NewzIntel.com

Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – Monetary Dialogue in March 2025: Summary of parliamentary scrutiny activities – 29-04-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    This paper provides a summary of all scrutiny activities of the European Parliament related to euro area monetary policy in occasion of the March 2025 Monetary Dialogue with the European Central Bank (ECB). It covers the topics chosen by the competent Committee and related expertise papers provided in advance of the Dialogue, the actual topics addressed during the Dialogue, a brief overview of results from the Monetary Policy Expert Panel Survey, the latest written questions made by Members to the ECB President and European Parliament resolution on the ECB Annual Report 2024. The document is published regularly ahead and after each Monetary Dialogue with the ECB.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Organic Regulation’s run provisions – E-001177/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    As stated in the Commission’s Communication ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations’[1], continuous support for organic farming remains essential for the Commission.

    Organic farming is a voluntary scheme[2] based on precise legal standards set in Regulation (EU) 2018/848 on organic production and labelling of organic products[3] and its associated secondary legislation. Organic farming has been increasingly successful over the last decade as EU consumers choose to support a model that is based on ambitious environmental and animal welfare rules.

    Regulation (EU) 2018/848 generally requires poultry to have access to open air areas and herbivores to have access to pastures and provides only time-limited exemptions to these requirements related in particular to weather conditions, state of the grounds or animal health diseases[4].

    • [1] COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations, Brussels, 19.2.2025 COM(2025) 75 final.
    • [2] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/farming/organic-farming_en
    • [3] Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2008, OJ L 150 14.6.2018, p. 1.
      ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/848/2024-12-01
    • [4] Frequently asked questions ON ORGANIC RULES , replies to questions 12 and 14.
      https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/e5b18da2-e7a7-4535-8425-db81ebe7e5ba_en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Clarification on the prohibition of burrow hunting with dogs under the Habitats Directive – E-001570/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001570/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Sebastian Everding (The Left), Emma Fourreau (The Left), Anja Hazekamp (The Left)

    Under Article 15 of the Habitats Directive, Member States are required to prohibit the use of all indiscriminate means capable of causing the local disappearance of, or serious disturbance to, populations of species listed in Annex IV or Annex V when managed under derogations.

    Burrow hunting with dogs is a widespread hunting practice in several Member States, particularly for foxes. However, this non-selective method poses a serious risk to strictly protected species such as Felis silvestris, Cricetus cricetus, and various Chiroptera species, which may unintentionally be targeted. Furthermore, Meles meles, listed under Appendix III of the Bern Convention, is frequently subjected to this practice, raising significant conservation concerns.

    • 1.Does the Commission intend to clarify that burrow hunting with dogs is prohibited under Article 15 of the Habitats Directive due to its non-selective nature?
    • 2.What measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure the protection of threatened species from non-selective hunting methods, including burrow hunting with dogs?

    Submitted: 17.4.2025

    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Threat to health from PFAS in food – E-001626/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001626/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Günther Sidl (S&D)

    According to the news website Euractiv, the Dutch health agency (the Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheiden Milieu or ‘RIVM’) issued a warning just before Easter advising people against eating eggs from their own garden, after studies reportedly found a high concentration of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), the harmful ‘forever chemicals’. The Euractiv article claims that similar warnings are in place for regions in France, Belgium and Italy.

    • 1.Does the Commission have a procedure for monitoring the PFAS contamination of food in the Member States and individual regions?
    • 2.What does the Commission make of the threat to health posed by PFAS in food, particularly in privately produced eggs?
    • 3.Does it have current plans to reduce the health risks associated with PFAS in food?

    Submitted: 23.4.2025

    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Making airbags mandatory for motorcyclists – E-001560/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001560/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Cristina Guarda (Verts/ALE)

    The many EU citizens who use mopeds and motorcycles for the purposes of mobility and recreation are particularly vulnerable because of the inherent risks of using these powered two-wheeled motor vehicles (PTWs).

    The share of PTW rider fatalities keeps increasing, the 3 361 motorcyclists and 539 moped users who died on EU roads in 2023 accounting for 19 % of all EU road traffic deaths that year[1].

    Given that:

    Inflatable airbags could, according to recent studies, improve motorcyclist safety by reducing serious spinal injuries by 60 %[2] and affording better lower-body protection[3].

    The Commission was stressing the need for specific airbag rules to address safety issues for motorcyclists as far back as 2010[4].

    Parliament highlighted the urgency of further safety measures for PTWs in its resolution of 6 October 2021[5].

    We therefore ask the Commission:

    What is it doing to improve road safety for motorcyclists? Is it considering making airbags compulsory for PTWs?

    Submitted: 16.4.2025

    • [1] https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/2023-figures-show-stalling-progress-reducing-road-fatalities-too-many-countries-2024-03-08_en?prefLang=it.
    • [2] Giustini, M., Cedri,S., Tallon, M., Roazzi, P., Formisano, R., Pitidis, A., ‘Use of back protector device on motorcycles and mopeds in Italy’, International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 43, Issue 6, December 2014, pp. 1921–1928, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu209.
    • [3] Pallacci, T., Baldanzini, N., Barbani, D., Pierini, M., ‘Preliminary effectiveness assessment of an airbag-based device for riders’ leg protection in side impacts’, Procedia Structural Integrity, Vol. 24, 2019, pp. 240–250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2020.02.021.
    • [4] European Commission, ‘Towards a European road safety area 2011-2020’, COM(2010) 389 final.
    • [5] European Parliament resolution of 6 October 2021 on the EU Road Safety Policy Framework 2021-2030 – Recommendations on next steps towards ‘Vision Zero’ (2021/2014(INI))
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Lack of reliability in olive oil taste classification systems experienced by Spanish producers – E-001575/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001575/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE)

    The olive oil sector in Spain and the EU faces legal uncertainty, as it is the only food product for which the quality control and classification system is based on a sensory analysis by tasting panels which can be carried out after the product is put on the market. Although Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2015 regulate that procedure, results vary significantly between panels and laboratories. This affects how products are categorised as extra virgin and virgin and leads to penalty proceedings with penalties of up to EUR 100 000. This disparity negatively affects producers, complicates exports and harms the competitiveness of the European sector vis-à-vis international markets.

    In view of the above:

    • 1.Could the Commission assess the feasibility of having approved, comparable tasting panels before products are bottled that are able to provide uniform, legally certain results?
    • 2.What steps is the Commission considering to improve the reliability of classification systems, avoid barriers to trade and lessen the legal uncertainty experienced by Spanish producers as a result of varying results produced by organoleptic analysis panels when classifying olive oil as virgin or extra virgin?

    Submitted: 17.4.2025

    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System – A10-0082/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System

    (COM(2024)0567 – C10‑0207/2024 – 2024/0315(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2024)0567),

    – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2) points (b) and (d) and Article 87(2) point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10-0207/2024),

    – 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 (A10-0082/2025),

    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

    AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT[*]

    to the Commission proposal

    ———————————————————

    REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

    on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System
     

    THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

    Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 77(2) points (b) and (d) and Article 87(2) point (a), thereof,

     

    Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

     

    After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

     

    Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure[1],

     

    Whereas:

    (1) Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 of the European Parliament and of the Council[2], establishing the Entry/Exit System (‘EES’), provides that the Commission is to decide the date from which the EES is to start operations, provided that certain conditions are met.

    (2) However, the Commission has not received all notifications pursuant to Article 66(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, which is one of the conditions for deciding on the start of operations of the EES.

    (3) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 only allows for a full start of operations, requiring all Member States to start using the EES fully for all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES and to use the EES simultaneously at all their border crossing points. However, a full start of operations of all EES functionalities at all border crossing points simultaneously constitutes a risk for the resilience of the EES as a whole and for passenger flows at the external borders.

    (4) In order to ensure a smooth launch of the EES and facilitate its timely roll-out in all Member States, to provide Member States with the necessary flexibility to start using the EES within a clearly defined period of time and to facilitate technical and operational adjustments when starting to operate the EES, it is necessary to lay down rules for a progressive start of operations of the EES during which Member States should be able to opt for a phased roll-out of the EES. To ensure these adjustments take account of potential travel flows and seasonal peaks, such a progressive start should have a duration of 180 calendar days.

    (5) To enable a progressive start of operations of the EES it is ▌necessary to derogate from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council[3] (‘Schengen Borders Code’). Other rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that are not affected by this Regulation apply as provided for in that Regulation. In particular, the data recorded in the EES throughout the progressive start of operations follow the rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and are considered reliable and accurate. This Regulation does not affect the validity of the notifications already provided to the Commission by Member States under Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    (6) Member States that do not intend to use the EES simultaneously at all their border crossing points from the start of operations, should progressively start operating the EES to record, on entry and exit, the data of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES at one or more border crossing points, or at one or more lanes of such border crossing points. If possible and applicable, Member States should include a combination of air, land and sea border crossing points. To ensure a controlled launch of the EES and to better manage and avoid potential long waiting times at the borders, where relevant, and if necessary, Member States should deploy all the functionalities of the EES progressively and register the data of all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES gradually. To ensure the full use of the EES at all border crossing points in the Union, where Member States choose a progressive start of operations it should be implemented in phases, which should set the minimum requirements to be reached by Member States. Member States will retain the possibility to accelerate implementation at national level or start operating the EES fully from the start of operations. The gradual processing of data in the EES should be carried out in full respect of the rights of data subjects as set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and should not lead, directly or indirectly, to any form of discrimination or profiling. The Commission, in consultation with the European Data Protection Supervisor, should issue guidelines on the processing of personal data in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

    (7) To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) should develop a high-level roll-out plan to support the effective and continuous operation of the EES Central System, include fall-back procedures for the functioning of the EES Central System and provide guidance to the end-users, including the Member States and Union agencies on planning and executing the EES deployment during its progressive start of operations and should submit it to the European Parliament, the Commission, Member States and Union agencies. ▌

    (8) To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, Member States should develop national roll-out plans in consultation with the Commission and eu-LISA and present those plans to the Commission. For each of the phases of the progressive start of the EES operations, the national roll-out plans should include the information on the set thresholds and requirements, in particular: (i) the date from which the EES will operate at each border crossing point; (ii) the percentage of the estimated number of border crossings to be registered in the EES out of the total number of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES; and (iii) where applicable, the biometric functionalities to be operated at each selected border crossing point. When preparing their respective national roll-out plans, Member States should appropriately coordinate with the operators of infrastructure where border crossing points are located. and inform relevant stakeholders of the border crossing points where they plan to start operating the EES and of their planned use of the biometric functionalities of the EES. To monitor compliance with the progressive start of operations, Member States should provide the Commission and eu-LISA monthly reports on the implementation of their roll-out plans unless and until the EES is used fully for all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES and is used simultaneously at all border crossing points in the Member State. Such monthly reports should include corrective measures, where necessary, to ensure compliance with the progressive start of operations. The Commission should issue guidelines to facilitate the adoption of national roll-out plans and monthly reports by the Member States that are concise and proportionate.

    (8a)  To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, it is important that neither the start nor the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES coincide with the peak travel seasons in summer, June to August, or winter, December to February.

    (9) Due to the progressive start of operations of the EES and resulting incompleteness of the data recorded in the EES, travel documents of third-country nationals should be systematically stamped on entry and exit during the progressive start of operations of the EES. National authorities should take into account the possible incompleteness of entry/exit records or of refusal of entry records and should consider stamps as prevailing over the information registered in the EES. In addition, when providing information to third-country nationals about the maximum remaining duration of their authorised stay, national authorities should base their assessment on the stamps affixed in the travel documents. The data recorded in the EES should be used in the calculation of maximum remaining duration only in case a stamp is missing.

    (10) Considering that the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES might be incomplete, national authorities should not take into account the results provided by the automated calculator on the maximum remaining duration of the authorised stay of third-country nationals registered in the EES. Similarly, when carrying out their tasks, national authorities should not take into account the automated mechanism to identify or flag the lack of exit records following the date of expiry of an authorised stay or the records for which the maximum duration of authorised stay was exceeded, as well as the generated lists of persons identified as overstayers.

    (11) To provide Member States with the necessary time to adjust to the start of the EES, for the first 60 calendar days of the progressive start of operations, the use of biometric functionalities at border crossing points should not be mandatory. However, Member States are encouraged to make use of those functionalities during that period in order to support a smooth operational transition and to enable the timely detection and resolution of any potential implementation issues. No later than the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations, Member States should operate the EES with biometric functionalities at least at half of their border crossing points. Providing biometric data should not be an entry condition for third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES at the border crossing points where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities.

    (12) To accommodate the need to progressively deploy the EES with biometric functionalities at some border crossing points, the biometric verification of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES should only be carried out at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated with biometric functionalities.

    (13) To ensure coherence of the operations of the interoperability between the Visa Information System (VIS) established by Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council[4] and the EES, the VIS should only be accessed directly at those border crossing points at which the EES is not operated. At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border authorities should make use of the interoperability between the EES and the VIS.

    (14) Third-country nationals whose data are to be recorded in the EES should be informed about their rights and obligations regarding the processing of their data in the form of a template as provided in Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. The information to be provided to third-country nationals subject to the EES registration should refer to the progressive start of operations of the EES. Third-country nationals should be informed in the template of their obligation to provide biometric data at border crossing points where it constitutes an entry condition. They should be made aware in the template of the consequences of not providing biometric data. They should be informed in the template that it will not be possible for them to verify the remaining duration of the authorised stay by automated means. National authorities should make all reasonable efforts to provide those third-country nationals with details of the duration of their authorised stay based on the stamps in their travel documents.

    (15) To reflect the progressive start of operations of the EES, the Commission should, at least every month, introduce relevant updates on the EES website.

    (16) The aim of raising awareness among third-country nationals on their specific rights and obligations would be best achieved if Member States customise the implementation of the campaign based on how the EES will operate at their borders at which the EES is operated in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. The information materials developed by the Commission, in cooperation with the supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and with the support of Member States in the context of Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 should therefore be adapted to carry out the information campaign accompanying the progressive start of operations.

    (17) During the progressive start of operations of the EES, the web service will not enable third-country nationals to electronically verify the exact duration of their authorised stay.

    (18) This Regulation does not affect the obligations of air carriers, sea carriers and international carriers transporting groups overland by coach as set out in Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement[5] and Council Directive 2001/51/EC.[6] In this respect, carriers should verify the stamps affixed in travel documents. To ensure effective communication with carriers about the distinct application of the EES at the border crossing points, ultimately benefiting travellers, it is crucial that Member States are transparent about the deployment of the EES at their border crossing points.

    (19) Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Article 12a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 provide for a transitional period and transitional measures referring to the start of operations of the EES. It is necessary to derogate from those Articles to ensure that the transitional period and the transitional measures apply only as of the end of the progressive start of operations. That derogation should cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    (20) To ensure that national authorities and EU agencies, in the performance of their tasks, avoid taking decisions exclusively based on data registered in the EES, they should take into account that individual files registered in the EES may contain incomplete data sets and should in any case not take decisions adversely affecting individuals exclusively on the basis that a registration of an alleged entry or exit is absent in the EES. That derogation should cease to apply 5 years after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 to reflect the 5-year retention period for data sets for which the exit record is missing as set out in Article 34(3) of that Regulation.

    (21) When ensuring compliance with the provisions in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 on the amendment of data and advance data erasure, Member States should complete the incomplete data to the extent permitted by the limited availability of the sets of data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

    (22) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should refrain from using data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations for carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments due to the incompleteness of the data that could lead to misleading risk and vulnerability assessments.

    (23) To ensure effective management of the external borders during the progressive start of operations of the EES, at the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated, border checks should be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as applicable [the day before the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226]. At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border checks should be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and the Schengen Borders Code. However, specific derogations from these Regulations should apply with regards to the verification at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated without biometric functionalities to enable the progressive start of operations. This should happen without prejudice to verifications of visa holders by using fingerprints, in accordance with Regulation (EC) 767/2008.

    (24) To enable an effective adjustment of technical and organisational arrangements ▌and to address potential exceptional circumstances of failure of the EES Central System, national systems or communication infrastructure, or excessive waiting times at their borders, during the period of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States should have the possibility to suspend the operations of the EES at certain border crossing points, fully or partially. In case of partial suspension, the registration of biometric data in the EES should be suspended. In case of full suspension, no data should be registered in the EES. In both cases, Member States should promptly inform the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers. No later than 6 hours after the start of the suspension, Member States should notify to the Commission and eu-LISA the reason for the full or partial suspension and its expected duration.

    (24a)  To mitigate additional risks related to the deployment of the EES with biometric functionalities, Member States should have the possibility, in exceptional circumstances leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting times at borders become excessive, to suspend the registration of biometric data in the EES after the end of the progressive start of operations. Such a suspension should be possible for a limited period of 60 days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES.

    (25) eu-LISA should publish reports on the statistics on the use of the system, which should serve to evaluate the system’s performance, assess Member States compliance with the eu-LISA high-level roll-out plan and the national roll-out plans, identify areas for improvement, monitor compliance with the progressive start of operations of the EES, and support decision-making relating to the system’s further development and optimisation. Furthermore, eu-LISA should continue its regular reporting to its Management Board, which will in turn oversee the gradual roll-out of EES operations.

    (26) The preparatory work related to the roll-out plans should be triggered by the date of the entry into force of this Regulation. Member States which have not yet submitted their declaration of readiness are urged to do so within 30 days after the entry into force of this Regulation. The progressive start of operations should apply from the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of EES Regulation. As this Regulation provides for temporary derogations, it should cease to apply 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.  However, the derogatory rules on the application of transitional period and transitional measures, access to EES data, verification by the carriers of stamps affixed in the travel documents and the suspension of the EES should apply for a limited period after the end of the progressive start of operations.

    (27) The objective of this Regulation, authorising derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 to provide for a progressive start of operations of the EES, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and impact of the action, be better achieved at Union level. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.

    (28) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark should, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.

    (29) This Regulation does not constitute a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland takes part in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC. Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

    (30) 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 those states association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Council Decision 1999/437/EC.

    (31) As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC, read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC.

    (32) As regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU.

    (33) As regards Cyprus, the provisions of this Regulation relating to the VIS constitute provisions building upon, or otherwise relating to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession. The operation of the EES requires the granting of passive access to the VIS. As the EES is only to be operated by those Member States that fulfil the conditions related to VIS at the start of the operation of the EES, Cyprus will not operate the EES from the start of operations. Cyprus is to be connected to the EES as soon as the conditions of the procedure referred to in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 are met.

    (34) The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and delivered its opinion on [xx].

    (35) This Regulation establishes strict rules concerning access to the EES, as well as the necessary safeguards for such access. It also sets out the individuals’ rights of access, rectification, completion, erasure and redress, in particular the right to a judicial remedy and the supervision of processing operations by public independent authorities. This Regulation therefore respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to human dignity, the prohibition of slavery and forced labour, the right to liberty and security, respect for private and family life, the protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination, the rights of the child, the rights of the elderly, the integration of persons with disabilities and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. 

    (36) This Regulation is without prejudice to the obligations deriving from the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967.

     

    HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

    Article 1
    Subject matter

    This Regulation lays down rules on a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System (EES) at the borders of the Member States at which the EES is operated in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and temporary derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399.

    Article 2
    Definitions

    For the purposes of this Regulation, the definitions in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 apply. In addition, the following definitions apply:

    (a) ‘progressive start of operations of the EES’ means the period of 180 calendar days starting from the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (b) ‘national authorities’ means the authorities referred to in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (c) ‘estimated number of border crossings’ means a Member State’s estimate of the number of border crossings of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 in each Member State based on the yearly average of the total number of border crossings of third-country nationals travelling for a short stay in that Member State calculated for the preceding two calendar years from the date of application  referred to in Article 8(1), second subparagraph, of this Regulation.

    Article 3
    Roll-out plans and monthly reports

    1. By [the 30th calendar day after the entry into force of this Regulation], the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) shall provide the European Parliament, the Commission, Member States, as well as Europol, with a high-level roll-out plan on the progressive start of operations of the EES, taking into account the phases set out in Article 4. That roll-out plan shall support the effective and continuous operation of the EES Central System, include fall-back procedures for the functioning of the EES Central System and provide guidance on the use of the EES to the end-users, including Member States and Europol ▌. 

    2. By [the 60th calendar day after the entry into force of this Regulation], in consultation with the Commission and eu-LISA, Member States shall develop  national roll-out plans on the progressive start of operations of the EES, taking into account the high-level roll-out plan referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and present those plans to the Commission. Where a Member State does not start operating the EES fully from the beginning of the progressive start of operations of the EES, the national roll-out plan shall specify how the thresholds and requirements set out in Article 4 shall be met. EU-Lisa shall assess whether the national roll-out plans are consistent with the high-level roll-out plan and shall confirm that they do not contain any deficiencies which could further delay the entry into operation of the EES. Member States shall inform relevant stakeholders of the border crossing points where they plan to start operating the EES and of their planned use of the biometric functionalities of the EES.

    3. ▌

    4. From the 30th calendar day after the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, Member States shall provide monthly reports to the European Parliament, the Commission and eu-LISA on the implementation of their national roll-out plans, including corrective measures where necessary to comply with the obligations set out in Article 4.

    5. At the request of the Commission, eu-LISA shall provide the Commission with the statistics necessary for the Commission to monitor the implementation of the high-level roll-out plan and the national roll-out plans, in accordance with Article 63(6) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    5a. The eu-Lisa Management Board shall adopt the high-level roll-out plan referred to in paragraph 1. The Management Board shall also monitor the stability of the EES Central System during the progressive start of operations and suggest additional actions where appropriate.

    5b. The Commission shall issue guidelines to facilitate the provision of concise national roll-out plans and monthly reports by the Member States.

    5c. The Commission, in consultation with the European Data Protection Supervisor, shall issue guidelines on the processing of personal data in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

    Article  4
    Progressive start of operations

    1. By way of derogation from Article 66(6) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 during the progressive start of operations of the EES, the Member States shall use the EES as set out in this Article.

    2. From the first day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, each Member State shall start using the EES on entry and exit at one or more border crossing points with, if possible and applicable, a combination of air, land and sea border crossing points, to record and store data of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. No later than the 30th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall register in the EES at least 10% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State.

    For the first 60 calendar days of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may operate the EES without biometric functionalities, and national authorities may create or update individual files without biometric data.

    3. No later than the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at least at half of their border crossing points. Member States shall register at least 35% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State. The individual files of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that are registered in the EES shall contain biometric data.

    4. No later than the 150th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at all their border crossing points and shall continue registering in the EES at least 50% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State.

    5. No later than the 170th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at all their border crossing points and shall register in the EES all third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    6. Refusals of entry, decided at a border crossing point at which the EES is operated, shall be recorded in the EES, as set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. Where the EES is operated with biometric functionalities, refusals of entry shall be recorded with biometric data. Where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities, refusals of entry shall be recorded without biometric data.

    7. From the first day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Europol shall use the EES as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    Article 5
    Other derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399

    1. In addition to the rules of Article 4, the rules set out in this Article shall apply to all Member States during the progressive start of operations of the EES.

    2. Border authorities shall systematically stamp the travel documents of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 on entry and exit.

    The stamping obligations referred to in Article 42a(1), second subparagraph, and Article 42a(2), (5) and (6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall apply mutatis mutandis in the Member States operating the EES.

    3. For entering, amending, erasing and consulting the data in the EES, national authorities that are competent for the purposes laid down in Articles 23 to 35 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall consider stamps as prevailing over the EES data, including in cases of discrepancy or in cases referred to in Article 16(4) of that Regulation. The data recorded in the EES shall prevail in case a stamp is missing.

    4. In the absence of a stamp affixed in the travel document and of an individual file created in the EES for a third-country national present in the territory of the Member States, national authorities may presume that the third-country national does not fulfil or no longer fulfils the conditions relating to entry or stay in the Member States.

    This presumption shall not apply to third-country nationals who can provide, by any means, credible evidence that they enjoy the right of free movement under Union law, ▌ or that they hold a residence permit or a long-stay visa.

    This presumption may be rebutted where the third-country nationals provide, by any means, credible evidence that they have respected the conditions relating to the duration of a short stay.

    Where the presumption is rebutted, national authorities shall perform one or more of the following tasks at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, to the extent allowed by this Regulation:

    (a) create an individual file for that third-country national in the EES, if necessary;

    (b) update the latest entry/exit record by entering the missing data;

    (c) erase an existing file where Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 provides for such erasure.

    5. Border authorities shall make use of the interoperability between the EES and the VIS referred to in Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 only at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated. Border authorities shall continue accessing the VIS directly:

    (a) at the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated;

    (b) where the EES is suspended in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation.

    6. National authorities and Europol shall disregard the following:

    (a) the results of the automated calculator that provides information on the maximum duration of the authorised stay referred to in Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (b) the automatically generated list of overstayers and its consequences in particular as referred to in Article 6(1), points (c) and (h), Article 12(3), Article 16(4), Article 34(3), Article 50(1), points (i) and (k), Article 63(1), point (e) of that Regulation.

    7. Processing operations by Member States that comply with this Regulation shall not be considered as unlawful or not compliant with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 for the purposes of Articles 45 and 48 of that Regulation.

    8. Verification of the identity and previous registration of third-country nationals pursuant to Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be carried out on the third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of that Regulation at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated with biometric functionalities, including through self-service systems, where available.

    9. In addition to the specific information referred to in Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that is to be added by the Member States in the template to provide information to third-country nationals about the processing of their personal data in the EES, Member States shall accompany the template to be handed over to third-country nationals at the time the individual file of the person concerned is being created  with the following information:

    ‘The Entry/Exit System is being progressively rolled out. During this roll-out period [from …], your personal data, including your biometric data, might not be collected for the purposes of the Entry/Exit System at all Member States’ external borders. If we need to mandatorily collect this information and you choose not to provide it, you will be refused entry. During this period of the progressive roll-out your data will not be automatically added to a list of overstayers. In addition, you will not be able to check how much longer you are authorised to stay using the website or equipment available at border crossing points. You may address any queries regarding the duration of your authorised stay to the relevant national authorities at the external borders.

    Please note that when the progressive roll-out of the EES is completed, your personal data will be processed according to the information provided in the document accompanying this form.’

    10. The information on the EES website referred to in Article 50(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be adapted by the Commission to reflect the progressive start of operations.

    11. The information campaign referred to in Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 accompanying the start of operations of the EES, shall reflect the specific conditions at the border crossing points, ensuring that the relevant information is communicated to those affected, and taking into account the phases set out in Article 4 of this Regulation. The Commission, in cooperation with the European Data Protection Supervisor and national supervisory authorities, shall support Member States in preparing the adapted materials of the information campaign.

    12. The application of Article 12(1) and (2), Article 13(1) and (2), Article 20 and Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be suspended.

    13. By way of derogation from Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Article 12a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the transitional period and the transitional measures set out in those Articles shall apply from the first day after the progressive start of operations of the EES has ended.

    14. At the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated, border checks shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as applicable on the day before the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border checks shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399.

    By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, at the border crossing points where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities, Article 6(1), point (f)(i), and the provisions on the verification of third-country nationals based on biometric data, solely for the purposes of the EES, referred to in Articles 6, point (f) (ii) and Article 8 (3), points (a) and (g) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall not apply.

    For the purposes of this Regulation, Article 9(3) and Article 12 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall be suspended.

    Article 6
    Access to the EES data

    1. When accessing the entry and exit records registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES in the performance of their tasks:

    (a) national authorities and Europol shall take into account that, due to the variable operations of the EES in each Member State during the progressive start of operations of the EES, the data could be incomplete;

    (aa)  national authorities and Europol shall not take decisions adversely affecting individuals solely on the basis that a registration of an alleged entry or exit is absent in the EES;

    (b) national authorities shall take into account that the data could be incomplete when communicating data in accordance with Articles 41 and 42 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (c) the ETIAS Central Unit shall take into account that the entry and exit records registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES could include incomplete sets of data for the purpose of verification in accordance with Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. 

    2. Competent authorities, the Commission and relevant Union agencies shall take into account that the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES may be incomplete when accessing data for reporting and statistics as referred in Article 63 of Regulation EU 2017/2226.

    3. By way of derogation from Article 13(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, carriers may start using the web service referred to in that Article from the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES. Carriers shall verify the stamps affixed in the travel documents with a view to fulfilling their obligations under Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and under Council Directive 2001/51/EC for the duration of the progressive start of operations of the EES.

    For a period of 180 calendar days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES, carriers shall, in addition to using the web service as referred to in Article 13(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 continue verifying the stamps affixed in travel documents with a view to fulfilling their obligations under Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and Council Directive 2001/51/EC.

    4. When fulfilling the obligations referred in Articles 35 and 52 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 in relation to the completion of personal data recorded in the EES, Member States shall complete the relevant data only to the extent possible taking into account the limited availability of the sets of data collected during the progressive start of operations of the EES. Where applicable, the administrative decision referred to in Article 52(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall refer to the conditions set out in Article 4 of this Regulation that allow for the registration of incomplete files.

    5. By way of derogation from Article 63(1), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, the duly authorised staff of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall not access the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES for the purpose of carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments.

    Article 7
    Suspension of the EES

    1. During the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may fully or partially suspend operating the EES at certain border crossing points in case of failure of the EES Central System, national systems or communication infrastructure, or events leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting time at a border crossing point becomes excessive.

    In case of partial suspension, the data referred to in Articles 16 to 20 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be collected, with the exception of biometric data.

    In case of full suspension, Member States shall completely suspend the EES operations and shall not collect the data referred to in Articles 16 to 20 of that Regulation.

    In both cases, Member States shall promptly inform the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers. No later than 6 hours after the start of the suspension, Member States shall notify to the Commission and eu-LISA the reason for the partial or full suspension and its expected duration ▌. Once the ▌circumstances that led to the suspension cease, Member States shall end the suspension and promptly notify the Commission, eu-LISA and the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers thereof.

    2. For a period of 60 calendar days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may partially suspend operating the EES as referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, at a certain border crossing point for a limited time of maximum 4 hours within a day and only in exceptional circumstances leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting time at a border crossing point becomes excessive. Member States shall be relieved of their obligation set out in Article 21(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 as regards biometric data. In those cases, Member States shall promptly and no later than 6 hours after the start of suspension notify the reason for the suspension and its expected duration to the Commission and eu-LISA.

    3. ▌

    4. ▌

    Article 8
    Entry into force and application

    1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the fourth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

    It shall apply from the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

    However, Article 3 of this Regulation shall apply from the entry into force of this Regulation.

    2. This Regulation shall cease to apply 180 calendar days from the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. However:

    (a) Article 5(13) shall cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (b) Article 6(1), (2), (4) and (5) shall cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (c) Article 6(3), second subparagraph, shall cease to apply 360 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

    (d) Article 7(2)) shall cease to apply 240 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

     (e) ▌.

    This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

    Done at Brussels,

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Violations identified by the Council of Europe anti-torture committee in detention and return centres in Italy – E-000124/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is aware of the report by the Council of Europe’s European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

    In the context of the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism, the Commission with the Member States experts assesses the implementation of the return acquis, in particular the Return Directive[1], by Member States. Following the Schengen evaluation carried out in Italy in 2021, the Council issued recommendations[2], which concerned, among others, the detention conditions. The Commission is closely following up and monitoring the effective implementation of those recommendations by Italy.

    As a follow up to the Lampedusa 10-point plan[3], a dedicated working group on returns was set up with Italy on 25 September 2023. The group regularly meets to discuss return matters, including issues linked to detention conditions. The findings of the Council of Europe’s report to which the Honourable Members make reference is discussed with Italy in this context.

    As regards the initiative carried out by Italy following the signature of a protocol with Albania, the implementation of the protocol under Italian law must not undermine or be detrimental to common EU rules. Moreover, it cannot prevent the aims and objectives of EU law, and it must be without prejudice to the rights and guarantees that persons in these situations are afforded by Member States, in line with their national law and obligations under international law.

    • [1] Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.
    • [2] Council Implementing Decision 10415/22 setting out a recommendation on addressing the deficiencies identified in the 2021 evaluation of Italy on the application of the Schengen acquis in the field of return.
    • [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_4503
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – The death of three minors at the Bulgarian border – E-000665/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The Commission stresses that efficient border management must uphold fundamental rights, including human dignity and the principle of non-refoulement. In light of the tragic death of three minors at the Bulgarian border, the Commission notes that it is the responsibility of the Bulgarian authorities to investigate allegations of wrongdoings and ensure accountability. While national authorities are tasked with these investigations, the Commission is in regular contact with Bulgaria to discuss border and migration management issues, including full respect of fundamental rights[1].

    2. The 2021-27 Border Management and Visa Instrument[2], governed by the Common Provisions Regulation[3], requires Member States to meet horizontal enabling conditions (HECs), one of which relates to the mechanisms for ensuring compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights (the Charter). Bulgaria, as all Member States, must demonstrate HEC compliance at the programme’s adoption and implementation[4]. If the Charter HEC is no longer fulfilled at the level of relevant specific objective, the Commission will not reimburse affected expenditure.

    3. The 2023 Facilitation Directive proposal[5] explicitly sets out that the elements of the offences included therein are usually not fulfilled when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance or the support of basic human needs. The directive does not aim to criminalise humanitarian aid provided to third-country nationals in line with legal obligations.

    • [1] This engagement includes closely working with the Bulgarian authorities to reinforce the national independent mechanism to monitor fundamental rights compliance at the external borders. The issue was covered within the framework of the Pilot Project for fast asylum and return procedures (https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/reporting-results-pilot-project-fast-asylum-and-return-procedures-bulgaria_en) and has been reinforced under the Cooperation Framework with Bulgaria on border ad migration management (https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/07649e14-1d49-48f1-a08a-9f8d8b9d4e9e_en?filename=Cooperation%20framework%20between%20the%20European%20Commission%2C%20the%20EU%20agencies%20and%20the%20Republic%20of%20Bulgaria_en.pdf&prefLang=it).
    • [2] Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy.
    • [3] Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy.
    • [4] Bulgaria, like all Member States, had to justify that it fulfils all HECs at the adoption of the programme and during the implementation of the programme has put in place measures to ensure the respect of fundamental rights for all projects funded. The Commission has frequent exchanges with the Bulgarian Managing Authority in charge of BMVI. HECs are discussed in Monitoring Committee meetings, during technical level exchanges, and are reported on in the Annual Performance Report.
    • [5] Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down minimum rules to prevent and counter the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and stay in the Union, and replacing Council Directive 2002/90/EC and Council Framework Decision 2002/946 JHA, 28.11.2023, COM(2023) 755 final, Recital 7.
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – El Salvador–United States agreement to send criminals to Salvadorian prisons – E-000494/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    On 11 March 2025, the Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation establishing a common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union[1]. The aim is to increase the effectiveness of returns of people with no right to stay in the EU through simplification, clarity and more efficiency. Credible returns are crucial for a comprehensive approach to migration and a deterrent for illegal migration.

    The proposal aims also at widening the third countries to which an illegally staying third-country national can be returned, provided that those third countries respect international human rights standards and the principle of non-refoulement and an agreement or arrangement is concluded.

    The return of third-country nationals subject to return as a criminal law sanction or as a consequence of a criminal law sanction or who are subject to extradition procedures is regulated either by Directive 2008/115/EC[2] or by national law, when a Member State has decided not to apply the directive in accordance with Article 2(2)(b), or relevant international conventions on the transfer of prisoners.

    Member States are generally bound by the European Convention of Human Rights. As regards criminal detention issues, Member States have committed to respect the standards on this matter drafted by the Council of Europe, such as the 2006 European Prison Rules. Also, on 8 December 2022, the Commission adopted a recommendation on the procedural rights of suspects and accused in pre-trial detention and on material detention conditions[3].

    • [1] Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union, and repealing Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, Council Directive 2001/40/EC and Council Decision 2004/191/EC, COM/2025/101 final.
    • [2] Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.
    • [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_7570
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Suspension of the Schengen Treaty – E-002359/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Schengen Borders Code allows Member States to temporarily reintroduce internal border control to address a serious threat to public policy or internal security[1].

    The Commission is engaged in an ongoing dialogue with all Member States concerned to ensure that mitigating measures limit the impact on cross-border travel, whilst at the same time encouraging them to use alternative measures, as listed in the Commission’s Recommendation of November 2023[2], to address security threats.

    Under the Treaties, there is no possibility to suspend the Schengen rules. Consequently, the Commission does not have the power to propose such a measure The Schengen area guarantees free movement to more than 450 million EU citizens.

    Around 3.5 million people cross internal borders daily, and almost 1.7 million people reside in one Schengen country while working in another.

    Schengen brings important economic benefits to citizens and businesses, contributing to a smooth functioning of the internal market by enhancing economic activity, creating jobs, and supporting the EU’s competitiveness.

    • [1] Article 25a, Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), OJ L 77, p.1-52, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1717.
    • [2] Commission Recommendation (EU) 2024/268 of 23 November 2023 on cooperation between the Member States with regard to serious threats to internal security and public policy in the area without internal border controls, OJ L, 2024/268, 17.1.2024.
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing police cooperation in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, and on enhancing Europol’s support to preventing and combating such crimes and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/794 – PE769.973v02-00

    Source: European Parliament

    BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing police cooperation in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, and on enhancing Europol’s support to preventing and combating such crimes and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/794
    Committee on Budgets
    Hélder Sousa Silva

    Source : © European Union, 2025 – EP

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Flood protection measures versus nature conservation – E-000813/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The Habitats Directive[1] in its Article 6(3) and 6(4) provides a clear and flexible procedure to address potential conflicts, applicable also in cases between flood protection and nature conservation needs[2]. Article 6(4) allows plans and projects with significant negative effects on a site to proceed for imperative reasons of overriding public interest , in the absence of alternative solutions and if compensatory measures are taken. This can typically apply to flood protection measures that relate to human health or public safety which are explicitly mentioned in Article 6(4), second paragraph.

    2. The Commission does not plan to amend the Habitats Directive beyond the current proposal to align the annexes to the amendment of the Bern Convention[3]. Regarding compensatory measures for impacts on Natura 2000 sites in the context of application of Article 6(4) of the directive, it is the national competent authority which decides on the need and character of such measures. The German authorities have a long-standing experience with successfully applying exemptions for flood protection measures[4]. The implementation of these flood protection measures shows the feasibility of such measures and the flexibility of the Habitats Directive.

    • [1] Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
    • [2] The provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/11e4ee91-2a8a-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1
    • [3] COM(2025)106 final: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/document/8ec6689c-a7d8-422e-829d-c4231fc32872_en
    • [4] The Commission has been notified pursuant to Art 6(4) about the following protective dykes, among others: Strengthening of the Rhine flood dyke/right side of the Murg dam (responsible authority: Raststatt/Baden-Württemberg State Council Office), Strengthening and reinforcement of the right-hand Elbe dyke near Fischbeck (responsible authority: district of Stendal/Saxony-Anhalt), Raising and strengthening of the Emden harbour dyke (responsible authority: Lower Saxony State Agency for Water Management, Coastal Defence and Nature Conservation/Lower Saxony).
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Need for diversified, sustainable pain management in the EU to reduce reliance on pharmaceuticals and strengthen supply chains, thus enhancing sustainable healthcare – E-000010/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. Member States are responsible for the definition of their health policy. This includes the definition of pain management and measuring gaps in access to painkillers. At EU level, in relation to medicines availability, the Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products (MSSG)[1], consisting of representatives of Member States, the European Medicines Agency and the Commission, monitors and responds to ongoing shortages of medicines that cannot be resolved at Member State level.

    2. Under the EU4Health Programme, seven projects are co-funded to support training initiatives for clinical and non-clinical staff with a focus on digital skills and other relevant skills[2]. One of these projects, the Health Professionals’ Digital Team Skills Advancement[3], develops a digital health literacy strategy and a plan to improve digital literacy in healthcare, which may benefit also those patients in need of pain management.

    The proposal for a Critical Medicines Act announced in the Political Guidelines[4] was adopted by the Commission on 11 March 2025[5]. It addresses supply chain vulnerabilities of critical medicines, facilitates increasing EU manufacturing capacity for critical medicines, and reduces Europe’s dependencies on third countries. This proposal complements the reform of the EU pharmaceutical legislation and will build on the ongoing work, notably in the Critical Medicines Alliance and in the MSSG.

    • [1] Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products (MSSG) meetings — European Medicines Agency (EMA): https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/what-we-do/crisis-preparedness-management/executive-steering-group-shortages-medicinal-products/executive-steering-group-shortages-safety-medicinal-products-mssg-meetings
    • [2] https://year-of-skills.europa.eu/news/skills-and-healthcare-training-opportunity-health-professionals-under-eu4health-programme-2023-10-16_en
    • [3] https://hpass.healthworkforce.eu/
    • [4] Political Guidelines (2024-2029), page 9: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en?filename=Political%20Guidelines%202024-2029_EN.pdf
    • [5] https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-critical-medicines-act_en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Implementation of Directive 2021/1883 on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of highly qualified employment – E-002755/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The EU Blue Card is an important tool for attracting highly qualified third-country nationals to the EU and strengthening the EU’s competitiveness.

    To promote public outreach, the Commission regularly updates the EU Immigration Portal[1] with comprehensive and up-to-date information on the EU Blue Card. Additionally, the Commission regularly convenes the Labour Migration Platform[2], which brings together representatives from Member States, European social partners, and other stakeholders, including employers, to facilitate discussions and cooperation on legal migration and support the effective operationalisation of EU-level initiatives in this area.

    The future EU Talent Pool, which will include online information on legal migration rules, including the EU Blue Card, will help promote job opportunities and ensure that the EU remains an attractive destination for global talent.

    The Commission remains dedicated to supporting Member States and enhancing the appeal of the EU’s Blue Card through effective monitoring and enforcement, and will continue to explore opportunities to better promote the EU Blue Card.

    • [1] https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/eu-immigration-portal_en
    • [2] https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/networks/labour-migration-platform_en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Landfills in Contrada Tufarelle – E-000891/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    By judgment of 21 March 2019 in C-498/17[1] the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) declared that Italy has failed to comply with Article 14 of the Landfill Directive[2] in respect of 44 so called ‘existing landfills’.

    Given that by 2022 compliance had not been achieved, as only 32 out the 44 landfills for which Italy was condemned by the CJEU in C-498/17 had been closed in accordance with the requirements of the directive, a Letter of Formal Notice (LFN) under Article 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU was issued on 6 April 2022[3]. The landfill CO.BE.MA. in Apulia in Contrada Tufarelle is among the 12 remaining non-compliant landfills included in the LFN adopted under Article 260 of the Treaty.

    The Commission is closely monitoring compliance with the Court’s ruling. According to the latest information shared by the Italian authorities, the closure of the landfill CO.BE.MA. in Apulia in Contrada Tufarelle is expected by 15 May 2025.

    The Commission is not aware of other landfills in Contrada Tufarelle. In any case, it is for the Italian competent authorities to give correct application to the relevant EU rules. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission may decide to intervene if systemic issues with application of these provisions of EU law arise.

    • [1] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=EN&num=C-498/17
    • [2] Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1-19, amended by Directive (EU) 2018/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 100-108.
    • [3] INFR(2011)2215, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_22_1769
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Breach of EU habitats legislation in Greece – E-000372/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission has been in close contact with the Greek authorities over the last years to assist them to implement the ruling of the Court in Case C-849 /19[1].

    Greece has now adopted conservation objectives for all Special Areas of Conservation. The Commission will take action as appropriate to ensure that Greece also adopts conservation measures to fully comply with the ruling.

    Concerning the separate file EU Pilot file EUP(2021)9806 and based on the information available, it was not possible to confirm the alleged in correct transposition of the Habitats Directive[2] and the file was closed.

    As regards infringement case INFR(2014)4073[3], the Commission is assessing the replies received by the Greek authorities, following the reasoned opinion. T he objective of this type of infringement procedure is to assist the Member State in bringing the situation of non-conformity to an end.

    This case concerns the absence of a national legal framework that complies with Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. However, this absence of compliant national framework does not mean that wind farm projects based on this framework are also automatically in breach of the above provision.

    National administrative and/or judicial bodies are primarily responsible to verify compliance of individual projects with the EU environmental legislation and provide the appropriate means to address the matter.

    Citizens are thus invited to use existing national means of redress if they want to contest a specific project for possibly breaching relevant EU law.

    In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action.

    • [1] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=235718&pageIndex=0&doclang=FR&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=76753
    • [2] Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
    • [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_23_525
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – PFAS chemicals dumped in Ukraine – E-000767/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission has not received any evidence related to the claims of illegal dumping, which could substantiate possible intervention. Nonetheless, the EU is working on addressing the issue of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) through a comprehensive set of actions.

    Certain PFAS are already regulated under the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Regulation[1] and the regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)[2].

    The export of fire-fighting foams containing perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) or perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is banned according to the Stockholm Convention[3] and the export ban is implemented in EU legislation as per Article 15(2) and Annex V Part 1 of Regulation (EU) No 649/2012[4].

    A proposal to restrict PFAS in all firefighting foams has been published for discussion with Member States[5] and adoption is expected by the end of 2025[6].

    The Commission is committed to providing long-term support to Ukraine in its efforts to align with EU environmental and health standards, including the management of chemicals.

    This includes assistance in approximating Ukraine’s chemicals legislation to the EU’s Regulation for the Classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures[7] and to REACH, which introduce modern approaches to chemical safety and management.

    Ukraine has access to funding and assistance through the Ukraine Facility[8] and other mechanisms, which target post-war reconstruction needs[9], including bilateral cooperation with EU Member States[10].

    This support aims to help Ukraine react to the environmental and health incurred damage, particularly in the context of the ongoing Russian military aggression.

    • [1] Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on persistent organic pollutants (recast), OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 45-77.
    • [2] Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006.
    • [3] Article 3 and Annex A.
    • [4] Regulation (EU) No 649/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 concerning the export and import of hazardous chemicals (recast), OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 60-106.
    • [5] in November 2024.
    • [6] https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/102503/1/consult?lang=en
    • [7] Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1-1355.
    • [8] https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/funding-and-technical-assistance/ukraine-facility_en
    • [9] Including hazardous waste management, capacity building, and other aspects of safe chemical management.
    • [10] For example, a cooperation between the Swedish Chemicals Agency and Ukraine on EU chemicals legislation, on reduction of negative effects of chemicals on health and the environment and conditions for the free movement of goods.
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – EU contributions to various foundations – E-000345/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission does not finance private foundations of the United States, including the Bill Gates Foundation. The Commission contributes (as many EU Member States and other major donors) to independent multi-partner global funds and initiatives of which the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is also often a major investor.

    In respect of the EU’s Financial Regulation[1], EU development funding implemented by foundations or other civil society organisations (CSOs) is awarded through competitive calls for proposals. Recourse to an award of a grant without a call for proposals can be justified only in exceptional cases.

    All development projects funded by the EU and implemented by CSOs are subject to strict and rigorous monitoring and reporting procedures on an annual basis.

    The EU projects, implemented by foundations or CSOs, are subject to audits and/or a specific result-oriented monitoring to ensure the attainment of agreed results. The reporting from all projects at corporate level allows for assessment of their impact through analysis of results and indicators.

    • [1] https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/990fe2a6-8f52-11ef-a130-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Delays in EFSA risk assessments – E-000501/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission acknowledges the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) critical role in providing timely, robust, transparent and independent scientific advice concerning the EU food and feed sectors.

    This is essential to ensure a high level of protection of human health and for evidence-based decision-making in the context of the operation of the internal market.

    To address delays in risk assessments, EFSA has prioritised the speed and efficiency of its scientific advice production[1] in its multiannual programming plan.

    From the experience gained, delays in assessing products requiring pre-market approval are mainly due to issues relating to the quality and/or insufficient data in application dossiers, leading to the need for (sometimes multiple) requests to applicants for providing additional information.

    For example, during the yellow mealworm assessment[2] referred to by the Honourable Member, EFSA had to request three times additional information from the applicant, causing pauses in the scientific evaluation until the requested data was provided.

    To address these challenges, EFSA has intensified efforts[3] to assist applicants, particularly small and medium enterprises (SMEs), in improving dossier quality, thereby reducing the overall time needed for risk assessments.

    EFSA ensures transparency in relation to its risk assessments via the ‘Open EFSA’ platform, which enables all stakeholders to follow the process from the receipt of the dossier to the adoption of the relevant scientific output[4].

    The Commission is currently evaluating EFSA’s performance[5], with the evaluation report due by March 2026, to identify potential improvements in the EFSA’s functioning and organisation.

    • [1] EFSA Programming Document 2025-2027 (page 10): https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2025-01/programming-document-2025-2027.pdf
    • [2] Safety of frozen and dried forms of whole yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor larva) as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, adopted 28 November 2024, https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9155 (see at page 23, section ‘7. Steps taken by EFSA’).
    • [3] These efforts include for example: The updated EFSA’s Novel Food Scientific Guidance: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/8961 (published in September 2024) providing advice for applicants on preparing novel food application dossiers; Call for expressions of interest targeting potential SME applicants who are interested in receiving EFSA’s pre-submission advice on the application requirements in novel foods: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/call/call-expressions-interest-efsas-advice-novel-food-smes-2025-edition; Call for expressions of interest in joining EFSA’s new stakeholder community on applications for food and feed products: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/call/call-expressions-interest-joining-efsas-new-stakeholder-community-applications-food-and-feed
    • [4] E.g. date of receipt and validation of the request, status of assessment, risk assessment deadline taking into account the ‘stop-the-clock’ periods in case of requests to applicants for additional information, publication date of the scientific output, etc. For more information, see at: https://open.efsa.europa.eu/
    • [5] Article 61(2) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002. For more information, s ee at: https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/general-food-law/performance-evaluation-european-food-safety-authority_en?prefLang=da

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: Radware Lands Largest Cloud Security Services Agreement to Date

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MAHWAH, N.J., May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Radware® (NASDAQ: RDWR), a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments, today announced it recorded a major customer win, securing its largest cloud security services agreement to date. The multi-year, multimillion dollar agreement is part of a renewal and expanded relationship with a global, Fortune 500 financial services and payments company and top 10 U.S. merchant acquirer. To manage business growth and increasing cyber threats, the customer plans to scale its security operations across Radware’s full suite of AI-powered Cloud DDoS Protection and Application Protection Services, safeguarding thousands of applications and billions of digital transactions.

    The company selected Radware for its ability to deliver a fully integrated, high-capacity application and network protection solution that seamlessly scales usage while minimizing the burden of operational overhead. The agreement spans Radware’s Cloud DDoS Protection Service and Cloud Application Protection Service, which also includes its Cloud Web Application Firewall Service, bot manager, and Web DDoS Protection.

    “Our customer’s rapid growth trajectory required an end-to-end cloud security platform that could keep pace with evolving cyber threats without burdening operational resources,” said Neal Quinn, head of North American cloud security services at Radware. “This landmark agreement reinforces Radware’s enormous potential in cloud security and is a testament to our continued investment in the U.S. market. It showcases the trusted partnerships we have built with some of the most demanding digital businesses in the world.”

    Radware’s cybersecurity suite includes application and network security solutions infused with EPIC-AI, state-of-the-art AI and generative AI algorithms which are built to block modern attacks while delivering consistent real-time protections across cloud, on-prem, and hybrid environments. Designed to automatically adapt to changes in the threat landscape, applications and infrastructure, Radware’s EPIC-AI approach to security helps organizations significantly improve attack detection and mitigation, reduce mean time to resolution (MTTR), and meet compliance challenges.

    Radware has received numerous awards for its application and network security solutions. Industry analysts such as Aite-Novarica Group, Forrester, Gartner, GigaOm, IDC, KuppingerCole, and QKS Group continue to recognize Radware as a market leader in cybersecurity.

    About Radware
    Radware® (NASDAQ: RDWR) is a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments. The company’s cloud application, infrastructure, and API security solutions use AI-driven algorithms for precise, hands-free, real-time protection from the most sophisticated web, application, and DDoS attacks, API abuse, and bad bots. Enterprises and carriers worldwide rely on Radware’s solutions to address evolving cybersecurity challenges and protect their brands and business operations while reducing costs. For more information, please visit the Radware website.

    Radware encourages you to join our community and follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn, Radware Blog, X, and YouTube.

    ©2025 Radware Ltd. All rights reserved. Any Radware products and solutions mentioned in this press release are protected by trademarks, patents, and pending patent applications of Radware in the U.S. and other countries. For more details, please see: https://www.radware.com/LegalNotice/. All other trademarks and names are property of their respective owners.

    Radware believes the information in this document is accurate in all material respects as of its publication date. However, the information is provided without any express, statutory, or implied warranties and is subject to change without notice.

    The contents of any website or hyperlinks mentioned in this press release are for informational purposes and the contents thereof are not part of this press release.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements made herein that are not statements of historical fact, including statements about Radware’s plans, outlook, beliefs, or opinions, are forward-looking statements. Generally, forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “estimates,” “plans,” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may,” and “could.” For example, when we say in this press release that this landmark agreement reinforces our enormous potential in cloud security, we are using forward-looking statements. Because such statements deal with future events, they are subject to various risks and uncertainties, and actual results, expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, could differ materially from Radware’s current forecasts and estimates. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: the impact of global economic conditions, including as a result of the state of war declared in Israel in October 2023 and instability in the Middle East, the war in Ukraine, tensions between China and Taiwan, financial and credit market fluctuations (including elevated interest rates), impacts from tariffs or other trade restrictions, inflation, and the potential for regional or global recessions; our dependence on independent distributors to sell our products; our ability to manage our anticipated growth effectively; our business may be affected by sanctions, export controls, and similar measures, targeting Russia and other countries and territories, as well as other responses to Russia’s military conflict in Ukraine, including indefinite suspension of operations in Russia and dealings with Russian entities by many multi-national businesses across a variety of industries; the ability of vendors to provide our hardware platforms and components for the manufacture of our products; our ability to attract, train, and retain highly qualified personnel; intense competition in the market for cybersecurity and application delivery solutions and in our industry in general, and changes in the competitive landscape; our ability to develop new solutions and enhance existing solutions; the impact to our reputation and business in the event of real or perceived shortcomings, defects, or vulnerabilities in our solutions, if our end-users experience security breaches, or if our information technology systems and data, or those of our service providers and other contractors, are compromised by cyber-attackers or other malicious actors or by a critical system failure; our use of AI technologies that present regulatory, litigation, and reputational risks; risks related to the fact that our products must interoperate with operating systems, software applications and hardware that are developed by others;  outages, interruptions, or delays in hosting services; the risks associated with our global operations, such as difficulties and costs of staffing and managing foreign operations, compliance costs arising from host country laws or regulations, partial or total expropriation, export duties and quotas, local tax exposure, economic or political instability, including as a result of insurrection, war, natural disasters, and major environmental, climate, or public health concerns; our net losses in the past and the possibility that we may incur losses in the future; a slowdown in the growth of the cybersecurity and application delivery solutions market or in the development of the market for our cloud-based solutions; long sales cycles for our solutions; risks and uncertainties relating to acquisitions or other investments; risks associated with doing business in countries with a history of corruption or with foreign governments; changes in foreign currency exchange rates; risks associated with undetected defects or errors in our products; our ability to protect our proprietary technology; intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties; laws, regulations, and industry standards affecting our business; compliance with open source and third-party licenses; complications with the design or implementation of our new enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system; our reliance on information technology systems; our ESG disclosures and initiatives; and other factors and risks over which we may have little or no control. This list is intended to identify only certain of the principal factors that could cause actual results to differ. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting Radware, refer to Radware’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other risk factors discussed from time to time by Radware in reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made and, except as required by applicable law, Radware undertakes no commitment to revise or update any forward-looking statement in order to reflect events or circumstances after the date any such statement is made. Radware’s public filings are available from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or may be obtained on Radware’s website at www.radware.com.

    Media Contacts:
    Gerri Dyrek
    Radware
    Gerri.Dyrek@radware.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Impact of automotive industry lay-offs on the EU labour market – E-000523/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is aware and concerned about the situation in the automotive industry. Challenges stem, among others, from shifting mobility patterns, increasing competition and global supply chain risks, new technologies and a volatile geopolitical context.

    Underscoring the commitment to safeguarding the future of this vital sector, the Commission President launched in January 2025 the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of the European Automotive Industry[1], which brings together industry, social partners and civil society representatives[2].

    The objective of the dialogue is to contribute to policy design, including in the skills and social field, to address the challenges facing the sector.

    This has fed into the Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector, published on 5 March 2025. The action plan addresses a broad range of issues to maintain a strong European production base and support a thriving car industry that creates jobs, drives growth and protects the environment.

    While the Commission cannot interfere in company decisions on restructuring, several Directives[3] stipulate minimum requirements on workers’ rights and involvement. This is supported by the Quality Framework for Restructuring and Anticipation of Change[4].

    The main instruments to support workers affected are the European Social Fund (ESF+), which helps in an anticipative way, including by supporting up- and reskilling[5], and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF)[6], activated by major restructuring events.

    The action plan proposes an extension to the EGF to support companies in restructuring processes to protect employees at risk of unemployment. One in five workers offered EGF support so far belongs to the car industry.

    • [1] https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/dialogues/dialogue-future-automotive-industry_en
    • [2] A list of participating organisations, including representatives of the automotive industry and infrastructure providers, is available here: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/880307/List%20of%20participating%20organisations.pdf
    • [3] Directive 98/59/EC on collective redundancies, Directive 2001/23/EC on transfer of undertakings, Directive 2002/14/EC establishing general framework for informing and consulting employees and Directive 2009/38/EC on European Works Councils.
    • [4] COM/2013/0882 final — 13.12.2013.
    • [5] Upskilling, reskilling, attracting talent, ensuring the right skills at the right place, are among the priorities supported by the ESF+. The funding is available, with a significant budget for skills development, the administration is in place, implementation of the 2021-2027 period is in full swing.
    • [6] See Regulation (EU) 2021/691 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013, OJ L 153, 3.5.2021, p. 48-70 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2021.153.01.0048.01.ENG

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Stepping up the fight against financial crime in the European Union – E-000649/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. Despite significant progress in cross-border cooperation against financial crimes, it is important that Member States systemically launch financial investigations when investigating serious criminal offenses. Swift transposition of the new Directive on asset recovery[1] will ensure that asset-tracing is part of all investigations into organised crime. The new rules on exchange of information[2] also boost police cooperation against financial crime. Europol and Eurojust support operational cooperation to tackle financial crimes, and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) prosecutes crimes, playing a key role in dismantling criminal activities across the EU, while OLAF, the European Anti-Fraud Office, complements these efforts by detecting, investigating, and preventing fraud, both affecting the EU’s financial interests.

    2. Acting as the ‘information hub’ for EU law enforcement, Europol provides the EPPO access to information from national law enforcement authorities stored in its information system. The Commission will take into account the cooperation with EPPO, and the need to further enhance it, when evaluating the current legal framework for Europol[3], and in any proposals that may follow.

    3. The Commission has launched reflections, supported by the High-Level Forum on the Future of EU Criminal Justice[4], on areas in which the EPPO will need more powers to look at cross-border serious crime, in particular corruption that impacts EU funds and cannot be handled alone by Member States . The EPPO’s role, and cooperation with Eurojust and Europol, will also be considered.

    • [1] OJ L, 2024/1260, 2.5.2024.
    • [2] OJ L 134, 22.5.2023, p. 1-24.
    • [3] OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53, as amended in 2022 OJ L 169, 27.6.2022, p. 1.
    • [4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_25_745
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Future actions related to the Global Gateway strategy – E-000832/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    In 2025, the Commission will focus on scaling up Global Gateway through the implementation of ongoing Global Gateway investment projects and the identification of new sustainable, high-impact investments that will further strengthen EU partnerships with third countries.

    The second Global Gateway Forum, to be held in June 2025, will also be a key moment in 2025 to showcase steps being taken to scale up Global Gateway.

    The Commission will continue its active engagement with Member States, their cooperation agencies and development financing institutions to emphasise the necessity of building a Team Europe approach to scaling up investments.

    The Commission will also continue its work to enhance the coordination of its and Member States financial tools, including those of export credit agencies, and to increase collaboration with the European private sector through investment facilitation mechanisms and business matchmaking initiatives.

    The Commission tracks and reports on EU support to Global Gateway investment projects through the annual report on the implementation of the EU’s external action instruments, as well as providing information through a dedicated public website[1].

    Global Gateway flagship projects which have been identified by the European Council as projects which showcase Global Gateway, are monitored by the Council’s Working Party of Foreign Relations Counsellors.

    In addition, regular exchanges take place between the Commission and the European Parliament, notably the Committee on Development.

    • [1] https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway_en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Participation of social stakeholders in the European Contact Group on Search and Rescue – E-000574/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Contact Group on Search and Rescue consists of Member States and Schengen Associated Countries and provides them with a space for dialogue as well as a framework to liaise with relevant stakeholders, including private entities owning or operating vessels for the purpose of search and rescue activities, such as non-governmental organisations[1].

    The Commission holds regular meetings with non-governmental organisations on search and rescue related issues, which have also informed the work of the Contact Group.

    • [1] Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1365 on cooperation among Member States concerning operations carried out by vessels owned or operated by private entities for the purpose of search and rescue activities, points (16) and (2), OJ L 317, 1.10.2020, p. 23-25.
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Industrial output plan – E-000505/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The President of the Commission tasked the High Representative and the Commissioner for Defence and Space to put forward a White Paper for European Defence Readiness 2030 within the first 100 days of the new mandate[1]. The College adopted it on 19 March 2025[2].

    The White Paper frames a new approach to defence and defence industry and identifies related investment needs. It addresses closing critical capability gaps, ramping-up European defence production and mobilising additional funding for defence.

    For the EU to provide tailored support to ramp-up defence industrial production capacities, it is important to have a clear picture of Member States’ capability targets, to translate them into industrial ones. This approach is summarised as an industrial output plan.

    Following the publication of the White Paper , consultations with all key stakeholder’s kicked-off , including with Member States , the European Parliament and Defence Industry , but also partners such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

    The EU will also support Member States in defining projects to address the critical capability gaps, starting with the priorities identified by the European Council on 6 March 2025.

    The outcome of these consultations will determine the way forward implementation of the embedded in , including how to further support ramping-up defence industrial production capacities.

    EU and NATO are in contact and hold structured dialogues on topics including emerging disruptive technologies and defence industrial matters.

    Under this framework they have regularly exchanged information on relevant ongoing activities, including the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic and the NATO Support and Procurement Agency.

    • [1] https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/1f8ec030-d018-41a2-9759-c694d4d56d6c_en?filename=Mission%20letter%20-%20KUBILIUS.pdf
    • [2] https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/document/download/30b50d2c-49aa-4250-9ca6-27a0347cf009_en?filename=White%20Paper.pdf
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Food safety – lead and cadmium in ceramics, glass and enamelled tableware and kitchenware – E-000380/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is committed to further harmonising EU legislation on food contact materials (FCMs), as indicated in its announcement to revise the legislation[1]. The Commission has recognised the need to significantly reduce the current EU limits for lead and cadmium allowed to transfer into food from ceramic materials, to widen the scope to other types of materials including glass and enamels, and to consider limits for other metals to safeguard public health.

    The Commission has already carried out a significant body of work on this initiative, including the development of adequate methodologies for testing[2], an inception impact assessment[3] and direct stakeholder dialogue as well as technical discussions with Member States.

    Further preparatory work for the initiative is ongoing, which is highly complex and requires further consultations with all relevant stakeholders to ensure the coherence of requirements across different types of FCMs, in particular the approach to regulating particularly hazardous substances but considering also the potential impacts on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and producers using traditional production techniques.

    • [1] https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/chemical-safety/food-contact-materials/revision-eu-rules_en
    • [2] https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC102075
    • [3] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/2074-Food-safety-heavy-metals-in-ceramic-glass-and-enameled-table-and-kitchenware_en
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Status of clear aligners in light of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 – E-000956/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on medical devices[1] (MDR) defines ‘custom-made devices’ in Article 2(3) and provides for legal exceptions for certain mass-produced devices.

    Accordingly, it would depend on the specific case whether clear aligners — also known as invisible braces — may be actually considered as custom-made devices or rather mass-produced devices.

    The Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG) established under Article 103 of the MDR endorsed the guidance document ‘MDCG 2021-3 Questions and Answers on Custom-Made Devices & considerations on Adaptable medical devices and Patient-matched medical devices’[2] where ‘orthotic braces’ are mentioned as examples of ‘mass-produced adaptable medical devices’, not considering them as custom-made devices.

    This reflects the situation on the market, where the use of clear aligners is largely extended as adapted devices from mass-produced devices, as well as the views of other international regulatory frameworks[3],[4].

    Both custom-made devices and mass-produced adaptable medical devices need the prescription of authorised healthcare professionals with respect to their specific characteristics and the needs of patients.

    Therefore, the possibility to purchase clear aligners or invisible braces without consulting a healthcare structure or professional may indeed represent a risk for patients as well as a competitive disadvantage for healthcare manufacturers and professionals.

    The responsibility for market surveillance and vigilance on the appropriate placing on the market and use of those devices belongs to the national competent authorities of the Member States in the field of medical devices[5].

    • [1]  OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/oj
    • [2] https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/385d7e20-d8b5-49d0-abd7-8daf269bf1b8_en?filename=mdcg_2021-3_en.pdf
    • [3] For instance, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration considers aligners as ‘patient-matched medical devices’, not custom-made devices. See https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/guidance/understanding-personalised-medical-devices-rules-including-3d-printed-devices#patientmatched-medical-devices
    • [4] See the guidance on ‘Personalized Medical Devices (PMD)’ by the International Medical Device Regulatory Forum (IMDRF) https://www.imdrf.org/working-groups/personalized-medical-devices
    • [5] https://health.ec.europa.eu/medical-devices-sector/new-regulations/contacts_en#national-competent-authorities
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Commission’s assessment and clarifying guidelines for Syrians living in the EU after the fall of the Assad regime – P-000100/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Article 11 of Directive 2011/95/EU[1] sets out the grounds for considering that a third-country national has ceased to be a refugee or a person eligible for subsidiary protection. This is also provided for by Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1347[2], which requires that determining authorities also take into account precise and up-to-date information obtained from relevant and available sources. The assessment of whether the conditions for international protection have ceased is to be undertaken on an individual basis, taking into account the specific circumstances of the beneficiary.

    Article 31(4) of Directive 2013/32/EU[3] allows Member States to postpone concluding the examination procedure due to an uncertain situation in the country of origin which is expected to be temporary. The Commission is monitoring the situation and has been informed by the relevant Member States about this suspension.

    The Commission continues to work closely with the United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Refugees to ensure that returns are voluntary, safe and dignified, and with other UN partners to help create the conditions inside Syria for people to return.

    • [1] Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted, OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9-26, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/95/oj
    • [2] Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection granted, amending Council Directive 2003/109/EC and repealing Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L, 2024/1347, 22.5.2024, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1347/oj
    • [3] Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast), OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60-95, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/32/oj
    Last updated: 29 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special Report 08/2025 “VAT fraud on imports” – Subcommittee on Tax Matters

    Source: European Parliament

    On 14 May from 15:00 to 16:15, together with the CONT committee, the FISC Subcommittee will invite Mr François-Roger Cazala, Member responsible of the European Court of Auditors (ECA) to present its the Special report 08/2025 on “Value Added Tax fraud on imports – The EU’s financial interests are insufficiently protected under simplified import customs procedures”.

    Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud negatively affects the collection of revenues in Member States as well as in the EU. According to the Commission, Member States lost around €89 billion in 2022. Fraud committed by traders on VAT levied on imports contributes to this loss and is one of the main types of cross-border VAT fraud affecting the fiscal policies and public finances of the EU.

    “The EU’s financial interests and single market are not protected firmly enough against Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud on imports when simplified import customs procedures are used”, according to ECA. There are serious weaknesses in the checks carried out by Member States and shortcomings in the cooperation at EU level and across Member States to combat the abuse of these procedures.

    The presentation will provide an opportunity for ECA to present its report and discuss its findings with CONT and FISC Members.

    Source : © European Union, 2025 – EP

    MIL OSI Europe News –