government and businesses to strengthen Scotland’s fight against this illicit trade.

    According to IPO research, almost one in three of those asked (29%) across the UK have purchased counterfeit goods in the past. Almost one in five (19%) said they purchase them often, sometimes or on an occasional basis. For 2021, the overall estimated value of imported counterfeit goods into the United Kingdom was over £7 billion.

    The group will focus on developing best practice and enhancing collective strategies to tackle the supply of counterfeit goods across Scotland. They will form a coordinated response to protect Scottish products, businesses and consumers from the threat of IP crime.

    It brings together members including the Scotch Whisky Association, Police Scotland, Trading Standards, The Wine & Spirit Trade Association and The Anti-Counterfeiting Group.

    Together, they will create a forum for distinct industry areas to share insight, intelligence and provide training and support for law enforcement agencies.

    The group’s work will also help build a greater understanding among the wider public of the harms this trade causes, emphasising that counterfeiting is anything but a victimless crime.

    The IPO’s Deputy Director of Enforcement Miles Rees stressed the importance of collaboration:

    We are pleased to support the re-launch of the Scottish Anti-Illicit Trade Group, which marks an important moment in tackling this significant threat to businesses and consumers in Scotland. Counterfeit goods not only harm those using them, but also cause wider harms to society, our economy and communities. Government, industry and law enforcement all have a crucial role to play in working together to combat counterfeiting and piracy, and the group represents a vital forum, helping drive action together.

    Rachel Jones, newly appointed Chair of the Scottish Anti-Illicit Trade Group and founder of Snapdragon, said:

    Counterfeiting is not a victimless crime. It is the second largest source of criminal income in the world, after drugs. I’m very honoured to chair this group as we bring together key partners to protect Scotland’s heritage brands and consumers.

    Fiona Richardson, Chief Officer for Trading Standards Scotland, said:

    Illicit trade is a priority for Trading Standards Scotland and the team regularly looks to undertake actions against those selling counterfeit goods. These actions are aimed at protecting consumers and legitimate businesses by preventing the sale of counterfeit products throughout Scotland.

    Detective Chief Superintendent Dave Ferry of Police Scotland emphasised the serious nature of illicit trade:

    People may believe this type of criminality to be victimless. The reality is that illicit trade funds serious organised crime, undermines legitimate businesses, puts jobs at risk and causes harm in our communities as the profits fund other illegal activities.

    Alan Park, Director of Legal Affairs at the Scotch Whisky Association, highlighted the importance of protecting Scotland’s premium products:

    Food and drink products strongly associated with their origin, like Scotch Whisky, carry a significant reputation based on their quality, authenticity and generations of investment. Those who attempt to take fraudulent advantage of that reputation will always face strong action, and the formation of this group is a significant step to help serve a strong message that this illegal activity won’t be tolerated.

    Members of the public can report suspected counterfeit goods to Police Scotland by calling 101 or anonymously through Crimestoppers.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Test to protect: Know your risk this World TB Day

    Source: City of Birmingham

    On World TB Day (March 24th), Birmingham City Council is urging communities in the city to understand their risk of contracting tuberculosis (TB) and how to protect themselves and their loved ones.

    An awareness campaign, launched in February, has been focusing on males aged between 25 to 34 years old, who were either born in or have lived in Pakistan, encouraging them to get tested and, if needed, treated for TB. This group has been identified by research as one of a number of communities at particularly high risk for contracting TB. Despite this increased risk, many within this demographic are less likely to get tested. 

    TB is an infection caused by bacteria that affects the lungs and other parts of the body. It is serious but can be cured with medication if detected and treated early.  

    The campaign’s central message -“Risk. Test. Protect.” – encourages individuals to visit testtoprotect.co.uk to determine their risk for TB, as well as Hepatitis B and C. The website offers information on how to get a free, confidential test, and underscores the importance of early detection in protecting both personal health and the health of their loved ones and their wider community. 

    World TB Day takes place each year on March 24th, the date in 1882 that Dr Robert Koch announced he had discovered the bacterium that causes TB, and aims to raise awareness of the condition’s impact and step up efforts to eradicate it globally. This aligns with Birmingham’s own commitment to the Fast-Track Cities Plus (FTC+) programme, which aims to end new cases of TB, Hepatitis B and C, and HIV in the city. 

    Councillor Mariam Khan, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care at Birmingham City Council, said: “World TB Day is an important reminder that there is still a lot of work to do to eradicate cases of TB globally, but that work starts with empowering people to understand their risk and then take the necessary steps to protect themselves and their loved ones through testing and treatment.  

    “This is the approach we are taking in Birmingham, encouraging communities identified as being at risk to find out if they could be living with TB without realising, and then enabling them to access the support and treatment they need. 

    “This is important any day of the year, not just on World TB Day, and I would urge those who may be part of an at-risk community to take that crucial first step and visit testtoprotect.co.uk to find out more.” 

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Councillors to consider Highland Investment Plan update

    Source: Scotland – Highland Council

    Highland Councillors will be asked to consider a new approach on the future of the Highland Investment Plan (HIP). 

    Approval is being sought for the allocation of funding for the first phase of proposed projects for 2024/25 to 2029/30 which will help improve local public facilities and sustain local communities and population. 

    The Highland Investment Plan commits to the establishment of a new generation of integrated community facilities (PODs) which will be complimented by a refreshed operating model for services across Highland Council and with key partners, such as NHS Highland. 

    A report to the meeting of The Highland Council on 27 March will provide Councillors with an update on the progress of the Council’s ambitious Highland Investment Plan. The report outlines that the establishment of Community PODs is linked to plans to modernise service delivery and are a key driver for the future operating model of the Highland Community Planning Partnership.  

    The HIP commits £2.1 billion of capital funding over a twenty-year period based on the ring fencing of 2% council tax per annum, or an equivalent revenue stream. 

    The Plan will be used to tackle the major challenges that Highland Council faces with transport and roads; schools and community facilities; depots and public offices across Highland communities.   

    Highland Council Leader Cllr Raymond Bremner said: “Included in the recommendations to Council, will be that Hub North Scotland Ltd be taken forward as the chosen Highland Investment Plan delivery partner; and that a Commissioning Approval Board be set up and chaired by the Assistant Chief Executive – Place. He added: “The wider context of the HIP is to establish a prospectus of investible developments that can attract private sector partners and gain more leverage for public sector investment in local communities.” 

    The Committee will also be asked to agree the allocation of capital funding to the first group of Phase 1 projects at Beauly, Charleston, Dingwall, Dunvegan, Fortrose, Inverness High and Thurso and the proposed project delivery timescales. Councillors will also be asked to agree an option to move to a Community POD development for St Clement’s and Dingwall Primary schools, on the basis that this provides the greatest educational benefits for both schools, and the maximum economic benefit for the wider community. 

    The report to Councillors invites them to note that ‘the relocation of St Clement’s School will require a statutory consultation to locate a replacement building for St Clement’s School on the new Dingwall Community POD site. If approved, the new Community POD development is prioritised for the earliest possible delivery, with construction commencing early in 2027 and the new building being operational by the end of 2028/29. 

    Convener of the Council, Cllr Bill Lobban added: “All work to date by the Council on the Highland Investment Plan has taken into account the views of local people and local issues and priorities. Members will have the opportunity to discuss the report on Thursday and if the recommendations regarding St Clement’s and Dingwall Primary schools are agreed, the Council will immediately commence an informal consultation period of engagement with relevant stakeholders from both schools. In addition, if agreed by Council, work will also start on a Strategic Outline Case for Lochaber Adult Care Provision.” 

    Members will also be updated on the Thurso Place-Based review which will determine a preferred model for a Thurso Community POD. If agreed, this project’s recommendation is that it should be prioritised for the earliest possible delivery with an estimated operational timescale in 2029/30. 

    In addition to the ongoing development of the Tain Campus, Nairn Academy, Broadford and Tornagrain projects, five previously prioritised Phase 1 projects are being progress with the following earliest operational dates at: Beauly Primary (2027/28); Charleston Academy (2029/30); Dunvegan Primary (2027/28); Fortrose Academy (2029/30); Inverness High (2029/30). 

    Funding of the Highland Investment Plan formed part of the Council Tax and budget decisions on 6 March 2025 when Council agreed its revenue budget for 2025/26, within which 2% of council tax income was agreed to support the HIP. 

    The full report can be found here (Item 5).   

    More information on the Highland Investment Plan can be found on the Council’s website:  

    https://www.highland.gov.uk/highlandinvestmentplan

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: The qualifying round of the XVIII youth patriotic competition “Spring of 1945” was held at the State University of Management

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    Last week, the State University of Management held the qualifying round of the 18th youth patriotic competition “Spring of 1945” in the “Patriotic Song” category.

    The main goal of the event is to revive the ideals of spiritual, moral and cultural traditions of centuries-old Rus’ among young people, to preserve the memory of the heroes of the multinational people who survived and won the Great Patriotic War. Amateur performers, youth student groups from Moscow, the Moscow region and all regions of Russia take part in the competition.

    The Director of the Institute of Distance Education of the State University of Management Sergey Lenshin addressed the participants of the competition with a welcoming speech, thanking the organizers and all participants of the competition on behalf of the university management for their active participation in preserving historical traditions, developing aesthetic taste in young people, and introducing them to cultural and historical heritage.

    The competition committee included teachers, professional performers, costume designers, fashion designers, directors, writers, heads of specialized universities and foundations, heads of historical clubs of Moscow, representatives of veterans’ councils, and the founding organizations of the Competition.

    The State University of Management held a selection in the nomination “Patriotic Song”, which includes four sub-nominations: – a song with patriotic content; – favorite songs of veterans; – an original song; – a song with a guitar.

    The following represent the State University of Management at the competition: the creative team “StuDos”, Alexandra Morozova and Ekaterina Mironova – students of the Institute of Correspondence Education.

    The Grand Prix winners, laureates and diploma winners in the nominations will be awarded diplomas of the Youth Patriotic Competition “Spring of ’45”. The winners will be awarded at the Gala Concert on April 16, 2025. The performance of the Grand Prix winner and laureates of the Competition will take place on May 9, 2025, as part of the annual citywide festive program “Victory Ball “At Six O’Clock in the Evening…”.

    We wish all our participants bright performances and, of course, victory!

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 03/24/2025

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: New recruitment to the driving school of the State University of Management

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    The GUU-Auto training center announces new recruitment for groups under the program “Professional training of drivers of category “B” vehicles”.

    The training starts on April 14. Classes are held on Mondays and Wednesdays from 19:00.

    Hurry, there are still places left!

    Additional information by phone 8 (495) 377 6446, 8 (916) 760 1014 (WhatsApp, Telegram), as well as in the educational department of the UC GUU Auto (room A-219) and on the official page of the UC GUU-Auto

    The GUU-Auto training center is a structural division of the State University of Management, providing paid educational services in professional training programs for drivers of vehicles.

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 03/24/2025

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: UNECE advances implementation of digital data exchange along SPECA corridors

    Source: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

    Increased use of digital solutions developed by UNECE’s subsidiary, intergovernmental body – the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT) – can enhance the sustainability and resilience of supply chains and strengthen global connectivity. Data mapping and alignment to the UN/CEFACT standards allow for a common semantic foundation for data exchange among the different port or railway information systems and other modes of transport.

    The benefits include reducing economic costs, enabling seamless data interchange among modes of transport and sectors in the supply chain, using the UN standards as a common semantic foundation for cross-border, multimodal, and cross-sectoral interoperability, simplification and automation of business processes, and raising business competitiveness.

    As part of the implementation the roadmap for digitalization of the Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor, which was adopted by States participating in the United Nations Special Programme for the Economies of Central Asia (SPECA) in November 2023, UNECE recently organized two capacity-building seminars in Turkmenistan to streamline efforts to digitalize transport and supply chains along the Trans-Caspian and other corridors in the region. 

    In 2023, the total cargo transported via the Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor increased by 86% in 2023, reaching 2.8 million tons, up from 1.5 million tons in 2022. According to a World Bank study, with targeted investments and policy reforms, the Middle Corridor has the potential to triple its trade volumes by 2030, reaching 11 million tons, and to reduce travel time by half. ​

    The first seminar focused on port-to-port data exchange in the Trans-Caspian Corridor, notably in Baku-Aktau and Baku-Turkmenbashi, to align this data exchange to the UN/CEFACT standards and Multimodal Transport Reference Data Model (MMT RDM). Baku and Aktau ports are already exchanging data on cargo, and the ports of Baku and Turkmenbashi have an agreement to exchange data.                       

    The seminar participants requested UNECE, the Governments of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan and the development partners to support the effort to align the data exchange to the UN/CEFACT standards in the context of the Trans-Caspian Digitalization Roadmap. In addition to supporting the digital exchange of information among the Caspian ports of Baku, Aktau, and Turkmenbashi, one of the recommendations of the seminar was to invite other ports along the Trans-Caspian Corridor – Kuryk, Poti, Batumi, Odessa, Constanta, Varna, Burgas, and Istanbul – to align to the UN/CEFACT standards.

    Under the SPECA Chairmanship of Turkmenistan in 2025, and with participation of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), the Organisation for Cooperation of Railways (OSJD), the railway agencies of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Iran, the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB), and Eurasian Development Bank, the second seminar focused on a pilot project to develop and use an electronic equivalent of the SMGS railway consignment note along the Kazakhstan–Turkmenistan–Iran (KTI) railway corridor.

    This pilot project would serve as a foundation for further development of a digital corridor along the KTI railway corridor, using the semantic standards and Multimodal Transport Reference Data Model (MMT RDM) of UN/CEFACT as a key reference for intermodal interoperability of data and document exchange.

    Representatives of UNECE, UNESCAP, and the railway agencies of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Iran discussed the possibilities for such a project in cooperation with the three governments and various stakeholders, including ECO, the Permanent Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Commission of the Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Central Asia (PS IGC TRACECA) and other development partners.

    The participants recommended that the railways and business community of the KTI and SPECA participating States promote the digital transformation of documents accompanying goods in the KTI corridor, in alignment with the UN/CEFACT standards to digitalize railway documents accompanying goods.

    Finally, the 20th session of the SPECA Working Group on Trade held in Ashgabat reviewed national and regional plans and strategies of the SPECA participating States for trade facilitation and sustainable development.

    The participants aimed to identify priority actions on which the SPECA Working Group on Trade could work in the coming several years and focused on deliverables, such as: 

    • Collaboration among SPECA participating States in the WTO process
    • Progress in the implementation of the SPECA Trade Facilitation Strategy and related roadmap
    • Progress in the implementation of the Principles for Sustainable Trade in the subregion
    • Studies and recommendations on regulatory and procedural non-tariff barriers to trade, and
    • Digitalization of data and document exchange in multimodal transport and trade using UN standards.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI China: US, Ukraine conclude ‘productive’ talks in Riyadh

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov announced Sunday that the talks between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations have concluded in Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh, saying the discussion was “productive and focused,” with “key points including energy” addressed.

    In a post on social media platform X, Umerov, who led the Ukrainian delegation, emphasized that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s goal is “to secure a just and lasting peace” for Ukraine and Europe at large, claiming, “We are working to make that goal a reality.”

    The Ukrainian and U.S. teams met earlier in the day in Riyadh.

    According to the Ukrinform news agency, the Ukrainian delegation also included State Secretary of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Oleksandr Karasevych, deputy heads of the President’s Office, Pavlo Palisa and Ihor Zhovkva, as well as Deputy Energy Minister Mykola Kolisnyk.

    The talks came almost two weeks after a previous meeting between the two sides in the Saudi port city of Jeddah saw Ukraine okay a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire plan in exchange for Washington lifting its pause on military aid to and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

    Notably, the meeting precedes the talks between U.S. and Russian delegations scheduled for Monday. Media reported late Sunday that the Russian delegation has arrived in Riyadh. The delegation includes Grigory Karasin, chairman of the committee on international affairs in Russia’s upper house, and Sergey Beseda, adviser to the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov said earlier.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Man sentenced for sexually abusing children

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    A man has been jailed for more than 11 years for sexual abusing two children.

    Jamal Armstrong, 35 (30.12.89) of no fixed address, was sentenced to 11 years and nine months’ imprisonment at Woolwich Crown Court on Friday, 21 March.

    He was also handed a Sexual Harm Prevention Order and restraining order against the victims.

    Armstrong admitted two counts of sexual assault by penetration on a female under 13 and four counts of sexual assault on a female under 13 when he appeared before Woolwich Crown Court on Tuesday, 17 December 2024.

    The offences took place at an address in Greenwich between November 2023 and August 2024.

    The two victims, who were aged 12 at the time of the offences, were known to Armstrong. They came forward and reported the crimes to police in August 2024 and an investigation was swiftly launched by the Met’s Public Protection South East team.

    Armstrong was arrested by officers on Tuesday, 14 August 2024 while he was attempting to leave the country. He was later charged.

    Over four months, officers compiled numerous witness statements and a body of evidence, which ultimately led to a guilty plea.

    Specialist officers supported the victims throughout the investigation.

    Detective Constable Callum Boast, of the Met’s Public Protection South East team, said: “I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks and gratitude to the victims in this case, who have been extremely courageous in coming forward to police and recounting the trauma of abuse they suffered because of Armstrong.

    “Armstrong is a dangerous individual who has carried out horrific crimes to two girls known to him. He will now serve a substantial amount of time behind bars for his despicable behaviour.

    “It cannot be underestimated the impact, both physical and mental, such sustained abuse will have had and I hope today’s sentence will give some sense of closure and peace to the victims and their loved ones.”

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: Prosafe SE: Operational update – February 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    24 March – Fleet utilisation for February 2025 was 57 per cent.  

    Safe Notos, Safe Zephyrus and Safe Concordia operated at full capacity during this period, achieving 100 per cent utilisation. Safe Eurus achieved a utilisation rate of 98 per cent.

    Safe Caledonia has commenced reactivation activities in Scapa Flow, UK, and will mobilise to the Captain Field, UK, within June 2025. 

    Safe Boreas is in Norway preparing for relocation in Q2 2025 for a contract in Australia commencing between mid-November 2025 and mid-February 2026.  

    The sale of Safe Concordia is completed, and the vessel was transferred to the new owner on March 13, 2025.   

    Safe Scandinavia remains laid up in Norway.  

    Prosafe is a leading owner and operator of semi-submersible accommodation vessels. The company is listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange with ticker code PRS. For more information, please refer to https://www.prosafe.com  

    For further information, please contact:  

    Terje Askvig, CEO 

    Phone: +47 952 03 886 

    Reese McNeel, CFO 
    Phone: +47 415 08 186 
     
    This information is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to Section 5-12 the Norwegian Securities Trading Act. 

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Scheduling and listing: using technology to co-ordinate resources more effectively

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Scheduling and listing: using technology to co-ordinate resources more effectively

    While judges decide when to schedule and list court and tribunal hearings, HMCTS puts the administrative and logistical arrangements in place to facilitate them.

    Under judicial direction, careful consideration is given to parties’ needs, judicial availability and wider resources such as the availability of staff, buildings and technology.

    Before the introduction of our online Scheduling and Listing tool, courts were struggling with outdated methods of planning and organising court time – they often used paper diaries, disconnected spreadsheets and basic calendars. This meant: 

    • staff spent excessive time on administrative tasks rather than supporting complex cases and working with judges 

    • courtroom space was under utilised  

    • no reliable data on how resources such as courtrooms, staff and judicial time were being used 

    • very little flexibility for local courts to manage their own schedules to suit their needs 

    There was a clear opportunity and need to offer local courts the flexibility to manage their own courtroom space and diaries, to understand future needs and effectively plan accordingly, save time and reduce the financial cost to the taxpayer through better courtroom utilisation. 

    Benefits of the digital service 

    Our digital Scheduling and Listing tool has delivered substantial improvements for court users, staff and the justice system, resulting in: 

    • reduced administrative burden through automated listing of procedural hearings 

    • enhanced visibility of room availability across multiple court buildings 

    • improved planning capability with comprehensive data insights 

    • better experience for listing officers with more reliable hearing information  

    • improved access to justice for court users due to better use of valuable judicial time and courtroom space 

    • stronger data security and business resilience with a standardised approach across jurisdictions and no reliance on paper-based system 

    • long-term planning capabilities beyond 6 months 

    • simplified process for legal professionals to manage their court commitments 

    • reduced risk of errors in scheduling 

    Our digital transformation 

    Since 2016, we’ve implemented two major digital solutions that are transforming how we organise the use of courtrooms and and resources. 

    In Civil and Family Courts and Tribunals we’ve designed and implemented ListAssist, a digital platform for listing hearings in England and Wales.  

    In criminal courts, instead of introducing a completely new system for scheduling and listing, we are adding a number of functions to Common Platform. This is already used to list most criminal hearings through its basic scheduling and listing capabilities, so we can deliver improvements quicker and more smoothly.  

    At every step, extensive user research and feedback from the people testing and using the service has been essential to overcome challenges and get new changes right before we introduced them in full. 

    ListAssist (Civil and Family Courts and Tribunals) 

    ListAssist is now live in all Civil and Family Courts and Tribunals in England and Wales. It has enabled listing officers to: 

    • provide automatic listing for routine hearings 

    • view resource availability across multiple locations 

    • deliver actionable insights on hearing durations and patterns 

    • integrate with the Court and Tribunal Hearings Service for improved public access 

    Common Platform enhancements (Criminal Courts) 

    Following successful testing by early adopters in Mold, Kent, Essex and Redditch in Autumn 2024, access to the first version of the scheduling tool went live in early 2025 for all Magistrates’ Courts in Wales and the South East, with positive results.  

    Users have told us the tool is easy to use and useful and we have incorporated enhancements suggested by our early adopters into the next phase of the tool’s development. We’re now rolling out across all magistrates’ courts across all regions following feedback from early adopters.  

    By creating a digital platform under the Reform Programme we’ve already: 

    • improved accuracy of booked sessions and removed duplicate recordings 

    • given users the ability to view, edit and create new sessions, allowing them to make real time changes to their schedule 

    • extended scheduling beyond 6-month limitation 

    Future enhancements will improve the scheduling and listing process by allowing staff to: 

    • see how much space is available in one glance, saving time in cross-referencing with different systems – delivering smoother justice for users  

    • view a two-week calendar, rather than one day allowing for better future planning 

    • have bulk editing capabilities for multiple hearings, ensuring optimum use of courtroom space, helping legal professionals manage their time effectively and increasing efficiency of cases  

    • reduce waiting times due to greater visibility of hearing room and judge availability  

    Better use of resources  

    The scheduling and listing tools will increase the quality of service offered to the public and legal professionals. It will support better use of hearing spaces; reduce administrative tasks so that skilled listing officers an focus on the more complex areas of hearing management; and provide greater confidence that hearings will proceed when scheduled.   

    The ability to allow for long-term vision and planning rather than just being able to view and schedule hearings on that day is making a huge difference to court users, helping legal professionals manage their time more effectively and ensuring optimum use of courtroom space.   

    Better information sharing 

    In turn, increased efficiency of the scheduling and listing of cases will improve the experience of our users’ visiting courts and tribunals, reducing the opportunity for errors to be made and, cutting down the time it takes listing officersto complete administrative tasks.  

    By having a consistent approach to how we list hearings on one universal platform, we will improve the accuracy of our data. Data providing accurate hearing durations and start times will increase our knowledge and reduce delays as we understand better how resources are used, in turn improving business resilience.  

    Working together 

    We work closely with: 

    • local listing officers and courts on rollout and delivery – we have carried out extensive user research in our Crown and magistrates’ courts and implemented pilots before full rollout. 

    • Courts and Tribunals Service Centres to offer best support and advice for stakeholders  

    • Magistrates, legal advisers and judiciary as a vital partner at all levels to deliver a more streamlined system 

    Getting support 

    We’ve implemented a comprehensive support strategy along the way, including: 

    • early adopter programme in key locations  

    • phased rollout allowing for feedback and system improvements 

    • dedicated training for staff transitioning from legacy systems 

    • ongoing support through local champions and digital support teams 

    • regular user feedback sessions to identify and address challenges 

    Feedback and insights  

    Users across the justice system feedback how the service has improved ways of working: 

    The transition has been surprisingly straightforward, with staff adapting quickly to the new process. The Programme team has been responsive to our feedback and concerns.

    The ability to view and create sessions has been invaluable… the system is intuitive and user-friendly.

    ListAssist was introduced to us quite slowly, which was helpful to let us adapt. So far, it’s worked well. The search is quick, and scheduling works well for us. Working with the project however has been good. In particular, it’s been really good to work with Barry Sutton, the Deputy Service Manager. He’s from a listing background so he understands the way we work and what we need.

    Future plans 

    We’re continuing to improve the service for the people who need to use it. Our plans include: 

    • further integration of ListAssist with case management systems 

    • enhanced data analytics capabilities for better resource planning 

    • potential expansion of tools to Crown Court scheduling 

    • continuous improvement based on user feedback 

    • development of additional automated features 

    • enhanced reporting capabilities for better resource management 

    Stay updated 

    To keep informed about the latest developments visit: 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Easier to apply, speedier processing and fewer hearings: how we made immigration appeals simpler, faster and more accessible

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Easier to apply, speedier processing and fewer hearings: how we made immigration appeals simpler, faster and more accessible

    The First-tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum service handles approximately 50,000 appeals every year.

    These appeals come from people challenging Home Office decisions about: 

    • their immigration status 

    • permissions to stay in the UK 

    • deportation 

    • entry clearance 

    Before the Reform Programme, appellants and staff faced significant barriers.  

    • Paper forms were complex for appellants, especially if English wasn’t their first language 

    • Language barriers made it harder for applicants to fully understand how their appeal was progressing or robustly present their case 

    • Our people spent lots of time manually reviewing and handling paper forms, slowing processes down 

    Our aim, through the Reform Programme was to build a trusted service for users, maintaining fairness and increasing transparency and accessibility.  

    Benefits of the digital service 

    Our modernised service has transformed the appeals process, making it simpler, more accessible and delivering substantial improvements for those appealing decisions: 

    • Simplified applications with less form fields to complete 

    • Faster processing times through our streamlined digital system 

    • Plain English throughout the service, making it more accessible and less daunting 

    • Seamless integration with Home Office systems for better case management 

    • Reduced administrative burden on HMCTS by eliminating paper-based processes 

    • Centralised and consistent support through our new Service Centres 

    • Improved flexibility and transparency – users can track their appeal’s progress online at any time 

    • Reduced need for hearings through a new Home Office review stage 

    • Fewer postponed or adjourned hearings due to better evidence management 

    Our Digital Transformation 

    We started transforming the service in January 2019 with a carefully planned launch of our digital service at two hearing centres. We worked closely with legal representatives to test and refine the service. Survey feedback and engagement with users helped us improve the service. New features were also added before it was rolled out to other hearing centres. 

    The full digital service launched in February 2020, making the appeal process simpler, faster and more accessible for all of those using the service.  

    For Appellants 

    For an appellant in person the service is designed to be simple and accessible. During the design stage, we worked closely with charities throughout the UK including Justice, Migrant Help and the Refugee Council where we learnt more about the experience of appellants, including vulnerable users, which helped us to create a better service.  

    Improvements include: 

    • User-friendly online application system 

    • Clear communication at every stage 

    • Real-time case tracking 

    • Integrated fee processing 

    • Streamlined document management 

    • Automated notifications and reminders 

    Our efforts are working. By enabling people to use the digital service it has freed up more judicial time and resource for the most complex cases.   

    Learning Lessons 

    We also encountered and overcame several challenges: 

    • Initial more limited functions required temporary workarounds 

    • Users required additional support to adapt to new processes 

    • Deadlines and direction orders not being met needed to be resolved 

    Getting Support 

    We’re committed to ensuring access to justice for everyone in several ways, including: 

    • retaining and improving the paper process for appellants unable or less confident to use the digital service 

    • dedicated support at the Service Centre for the Immigration and Asylum service 

    • help with handling fees, listing appeal hearings and processing applications for permission to appeal to the upper tribunal  

    Feedback and Insights 

    Our transformation has received strong endorsement from senior leaders, including the former Senior President of Tribunals for England and Wales, who commented:  

    I see this as the model for all remaining tribunals. 

    Users report significantly improved experiences, particularly noting the simplified forms and clearer communication. Legal representatives have said that the digital service allows more time to speak with clients about issues about their case, making it easier to prepare an appeal in more detail. 

    Future Plans 

    We’re building on our success with ambitious plans. We will: 

    • expand the digital appeals service to include appeals where the appellant is either in prison or an immigration removal centre 

    • develop a new process for managing applications made on paper allowing these cases to mirror the new digital journey  

    • move all cases onto the digital platform 

    • continue to make service improvements based on user feedback 

    Stay Updated 

    For the latest guidance on appealing a benefits decision, visit: Appeal against a visa or immigration decision: Overview – GOV.UK 

    Keep up to date with the latest Tribunals news and information by subscribing to our e-alerts and newsletters.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: How we made workplace justice simpler, faster and more accessible for everyone

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    How we made workplace justice simpler, faster and more accessible for everyone

    Employment Tribunals play a vital role in the UK justice system, resolving disputes between employers and employees.

    These disputes may be on issues such as: 

    • unfair dismissal 

    • discrimination 

    • redundancy 

    • whistleblowing claims 

    • breach of contract 

    Hearings involve evidence, witness testimony and legal arguments and are decided upon by a judge sitting alone, or by a panel made up of: 

    • a judge 

    • a panel member with a worker’s background 

    • a panel member with an employer’s background 

    Before the Reform Programme, there were a number of issues with the process: 

    • Panel members and HMCTS teams had to manually handle, transport and store high numbers of paper documents 

    • Transportation of this paper had environmental impacts and caused bottlenecks and delays to cases 

    • Forms weren’t intuitive or supportive, increasing the risk of human error 

    • Claimants and defendants often needed to travel to buildings for hearings 

    • Judges spent time making lower-level decisions, taking them away from complex matters that required them 

    Our modernisation programme aimed to transform an outdated paper-based system that was struggling to meet modern expectations into an efficient, user-friendly service fit for the 21st century. 

    Benefits 

    Since July 2022, more than 17,500 people have made digital claims using the modernised service. These people benefitted from:

    • an end-to-end digital journey for submitting and managing claims 

    • supportive, intuitive online forms and simplified procedures with reduced legal jargon, reducing the opportunity for errors 

    • the flexibility of real-time case tracking and 24/7 access to case files 

    • an increase in remote hearings which have reduced the need to spend time travelling, as well as additional environmental benefits  

    • faster progression of their case with streamlined administrative processes 

    Changes to regulations also meant legal officers could be appointed to support judges with certain functions which they could in turn do more effectively through improved technology. This step ensured more efficient use of judicial time for more complex matters. 

    Our digital transformation 

    The journey to reform Employment Tribunals began in 2021. Public consultation showed strong support for modernisation and we began the process by developing and testing the new digital claim form (ET1). 

    This would be the foundation of the modernised services, giving claimants (or their representatives) an accessible, intuitive form that they could access via GOV.UK and complete and submit online at any time. 

    We then gave users access to two key digital platforms: 

    • MyHMCTS – A specialised portal for legal professionals to manage and interact with case materials on behalf of their client 

    • CitizenUI – An accessible interface for members of the public to access directly 

    The national rollout completed in July 2024, transforming all Employment Tribunal offices. Throughout rollout, we’ve made sure our staff have felt supported and clear on the role they play in having a positive impact on the tribunal process.  

    The online service is popular too, with 80% of all single claims now made digitally. 

    Getting support 

    While digital innovation is important, we’ve maintained our commitment to accessibility: 

    • Paper options remain for those who need them 

    • Development of central printing facilities 

    • Comprehensive guidance materials 

    • Support for those without digital access or confidence 

    Feedback and insights 

    Users across the system have embraced the changes: 

    Access to the relevant documents without waiting for either the parties or the staff to provide them… it is a game changer. – Tribunal Judge 

    The system/portal has great potential and should be a very useful and efficient tool for both users and HMCTS. – Legal Professional 

    I don’t have to carry so much stuff around… I can get what I need usually from the electronic file. – Tribunal Staff Member 

    Supporting Sarah through her workplace dispute  

    “I was looking forward to starting my maternity leave and spending time with my family but after a few months, I realised my employer’s attitude towards me had changed.  

    Before I told them I was pregnant, I was regularly encouraged to apply for promotion and my boss would send me details of vacancies and training opportunities. This contact stopped while I was on maternity leave and I later discovered colleagues had applied for and been promoted into roles I would have been perfect for, but I was never told about them. I was excluded and I felt my employer had discriminated against me and I became extremely unhappy.  

    It was a daunting prospect, but I decided to make a claim to an Employment Tribunal. I’d never done anything like this before and I was very nervous but the process has been great so far. Because it’s all online, I can log on whenever I want and see how the claim is progressing. This has been really important as I rarely have the time to make phone calls in the day, chasing people up. I also thought I’d have to travel to hearings on a regular basis, but that hasn’t been the case.  

    I’m actually enjoying the process and I look forward to the claim being settled so I can move on with my life.”  

    Working together 

    We worked closely with: 

    • Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) – now the Department of Business and Trade – and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to consult on plans to reform the service 

    • Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) to make sure free advice would be available to those using the digital service 

    • the judiciary as a vital partner at all levels 

    Future plans 

    We’re committed to continuous improvement through: 

    • developing Service Centre support by end of 2025 

    • implementing ‘ListAssist’ software for improved case listing 

    • developing capability for handling multiple claims 

    • enhancing system performance and improving how to navigate it further 

    • introducing bulk printing and scanning facilities 

    • refining user-friendly interfaces based on feedback from our teams 

    Stay updated 

    Keep informed about Employment Tribunals through: 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Modern justice for all: Our Online Civil Money Claims reformed service helps more people settle disputes away from the courtroom

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Modern justice for all: Our Online Civil Money Claims reformed service helps more people settle disputes away from the courtroom

    Every year, thousands of people and businesses need to recover money they’re owed through the county courts. They do this through making civil money claims, which help to ensure access to justice and promote economic stability by allowing individuals and business to resolve disputes fairly and efficiently.

    Before 2018, the process was delivered through paper forms or using Money Claim Online (MCOL), a system that was only partially digital. This meant: 

    • users having to wait for long periods of time for case updates 

    • paperwork sometimes got lost, causing further delay and inconvenience for users 

    • increased chance of human error when inputting data 

    • complicated legal jargon, causing confusion for users 

    • high costs of printing, posting and transporting paper, as well as the associated environmental impact  

    We knew there was a clear opportunity to create a user-focused digital process from start to finish, where users – members of the public, business owners or legal professionals – could resolve disputes in a simple, accessible and proportionate way. 

    We created the Online Civil Money Claims (OCMC) service to help people resolve financial disputes quickly and easily, whether they’re dealing with unpaid invoices, undelivered goods, or contract disputes. 

    Benefits 

    Between April 2019 and October 2024, more than 495,000 claims have been made by users without a solicitor or legal representative and of these, more than 162,000 were settled without needing a hearing.  More than 58,600 claims have been made by legal professionals on behalf of a client through OCMC. 

    OCMC is designed with our users in mind: 

    • we now engage with users by email, so they don’t need to wait for updates by post, and updates to the case are made in real time 

    • the OCMC dashboard is available at any time day or night, reducing the need to chase up case updates within office hours  

    • users can manage their case digitally by following easy to understand prompts 

    • we see more users engaging with the system – more defendants are responding to claims and most importantly, more parties  are settling without needing court intervention

    • for those cases that do require a hearing, OCMC has made the process much more efficient. For example. the time from claim issue to receive a directions order is now three times faster which means that cases can be ready for hearing faster 

    • the financial and environmental cost to the taxpayer associated with the use and transportation of paper forms has been reduced 

    Our digital transformation 

    Starting in 2018, we’ve completely redesigned how money claims work: 

    • created a fully digital journey from start to finish 

    • replaced legal jargon with clear, simple language 

    • built an intuitive dashboard for unrepresented users that shows real-time case updates 

    • engaged with users via email rather than just postal address, providing timely, regular and clear updates  

    • introduced the online case management system MyHMCTS for legal professionals to manage a variety of legal matters, including online civil money claims 

    • added Welsh language options for defendants 

    • expanded the service to handle larger value claims  

    • empowered legal advisors to give digital directions for smaller claims 

    • established ‘early adopter’ courts to test improvements and build confidence before rolling out nationally 

    The increase in speed to progress cases brought using the digital service has been significant: 

    • the time it takes from issuing a claim to receiving a directions order – which sets out how a case that is disputed will be heard and what evidence is required for hearing, – is now just over 8 weeks compared to 30 weeks for paper cases – that’s more than three times quicker 

    • more users are responding to claims than ever before and more cases are being settled 

    Getting support 

    We understand that digital services aren’t suitable for everyone. That’s why we: 

    • maintain paper options for those who need them 

    • partner with We Are Digital to provide in-person support 

    • have a dedicated team at our Service Centre in Stoke to handle all online civil money claims enquiries 

    • use feedback data to identify and remove barriers for users with disabilities 

    • provide extra support for those struggling with the digital process 

    Feedback and insights 

    Users are consistently positive about the service’s accessibility and efficiency: 

    Found form very easy to use and fill in.

    The online forms were very easy to complete and, when settled, it was easy to update the claim to reflect this.

    An entirely positive experience. Each section of the application was clear and easy to use. Progress through the different sections was logical and intuitive.

    “I was recently asked to represent a client involved in a dispute with a builder. She had hired the firm to construct an extension to her home, but the project was riddled with problems from the very beginning. The work faced numerous delays and when a local authority surveyor came to inspect the extension, it failed to meet building control standards. Naturally, my client wanted to file a money claim against the building firm, who also had legal representation.  

    “Thankfully, the Online Civil Money Claims (OCMC) service made the whole process straightforward. As my firm uses the MyHMCTS portal, uploading documents was quick and easy.  

    “The process took about ten weeks for the directions order to be issued—a decision from the judge on how much the defendant should pay. My client was satisfied with this outcome, as it gave her time to hire a new builder to fix the issues with the extension.  

    “I’ve been with my firm for many years, so I remember the days of dealing with claims on paper and using the MCOL system. While MCOL marked an important step toward digitalisation, the new OCMC system is far superior. I can log in whenever it suits me, upload documents, and there’s no more waiting for physical files to arrive in the post.”  

    Working together 

    We worked closely with:  

    • legal professionals working in the civil jurisdiction who fed back on the system design and usability   

    • the judiciary as a vital partner at all levels 

    Future plans 

    We’re committed to continuing improvements by: 

    • using collected data to identify and address user barriers 

    • expanding digital features based on user feedback 

    • streamlining processes further to reduce resolution times 

    • ensuring the service remains accessible to all users 

    • seeking further funding to develop new features that will support more complex cases 

    Stay updated 

    Keep up to date with the latest Civil news and information by subscribing to our e-alerts and newsletters.  

    For support with making a claim of £25,000 or less, visit make a court claim for money: Make a claim – GOV.UK

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Less paper, better data, quicker transfer of information – how a digital tribunals system is improving the appeals process

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Less paper, better data, quicker transfer of information – how a digital tribunals system is improving the appeals process

    The Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) tribunal handles appeals when people disagree with decisions about their benefits or child support, made by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) or HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

    The tribunal makes it easier for people to appeal decisions about 24 different types of benefits, including: 

    • Universal Credit 

    • Personal Independence Payment 

    • Employment and Support Allowance 

    • Disability Living Allowance 

    • Attendance Allowance 

    • Carer’s Allowance 

    • Child Support 

    These benefits are intended to help people who may: 

    • need financial support during difficult times 

    • have disabilities or health conditions 

    • are seeking employment 

    • require help with child support arrangements 

    Before 2016, everything was done on paper. This meant: 

    • staff and judges had to manually handle dozens of documents 

    • high costs for photocopying and posting documents 

    • risk of human error when inputting data 

    • significant environmental impact from paper use and transport 

    • very little flexibility for appellants to track or interact with appeals 

    There was a clear opportunity and need to offer people the ability to make and manage their appeals online to save time at some stages, increase consistency and flexibility, and reduce the financial cost to the taxpayer.  

    Benefits of the digital service 

    Last year over 113,000 appeals were raised by people using our digital system, meaning that: 

    • appellants could track the progress of their own case online at any time of day or night 

    • information was transferred between government departments in seconds rather than days 

    • there were fewer opportunities for errors because data did not need to be manually entered multiple times 

    • the financial and environmental cost to the taxpayer associated with the use and transportation of paper forms was reduced 

    Our digital transformation 

    Since 2016, we’ve transformed the service through several significant digital improvements.  

    At times, we’ve needed to respond to wider changes to alter the original vision for modernising the service, particularly as some benefit types were intended to be moved under Universal Credit by DWP. But at every step, feedback from the people testing and using the service has been essential to overcome challenges and get new changes right before we introduced them in full. 

    Submit your appeal 

    By introducing our online portal on GOV.UK appellants (the individuals making the appeal) can now appeal a benefits decision digitally. Other improvements include: 

    • the ability to upload supporting evidence digitally 

    • automatic case creation, significantly reducing staff data entry 

    • faster, clear notifications reach decision-making departments immediately 

    Appeals now reach DWP within seconds (which previously took a week). 

    Manage your appeal 

    Appellants can now subscribe to track the progress of their appeal online. This enables them to: 

    • receive text and email updates directly, without needing to chase 

    • upload additional evidence at any time 

    • check their case status more conveniently 

    Digital processing 

    Reform has introduced the ability for paper applications to be brought into – and benefit from – the digital process. 

    Paper applications on new appeal forms and any supporting evidence are now scanned creating a digital case record. We’ve also expanded our digital printing system meaning paper communications are as efficient as possible. 

    Through this, nearly 90% of SSCS tribunal cases that can be dealt with online are now handled digitally from start to finish. Between 2019 and 2024 we’ve saved around 7.7 million sheets of paper through applications being made digitally, instead of on paper. And considering the amount of supporting documentation that panel members and agencies require further along the process, we estimate that we saved the equivalent of 18.5 million sheets of paper through making information digital in the financial year ending in 2024 alone.  

    Better information sharing 

    By creating a digital system, we’ve significantly improved how information is shared between the parties involved in an appeal. 

    • Evidence is shared smoothly and quickly between all parties 

    • digital bundles for tribunal members are clearer and more accessible 

    • an integrated case scheduling system called ‘List Assist’ is being piloted with intention to deliver nationally to make most efficient use of tribunals time 

    • a single route of contact through our Court and Tribunal Service Centres enables a consistent service through the appellant’s preferred format 

    The digital system also gives us the data we need to ensure people are able to access justice whoever they are. We can now analyse whether the result of a case is different depending on the particular characteristics of the appellant, such as their language, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or sex. Our 2023 access to justice report on the reformed SSCS service indicated there was no difference in outcome based on these. 

    The results show the online system is working well: 

    • 89% of people now choose to use the online service where it is available, compared to less than a third in 2019 

    • more than 8 in 10 users rate the service as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ 

    • over 113,000 people and their families helped in a single year 

    User feedback shows how the service has improved: 

    Fantastic easy helpful service. Thank you for making all so easy for all of us. 

    Excellent service for keeping up to date with appeals.

    The website is well displayed and the instructions on it help you to navigate across the system in an easy manner.

    Jane’s story 

    “When I needed to appeal my Personal Independence Payment decision, I found the new online system much easier than the old paper process. Instead of printing forms and posting evidence, I submitted everything through GOV.UK in one sitting. 

    I could track my case’s progress anytime and upload additional medical evidence when I needed to. Getting text updates meant I didn’t have to keep calling to check what was happening. 

    Through the new ‘Manage Your Appeal’ feature, I could see exactly what was happening with my case. When I found additional medical evidence, I easily uploaded it through the portal rather than posting it. 

    The digital system meant my evidence was instantly available to all parties involved. The whole process was less stressful and more transparent than I expected.” 

    Working together 

    We work closely with: 

    • DWP and HMRC to develop the service 

    • appellants through user research 

    • Courts and Tribunals Service Centres, Regional Processing Centres and National Business Centres to best support our users 

    • the judiciary as a vital partner at all levels 

    Getting support 

    We know not everyone finds it easy to use online services. That’s why we: 

    • still accept paper applications 

    • provide a free digital support service across England, Wales and Scotland 

    • have a dedicated phone service through our Court and Tribunal Service Centre to help with queries and we also offer webchat options  

    Between June 2022 and May 2024, we provided 7,245 free support sessions to help people use HMCTS services – 93% of these supported SSCS appellants. 

    Future plans 

    We’re continuing to improve the service for the people who need to use it. Our plans include: 

    • making online tools even more intuitive and user-friendly 

    • rolling out our ‘List Assist’ scheduling system nationwide in 2025 

    • introducing functionality to help judges and staff manage tasks more efficiently, and progress cases most effectively 

    • improving service delivery based on user feedback 

    Stay updated 

    For the latest guidance on appealing a benefits decision, visit: Appeal a benefit decision: Overview – GOV.UK

    Keep up to date with the latest Tribunals news and information by subscribing to our e-alerts and newsletters.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: From paper to digital: bringing more peace of mind to separating couples

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    From paper to digital: bringing more peace of mind to separating couples

    Getting divorced is a significant life event that affects thousands of people each year in England and Wales.

    Until 2018, the process was entirely paper-based, meaning: 

    • mistakes were commonly made when completing lengthy, jargon-heavy forms 

    • delays caused by needing to return high numbers of applications due to errors 

    • slow notifications to the applicant or legal professional that an application had been received 

    • hours spent by our people opening post, creating paper case files, tracking down missing forms and taking payments over the telephone 

    • environmental impacts and cost to the taxpayer associated with printing, posting and transporting paper 

    The service needed modernisation to better serve both the public and legal professionals during what is often an emotionally challenging time. 

    Benefits of the digital service 

    Our modernised divorce service has revolutionised the application process, delivering significant improvements. Since 2019, over 511,000 applications have been made digitally by people getting divorced, meaning: 

    • internal management information shows that calls from court users are being answered in less than a minute  

    • they’ve been better supported through being able to access information about help with fees during the application process 

    • improved clarity and assurance by being able to track and manage multiple processes in their case through one integrated service 

    • data and sensitive information is protected through more robust privacy protections 

    • reduced environmental impact by minimising paper usage 

    Our digital transformation 

    The transformation journey began in 2016 with comprehensive user research to understand the challenges faced by divorcing couples, legal professionals, and court staff.  

    Our transformed service offers: 

    • 24/7 access to applications 

    • the option to save and return, allowing people to take a break or find documents without losing progress on their application 

    • real-time application status tracking 

    • clear, step-by-step guidance to minimise mistakes 

    • the ability to make a joint application under the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 

    • integrated financial remedy process for legal professionals to help couples agree how to manage finances 

    • the ability to share work across teams for legal firms 

    • streamlined payment options 

    Our digital approach is working – we’ve seen digital uptake soar from 22% in 2020 to 94% in 2024. 

    Responding to new laws 

    Since the original online divorce service launched to the public in 2018 we’ve responded quickly to wider changes. We relaunched the service in 2022 following the implementation of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act.  

    The service now enables joint applications for divorce, helping to reduce acrimony amongst separating couples. When planning these changes we worked with people using the service, listening to their feedback at every step to ensure the new service worked smoothly for the people that needed it.  

    Feedback from members of the public and legal professionals shows how the service has improved: 

    Crispin, Service user

    The overall experience was pretty smooth… everything worked as it should do. It felt like one of the more positive parts of the divorce. 

    Karen Dovaston, Solicitor

    On the solicitor side, it’s efficiency. I can log in and see all my cases and see exactly what’s going on with them. It’s really efficient in terms of being able to update your clients as to what’s going on and where things are. You can download documents very easily, making your applications easily and quickly.

    The knock-on effect for me and for my clients is I have a fixed fee for a divorce. I’m happy with it and it means that I can pass all those savings on to my client because I’m not then spending all the time that I would have been spending drafting paper documents, keying in information in paper documents, because the digital system just pulls it all through.

    Arwel’s story 

    When Arwel and his wife Caroline decided to divorce, he wasn’t sure how to get the process underway and felt daunted. A colleague had been through the process and told him that it wasn’t as complicated as it used to be and that applying online was easy. Arwel did some research and decided to apply online. He wasn’t sure what to expect but with the online divorce service he was able to fit submitting and monitoring his application around his busy shift working pattern. 

    Arwel found using the online service surprisingly easy, there were links to useful guidance and when he needed to track down information he could save his application and return to it when he was ready. Because of his work rota Arwel found the option to check online much easier than calling a helpline. It meant he didn’t need to find somewhere private in his busy office and he could check at a time that suited him.   

    Overall, the digital divorce service gave Arwel peace of mind that his application was progressing. The law relating to divorce meant the process took a long time, but the service made it clear how far he’d progressed which allowed him to focus on the future.   

    Working Together 

    We’ve worked closely with: 

    • our divorce stakeholder group, comprising of divorce professionals across England and Wales 

    • the judiciary  

    • our Courts and Tribunals Service Centre in Stoke to support our users 

    Getting Support 

    We’ve created a comprehensive support system to ensure no one is left behind. This includes: 

    • a free digital support service through the We Are Group for applicants in England and Wales 

    • modernised paper forms with simplified language and clearer instructions 

    • dedicated support on the phone or by webchat through our Court and Tribunal Service Centre 

    Future Plans 

    We’re continuing to improve the service for all applicants and their advisers. In the future we’ll: 

    • offer online applications for interim orders (to make a general application as part of a divorce, dissolution or separation) 

    • enable applicants to see where they are in the 20-week statutory waiting period 

    • further enhance our notification system 

    • introduce digital document upload capability 

    • streamline processing of complex cases 

    • continue to improve guidance for choosing the right application type, based on an applicant’s personal circumstances 

    Stay Updated 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Courts and Tribunals Service Centres: supporting users through centralised systems and teams

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Courts and Tribunals Service Centres: supporting users through centralised systems and teams

    Our Courts and Tribunals Service Centres (CTSCs) were established as part of the HMCTS Reform Programme, to centralise the administration of cases for multiple digital services.

    Call handlers and agents are there to support and guide users who may have questions or need information about their court or tribunal case, delivering improved access to justice. 

    Service Centres are one of the three pillars of our National Services, the other two being the National Business Centres (NBCs) and Enforcement, both of which existed pre-reform.   

    There are five Service Centres across England and Wales:  

    • Stoke-on-Trent 

    • Birmingham 

    • Loughborough 

    • Salford  

    • Newport 

    Before 2019, it was the responsibility of individual courts and tribunals teams to handle case queries and administrative tasks, using mainly paper-based processes. This meant: 

    • service delivery was inconsistent, as processes varied between courts and tribunals  

    • processes were often inefficient and less flexible  

    • there was an increased risk of error 

    • users could not self-serve or have visibility of their case  

    • users incurred costs related to postage and travel  

    Benefits of a centralised service 

    Service Centres have brought significant change to the way we deliver justice and are a truly national resource. By having everyone involved in delivering a service centrally located, and using a single system, an issue can be identified, addressed and resolved far more quickly and efficiently, without the need to send information and instructions across multiple locations.  

    The benefits of this are: 

    • faster processing times  

    • consistent service delivery across all locations 

    • users and legal professionals have a single point of contact 

    • greater flexibility to meet peaks in demand 

    • multi-skilled teams are able to handle various tasks across the services 

    • court-based staff can focus on addressing local issues across our estate 

    Our digital transformation 

    The move from paper-based to digital processes in many of our services has fundamentally changed how justice is administered.  

    Benefits of the digital service include:  

    • real-time case visibility for users through online self-service options 

    • reduced paper usage, postage and storage costs 

    • service agents work from a single platform, improving efficiency and accuracy 

    • instant access to case histories  

    • quicker feedback and case outcomes for users 

    • legal professionals can manage their applications at any time and from any device 

    We are aware that some users need additional support when using digital our services. That is why we: 

    • offer our Digital Support Service, delivered by the We Are Group.  

    • still accept paper-based applications 

    • offer a range of contact methods to suit user preferences, including a webchat in certain services and traditional telephone support.  

    During 2024, Service Centres and National Business Centres handled over 2.8 million telephone calls. Service Centres received over 519,000 emails and replied to over 25,000 webchat messages (divorce and probate only) from the people who use our courts and tribunals, providing direct support to members of the public, professional users, members of the media, and many others.    

    These calls were dealt with in an average handling time of just over 14 minutes.  

    Contact management systems (the way we receive and handle calls, emails and webchat from our users) have changed significantly, with new technology meaning we:  

    • can respond more effectively to demand 

    • have better tools when handling enquiries such as knowledge articles and standard operating procedures on hand  

    • can better understand reasons for contact  

    • have rich data on demand, including types of interaction with users, wait times and service performance 

    Over 73% of users who completed the post-call survey about their telephony contact in 2024 were satisfied with their call. While feedback on their contact has been positive: 

    Your staff were professional, polite, compassionate, empathetic and showed good listening abilities. They addressed my concerns and queries efficiently and effectively. Great service in emotionally trying times.  

    Very helpful, polite and answered my questions and gave all the information needed very clearly and concisely.

    Case study  

    Ryan and John work in one of our Service Centres. They describe their experience of supporting a caller through a very difficult situation with professionalism and care. The example also highlights the benefits of new digital services over paper, underlining the benefits of reform.    

    We take lots of calls from the public who have queries about their applications. However, in this particular case a gentleman called us letting us know his application had gone wrong. He was suffering with lots of personal issues and was clearly feeling suicidal.   

    I decided we would take responsibility for this and assured him that if there was anything that we could do to help, we will. Luckily here at the Service Centre we have many options to relieve these situations.  

    We soon found his file wasn’t where it was supposed to be, and the court were not aware of this. My team acted quickly to locate the file, while keeping him on board and calm. We contacted the court, where the judge understood the urgency of the case and granted an order. By taking initiative and having autonomy to make decisions we were able to make this happen quickly.   

    This gentleman’s case was an old-style paper case. However, if this had been a digital case what took five days to resolve, would have taken under five minutes.   

    That’s the power of reform, and in these situations the reform project has massively helped people in those situations.   

    Working together 

    Service Centres, courts and tribunals work hand-in-hand to provide access to justice. They are all part of the same service, wherever in England, Wales or Scotland they are based. Successful working relationships have been built by ensuring there is clarity on the roles and responsibilities of the courts, tribunals and Service Centres and establishing channels of communication, to monitor performance, analyse feedback and plan future improvements. 

    Future plans 

    Now we have embedded our services nationally, we will continue to make incremental improvements. Our plans include: 

    • evolving the digital systems used in Service Centres 

    • exploring how we can build on the complexity of the work we deliver 

    • considering centralising more work into National Services, where it makes sense to do so   

    Stay updated 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Common Platform: a modern digital case management system for the criminal justice system

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Common Platform: a modern digital case management system for the criminal justice system

    Common Platform is a bespoke digital case management system, designed and developed by HMCTS, for the Crown and magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.

    It has brought together a range of different ‘legacy’ case management systems used in the criminal justice system under a single, unified platform. 

    Before Common Platform, our people and partners faced significant daily challenges:  

    • High volumes of physical documents using hours of court time to manually handle 

    • Significant cost to the taxpayer of printing and transporting paper between agencies, causing delays and inefficiencies throughout the justice system. 

    • Need for legal advisers and court clerks to manually record and process actions after the hearing, slowing access to justice down further for victims, defendants and witnesses 

    • Delays and inefficiencies in completing daily tasks like booking interpreters, requesting screens, or processing court orders required multiple manual steps across different systems, causing delay and inefficiency 

    Benefits 

    Over 2.3 million criminal cases have been managed on Common Platform as of February 2025 (source Reformed Services Management Information, March 2025), meaning a number of benefits for the people and parties involved 

    • The right people involved in a case can access the right, up to date information at any time of day or night  

    • Users and agencies receive notifications and real time updates to the case instantly  

    • Automation of manual processes mean quicker progress, reduced chance of error and better use of expertise 

    • Information and data is kept and shared safely through controls over who can see what based on their role 

    • Greater resilience as HMCTS teams and external parties can access cases from any location, ensuring service continuity even if even if they cannot physically be on site at a court 

    • Quicker processing and uploading through automated case management, particularly for Single Justice Procedure cases 

    • Greater efficiency by eliminating some paper-based processes  

    • Better data collection to inform improvements  

    By developing the system in-house, we have strengthened our expertise and have greater flexibility to adapt the system to changing needs and technological developments.  

    Case Management Evolution  

    The implementation of Common Platform into all Crown and magistrates’ courts has transformed how cases are managed in criminal courts: over 2.3 million cases managed through the system (source Reformed Services Management Information, March 2025), demonstrates its robust capability , demonstrates its robust capability  

    • single system replacing multiple outdated platforms, reduces complexity and training needs 

    • real-time case updates across all agencies, significantly reduces delays in information sharing 

    Our Digital Transformation 

    The journey to modernise our criminal courts began in 2011, with Common Platform representing the most significant technological transformation in the justice system’s history. Under the Reform Programme from 2016, we faced the challenge of replacing multiple outdated systems that weren’t communicating with each other.  

    It has been very challenging to introduce such a significant change: 

    • Teams across HMCTS had to adapt to new roles and ways of working while managing existing caseloads  

    • The pandemic was especially challenging, as court personnel managed dual systems in live courtrooms 

    • We did not always get it right, initially focusing too heavily on technical solutions rather than user experience 

    • We did not deliver everything we set out to – for example Crown Prosecution Service case management systems interface with Common Platform, rather than being a direct part of it as originally planned 

    This has been valuable learning and helped shape our approach. By placing users at the heart of development and using their feedback to directly inform plans, we have still achieved a lot.  

    Digital Documentation  

    The move to digital processes has transformed how documents are handled and shared:  

    • Defence advocates can complete crucial forms digitally in real-time, saving court time and reducing errors  

    • Self-service access for case materials, allowing users more control  

    • Automatic generation of notices, orders and warrants, speeding up justice delivery  

    • Digital submission of documents, cutting costs and environmental impact  

    • Seamless transfer of materials between magistrates’ and Crown Courts, reducing delays 

    Automated Processing  

    Reform has introduced significant automation to streamline court processes:  

    • Automated Track Case Management (ATCM) for Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases, increasing efficiency  

    • Instant case creation and updates, eliminating manual data entry  

    • Automatic notifications to relevant parties, improving communication flow  

    • Electronic monitoring forms processed immediately, reducing processing time from hours to minutes  

    • Screen requests handled automatically, ensuring courtroom readiness 

    Better Information Sharing  

    The digital system has revolutionised information sharing between justice partners:  

    • Instant result notifications to police forces, enabling swift action  

    • Direct updates to the Legal Aid Agency, speeding up payments to advocates  

    • Immediate sharing of sentencing information with prisons and probation, improving offender management  

    • Role-based access ensuring secure information sharing, maintaining data protection  

    • Single point of contact through Courts and Tribunals Service Centres (CTSC), providing consistent support 

    System Performance  

    The platform has demonstrated significant improvements in efficiency and user satisfaction:  

    • Criminal courts across England and Wales now fully digital since August 2023, modernising justice delivery  

    • Defence practitioners can access case information instantly, improving preparation time  

    • Court personnel report significant time savings through automated processes 

    • positive feedback from judiciary, legal professionals and court personnel (January 2025) 

    This transformation represents a fundamental, technological change in the criminal courts moving all information digitally onto a shared system that all stakeholders can access, creating a more efficient, accessible and resilient justice system for all. 

    Working Together 

    We worked closely with: 

    • local police forces on rollout and delivery – police prosecutors are now able to upload direct to the system and self-serve 

    • CPS, who were a founding partner on setting up the system, improving their access to digital forms and requests 

    • All criminal justice system partners 

    • non police prosecutors (NPPs) – NPPs are now able to upload direct on to the system and self-serve 

    • Legal Aid Agency – ensuring defence advocates are paid swiftly for legal aid cases 

    • Courts and Tribunals Service Centres to offer best support and advice with ongoing cases to all stakeholders 

    • HM Prisons and Probation Service improving offender management, as they previously did not have access to the Libra legacy system 

    • Magistrates, legal advisers and judiciary as a vital partner at all levels to deliver a more streamlined system 

    Getting Support 

    We’ve established comprehensive support systems: 

    • dedicated Courts and Tribunals Service Centre (CTSC) providing customer support 

    • specialised training programmes for court personnel and system users 

    • regular system updates based on user feedback 

    • technical support available for all professional users 

    • service boards to monitor live performance and system changes  

    • permanent change function to prioritise and resource future improvements 

    Feedback and Insights 

    Users across the justice system have praised the new platform: 

    We have better oversight of cases, the triage process ensures that cases are listed appropriately and in the correct court, which means we are saving court time.

    Sharon Kostanjsek, Criminal Justice Unit Manager, Avon and Somerset Police 

    Dealing with a case on a single system, rather than at least 3 different systems as we did previously, is more practical and efficient.

    Jon Sugden, legal adviser  

    I like that producing orders is far simpler, now they are created directly from the result. There is no need to produce orders manually and email them or complete a lengthy electronic monitoring form.

    Mark Whiteley, formerly Wales transformation implementer 

    Future Plans 

    As we continue to develop the platform, we’re focusing on:  

    • enhanced data analytics capabilities, enabling evidence-based improvements  

    • further automation opportunities to continue increasing efficiency  

    • maintaining system flexibility to adapt to future needs  

    • continue developing new features based on user feedback 

    • transfer of system responsibility to HMCTS live service teams by March 2025 

    Stay Updated 

    Keep up to date with the latest criminal court news and information by subscribing to our e-alerts and newsletters.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Modernising probate: easing the most challenging times through innovation

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    Modernising probate: easing the most challenging times through innovation

    Probate is the legal right to handle someone’s estate after they die.

    Before 2019, applications were made on paper meaning: 

    • a risk of human error when completing complex, inaccessible forms 

    • legal jargon was not explained well or in a user-friendly way 

    • an inefficient process for court staff, applicants and probate professionals when manually handling dozens of forms 

    • applicants needed to travel to compulsory in-person appointments at registry offices  

    • a lack of flexibility to suit modern ways of working for the courts and probate professionals 

    We wanted to create a more accessible, user-friendly service that works for everyone, whether they choose to apply online or use paper forms. 

    Benefits 

    The reformed service has transformed probate administration. Through over 1 million digital applications received since 2019, we’ve seen:  

    • positive environmental impact by eliminating over 25 million pieces of paper 

    • improved flow of legacy information from the probate service to charities, helping them to plan their vital work 

    • consistent, 24/7 access to the service from any device 

    • simplified language and streamlined processes 

    • increased flexibility with the digital statement of truth replacing inconvenient in-person oaths and the requirement for a ‘wet signature’ 

    • improved resilience, enabling continued granting of applications during the pandemic  

    Our digital transformation 

    The journey to modernise probate began in 2016 with extensive user research, leading to the 2019 launch of our digital service, making probate one of the first services to be reformed. We’ve created two tailored pathways. 

    For personal applicants we now have: 

    • a user-friendly online application via GOV.UK 

    • the ability to save and return to an online application 

    • step-by-step guidance throughout 

    • real-time application tracking 

    • the ability to complete digital statement of truth at home 

    • a service with clear, jargon-free language 

    Probate professionals now have a: 

    • comprehensive MyHMCTS platform for online probate applications 

    • collaborative team working features 

    • streamlined online payment system 

    • smoother integration with HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) processes 

    • better way to manage workflows 

    • modern digital case files, accessible from any device 

    It’s clear that the digital service is working well: 

    • Digital applications have risen steeply from 17% in FY 19/20 to 80% April 2024 to December 2024  

    Getting support 

    For people who are less able or confident using online services, we’ve developed a comprehensive support system which includes: 

    • simplified paper forms 

    • a dedicated Digital Support service 

    • a specialist Service Centre for the probate service 

    • telephone support 

    • clear guidance on GOV.UK 

    • ensuring accessibility for all users 

    Feedback from service users 

    Applicants have told us what they think of the digital probate service: 

    It’s easy to use, fast and convenient. I found it so easy and efficient. It’s exactly what you want from an online government system – if only everything could be this easy!

    It was intuitive to use and the whole thing flowed from one section to the next really well. The way things are summarised at the end is very helpful. You can check it all before you send it and that’s reassuring.

    I’d been expecting sheets and sheets of questions – but that wasn’t the case. The instructions were clearly written and the way everything was set out was so user friendly. I think it took a couple of hours to complete.

    I initially thought the online service would be complicated and take some dealing with. I thought it would take me a long time to complete, but it didn’t take me long at all – an hour at the most.

    James’ story 

    “When James lost his father, he faced the daunting task of dealing with his estate. In the past, some of James’ friends who had gone through the probate process had told him it was paper-based, confusing, and filled with legal jargon that made it challenging for personal applicants like him, which worried him a lot. However, with the reformed digital service, James was able to apply for probate online at a time that suited him, without needing to visit a probate registry or deal with extensive paperwork. 

    Using the new digital service, James found the application process intuitive and efficient, allowing him to save his progress and return later. He could easily track his application status online, reducing uncertainty and providing reassurance during a difficult time. The digital statement of truth replaced the need for an in-person oath, saving James time and travel expenses. 

    Overall, the digital probate service provided James with a flexible, accessible, and user-friendly way to manage his father’s estate, making a challenging process much more manageable and allowing him to focus on what truly mattered.” 

    Working together 

    We work closely with: 

    • our probate service user group which includes Society of Trusts and Estates Practitioners, Institute of Legacy Management, The Law Society, Remember a Charity and the Institute of Chartered Accountants, England and Wales 

    • HMRC to streamline processes 

    Future plans 

    The journey to deliver an effective online service has not always been straight forward, and we’ve learned a lot. When we launched the service the combination of a planned fee increase, adapting to new ways of working and increased demand led to delays in applications being granted.  

    At its peak in August 2023, there was a backlog of 97,000 applications. The service is now concluding its recovery plan and the open caseload is around 37,000. The workable open caseload (where we have the information needed to progress the application) dropped by over 80% in the year to January 2025 to 9,856.  

    We’re now committed to continuously improving the service by: 

    • continuing to share information with the charity sector who rely on donations to carry out their important work 

    • working closely with probate professional representatives to improve the service 

    • improving notifications to make it easier for applicants to know what they need to send us 

    • streamlining inheritance tax processes with HMRC 

    • offering regional office drop-in sessions for probate professionals 

    • offering dedicated registrar appointments to progress complex applications 

    • improving notifications about application status 

    Stay updated 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: ATCM: Over 1 million Single Justice Procedure cases moved from paper to digital

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Case study

    ATCM: Over 1 million Single Justice Procedure cases moved from paper to digital

    The Single Justice Procedure (SJP) was introduced by the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

    It allows prosecutors – who decide whether a case should be taken through the procedure – to deal with cases involving adult defendants accused of lesser offences that cannot result in a prison sentence, including: 

    • speeding 

    • driving without insurance 

    • TV license evasion 

    • evading train fares  

    It enables defendants, prosecutors and courts to reach a resolution to minor offences without having to attend court (unless they choose to do so). 

    A single magistrate, advised by a professional lawyer, deals with cases under SJP away from a courtroom. There’s no prosecutor or defendant present and they can deal with the case swiftly without tying up valuable court time.  

    Before 2017, SJP cases relied on paper-based processes and outdated technology meaning: 

    • court staff and magistrates manually handling lots of paper 

    • hours spent manually entering data which also increased the risk of human error 

    • inefficient sharing of information over email causing delays 

    • cost to the taxpayer associated with printing and transporting files from building to building    

    The system needed modernisation to handle summary, non-imprisonable offences more efficiently.  

    Benefits 

    By introducing Automated Track Case Management (ATCM), a digital service created to help process SJP cases on the Common Platform criminal case management system, we’ve transformed the process. This modernised, streamlined service now provides courts, prosecutors, and the public with a more efficient service. 

    Over 1.1 million SJP cases have been completed digitally between April 2017 and 31 December 2024, each benefiting through: 

    • faster justice giving prosecutors more capacity and enabling for defendants to move on more quickly with their lives 

    • quicker information sharing between court, prosecutor and defendant 

    • the ability to interact with cases more accessibly at any time and keep informed of progress 

    • greater flexibility to magistrates and court staff, enabling a more efficient running of the work coming into court 

    • better consistency of service being provided to all stakeholders, with Courts and Tribunals Service Centres dealing with day-to-day enquiries, rather than individual courts 

    • more effective use of physical court capacity providing better value for money to the taxpayer 

    • case lists published online and additional information made available to journalists, to support open justice 

    • significant reduction in the financial cost of printing and transporting paper files 

    Our digital transformation 

    ATCM represents a transformation of the SJP system. The digital platform now manages cases from initial receipt through to the magistrate’s decision, while providing transparent access to case outcomes, referrals, and costs awarded to all stakeholders in the process, as well as journalists. 

    By creating a digital platform under the Reform Programme we’ve enabled: 

    • end-to-end digital case management from beginning of the process to decision, allowing all stakeholders to access the information they need in real time 

    • direct digital case uploading by prosecutors including DVLA, TV Licensing, TfL and local police forces 

    • online plea submissions, where defendants can upload supporting information  

    • real-time tracking of the progress made by a case 

    • automated notification system for case decisions to all stakeholders involved in the process, and also to journalists 

    • journalists can obtain detailed information (prosecution facts and defence mitigation) digitally 

    • digital access for magistrates to enter decisions directly into the system 

    • integrated support from Courts and Tribunals Service Centre (CTSC) 

    This benefits a range of people involved in the process: 

    • Prosecutors including the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, TV Licensing, and police forces can now upload cases directly to the system 

    • Defendants can submit pleas and access supporting information online 

    • Magistrates and legal advisers can access case details, record decisions, generate orders and notices, and update driver records all through one unified platform 

    • Journalists receive more information and do not have to travel to courts in person in order to report on cases 

    Better information sharing 

    The system’s role-based access ensures users only see information relevant to their needs, eliminating the need for paper documentation and reducing manual data entry.  

    Transparency is maintained through online publication of court lists, while journalists can access both upcoming hearing lists and court records, enabling scrutiny and reporting of outcomes to the public. 

    Take up of the digital service has been strong, with the volume of digital cases between April 2019 and March 2023 more than doubling.

    Since April 2022, 80% of people going through the single justice service are satisfied with the service they received.  

    Working together 

    We have consulted and collaborated with a number of justice partners to design, test and implement Automated Track Case Management, the digital system developed to administer Single Justice Procedure cases online: 

    • local police forces on rollout and delivery – police prosecutors are now able to upload direct to the system and self-serve 

    • all criminal justice system partners  

    • non police prosecutors (NPPs) – these are now digital by default and onboarding for NPPs will accelerate in 2025/2026 

    • Courts and Tribunals Service Centres to offer best support and advice with ongoing cases to all stakeholders 

    • magistrates, legal advisers and judiciary as a vital partner to deliver a more streamlined system 

    Getting support 

    The Courts and Tribunals Service Centres (CTSC) provide comprehensive assistance to all users. Key improvements include: 

    • dedicated support for defendants, prosecutors, and journalists 

    • consistent service levels across all interactions 

    • reduced wait times from over an hour to 15 minutes for phone queries 

    • new online self-endorsement system for driving licence details 

    Feedback and insights 

    Andrew Morris, Acting Head of Legal Operations for Wales, reflected:

    “It increases flexibility, is time efficient, more eco-friendly, and saves courtroom space for dealing with more serious offences.” 

    West Yorkshire Police Unit Operations Manager, Debbie Taylor, emphasised the impact:

    “Before ATCM and Common Platform, we did 600 SJP cases a week. In October 2024, it’s now gone up to 650 cases a week – and we are on track to increase to a thousand by June or July 2025.”   

    Future plans 

    We plan to continue to evolve the system including: 

    • completing the digital service rollout to all police forces nationwide engaging new non–police prosecutors including the Environment Agency and transport companies 

    • holding a comprehensive evaluation of the system’s sustainability and effectiveness 

    • improving media access and transparency measures – publishing more data than ever before, as well as inviting journalists to observe SJP sessions 

    • developing enhanced self-service options for users 

    • implementing continuous technological improvements 

    Stay updated 

    Keep up to date with the latest criminal court news and information by subscribing to our e-alerts and newsletters.  

    You can read more about how the Single Justice Procedure works by visiting: Explaining the Single Justice Procedure in the magistrates’ court – Inside HMCTS 

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Pension Age Disability Payment opens for applications in 13 local authority areas

    Source: Scottish Government

    New Scottish benefit for pensioners extends to more areas ahead of national roll out 

    A new benefit for pensioners is now open for applications in 13 more local authority areas in Scotland.   

    Pension Age Disability Payment has been extended to Aberdeenshire, Angus, Clackmannanshire, Dundee City, Falkirk, Fife, Moray, Na h-Eileanan Siar (Western Isles), Perth and Kinross and Stirling.  

     It is also now available in all three Ayrshire local authority areas – East Ayrshire, North Ayrshire and South Ayrshire.   

    The payment first launched in five local authority areas on 21 October 2024  and will be available throughout Scotland from 22 April this year.  

    Pension Age Disability Payment is for disabled people or those with a long-term health condition that means they need help looking after themselves or supervision to stay safe. It is available to people of State Pension age and is also available to pensioners who are terminally ill.  

    It is not means-tested and is worth between £290 and £434 a month depending on the needs of the person who gets it (increasing to between £295 and £441 a month from 1 April 2025).   

    Pension Age Disability Payment is replacing Attendance Allowance from the Department for Work and Pensions in Scotland. Social Security Scotland has started transferring the awards of 169,000 people in Scotland who currently receive Attendance Allowance to the new benefit.    

    People currently getting Attendance Allowance do not need to take any action; the transfer will happen automatically in phases throughout 2025. Everyone will continue to receive their payments on time and in the right amount.   

    Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said:  

    “I urge anyone who thinks they could be eligible for Pension Age Disability Payment to apply.

    “It is vital older people who are disabled, terminally ill people or who have care needs get the money they need to help them look after themselves, stay safe and live with dignity.

    “The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring everyone gets the financial support they’re entitled to and this has not changed following the UK Government’s announcement on welfare.”

    Henry Simmons, Alzheimer Scotland’s Chief Executive said:

    “It’s great to see Pension Age Disability Payment being rolled out across more areas. At the Brain Health and Dementia Resource Centre, we know that living with dementia leads to extra costs so it’s important that those affected can access the financial support they need, when they need it.

    “The application support that Social Security Scotland provide is vital for people who are already dealing with the emotional and practical challenges of living with dementia.

    “The availability of this support will make a positive difference to people living with dementia, improving their ability to live well with their condition.” 

    More information about Pension Age Disability Payment including who is eligible and how to apply can be found at: www.mygov.scot/pensiondisability  

    Background  

    Pension Age Disability Payment is replacing Attendance Allowance in Scotland. People in Scotland who are getting Attendance Allowance from the Department for Work and Pensions do not need to do anything as their award transfer will happen automatically. Social Security Scotland will write to people to let them know when this is happening and when this is complete. Social Security Scotland aims to complete case transfer for everyone by the end of 2025. Until people receive the letter from Social Security Scotland to tell them their transfer is complete, they should continue to report any change in circumstances, including a terminal illness diagnosis, to the Department for Work and Pensions.

    Pension Age Disability Payment launched on 21 October 2024 in five pilot areas – Aberdeen City, Argyll and Bute, Highland, Orkney and Shetland. It has rolled out to 13 more areas – Aberdeenshire, Angus, Clackmannanshire, Dundee City, East Ayrshire, Falkirk, Fife, Moray, Na h-Eileanan Siar (Western Isles), North Ayrshire, Perth and Kinross, South Ayrshire and Stirling. The payment will be available throughout Scotland from 22 April 2025.   

    Eligible people who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness are automatically entitled to the higher rate of care and can apply under special rules for terminal illness. This means that Social Security Scotland will prioritise their application. People who are already getting Pension Age Disability Payment who later receive a terminal illness diagnosis can also report this diagnosis under the special rules for terminal illness.   

    Pension Age Disability Payment was designed with the people who will be eligible for the benefit and those who support them. Improvements include a streamlined process for people to nominate a third-party representative who can support them in their interactions with Social Security Scotland.  

    Social Security Scotland can help people to apply, with face-to-face support available from advisers based in communities across the country.  

    Help is also available from independent advocacy service Voiceability who are funded by the Scottish Government to help disabled people applying for devolved benefits.  

    Social Security Scotland also has a separate, accelerated application process for people who are terminally ill. This is open to any eligible person who has a terminal diagnosis, no matter how long they’re expected to live. This is different to the Department for Work and Pensions, who only class someone as terminally ill if they are expected to live for 12 months or less. Eligible people automatically get the highest possible amount of Pension Age Disability Payment.   

    The Scottish Government has made it easier for people to nominate someone to support them in their engagement with Social Security Scotland – something that older disabled people told us was important to them.   

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Not Child’s Play. Polytechnic University Talks About Financial Security

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

    At Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, as part of the V International Financial Security Olympiad, a thematic lesson “NOT Child’s Play: 2.0. Drop Willy-nilly” was held, dedicated to issues of financial security and counteracting fraud. The event was held in a mixed format, which allowed more than 3,000 participants to unite: students and teachers from various SPbPU institutes, teachers and schoolchildren from St. Petersburg and the Donetsk People’s Republic.

    At the event, Deputy Head of the Interregional Department of Rosfinmonitoring for the Northwestern Federal District Daniil Sharippo presented the activities of the structure and spoke about various fraud schemes. He explained who droppers are, as well as the methods used by criminals to deceive citizens.

    The expert spoke in detail about the forms of telephone fraud and demonstrated how fake video and audio recordings are used. Particular attention was paid to current types of crimes.

    During the discussion, participants shared personal stories about encounters with scammers and discussed how to properly respond to such situations. The lesson was not only educational, but also practical, as students learned the basic rules of security in financial matters.

    “We will continue to hold such events. This is a very important topic that needs to be covered,” stressed SPbPU Vice-Rector for Security Alexander Airapetyan. “Today you were told about the main methods and ways to combat fraudsters. Use them, help the older and younger generations, as they are most susceptible to negative influence. Critical thinking is very important in the modern world.”

    At the end of the event, the participants received an invitation to the international Olympiad on financial security, the winners and prize winners of which have priority when entering the bachelor’s, specialist’s and master’s programs of SPbPU. This became an additional incentive for in-depth study of this topic. Detailed information on the procedure for holding the Olympiad can be found atwebsite.

    The Higher School of Public Administration of IPMEiT is an active participant in the Olympiad movement on financial security. Students participate and win prizes in this competition every year.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Polytechnic football players win Turchak tournament

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

    The 11th tournament of the association of football federations “North-West” among youth teams named after Anatoly Turchak has ended in Saint Petersburg. Eight U-21 teams from professional clubs and sports schools, as well as two student teams, participated in the event. The fate of the final was decided by a penalty shootout, in which the team of the Polytechnic University beat “Leningradets”.

    The final match was tense. In the 24th minute, with the score 1:1, the SPbPU team was left in the minority after a dismissal. At the end of the first half, Leningradets took the lead. But the Polytechnicians showed character, leveling the score — 2:2. In the penalty shootout, SPbPU goalkeeper Nikita Maksimov repelled three shots from the opponents and brought the team victory.

    The Polytechnic team finally broke its losing streak: in 2023 and 2024, our footballers missed out on bronze, losing on penalties. The first medals of the Turchak tournament turned out to be gold for the Black Bears. Captain Dmitry Gultyaev was recognized as the best player of the tournament.

    The Polytechnicians were awarded an exclusive trophy, which bears the logos of the football federations that are part of the North-West OFF, and the signature of Anatoly Turchak with his quote: I have loved, love and will love football.

    We had two goals for this tournament: to win and to prepare for the first stage of the National Student Football League. For us, it starts in mid-April in Astrakhan. All the matches were tough, the score did not always reflect what was happening on the field. When we lost 0:4 to Leningradets in the group stage, I thought that perhaps this was the key moment of the tournament for us with a plus sign. I knew that the team would shake itself up and win in the decisive matches, and so it turned out. Many thanks to all our players who did not let us down, came to all the matches. We also thank the administrative staff and fans who supported us in the stands and watched the broadcasts, – shared the head coach of the Polytechnic national football team Stepan Verbitsky.

    Photos provided by OFF “North-West”.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Students of the State University of Management won medals at intellectual games of logisticians

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    Last week, the first Logistics Debates and the III Elective Intellectual Game were held at the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, in which students from the State University of Management took part.

    In the first Logistics Debates, teams of three competed in the persuasiveness of their arguments for prizes in the form of certificates for the Art of Speech course. GUU was represented by 4th-year students: 1. Fink Daniil; 2. Molchanova Elizaveta; 3. Kozhokar Andrey.

    Our glorious trio won bronze medals, congratulations!

    In the III Elective Intellectual Game on Logistics, the team of the 2nd year students of the State University of Management competed for the crystal owl and the title of the smartest and most resourceful: 1. Pirozhnikov Alexander; 2. Rezvov Anton; 3. Glyzina Ekaterina; 4. Antonova Kristina; 5. Pashayeva Sayat; 6. Nikolaev Igor.

    Our students showed their worth and received certificates.

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 03/24/2025

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News