Category: Justice

  • MIL-OSI Security: 16 ‘Anti-Tren’ Members and Associates Charged with Cocaine and Firearms Trafficking

    Source: US FBI

    HOUSTON – Several foreign nationals illegally residing in the Houston area are now in custody for drug trafficking and weapons charges following a law enforcement operation targeting Venezuelan nationals and alleged members or associates of the Anti-Tren transnational criminal organization, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    Most are expected to make their initial appearances before U.S. Magistrate Judge Peter Bray at 2 p.m.

    The charges allege Anti-Tren is a criminal organization almost exclusively comprised of former members and associates of Tren de Aragua (TdA). Similar to TdA, purposes of Anti-Tren allegedly include preserving and protecting the power and territory of the organization and its members and associates through attempted murder, other acts of violence and threats of such. This includes targeting members and associates of TdA and enriching the members and associates of Anti-Tren through, among other things, the trafficking of firearms and controlled substances, according to the charges.

    Two criminal complaints charge 14 Anti-Tren members and associates with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. These include Luis Miguel Claros Sarmiento, 26, Dany E. Rojas, 28, Ismael Leon Belbin, 24, Andy Luis Alvarez Herrera, 28, Cesar Oskeiber Cabezas Pacheco, 26, and Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, 27; Venezuelan nationals Raul Armando Ramirez Correa, 24, Darwin Martinez, 37, Peter Davila, 34, Otis Jose Rodriguez Garcia, 31, Pedro Hernandez Delgado, 19, Jesus F. Fernandez Troconiz, 26, Embeer J. Gutierrez Ternawskyj, 24, as well as Raul Antonio Claros Sarmiento, 30, Honduras.

    According to the allegations, two groups of individuals agreed to transport kilogram quantities of cocaine in exchange for $15,000 for each load with each group accepting half as payment in advance.

    “The Southern District’s twin priorities are securing our border and the eradication of violent crime. This case implicates both,” said Ganjei. “Operation Take Back America means going on the offensive against transnational criminal organizations to ensure that they cannot take root in our community and endanger public safety. SDTX is going to be unapologetic in carrying out that mission.”

    “These arrests are the largest takedown of suspected Anti-Tren members and associates by the FBI, so far, and they happened right here in Houston,” said Special Agent in Charge Douglas Williams of the FBI Houston Field Office. “These individuals are accused of engaging in a turf war with TdA members and carrying out numerous violent crimes throughout our city, including a mass shooting at a local sports bar that left six people wounded. Fortunately, for the good and safety of our community, these individuals are now in federal custody facing U.S.  justice.”

    If convicted, they face up to life in prison and a possible $10 million fine.

    Correa, Ternawskyj, Garcia, Delgado and Pedro Jose Ramirez Delgado, 26, are also charged separately with various weapons offenses based on their alleged possession and sale of firearms. If convicted of those charges, they could receive up to 15 years in prison.

    Jose Miguel Briceno, 25, a Venzuelan national who resided in Houston illegally, is charged separately with unlawful possession of ammunition by an alien. The criminal complaint alleges he was involved in a mass shooting at the Latinas Sports Bar club in Houston in March where six people were wounded, four of whom were in critical condition. According to the complaint, Briceno used a firearm to shoot inside the doorway of the bar and then discarded the firearm which law enforcement never located. If convicted, he faces up to 15 years imprisonment and a maximum $250,000 possible fine.

    The FBI Houston field office conducted this investigation with the assistance of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Marshals Service and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) – Enforcement and Removal Operations, Texas Department of Public Safety, Houston Police Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Office.  

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys Casey N. MacDonald and Anibal J. Alaniz are prosecuting the case along with Jason Harley from the Department of Justice’s Joint Task Force Vulcan (JTFV). 

    JTFV, which was created to combat MS-13 and now expanded to TdA under Attorney General Bondi, has been comprised of U.S. Attorney’s Offices across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; Eastern District of Texas; Southern District of Florida; Western District of Oklahoma; Northern District of Ohio; Eastern District of Virginia; Southern District of California; District of Columbia and Districts of New Jersey, Utah, Massachusetts, Nevada and Alaska as well as the Department of Justice’s National Security and Criminal Divisions. Additionally, the FBI; DEA; ICE-Homeland Security Investigations; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service; and Federal Bureau of Prisons have been essential law enforcement partners and spearheaded JTFV’s investigations.

    This case is also a part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces and Project Safe Neighborhood.

    A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence. A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Nearly 50 Charged in Southern District of Texas as Part of National Health Care Fraud Takedown

    Source: US FBI

    Combined efforts have resulted in charges against 18 medical professionals after nearly 12 million pills distributed and over $360 million fraudulently billed to Medicare

    HOUSTON – A total of 22 cases are being announced as part of local efforts targeting health care fraud and include various schemes alleging unlawful distribution of controlled substances, some of which were diverted onto the black market, hospice fraud, kickbacks and other Medicare/Medicaid fraud schemes involving medically unnecessary genetic tests, durable medical equipment and more.  

    The charges filed in Southern District of Texas (SDTX) federal court are part of the Department of Justice’s 2025 national health care fraud takedown.

    “Americans rely on Medicare for needed treatments and living-saving care. Those that bilk this fund to unlawfully enrich themselves are ultimately stealing from the taxpayer and damaging public confidence in our health system,” said U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei. “Today’s takedown is a reminder to would-be medical fraudsters that the Department of Justice is always standing guard over the public fisc.”

    “This record-setting health care fraud takedown delivers justice to criminal actors who prey upon our most vulnerable citizens and steal from hardworking American taxpayers,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Make no mistake – this administration will not tolerate criminals who line their pockets with taxpayer dollars while endangering the health and safety of our communities.”

    One of the largest cases include three individuals for their alleged roles in a $110 million hospice fraud and kickback scheme. The charges allege Dera Ogudo, 39, and Victoria Martinez, 35, both of Richmond, operated hospice company United Palliative & Hospice Company (UPHC) that misled vulnerable elderly adults about what services were being billed to their Medicare and Medicaid plans. According to court documents, UPHC Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries and/or their family members believed they would be receiving palliative or home health services. In truth, these patients were enrolled in hospice services but were not actually terminally ill as Medicare and Medicaid requires, according to the charges. Ogudo allegedly paid kickbacks to several group homeowners in exchange for enrolling their beneficiaries in hospice with UPHC and bribed a physician to certify and re-certify UPHC patients as terminally ill when they were not. Ogudo also allegedly paid kickbacks to Evelyn Shaw, 52, Houston, in exchange for referrals from a local psychiatric hospital where Shaw was employed as discharge coordinator.

    In relation to the scheme, Carlos Munoz, 57, Richmond, is charged by information. Ogudo allegedly paid Munoz, a medical doctor, kickbacks and bribes to certify and re-certify Medicare and Medicaid patients for hospices services.

    In a separate case, Keilan Peterson aka Young Jay or Jay, 38, and Kimberly Martinez, 47, Houston, have been charged for their alleged participation in a scheme to unlawfully distribute and dispense controlled substances in exchange for cash through Relief Medical Center and GroveCare clinics in Houston. As alleged in their indictment, Peterson paid three doctors to allow Peterson, Martinez and others at the clinics to use the doctors’ electronic prescribing credentials to issue prescriptions for significant amounts of hydrocodone, carisoprodol and oxycodone. Peterson also allegedly sent some of these illegitimate prescriptions to his own pharmacy, Next Level Pharmacy, and took possession of the controlled substances to sell on the black market. In total, the indictment alleges Peterson and others issued over 2 million controlled substance pills, the vast majority of which were unauthorized, issued without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the usual course of professional practice.

    A podiatrist and the self-proclaimed CEO of a local medical clinic were also charged in another $90 million Medicare fraud scheme. The 15-count superseding indictment alleges David Jenson, 57, and Nestor Rafael Romero Magallanes, 29, both of Spring, conspired to fraudulently bill Medicare for over $90 million for skin substitute products-often for patients who did not have qualifying wounds. They allegedly submitted claims for patients who did not have qualifying wounds, or any wounds at all, and continued billing even after a 2023 audit denied all their claims and flagged the conduct as improper. The indictment further alleges Jenson and Romero falsified medical records to make it appear patients had chronic wounds and manipulated documentation to show those wounds were improving despite no such existing conditions. 

    Charged with wire fraud, Tyneza P. Mitchell, 43, Spring, was allegedly involved in a scheme to bill the COVID-19 Claims Reimbursement to Health Care Providers and Facilities for Testing, Treatment and Vaccine Administration for the Uninsured Program. The charges allege billing included in-office consultations regarding COVID diagnosis and treatment she never provided. As alleged in the indictment, Mitchell is a licensed nurse practitioner who received $9.9 million as a result of her fraudulent scheme.

    Daphne Johnson, 60, Stafford, was allegedly involved in a scheme to bill Medicaid $793,804 for mental health therapy services she never provided. As alleged in the information, Johnson received $331,112 as a result of her fraudulent scheme.

    Prosecutors with the Department of Justice’s Health Care Fraud Strike Force also filed charges against several more individuals in this district with assistance from SDTX.

    Chad Harper, 49, Pearland, is facing numerous charges in connection with a $115 Medicare fraud scheme. As alleged in the indictment, Harper owned multiple laboratories through which he billed Medicare for genetic and other diagnostic testing induced by kickbacks and bribes which were medically unnecessary or otherwise ineligible for Medicare. The indictment alleges Harper generated business through a nationwide network of marketers who directed referrals to the laboratories in exchange for illegal kickbacks that Harper paid through shell companies. Harper allegedly funded his operation through, among other ways, obtaining a fraudulent equipment loan from a local credit union. Harper allegedly laundered the proceeds of his schemes through other shell companies, which purchased and held real properties and assets and passed profits on to Harper.

    Dr. Maryam “Meg” Qayum, 67, New Caney, is charged with multiple counts of illegally distributing a controlled substance along with Jared Williams, 48, Pearland; and Tomi-Ko Bowers, 70, Lester “Lay” Stokes, 37, and Melvin Sampson, 55, all of Houston. The charges stem from their alleged roles in diverting more than three million opioids onto the black market. As alleged in the indictment, Qayum is a medical doctor and Bowers an advanced practice registered nurse who operated Recare Clinic in Kingwood along with Stokes. They allegedly sold oxycodone and hydrocodone prescriptions to drug traffickers in exchange for cash. Sampson is alleged to be one such individual who recruited others to pose as patients, paid cash for the prescriptions from Qayum, filled Qayum’s prescriptions at complicit pharmacies and resold the drugs on the black market.

    Other Strike Force cases include one charging Sacha Lashun Betts, 47, Houston, and Nicholas Aguillard, 49, Rosenberg; Lisa Darlene Durden, 60, and Jordan O. Williams, 56, both of Missouri City; Quincy Guillory, 51, Richmond; Mykel Walker, 42, Cypress, and Kaeita Rankin, 48, Houston. The indictment alleges they participated in a conspiracy to distribute and dispense controlled substances in connection with the establishment, oversight and operation of a drug trafficking organization that controlled more than a dozen “front” pharmacies used to sell opioids and other commonly abused prescription drugs, often in bulk, to street-level drug dealers on Houston’s black market. From 2015 through 2022, the defendants’ pharmacies unlawfully distributed and dispensed more than 4.4 million doses of opioids and other commonly abused prescription drugs, with an estimated street value exceeding $75 million, according to the charges. The co-conspirators allegedly sold opioids and other commonly abused prescription drugs to street-level drug traffickers in exchange for cash.

    Other cases involve fraudulent schemes for kickbacks or billing Medicare for medically unnecessary genetic tests or footbath drugs, durable medical equipment, conspiracies to unlawfully distribute and dispense controlled substances, some involving diversion onto the black market or in connection to the operation of pill-mill pharmacies. Those charged in this district also include residents of Houston, Richmond, League City, Rosharon, Sugar Land, Katy, Pearland and Manvel as well as U.S. citizens from Florida, Indiana and Georgia.

    All the cases are part of a strategically coordinated, nationwide law enforcement action that resulted in criminal charges against 324 defendants for their alleged participation in health care fraud and illegal drug diversion schemes that involved the submission of over $14.6 billion in intended loss and over 15 million pills of illegally diverted controlled substances. The defendants allegedly defrauded programs entrusted for the care of the elderly and disabled to line their own pockets. The United States has seized over $245 million in cash, luxury vehicles and other assets in connection with the takedown.

    Descriptions of each SDTX case and others involved in the enforcement actions are available on the Department of Justice’s website.

    Department of Health and Human Services – Office of Inspector General (OIG), FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, Federal Housing Finance Agency – OIG and U.S. Postal Service – OIG conducted the various investigations with assistance of police departments in Conroe, Dickinson and Houston. Assistant U.S. Attorneys (AUSA) Brad Gray, Kathryn Olson, Christine Lu, Alexander Alum and Thomas Carter are prosecting the SDTX cases with assistance from AUSAs Kristine Rollinson and Brandon Fyffe who are handling forfeiture matters. Counsel to the Chief of the Health Care Fraud Unit Alexis Gregorian, Acting Assistant Chief Devon Helfmeyer, Senior Litigation Counsel Catherine Wagner and Trial Attorneys Adam Tisdall, Andrew Tamayo, Monica Cooper, Benjamin Smith, Yael Mash, Erika V. Suhr, Ethan Womble, Claire Horrell and Gary A. Crosby are prosecuting the Strike Force matters.

    SDTX and The Health Care Fraud Unit’s Rapid Response, Texas, Florida, Gulf Coast, Los Angeles, Midwest, New England and Northeast Strike Forces are prosecuting the cases as well as U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the Districts of Columbia, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont; Northern and Western Districts of Texas; Central, Northern and Southern Districts of California; Middle, Northern and Southern Districts of Florida; Middle District of Georgia; Northern District of Illinois; Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky; Eastern and Middle Districts of Louisiana; Eastern District of Michigan; Northern and Southern Districts of Mississippi; Eastern, Northern, Southern and Western Districts of New York; Eastern and Western Districts of North Carolina; Northern and Southern Districts of Ohio; Northern and Western Districts of Oklahoma; Eastern District of Pennsylvania; Middle and Western Districts of Tennessee; Eastern District of Virginia; Western District of Washington; Northern District of West Virginia; and State Attorney Generals’ Offices for Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania with assistance from the Health Care Fraud Unit’s Data Analytics Team.

    A complaint, information or indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence. A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Louisiana felon sentenced to federal prison for Shelby County firearms violation

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    BEAUMONT, Texas –A Bourg, Louisiana man has been sentenced for illegally possessing a firearm in the Eastern District of Texas, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Jay R. Combs.

    Brad Michael Broussard, 44, pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to 57 months in federal prison by U.S. District Judge Marcia A. Crone on July 1, 2025.

    According to information presented in court, on January 1, 2024, Broussard was stopped by law enforcement in Shelby County after he struck several construction barrels while traveling down the highway.  The smell of marijuana was evident during the traffic stop prompting a search of the vehicle.  A search of the vehicle resulted in the discovery of four firearms, including a pistol equipped with a homemade silencer.  Broussard was also in possession of hallucinogenic mushrooms, marijuana, numerous prescription pills, a methamphetamine pipe, and assorted other drug paraphernalia.  

    Further investigation revealed Broussard has five felony convictions, all for burglary.  Federal law prohibits convicted felons from owning or possessing firearms or ammunition.

    This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

    This case was investigated by the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. This case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald S. Carter.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: West Tennessee Gang Member Sentenced for Possession of a Machinegun

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    Jackson, TN – A federal judge has sentenced Mekevin Woods, 23, of Bolivar, Tennessee, to 38 months in federal prison for possessing a machinegun conversion device, also known as a “switch.” Interim U.S. Attorney Joseph C. Murphy, Jr. announced the sentence today.

    According to evidence presented in court, on December 23, 2023, an officer with the Bolivar Police Department (BPD) attempted a traffic stop of a gray 2022 Infiniti Q60.  When the driver refused to stop, he led the BPD officer on a high-speed pursuit reaching speeds of 80 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. Finally, Woods, the driver and sole occupant of the vehicle, traveled into oncoming traffic, jumped from the vehicle, and fled on foot. While fleeing, the officer observed Woods with a firearm in his right hand.

    Officers with the Bolivar Police Department ultimately arrested Woods with the assistance of a K-9 unit and located a Glock handgun loaded with 32 rounds in an extended magazine with a machinegun conversion device attached to the firearm. Officers also determined the vehicle was stolen out of Memphis. Woods was identified as a member of the TMO 45 gang, a hybrid street gang comprised of both adult and juvenile members, that is involved in firearms and narcotics trafficking and is responsible for several shooting incidents in the Fayette and Hardeman County area.

    The case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Jackson Resident Agency; and the Bolivar Police Department.

    Assistant United States Attorney Christie Hopper prosecuted this case on behalf of the government.

    ###

    For more information, please contact the Media Relations Team at USATNW.Media@usdoj.gov. Follow the U.S. Attorney’s Office on Facebook or on X at @WDTNNews for office news and updates.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Dan Goldman Introduces Amendment to GOP Budget Barring ICE From Obstructing Congressional Oversight of Immigration Facilities

    Source: US Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10)

    Goldman and Numerous Other Congressmembers Have Been Illegally Denied Access to ICE Field Offices Used to House Immigrants in Inhumane Conditions 

    Administration’s Crackdown on Law-Abiding, Non-Violent Immigrants Has Led to Widespread Reports of Overcrowding, Inhumane Conditions at ICE Detention Facilities Nationwide 

    Watch Goldman’s Rules Committee Testimony Here 
    Read the Reconciliation Amendment Here 

    Washington, D.C. — Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10) introduced an amendment to the Republican reconciliation bill forbidding any of its funds from being used to prevent or impede Members of Congress from conducting their statutorily authorized oversight of immigration enforcement and detention facilities.  

    “Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans’ Big Ugly Bill for Billionaires doesn’t just slash health care and food assistance programs by over a trillion dollars, it increases funding by tens of billions of dollars to expand and accelerate this administration’s authoritarian crackdown on law-abiding, non-violent immigrants”, Congressman Dan Goldman said. “It is Congress’ responsibility to ensure this money is used appropriately, and that requires us to do our constitutional and statutory oversight. This administration is not above the law, and I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment reaffirming Congress’ constitutional authority as an independent and co-equal branch of government.”  

    Goldman’s amendment would ensure that none of the funding in the GOP’s reconciliation bill could be used to prevent congressional oversight of any location or facility related to civil enforcement of immigration law. The prohibition would include temporarily modifying locations before congressional visits or requiring members of Congress to provide prior notice before being allowed into the facility, as the administration has recently demanded in direct violation of Section 527(a) of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024. 

    Congressman Goldman has made combating the Trump administration’s lawless immigration enforcement tactics a top priority since the start of Donald Trump’s second term. 

    Last week, Goldman and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat introduced the ‘No Secret Police Act,’ which would require law enforcement officers and agents of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) engaged in border security and civil immigration enforcement to clearly display identification and insignia when detaining or arresting individuals and to ban them from using home-made, non-tactical masks.    
    Last month, Goldman led 8 of his New York City House Democratic colleagues in sending an oversight letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem and Acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons demanding ICE comply with Section 527(a) of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024 and stop denying members of Congress access to facilities that ICE is using to house immigrants. 
    Days before, Goldman and Congressman Nadler hosted a press conference after observing court proceedings at 26 Federal Plaza and being denied access to the federal building’s 10th floor, where immigrants are being detained for days and sleeping on the floor and benches in inhumane conditions.  

    ### 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Met release footage of man wanted in connection with a sexual assault

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Detectives have released CCTV footage of a man they need to trace following a sexual assault in May.

    A woman in her 20s reported that a man sexually assaulted her in Park Road, W7 at around 23:50hrs on Wednesday, 21 May. She is currently being supported by specialist officers.

    The man followed the woman off the E1 bus, which takes a route from Ealing Broadway Station to Greenford Broadway.

    As the bus approached Browning Avenue, W7, he sexually assaulted the woman as he alighted. He then followed her down Park Road, W7 where he assaulted her.

    The man was seen on CCTV running north on Park Road following the incident, towards Browning Avenue and the E1 bus stop.

    He is described as Black, in his late 20s or early 30s, and approximately 5ft 11in tall, with a slim build. He has dark, curly hair and was captured on CCTV wearing a black jacket and navy blue, Nike t-shirt.

    Detective Constable Teresa Moore, leading the Met’s investigation, said: “Women and girls should be safe to travel on public transport – and walk the streets of London – without being attacked.

    “This incident highlights the opportunistic behaviour of the offender so it is really important we locate him as soon as possible.”

    If you have any relevant information to share – particularly if you were on the E1 bus on Wednesday, 21 May between 23:45hrs and 23:58hrs – please contact us on 101 immediately and quote 697/21MAY.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Eight arrests for conspiracy to destroy ULEZ cameras

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Eight people have been arrested in a coordinated Met Police operation targeting those conspiring to destroy ULEZ cameras.

    In the early hours of Wednesday, 2 July officers executed warrants at addresses in London, Windsor and on the Isle of Sheppey.

    The London arrests took place in Uxbridge, Ickenham, Northwood, Sutton and Eltham.

    Six men and two women were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal damage.

    One of the men is also alleged to have been involved in threatening and harassing the team sent to repair a damaged camera.

    Those arrested remain in custody. Searches are ongoing at their addresses but officers have already recovered items related to the alleged offending.

    Superintendent Paul Thomas, of the Met’s Roads and Transport Policing Command, said: “There is a big difference between lawful protest and plotting to destroy or seriously damage property.

    “Some may think of this sort of behaviour as a victimless crime, but when cameras are damaged or destroyed it creates dangerous hazards, risking collisions on the road in addition to disruption for motorists and residents.

    “We take these offences very seriously and officers will continue working closely with Transport for London and other partners to identify and build a case against those responsible.

    “Today’s arrests are a significant development in what has been a long and complex investigation that is not yet over.

    “I would appeal to anyone who has information about plans to target ULEZ cameras to come forward.”

    If you have information, please call the police on 101, or the independent charity, Crimestoppers, on 0800 555 111.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Single-use vapes ban in effect from 1 August02 July 2025 The Minister for Infrastructure has signed a Commencement Order which means it will be illegal to import and supply single-use vapes in Jersey from Friday 1 August 2025. Retailers have until 1 February… Read more

    Source: Channel Islands – Jersey

    02 July 2025

    The Minister for Infrastructure has signed a Commencement Order which means it will be illegal to import and supply single-use vapes in Jersey from Friday 1 August 2025.

    Retailers have until 1 February 2026 to sell existing stocks of single-use vapes. This only applies to single-use vapes that were imported prior to the law coming into force and retailers may be asked to provide evidence of this. After the six-month sell-through period, it will be illegal for retailers to sell any single-use vapes. 

    If an individual bought one or more single-use vapes before the ban, they are still permitted to use them. 

    The ban follows amendments made to the Single-Use Plastics etc. (Restrictions) (Jersey) Amendment Law 2025 approved by the States Assembly in December 2024. This is because of their damaging impact on the environment. The change aims to help tackle the climate emergency and reduce Jersey’s waste. 

    A vape is considered single-use if it meets one or more of the following: 

    • It cannot be reused 
    • It cannot be refilled 
    • Its battery cannot be recharged 
    • Its coil cannot be replaced.

    Vapes that are permitted must be designed to allow all of the above functions. 

    England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland banned the sale and supply of single use vapes from 1 June 2025 with no selling through period. 

    For more information, visit: gov.je/singleuseplastics.​​

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Security Council Debates Multifaceted Crisis in Haiti

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    9953rd Meting (AM)

    The Security Council will discuss the situation in Haiti, which faces a multifaceted crisis amid ongoing gang violence.  Members will hear a briefing by Miroslav Jenča, Assistant Secretary-General for Europe, Central Asia and Americas, Departments of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and Peace Operations, on the activities of a United Nations’ support mission.  Ghada Fathy Waly, Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, is also expected to brief the 15-member organ..

    For information media. Not an official record.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Monitoring for Sharks Along Long Island Beaches

    Source: US State of New York

    head of Fourth of July weekend and in preparation for beach and swimming season, Governor Kathy Hochul today updated New Yorkers on measures to watch out for sharks and other potentially dangerous marine life at Long Island State Parks this summer. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, in collaboration with the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), expanded and updated surveillance capability, including new drones and drone operators, at Long Island State Park beaches.

    “Our Long Island State Park beaches are cherished by New Yorkers and visitors alike — perfect places to get offline, get outside and enjoy the outdoors.” Governor Hochul said. “We are continuing to strengthen our shark surveillance capabilities and safety tactics at these beaches to help protect these treasured summertime traditions. I encourage all beachgoers to stay safe, stay alert and always follow the direction of lifeguards and park staff.”

    New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (State Parks) lifeguards continuously scan and patrol the waters from shore and by surfboat and personal watercraft for any dangerous marine life, such as sharks. Park Police and Park staff actively patrol the beachfront as well, using drones to search the water for dangerous marine life or large schools of fish that may attract them. State Parks’ expanded surveillance capabilities this summer include: 

    • Added 6 drones to its 22 currently in operation for a total of 28 drones;
    • Trained 8 new drone pilots for a total of 48 drone operators among operations staff, lifeguards and Park Police; and
    • Assigned one large enterprise drone to Park Police with thermal imaging, laser range finding, and high-quality cameras to allow for night-time surveillance and patrols in adverse weather conditions. This drone can also drop personal flotation devices in emergencies. 

    When there are shark sightings and/or interactions in State Parks beaches, swimming is suspended, and all swimmers are cleared from the water. State Parks works with the DEC to confirm potential shark sightings. Swimming is allowed to resume at least one hour after the last confirmed sighting. State Park lifeguards, Park Police and park staff stay on high alert and patrol the waters for dangerous marine life. In addition, the Long Island Coastal Awareness Group, composed of more than 200 individuals from municipalities, agencies, and private beach operators stretching from Queens through Long Island, is notified so they may take appropriate action in their respective jurisdictions.

    New York State Parks Commissioner Pro Tem Randy Simons said, “Our staff is well prepared to safeguard beachgoers this summer season, and we’re excited to adopt the latest technology to be even more effective. I’m grateful to Governor Hochul and the Department of Environmental Conservation for their continued support and partnership in keeping these beaches as safe as possible. I encourage beachgoers to follow guidance and directions from parks staff and be shark smart while enjoying their summer fun.” 

    Department of Environmental Conservation Commissioner Amanda Lefton said, “Visits to Long Island’s ocean beaches are a treasured part of summer plans for New Yorkers and out-of-state visitors alike. Being aware of rip currents, following the State’s shark safety guidance, and keeping in mind that our coastal areas are part of a wild and natural marine ecosystem will help swimmers avoid danger while enjoying some fun in the sun. Thanks to Governor Hochul, DEC and our partners at State Parks have the necessary tools to keep an eye on the water and help ensure all beachgoers recreate safely.”

    New Yorkers are encouraged to follow shark safety guidance: 

    • Avoid areas with schools of fish, splashing fish, or diving seabirds;
    • Avoid swimming at dusk, night, and dawn;
    • Avoid murky water;
    • Swim, paddle and surf in groups;
    • Stay close to shore, where your feet can touch the bottom; and
    • Always follow the instructions of lifeguards and Parks’ staff.

    Humans assume risk whenever they enter any wild environment, whether on land or in the water. Although it is impossible to eliminate risk altogether, ocean users can modify their behavior to minimize potential interactions with sharks and reduce overall risk. When in the ocean, follow DEC’s shark safety guidelines to minimize the potential for negative interactions with sharks.

    New Technology Helps Improve Awareness of Rip Currents
    In the Long Island Region of New York, State Parks purchased two virtual reality headsets to improve public awareness and understanding of the dangers of rip currents. Members of the public can use these headsets at water safety outreach events at New York State Parks’ beaches, May 31-September 6, 2025. The technology is bilingual, with instruction available in both English and Spanish. The headsets employ technology developed by Hofstra University Professor Jase Bernhardt and developer Frank Martin, funded by New York Sea Grant.

    Rip currents are powerful, narrow channels of fast-moving water that are prevalent along coastlines. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), lifeguards rescue tens of thousands of people from rip currents in the U.S. every year, but it is estimated that 100 people are killed by rip currents annually.

    Rip currents usually form near a shallow point in the water, and can happen at any beach with breaking waves, including the beaches on the Great Lakes. If you are caught in a rip current, remain calm and don’t fight it. Swim parallel to the shore until you are out of the current, and float or tread water if you begin to tire.  Learn more about rip currents.

    The Long Island Region Water Safety Education Program initiative started at Robert Moses Field 5 last year. For summer 2025, programming has been expanded to other parks in the region, including:

    • July 12, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., Sunken Meadow State Park: Field 1 Boardwalk
    • July 25 , 4-8 p.m., Robert Moses State Park: Field 5
    • August 9, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., Heckscher State Park
    • August 16, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., Wildwood State Park: Beachfront
    • August 23, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., Sunken Meadow State Park: Field 1 Boardwalk
    • September 6, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., Captree State Park: Dockside Festival

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: EU Climate Law: new way to reach 2040 targets

    Source: European Union 2

    The Commission has proposed an amendment to the EU’s Climate Law that would see a 2040 EU climate target of a 90% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 1990 levels. The proposal also sets out a more pragmatic and flexible way to reach the 2040 target.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Rochester Man Who Lured Minor to Hotel for Sex Pleads Guilty

    Source: US FBI

    ROCHESTER, N.Y.-U.S. Attorney Michael DiGiacomo announced today that Jonathan Woody, 31, of Rochester, NY, pleaded guilty to coercion and enticement of a minor, before U.S. District Judge Charles J. Siragusa. The charge carries a minimum penalty of 10 years in prison, maximum penalty of life and a $250,000 fine.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Kyle P. Rossi, who is handling the case, stated that in January 2024, Woody engaged in sexually explicit online and text communications with a 13-year-old child that he met on social media. On January 2, 2024, Woody paid for an Uber to transport the child to a hotel in Greece, NY, where he rented a room. While at the hotel, Woody provided alcohol and marijuana and engaged in sexual acts with the child. After realizing that the child was missing from home, the child’s family called 911 to initiate a missing person investigation. The child returned home, at which time law enforcement learned of Woody’s interactions with the child. Subsequent investigation resulted in the identification and arrest of Woody.       

    The plea is the result of an investigation by the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office, under the direction of Sheriff Todd Baxter, the Greece Police Department, under the direction of Chief Michael Wood, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Child Exploitation Task Force, under the direction of Acting Special Agent-in-Charge Mark Grimm.

    Sentencing is scheduled for October 30, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. before Judge Siragusa.  

    # # # #

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Stop the senseless vandalism in our play parks this summer

    Source: Northern Ireland City of Armagh

    Throughout the year, play parks across the Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon borough have experienced incidents of vandalism that not only cost the ratepayer money but also prevent children from enjoying vital play time and outdoor activities.

    These acts of damage – ranging from broken swings and burned slides to graffiti and smashed glass – often lead to the temporary closure of parks until repairs can be made.

    This means children across the borough miss out on safe, local spaces to play, exercise and socialise with friends – particularly during the school holidays when these parks are needed most. Vandalism discourages families from using the parks leading to less physical activity and community interaction.

    “This senseless vandalism in our parks has got to stop,” commented Chair of the Policing and Community Safety Partnership, Councillor Julie Flaherty. “Many of our play parks have been heavily invested in and completely refurbished recently – yet these acts of destruction are causing unnecessary inconvenience to our communities, costing the ratepayer money and leaving our children without local play parks.

    “Council investment has ensured that 43 of our 95 parks have been upgraded with inclusive features such as sensory equipment, wheelchair-accessible play items and communication boards.  Some parks even have braille panels and quiet areas.  The cost of damage to these isn’t just financial but causes emotional distress too.

    “Unfortunately, a lot of this vandalism is caused by young people and anti-social behaviour, therefore during the summer months we would urge parents and carers to be aware of their children’s whereabouts. Know who they are with and tell them about the serious consequences of anti-social behaviour. If they are unsupervised, they may get into trouble whether acting intentionally or through association with others.”

    The Council is encouraging local residents to help look after and protect these valued community spaces. Preventing vandalism requires a combination of community engagement, surveillance, education and regular maintenance.  If you witness any acts of vandalism or anti-social behaviour in a local play park, please report it by calling 101 or report online: https://www.psni.police.uk/report

    Together, we can keep our play parks safe, welcoming, and fun for all.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Security Council Sets Election Date to Fill Vacancy on International Court of Justice

    Source: United Nations 4

    9952nd Meeting (AM)

    The Security Council meets today to take up a note by the Secretary-General titled “Date of an election to fill a vacancy in the International Court of Justice”.

    The election will be to fill the seat of Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf (Somalia), who informed the President of the International Court of Justice, pursuant to Article 13, of his resignation as a member of the Court, effective 30 September 2025.

    Article 14 of the Statute of the Court provides that vacancies shall be filled by the same method as that laid down for the first election, subject to the following provision:  the Secretary-General shall, within one month of the occurrence of the vacancy, proceed to issue the invitations provided for in Article 5, and the date of the election shall be fixed by the Security Council.

    For information media. Not an official record.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: New York Construction Company Supervisor Sentenced for Attempting to Cover Up Role in Fatal Long Island Construction Incident

    Source: US State of California

    Richard Zagger, 58, of Blue Point, New York, was sentenced yesterday to one year in prison and two years of supervised release after previously pleading guilty to a four-count indictment charging him with conspiracy and obstruction of official proceedings relating to an investigation into a fatal construction accident.

    Zagger was a supervisor for Northridge Construction Corporation, located in East Patchogue, Long Island, New York. As part of his duties, Zagger was responsible for overseeing Northridge employees who were assembling a metal shed on the construction company’s office property. During the assembly, one of the employees fell from the improperly secured shed roof and died.

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) investigated the employee’s death and identified several violations of worker safety standards, including the failure to maintain the stability of a metal structure at all times during construction. Additionally, Zagger made false statements and conspired with others to make false statements to obstruct OSHA’s investigation of the accident.

    Northridge Construction Corporation was previously sentenced to pay a $100,000 fine and complete a five-year term of probation for violating a worker safety standard causing the death of an employee and making false statements during the subsequent investigation.

    Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) made the announcement.

    Senior Trial Attorneys Daniel Dooher and Richard J. Powers and Trial Attorney Rachel Roberts of ENRD’s Environmental Crimes Section prosecuted the case.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: New York Construction Company Supervisor Sentenced for Attempting to Cover Up Role in Fatal Long Island Construction Incident

    Source: United States Attorneys General 7

    Richard Zagger, 58, of Blue Point, New York, was sentenced yesterday to one year in prison and two years of supervised release after previously pleading guilty to a four-count indictment charging him with conspiracy and obstruction of official proceedings relating to an investigation into a fatal construction accident.

    Zagger was a supervisor for Northridge Construction Corporation, located in East Patchogue, Long Island, New York. As part of his duties, Zagger was responsible for overseeing Northridge employees who were assembling a metal shed on the construction company’s office property. During the assembly, one of the employees fell from the improperly secured shed roof and died.

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) investigated the employee’s death and identified several violations of worker safety standards, including the failure to maintain the stability of a metal structure at all times during construction. Additionally, Zagger made false statements and conspired with others to make false statements to obstruct OSHA’s investigation of the accident.

    Northridge Construction Corporation was previously sentenced to pay a $100,000 fine and complete a five-year term of probation for violating a worker safety standard causing the death of an employee and making false statements during the subsequent investigation.

    Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) made the announcement.

    Senior Trial Attorneys Daniel Dooher and Richard J. Powers and Trial Attorney Rachel Roberts of ENRD’s Environmental Crimes Section prosecuted the case.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Nigeria: 2025 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for Nigeria

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    Summary

    Nigeria has implemented major reforms over the last 2 years which have improved macroeconomic stability and enhanced resilience. The country successfully tapped the Eurobond market and earned a credit rating upgrade, pointing to improved confidence. Growth has been steady but too low in per-capita terms, and inflation remains high. Gains have yet to benefit all Nigerians. Food insecurity and poverty have risen. Half-way through its term, the government is now focused on raising growth, while adapting to the spillovers from the changing global environment.

    Subject: Anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), Crime, Currency markets, Exchange rates, Financial markets, Fiscal policy, Foreign exchange, Inflation, Oil prices, Oil production, Prices, Production, Public debt, Revenue mobilization

    Keywords: Anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), Currency markets, Exchange rates, Inflation, Oil prices, Oil production, Revenue administration, Revenue mobilization

    MIL OSI Global Banks

  • MIL-OSI: Voxtur Announces Results of Annual and Special Meeting of Shareholders

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORONTO and TAMPA, Fla., July 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Voxtur Analytics Corp. (TSXV: VXTR; OTCQB: VXTRF) (“Voxtur” or the “Company”), a North American technology company creating a more transparent and accessible real estate lending ecosystem, today announced the results of its Annual and Special Meeting of Shareholders held earlier today (the “Meeting”).

    At the Meeting, the shareholders of the Company approved a resolution setting the number of directors of the Company at four and authorizing the Board to set the number of directors, and elected the following persons to serve as directors of the Company (the “Board”), each for a term of one year or until their successor is duly elected or appointed: Michael Harris, Allan Bezanson, Ray Williams, and Gary Yeoman.

    The shareholders also approved the appointment of MNP LLP as the Company’s auditor and the ratification of the Company’s Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”). A complete copy of the LTIP is available in the Management Information Circular for the Meeting, which is available at www.sedar.com. Finally, the shareholders confirmed, ratified and approved the Advance Notice By-Law.

    About Voxtur

    Voxtur is a proptech company. The company offers targeted data analytics to simplify the multifaceted aspects of the lending lifecycle for investors, lenders, government agencies and servicers. Voxtur’s proprietary data hub and workflow platforms more accurately and efficiently value real estate assets, providing critical due diligence that enables market participants to effectively originate, trade, or service defaults on mortgage loans. As an independent and transparent mortgage technology provider, the company offers primary and secondary market solutions in the United States and Canada. For more information, visit www.voxtur.com

    Forward-Looking Information

    This news release contains certain forward-looking statements and forward-looking information (collectively, “forward-looking information”) which reflect the expectations of management regarding the Company’s future growth, financial performance and objectives and the Company’s strategic initiatives, plans, business prospects and opportunities. These forward-looking statements reflect management’s current expectations regarding future events and the Company’s financial and operating performance and speak only as of the date of this press release. By their very nature, forward-looking statements require management to make assumptions and involve significant risks and uncertainties, should not be read as guarantees of future events, performance or results, and give rise to the possibility that management’s predictions, forecasts, projections, expectations or conclusions will not prove to be accurate, that the assumptions may not be correct and that the Company’s future growth, financial performance and objectives and the Company’s strategic initiatives, plans, business prospects and opportunities, including the duration, impact of and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, will not occur or be achieved. Any information contained herein that is not based on historical facts may be deemed to constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of Canadian and United States securities laws. Forward-looking information may be based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release, and may be identified by the words “may”, “would”, “could”, “should”, “will”, “intend”, “plan”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect” or similar expressions. Forward-looking information may include but is not limited to the anticipated financial performance of the Company and other events or conditions that may occur in the future. Investors are cautioned that forward-looking information is not based on historical facts but instead reflects estimates or projections concerning future results or events based on the opinions, assumptions and estimates of management considered reasonable at the date the information is provided. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, such information involves risks and uncertainties, and undue reliance should not be placed on such information, as unknown or unpredictable factors could have material adverse effects on future results, performance, or achievements of the Company. Among the key factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking information include but are not limited to: additional costs related to acquisitions, integration of acquired businesses, and implementation of new products; changing global financial conditions, especially in light of the COVID-19 global pandemic; reliance on specific key employees and customers to maintain business operations; competition within the Company’s industry; a risk in technological failure, failure to implement technological upgrades, or failure to implement new technological products in accordance with expected timelines; changing market conditions related to defaulted mortgage loans, and the failure of clients to send foreclosure and bankruptcy referrals in volumes similar to those prior to the COVID-19 global pandemic; failure of governing agencies and regulatory bodies to approve the use of products and services developed by the Company; the Company’s dependence on maintaining intellectual property and protecting newly developed intellectual property; operating losses and negative cash flows; and currency fluctuations. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information contained herein. Factors relating to the Company’s financial guidance and targets disclosed in this press release include, in addition to the factors set out above, the degree to which actual future events accord with, or vary from, the expectations of, and assumptions used by, Voxtur’s management in preparing the financial guidance and targets.

    This forward-looking information is provided as of the date of this news release and, accordingly, is subject to change after such date. The Company does not assume any obligation to update or revise this information to reflect new events or circumstances except as required in accordance with applicable laws.

    Neither TSXV nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSXV) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    Voxtur’s common shares are traded on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol VXTR and in the US on the OTCQB under the symbol VXTRF.

    Company Contact:
    Jordan Ross
    Tel: (416)708-9764

    jordan@voxtur.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Former SWAT Leader and National Educator Joins WrapTactics™ to Launch Digital Pre-Escalation Training

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIAMI, July 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Wrap Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: WRAP) (“Wrap” or, the “Company”), a global leader in pre-escalation and non-lethal public safety solutions, today announces the appointment of Todd Larson, EdD., MSL, FABC, as Strategic Advisor of the Company. Dr. Larson will guide the development of WrapTactics™, Wrap’s advanced learning management system focused on elevating police training through integrated mindset conditioning, emotional regulation and tactical problem-solving.

    Dr. Larson brings over 30 years of experience in law enforcement, public safety innovation and education. His decorated 22-year tenure with the Scottsdale Police Department included leadership roles in Special Investigations, Violent Crimes, and more than a decade with the SWAT team as operator, sniper and team leader. Complementing his field experience, Dr. Larson has taught at the University of Phoenix, Northern Arizona University, and delivered leadership, ethics and emotional intelligence training nationwide to thousands of officers.

    “Dr. Larson’s commitment to innovation, leadership and his extensive law enforcement experience makes him an invaluable addition to our core advisory team,” said Scot Cohen, Chief Executive Officer of Wrap. “His expertise is expected to ensure our learning system is grounded in reality, guided by science and focused on safer outcomes for all.”

    As Wrap builds a scalable and practical training platform in public safety, Dr. Larson will lead efforts to embed scenario-based modules rooted in real-world encounters, emphasizing three critical components of effective policing:

    • Mindset framing to foster clarity under pressure within the pre-escalation period;
    • Emotion regulation to de-escalate before force becomes necessary; and
    • Tactical precision to resolve situations safely and effectively.

    “I am honored to support Wrap’s mission to improve officer readiness through innovation,” said Dr. Larson. “WrapTactics™ isn’t just about tools—it’s about transforming the way officers think, respond and lead in every interaction.”

    Larson holds a Doctorate in Organizational Leadership and a master’s degree in leadership with an emphasis in Crisis Management and Disaster Preparedness from Grand Canyon University, as well as a bachelor’s degree in education from Northern Arizona University. He also works as a consultant with a large Arizona based healthcare system focused on Innovation and Network Operations, is a published author and a nationally known speaker.

    To learn more about WrapTactics™ and Dr. Larson’s role in redefining modern police training, visit [www.wrap.com].

    About Wrap Technologies, Inc.

    Wrap Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: WRAP) a global leader in innovative public safety technologies and non-lethal tools, delivering cutting-edge technology with exceptional people to address the complex, modern day challenges facing public safety organizations.

    Wrap’s BolaWrap® 150 solution leads the world in pre-escalation and beyond, providing law enforcement with a safer choice for nearly every phase of a critical incident.

    This innovative, patented device deploys a multi-sensory, cognitive disruption that leverages sight, sound and sensation to expand the pre-escalation period and give officers the advantage and critical time to manage non-compliant subjects before resorting to higher-force options. The BolaWrap® 150 is a not pain-based- compliance. It does not shoot, strike, shock, or incapacitate—instead, it helps officers strategically operate pre-escalation on the force continuum, reducing the risk of injury to both officers and subjects. Used by over 1,000 agencies across the U.S. and in 60 countries, BolaWrap® is backed by training certified by the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training (IADLEST), reinforcing Wrap’s commitment to public safety through cutting-edge technology and expert training.

    Wrap Reality® VR is a fully immersive training simulator to enhance decision-making under pressure.

    As a comprehensive public safety training platform, it provides first responders with realistic, interactive scenarios that reflect the evolving challenges of modern law enforcement. By offering a growing library of real-world situations, Wrap Reality® equips officers with the skills and confidence to navigate high stakes encounters effectively, leading to safer outcomes for both responders and the communities they serve.

    WrapVision is an all-new body-worn camera and evidence management system built for efficiency.

    Designed for efficiency, security, and transparency to meet the rigorous demands of modern law enforcement, WrapVision captures, stores and helps manage digital evidence, with operational security, regulatory compliance and superior video picture quality and field of view.

    The WrapVision camera, powered by IONODES boasts cloud integration and adheres to Trade Agreements Act (TAA) compliance requirements and GSA schedule contracts requirements. Crucially, unlike many competitor devices manufactured overseas in foreign, non-compliant, and possibly hostile regions, WrapVision is built in North America, promoting unparalleled data integrity and reducing critical concerns over unauthorized access or foreign surveillance risks.

    Trademark Information

    Trademark Information Wrap, the Wrap logo, BolaWrap®, Wrap Reality® and Wrap Training Academy are trademarks of Wrap Technologies, Inc., some of which are registered in the U.S. and abroad. All other trade names used herein are either trademarks or registered trademarks of the respective holders.

    Cautionary Note on Forward-Looking Statements – Safe Harbor Statement

    This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “should”, “believe”, “target”, “project”, “goals”, “estimate”, “potential”, “predict”, “may”, “will”, “could”, “intend”, and variations of these terms or the negative of these terms and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. Moreover, forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which involve factors or circumstances that are beyond the Company’s control. The Company’s actual results could differ materially from those stated or implied in forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including but not limited to: the Company’s expectations related to the appointment of the new Chief Financial Officer, the expected benefits of the acquisition of W1 Global, LLC, the Company’s ability to maintain compliance with the Nasdaq Capital Market’s listing standards; the Company’s ability to successfully implement training programs for the use of its products; the Company’s ability to manufacture and produce products for its customers; the Company’s ability to develop sales for its products; the market acceptance of existing and future products; the availability of funding to continue to finance operations; the complexity, expense and time associated with sales to law enforcement and government entities; the lengthy evaluation and sales cycle for the Company’s product solutions; product defects; litigation risks from alleged product-related injuries; risks of government regulations; the business impact of health crises or outbreaks of disease, such as epidemics or pandemics; the impact resulting from geopolitical conflicts and any resulting sanctions; the ability to obtain export licenses for counties outside of the United States; the ability to obtain patents and defend intellectual property against competitors; the impact of competitive products and solutions; and the Company’s ability to maintain and enhance its brand, as well as other risk factors mentioned in the Company’s most recent annual report on Form 10-K, subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and other Securities and Exchange Commission filings. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this release and were based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections as well as the beliefs and assumptions of management. Except as required by law, the Company undertakes no duty or obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this release as a result of new information, future events or changes in its expectations.

    Investor Relations Contact:
    (800) 583-2652
    ir@wrap.com

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/6444767d-f765-42a5-873b-4d2990983561

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Suburban Chicago Businessman Convicted for Role in Bank Fraud and PPP Fraud Schemes

    Source: US State of California

    A federal jury convicted an Illinois businessman yesterday for his role in schemes to fraudulently obtain over $55 million in commercial loans and lines of credit and for submitting fraudulent applications to obtain COVID-19 relief money guaranteed by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).

    According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Rahul Shah, 56, of Evanston, the owner and operator of several information technology companies in the Chicago area, fraudulently obtained funds from loans and lines of credit for which he was not eligible from federally insured financial institutions and later defaulted on at least one such line of credit and one such loan. Shah submitted to federally insured financial institutions falsified bank statements that fraudulently inflated deposits, falsified balance sheets that overstated revenues, and fabricated audited financial statements with forged signatures. Shah also engaged in monetary transactions with proceeds from the bank fraud.

    Shah also submitted to a federally insured bank an application for a $441,138 loan guaranteed by the SBA that significantly overstated the payroll expenses of a company he controlled. In support of the loan application, he submitted to the lender several fraudulent IRS documents, which falsely represented that the company made payments to multiple individuals who had not received such payments. He also used stolen identities to carry out the fraud, using the names and taxpayer identification numbers of individuals that he knew had not received payments from the company in the PPP loan applications.

    In addition, Shah signed and caused to be submitted to the lender what purported to be IRS Forms 941 representing his company’s quarterly payroll expenses for 2019. A comparison between the documents submitted to the lender and the company’s IRS and state tax filings revealed that Shah’s company reported significantly lower payroll expenses to the tax authorities.

    Shah was convicted of seven counts of bank fraud, five counts of making false statements to a financial institution, two counts of money laundering, and two counts of aggravated identity theft. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 13. Shah faces up to 30 years in prison on each count of bank fraud and false statements to a financial institution, up to 10 years in prison on each count of money laundering, and up to two years in prison for each aggravated identity theft count. A federal district court judge will determine the sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros for the Northern District of Illinois, Special Agent in Charge Douglas S. DePodesta of the FBI Chicago Field Office, and Special Agent in Charge Brady Ipock of the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General (SBA OIG) Chicago Field Office made the announcement.

    The FBI Chicago Field Office and SBA OIG Chicago Field Office investigated the case.

    Assistant Chief Patrick Mott and Trial Attorney Lindsey Carson of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Jasmina Vajzovic for the Northern District of Illinois are prosecuting the case.

    The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s prosecution of fraud schemes that exploit the PPP. Since the enactment of the CARES Act, the Fraud Section has prosecuted over 200 defendants in more than 130 criminal cases and has seized over $78 million in cash proceeds derived from fraudulently obtained PPP funds, as well as numerous real estate properties and luxury items purchased with such proceeds. More information can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-fraud/cares-act-fraud

    Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Justice Department’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Federal Probation Officer Sentenced for Child Exploitation Charges

    Source: US FBI

    Oxford, MS – A former federal probation officer was sentenced today to 10 years in prison for receiving child sexual abuse materials.

    Lonnie Everill pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography on January 14, 2025.

    According to court documents, Lonnie Everill, 46 years old, of Water Valley, Mississippi, was initially investigated after engaging in chats with another social media user regarding their sexual interest in children. When investigators reviewed the contents of the account attributable to Everill, they found images and videos of prepubescent minors engaged in sexual conduct. Over the course of four (4) months, Everill had sent and received a number of images and videos of child sexual abuse material, as well as selfies and images of local minors not engaged in sexually explicit conduct.

    During his time as a probation officer, Everill had structured his career to focus on the rehabilitation and supervision of sexual offenders. Everill was employed in Utah, California, South Carolina, and Mississippi. 

    U.S. District Judge Dan Jordan sentenced Everill to 120 months in federal prison. In handing down the prison term, the court held him accountable for over 1,400 images. Everill was further ordered to pay $3,000 in restitution to the victims in the images he possessed and an additional assessment of $10,000. He will also have to comply with numerous requirements designed to restrict his access to children and the internet and will be ordered to register as a sex offender. The court noted that many of the images and videos he possessed were of very young children and toddlers being raped.

    “Everill’s betrayal of trust has been truly staggering,” stated U.S. Attorney Clay Joyner. “His criminal conduct affected victims, the community, and undermined the credibility of the great federal probation officers in this district. I truly appreciate the exceptional prosecution led by AUSA Parker King and FBI Supervisory Agent Ryan Berthay that uncovered his crimes and brought him to justice.”

    “The conduct of this former law enforcement officer was beyond shocking and a gross betrayal of public trust,” said Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Jackson Field Office Robert Eikhoff. “When someone in a position of authority commits such a revolting crime, the damage extends beyond the youthful victims; it shakes the very foundation of our communities’ trust. No matter their badge or title, the FBI will always aggressively pursue those that prey on our children.”

    This case was investigated by the FBI.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Parker S. King prosecuted the case, which was brought as part of the Project Safe Childhood nationwide initiative by the Department of Justice to combat the epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Suburban Chicago Businessman Convicted for Role in Bank Fraud and PPP Fraud Schemes

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    A federal jury convicted an Illinois businessman yesterday for his role in schemes to fraudulently obtain over $55 million in commercial loans and lines of credit and for submitting fraudulent applications to obtain COVID-19 relief money guaranteed by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).

    According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Rahul Shah, 56, of Evanston, the owner and operator of several information technology companies in the Chicago area, fraudulently obtained funds from loans and lines of credit for which he was not eligible from federally insured financial institutions and later defaulted on at least one such line of credit and one such loan. Shah submitted to federally insured financial institutions falsified bank statements that fraudulently inflated deposits, falsified balance sheets that overstated revenues, and fabricated audited financial statements with forged signatures. Shah also engaged in monetary transactions with proceeds from the bank fraud.

    Shah also submitted to a federally insured bank an application for a $441,138 loan guaranteed by the SBA that significantly overstated the payroll expenses of a company he controlled. In support of the loan application, he submitted to the lender several fraudulent IRS documents, which falsely represented that the company made payments to multiple individuals who had not received such payments. He also used stolen identities to carry out the fraud, using the names and taxpayer identification numbers of individuals that he knew had not received payments from the company in the PPP loan applications.

    In addition, Shah signed and caused to be submitted to the lender what purported to be IRS Forms 941 representing his company’s quarterly payroll expenses for 2019. A comparison between the documents submitted to the lender and the company’s IRS and state tax filings revealed that Shah’s company reported significantly lower payroll expenses to the tax authorities.

    Shah was convicted of seven counts of bank fraud, five counts of making false statements to a financial institution, two counts of money laundering, and two counts of aggravated identity theft. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 13. Shah faces up to 30 years in prison on each count of bank fraud and false statements to a financial institution, up to 10 years in prison on each count of money laundering, and up to two years in prison for each aggravated identity theft count. A federal district court judge will determine the sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros for the Northern District of Illinois, Special Agent in Charge Douglas S. DePodesta of the FBI Chicago Field Office, and Special Agent in Charge Brady Ipock of the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General (SBA OIG) Chicago Field Office made the announcement.

    The FBI Chicago Field Office and SBA OIG Chicago Field Office investigated the case.

    Assistant Chief Patrick Mott and Trial Attorney Lindsey Carson of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Jasmina Vajzovic for the Northern District of Illinois are prosecuting the case.

    The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s prosecution of fraud schemes that exploit the PPP. Since the enactment of the CARES Act, the Fraud Section has prosecuted over 200 defendants in more than 130 criminal cases and has seized over $78 million in cash proceeds derived from fraudulently obtained PPP funds, as well as numerous real estate properties and luxury items purchased with such proceeds. More information can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-fraud/cares-act-fraud

    Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Justice Department’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-Evening Report: Philadelphia’s $2B affordable housing plan relies heavily on municipal bonds, which can come with hidden costs for taxpayers

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jade Craig, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Mississippi

    The Parker administration says it will issue $800 million in bonds over the next four years to fund affordable housing. Jeff Fusco/The Conversation, CC BY-NC-SA

    Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker’s Housing Opportunities Made Easy initiative, which was included in the city budget passed June 12, 2025, is an ambitious effort to address the city’s affordable housing challenges.

    Parker has promised to create or preserve 30,000 affordable housing units throughout the city, at a cost of roughly US$2 billion.

    To help fund the plan, the Parker administration says it will issue $800 million in housing bonds over the next three years.

    In an April 2025 report on the housing plan, the Parker administration admits that, in light of declining federal investment in affordable housing, proceeds from municipal bonds issued by the local government “have taken on an outsized role” in Philadelphia’s housing programs.

    Often, only city treasurers and the finance committees of city councils pay attention to the details behind these municipal bonds.

    As a law professor who studies the social impact of municipal bonds, I believe it’s important that city residents understand how these bonds work as well.

    While municipal bonds are integral to the city’s effort to increase access to affordable and market-rate housing, they can include hidden costs and requirements that raise prices in ways that make city services unaffordable for lower-income residents.

    The Parker administration has vowed to create or preserve 30,000 affordable housing units in Philly through new construction, rehabilitation and expanded rental assistance.
    Jeff Fusco/The Conversation, CC BY-SA

    How municipal bonds work

    Most people are aware that companies sell shares on the stock market to raise capital. State and local governments do the same thing in the form of municipal bonds, which help them raise money to cover their expenses and to finance infrastructure projects.

    These bonds are a form of debt. Investors can purchase an interest in the bond and, in exchange, the local government promises to pay the money back with interest in a specified time period. The money from investors functions like a loan to the government.

    Municipal bonds are often used so that one generation of taxpayers is not having to bear the full cost of a project that will benefit multiple generations of residents. The cost of building a bridge, for example, which will be in use for decades, can be spread out over 30 years so that residents pay back the loan slowly over time rather than saddle residents with huge tax increases one year to cover the cost.

    However, the cost of borrowing pushes up the cost of projects by adding interest payments the same way a mortgage adds to the overall cost of buying a house. Overall, the market and state and local governments have historically viewed this cost as a worthy trade-off.

    Some municipal bonds have limits

    The Parker administration has several options when it comes to raising capital on the municipal market.

    The most common method is through general obligation bonds, which are backed by the city’s authority to impose and collect taxes. Bondholders rely on the city’s “full faith and credit” to assure them that if the city has difficulty paying back the debt, the city will raise taxes on residents to secure the payment.

    The city plans to use general obligation bonds to help fund its affordable housing plan, but there are limits on how much it can borrow this way. The state constitution limits Philadelphia’s ability to incur debt to a total of 13.5% of the value of its assessed taxable real estate, based on an average of this amount for the preceding 10 years.

    Philadelphia is more affordable than several other big U.S. cities, according to a 2020 report from the Pew Charitable Trusts, but it has a high poverty rate.
    Jeff Fusco/The Conversation, CC BY-SA

    Philly has another option

    The city, however, also has the authority to take on another form of debt: revenue bonds. Revenue bonds rely on specific sources of revenue instead of the government’s taxing power. Jurisdictions issue revenue bonds to fund particular projects or services – usually ones that generate income from fees paid by users.

    For example, a publicly owned water utility or electric company relies on water and sewage fees or electricity rates and charges to pay back their revenue bonds. Likewise, a transportation authority will rely on tolls to pay back revenue bonds issued to build a toll road, such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

    Under state law, revenue bonds are “non-debt debts.” They are not debts owed by the city, because the city has not promised to repay the debt through the use of its own taxing powers. Instead, the people who pay the fees to use the service are paying back the debt.

    Since states began to place stricter limits on debt in the wake of the Great Depression in the 1930s, cities across the U.S. have increasingly used revenue bonds to get around state debt limits and still fund valuable public services, including affordable housing projects.

    When another government entity – rather than the city – issues the bond, and the city pays them a service fee for doing so, it’s a form of what’s called conduit debt. That obligation to pay the service fee to the other government entity is the conduit debt that the city pays out of its general fund.

    In Philadelphia, conduit debt includes revenue bonds issued by the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development and Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority.

    From fiscal years 2012 to 2021, the city’s outstanding debt from general obligation bonds paid for out of its general fund was between $1.3 billion to $1.7 billion per year. However, the city’s conduit debt outstripped that number every year, ranging from $1.8 billion to nearly $2.3 billion. In more recent years, conduit debt has been less than the city’s debt from general obligation bonds.

    The city keeps conduit debt on its books – and is obligated to pay it back – even though it comes from bonds issued by the development authorities, because these debts loop back to the city. In the bonds issued by these agencies, the city actually becomes like a client of the agency. The city is typically obligated to pay the agency service fees as part of a contractual obligation that cannot be canceled.

    The revenue on which the development agencies’ bonds rely, the money from which bondholders expect to be paid back, does not come from fees that residents pay out of their own pocket – for example through ticket sales from a sports stadium built with revenue bonds. The money instead comes out of the city’s treasury.

    A loophole to affordable housing

    Essentially this is a loophole for the city to bypass debt limits set for Philadelphia in the state constitution. Sometimes creativity in government requires using loopholes to get the job done – to get to yes instead of a stalemate.

    Consider this analogy. Say your sister takes out a bank loan to buy a car for you because your credit limit is maxed out. She is relying on you to pay her back, and she uses your payment to pay the bank. But if you don’t pay her back, she’s not responsible by law for paying the bank herself. So, it’s your debt, but she is the conduit.

    If the city holds itself accountable, it can use conduit debt responsibly to make affordable housing construction a reality.

    The mayor’s office did not respond to my questions about whether they plan to use conduit debt issued by a development authority, whether that conduit debt would include service fees, and what funds would be used to pay those fees.

    In its quest to increase access to affordable housing, the Parker administration should, in my view, be mindful of limiting the service fees it agrees to pay – which have no legally prescribed limits – and also account for where it will find income to cover these costs. For example, will it come from the sale of city-owned land? Fees charged to developers? Or some other source?

    Otherwise, taxpayers may be left to foot a bill that is essentially unlimited.

    Read more of our stories about Philadelphia.

    Jade Craig does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Philadelphia’s $2B affordable housing plan relies heavily on municipal bonds, which can come with hidden costs for taxpayers – https://theconversation.com/philadelphias-2b-affordable-housing-plan-relies-heavily-on-municipal-bonds-which-can-come-with-hidden-costs-for-taxpayers-253522

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) Committee Condemns Killing of Ekurhuleni Metro’s Forensic Audit Chief


    Download logo

    The Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) has learned with shock about the brutal assassination of Mr Mpho Mafole, the City of Ekurhuleni’s group divisional head of corporate and forensic audits.

    According to media reports, the 47-year-old was gunned down on Monday while driving along the R23 in Esselen Park. Police reportedly discovered Mr Mafole’s body inside his vehicle, riddled with gunshot wounds.

    Mr Mafole, who was appointed to the position only three months ago, brought with him an impressive track record of public service, including 14 years in the Office of the Auditor-General of South Africa. He was tasked with uncovering financial irregularities and promoting transparency in the City of Ekurhuleni, one of the country’s largest municipalities.

    Committee Chairperson Dr Zweli Mkhize said the nature of Mr Mafole’s work underscored the often-dangerous responsibilities undertaken by those at the forefront of rooting out corruption in our public institutions. “The committee condemns this cowardly and violent act as this not only threatens the lives of dedicated public servants but also seeks to intimidate and hinder efforts to build clean and accountable governance, particularly in our municipalities where systemic failures persist,” said the Chairperson.

    Dr Mkhize said this tragedy is a stark reminder of the urgent need to strengthen the protection of whistleblowers and anti-corruption officials. “Reforms to safeguard those who speak out and act against corruption must urgently be expedited.” He said municipalities, and the rest of government, must uphold the highest standards of financial oversight and integrity.

    The Chairperson also noted that this tragedy comes as the committee prepares for the start of extensive oversight visits across provinces to demand accountability from municipalities following the latest dismal municipal audit outcomes. “The committee will continue to exercise its oversight mandate, working with all spheres of government to ensure that those who risk their lives in service of public accountability are protected and that the rot that enables criminality is eradicated,” he said.

    “The committee extends its heartfelt condolences to Mr Mafole’s family, colleagues, and loved ones during this difficult time. We urge law enforcement agencies to bring the perpetrators to justice swiftly.”

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

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Security: Detectives appeal for information following serious assault in Hackney

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Detectives investigating a serious assault in Hackney are appealing for witnesses to come forward, and have named a man they need to trace.

    On Saturday, 28 June at 00:56hrs police were called to reports of a fight between two men in Lower Clapton Road, E5.

    Officers attended alongside the London Ambulance Service who treated a 32-year-old man at the scene before transporting him to hospital. He remains in hospital with serious injuries that are believed to be life-changing.

    After making enquiries and reviewing CCTV, detectives are keen to speak to Christopher Richards, 32 (08.08.1992) of South Ockendon, Thurrock, in relation to the assault.

    Richards is known to have links to the Hackney area, as well as South Ockendon, Hammersmith and Fulham and Islington. He is of a medium, broad build and has dark brown hair.

    Anyone who has information on Richards’ and his whereabouts, or anyone with further information that could help the investigation, is urged to contact police on 101 quoting CAD 409/28JUN25.

    To remain anonymous, call the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or visit crimestoppers-uk.org.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Second person charged following fatal shooting in Enfield

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    A second person has been charged following the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Keanu Harker in Enfield.

    Eliezer Mbaki, 24 (8.7.00), of Oulton Road, Tottenham, was arrested on Monday, 30 June. He was charged on Tuesday, 1 July with perverting the course of justice.

    He was remanded to appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, 2 July.

    After receiving reports that gunshots had been heard on Thursday, 26 June, Met officers attended Great Cambridge Road, Enfield alongside the London Ambulance Service.

    An arrival the victim, Keanu Harker, was treated before being taken to a nearby hospital.

    Sadly, despite the best efforts of medical staff, he later died from his injuries.

    His family continue to be supported by specialist officers.

    A 17-year-old – who cannot be named for legal reasons – was also arrested on Sunday, 29 July, in connection with the shooting.

    He appeared before Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, 1 July, charged with murder. He will next appear at the Old Bailey on Thursday, 3 July.

    Several lines of enquiry remain active.

    Anyone with information about the incident is asked to call police on 101 quoting CAD 8393/26JUN or to remain anonymous call Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Africa: W Cape welcomes employment of new peace officers in Bergrivier

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Wednesday, July 2, 2025

    Western Cape MEC for Police Oversight and Community Safety, Anroux Marais, has voiced her support for the graduation and employment of 20 new peace officers (POs) in the Bergrivier Municipality.

    According to the provincial department, the recruitment and training of these officers is part of a five-year strategic plan aimed at strengthening local law enforcement across municipalities in the province.

    This initiative is designed to create a safer Western Cape for everyone.

    In collaboration with the City of Cape Town’s accredited Public Training College, the graduates completed a 30-day programme accredited by the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority (SASSETA). 

    Upon finishing the course, the officers received formal certification to serve as both peace officers and traffic wardens.

    Addressing the graduates during the ceremony, Marais reminded them that their role extends beyond merely enforcing the law. 

    “You are here not only to maintain order but also to build trust, foster relationships, and help create safer, more connected communities, where residents can live and move freely,“ she said. 

    Marais encouraged them to serve with honour, courage and distinction.

    The MEC believes that the training and certification these young peace officers have received not only enhances their employability but also opens doors to future careers in law enforcement and public safety.

    “The Western Cape government remains committed to investing in youth and building safer communities through initiatives like our Peace Officer Training Project. Safer communities support a stronger economy, as people are more likely to invest when they feel safe, which in turn drives job creation.” – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Over 60 000 applications received on SAPS e-recruitment site

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Wednesday, July 2, 2025

    The South African Police Service (SAPS) e-recruitment site is continuing to receive large volumes of applications for the Basic Police Learning Development Programme (BPLDP). 

    The site, https://erecruitment.saps.gov.za/, was officially launched on Monday.

    READ | SAPS launches long awaited e-Recruitment drive

    In the first 24 hours, SAPS received in excess of 67 774 applications from various parts of the country. 

    “SAPS is aware that the website is experiencing a delayed response due to traffic volumes. The Technology Management Services (TMS), inclusive of IT experts, is continuously monitoring the influx of applications. 

    “Applicants are advised to be patient and to continue refreshing the careers page,” SAPS said in a statement.

    The closing date for applications for the Basic Police Learning Development Programme is 18 July 2025.

    All applications should be submitted via the website portal and not via email. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Europe: EU’s Climate Law presents a new way to get to 2040

    Source: EuroStat – European Statistics

    European Commission Press release Brussels, 02 Jul 2025 The European Commission today proposed an amendment to the EU Climate Law, setting a 2040 EU climate target of 90% reduction in net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, compared to 1990 levels, as requested by the Commission Political Guidelines for 2024-2029.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of measures and cooperation in matters relating to the protection of adults – A10-0128/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of measures and cooperation in matters relating to the protection of adults

    (COM(2023)0280 – C9‑0192/2023 – 2023/0169(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0280),

     having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 81(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0192/2023),

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

     having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 13 December 2024,

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A10-0128/2025),

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

    2. Approves its statement annexed to this resolution, which will be published in the L series of the Official Journal of the European Union together with the final legislative act;

    3. Suggests that the act be cited as ‘the Jana Toom and …..- Regulation on Jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of measures and cooperation in matters relating to the protection of adults’[1];

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

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

     

    Amendment  1

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Citation 3 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee1a,

     

    __________________

     

    1a  OJ C, C/2024/1581, 5.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1581/oj.

    Amendment  2

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (1) The purpose of this Regulation is to lay down rules, in cross-border cases, for the protection of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests. In particular, this Regulation lays down rules on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of measures, acceptance of authentic instruments and cooperation between Member States’ competent authorities and Central Authorities.

    (1) The purpose of this Regulation is to lay down rules, in cross-border cases, for the protection of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests or require support and safeguards in decision-making. In particular, this Regulation lays down rules on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of measures, verification of their implementation, acceptance recognition of authentic instruments and cooperation between Member States’ competent authorities and Central Authorities.

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (3) In accordance with Article 81(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), such measures may include those aimed at ensuring the compatibility of the rules applicable in the Member States concerning conflict of laws and jurisdiction and the mutual recognition and enforcement between Member States of judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases.

    (3) In accordance with Article 81(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), such measures may include those aimed at ensuring the compatibility of the rules applicable in the Member States concerning conflict of laws and jurisdiction and the mutual recognition and enforcement between Member States of judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases, effective access to justice, the elimination of obstacles to the proper functioning of civil proceedings and support for the training of the judiciary and judicial staff.

    Amendment  4

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (5) In the absence of such common rules, various difficulties may arise for the adults who are not in a position to protect their interests in cross-border situations, including where those adults move to another Member State or where they own real property or other assets in another Member State. Difficulties may arise for instance where measures taken in one Member State with a view to protecting the adults, including support measures provided to exercise their legal capacity, need to be invoked in other Member States, or where powers of representation granted by the adults to be exercised by their representatives when the adults are not in a position to protect their interests need to be later invoked abroad. Those difficulties can have serious adverse consequences on legal certainty in cross-border dealings and on the rights and wellbeing of the adults and on respect for their dignity. In particular, fundamental rights of the adults, such as access to justice, the right to autonomy, and the right to property and to free movement, may be negatively affected.

    (5) In the absence of such common rules, various difficulties may arise for the adults who, in cross-border situations, require support and safeguards in decision-making and, for the purpose of the application of the Convention of the Hague Conference on Private International Law of 13 January 2000 on the International Protection of Adults (‘HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention’) to be interpreted in the light of the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘UNCRPD’), are not in a position to protect their interests. This includes situations where those adults move to another Member State or where they own real property or other assets in another Member State. Difficulties may arise for instance where measures taken in one Member State with a view to protecting the adults, including support measures provided to exercise their legal capacity, need to be invoked in other Member States, or where powers of representation granted by the adults to be exercised by their representatives when the adults require support in decision-making and in the protection of their interests need to be later invoked abroad. Those difficulties can have serious adverse consequences on legal certainty in cross-border dealings and on the rights and wellbeing of the adults and on respect for their dignity. In particular, fundamental rights of the adults, such as access to justice, the right to autonomy, and the right to property and to free movement, may be negatively and, sometimes, ireversibly affected.

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (10) In addition, the interpretation of the rules laid down in this Regulation should be guided by its objectives that are to enhance the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms and other rights of adults in cross-border situations, including their right to autonomy, access to justice, right to property, right to be heard, right to free movement and equality. In this regard, this Regulation builds on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’) and on international human rights law in this area. In particular, a significant part of adults to which this Regulation applies are persons with disabilities. Their rights, including the right to equality before the law, integrity, access to justice and respect for their inherent dignity and individual autonomy, are guaranteed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities11 (‘UNCRPD’), to which both the Union and its Member States are parties. The rights safeguarded in the UNCRPD are to be protected both in national and cross-border cases, and where measures are taken in relation to persons with disabilities, those measures are to be in line with the UNCRPD. This Regulation, laying down private international law rules for cross-border cases, should be applied consistently with the human rights obligations under the UNCRPD, in particular with its Articles 3, 9, 12 and 19. As contracting Parties to the UNCRPD, Member States are to ensure that their national substantive and procedural laws on the treatment of adults are consistent with the human rights obligations provided by the UNCRPD. In particular, Member States are to respect the equality of adults before the law and their right to enjoy legal capacity on equal basis with others in all aspects of life, with the support that they may require, as well as the autonomy and integrity of the adults in accordance with Article 12 of the UNCRPD.

    (10) In addition, the interpretation of the rules laid down in this Regulation should be guided by its objectives that are to enhance the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms and other rights of adults in cross-border situations, including their right to autonomy, access to justice, right to property, right to be heard, right to free movement, non-discrimination and equality. In this regard, this Regulation builds on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’) and on international human rights law in this area. In particular, a significant part of adults to which this Regulation applies are persons with disabilities. Their rights, including the right to equality before the law, integrity, access to justice and respect for their inherent dignity and individual autonomy, are guaranteed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities11 (‘UNCRPD’), to which both the Union and its Member States are parties. The rights safeguarded in the UNCRPD are to be protected both in national and cross-border cases, and where measures are taken in relation to persons with disabilities, those measures are to be in line with the UNCRPD. This Regulation, laying down private international law rules for cross-border cases, should be applied consistently with the human rights obligations under the UNCRPD, in particular with its Articles 3, 9, 12 and 19. As contracting Parties to the UNCRPD, Member States are to ensure that their national substantive and procedural laws on the treatment of adults are consistent with the human rights obligations provided by the UNCRPD. In particular, Member States are to respect the equality of adults before the law and their right to enjoy legal capacity on equal basis with others in all aspects of life, with the support that they may require, as well as the autonomy and integrity of the adults in accordance with Article 12 of the UNCRPD. To ensure, in line with the UNCRPD, that all persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others, courts should prioritise supported decision-making over substituted decision-making, where appropriate, ensuring that the views, will and preferences of the adult concerned are central to any protective intervention.

    __________________

    __________________

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (10a) This Regulation is aimed at supporting the application of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention with measures that are focused on full respect of the autonomy of adults concerned and the establishment of supported decision-making regimes and advance planning across the Union. The UNCRPD entered into force for the Union on 22 January 2011. The objective was for the Union to support the Member States in its implementation within its competences. In line with European Court of Justice juriprudence1a, it has consistently been held that international conventions which are an integral part of the legal order of the Union and are binding on it, have primacy over secondary legislation. Therefore, secondary legislation is to be interpreted as far as possible in accordance with those conventions. In line with the UNCRPD, every person has the inherent right to dignity, autonomy, and equality before the law, including the right to make their own decisions. The protection of adults should not be based on restricting their legal capacity by, for example, having a third person or authority make decisions on their behalf. Protection, instead, must be based on the provision of support to the adult to ensure that they can make autonomous decisions about their lives. The implementation of supported decision-making may take various forms which may include facilitating for the adult to choose one or more trusted support persons to assist them in exercising their legal capacity, implementing accessibility measures such as understandable formats, and advance planning mechanisms in which a person plans in advance how their will and preferences shall be addressed in times of certain decision-making. Supported decision-making must be voluntary, initiated and terminated only at the person’s request, with full control over the choice and dismissal of support persons. Protection, as interpreted by the UNCRPD, means empowering individuals to exercise their rights – not limiting them – and ensuring that their choices guide all decisions affecting their lives.

     

    __________________

     

    1a Opinion of AG Szpunar, C-641/18, LG v Rina SpA, 14 January 2020; Judgement of the ECJ, C-15/17, Bosphorus Queeen Shipping Ltd Corp. v Rajavartiolaitos, 11 July 2018.

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 11

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (11) Besides the protection, in cross-border situations, of fundamental rights and freedoms and other rights of adults, including the respect for their will and preferences, this Regulation also aims to improve the effectiveness and speed of judicial and administrative proceedings concerning the protection of adults by simplifying and streamlining the mechanisms for cooperation in cross-border proceedings. It further aims to strengthen legal certainty and predictability in cross-border dealings, both for adults and their representatives and for other parties, whether they are public or private entities. Providing greater legal certainty and simpler, streamlined and digitalised procedures should also encourage individuals to exercise their right to free movement.

    (11) Besides the protection, in cross-border situations, of fundamental rights and freedoms and other rights of adults, including the respect for their will and preferences, this Regulation also aims to improve the effectiveness and speed of judicial and administrative proceedings concerning the protection of adults establishing clear, simpler and functional mechanisms for cooperation in cross-border proceedings. It further aims to strengthen legal certainty and predictability in cross-border dealings, both for adults and their representatives and for other parties, whether they are public or private entities. Providing greater legal certainty and simpler, streamlined and digitalised procedures should also encourage individuals to exercise their right to free movement.

    Amendment  8

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (12) This Regulation should cover civil matters involving the protection of adults, in particular related to measures, authentic instruments and powers of representation, aimed at the protection of an adult. The protection is required due to an insufficiency or an impairment of the personal faculties of the adult, which can be permanent or temporary and, among others, of physical or psychosocial nature, or in connection with an age-related disease, such as Alzheimer’s disease, or resulting from a health condition, such as a coma. The protection is in particular required where barriers in the interaction with a range of environmental and personal factors hinder their participation in society on equal basis with others, in particular where the insufficiency or impairment of the personal faculties of the adult is such as to prevent that adult from looking after his or her own interests, such as property interests and personal or health interests. Serious neglect of the personal or property interests of the relatives for whom the adult is responsible may also reveal an impairment or insufficiency of the adult’s personal faculties.

    (12) This Regulation should cover civil matters involving the support and protection of adults, in particular related to measures, authentic instruments and powers of representation, aimed at the support and protection of an adult. The support and protection is required due to an insufficiency or an impairment of the personal faculties of the adult, which can be permanent or temporary and, among others, of physical or psychosocial nature, or in connection with an age-related disease, such as Alzheimer’s disease, or resulting from a health condition, such as a coma. The personal faculties of the adult can be affected in full or in part and the adult can require varying degrees of support and assistance in exercising their legal capacity. More intensive forms of protection can in particular be required where barriers in the interaction with a range of environmental and personal factors hinder their participation in society on equal basis with others, in particular where the insufficiency or impairment of the personal faculties of the adult is such as to prevent that adult from looking after their own interests, such as property interests and personal or health interests. In such situations, protection should still be provided with full respect for the will and preferences of the adult. Examples of appropriate support of the adult in such situations include inferring the will and preferences of the adult from the adult’s social circle, previous declared wishes or other sources of information that can reveal preferences. Serious neglect of the personal or property interests of the relatives for whom the adult is responsible may also reveal an impairment or insufficiency of the adult’s personal faculties.

    Amendment  9

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (12a) The extent of an insufficiency or an impairment of the personal faculties of the adult can change over time. Decisions taken to support and protect the adult should be reviewed at appropriate intervals of time in order to account for changes in the circumstances of the adult and to confirm whether the related measures are still justified.

    Amendment  10

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 14

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (14) The terminology used for protective measures differs in the legal systems of each Member State and these differences in terminology should not affect the recognition of those protective measures in other Member States.

    deleted

    Amendment  11

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 16

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (16) To ensure a uniform interpretation of this Regulation, this Regulation should define in particular the notions of adults, representatives and authorities, which may have divergent meanings in the Member States legal systems. For the purposes of this Regulation, an adult is a person who has reached the age of 18 years. Depending on the context, this should refer for example to adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests, or adults who granted powers of representation to be exercised when those adults are not in a position to protect their interests.

    (16) To ensure a uniform interpretation of this Regulation, this Regulation should define in particular the notions of adults, representatives and courts, which may have divergent meanings in the Member States legal systems. For the purposes of this Regulation, an adult is a person who has reached the age of 18 years. Depending on the context, this should refer for example to adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests, or adults who granted powers of representation to be exercised when those adults are not in a position to protect their interests or require support and safeguards in decision-making.

    Amendment  12

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 18

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (18) For the purposes of this Regulation, and in line with the terminology used in the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, the concept of ‘authority’ should be interpreted as referring to the judicial or administrative authorities taking measures directed to the protection of the adult. More broadly, a ‘competent authority’ should be interpreted as referring to a public authority of a Member State with responsibilities in matters of protection of adults. This includes authorities taking measures, authorities drawing up authentic acts and authorities issuing attestations, forms or the European Certificate of Representation. It further includes other authorities, or entities acting in an official capacity in matters related to the protection of adults, such as those that are responsible for the supervision or implementation of measures.

    (18) For the purposes of this Regulation and according to the case-law of the Court of Justice, the term ‘court’ should be given a broad meaning so as to also cover administrative authorities, or other authorities, such as notaries, who or which exercise jurisdiction in matters covered by this Regulation, and in line with the terminology used in the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, the concept of ‘court’ should be interpreted as referring to the judicial or administrative authorities taking measures directed to the protection of the adult. More broadly, a ‘competent authority’ should be interpreted as referring to a court or a public office holder of a Member State with responsibilities in matters of protection of adults. This includes authorities taking measures, authorities drawing up authentic acts and authorities issuing attestations, forms or the European Certificate of Representation. It further includes other authorities, or entities acting in an official capacity in matters related to the protection of adults, such as those that are responsible for the supervision or implementation of measures.

    Amendment  13

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 19

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (19) The rules on international jurisdiction and on applicable law in respect of the protection of adults should be those set out in the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, to avoid discrepancies and ensure, to the extent possible, that the same rules apply to a case involving Member States and third countries that are party to that Convention. Some Member States may not be contracting Parties to the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention at the time this Regulation will be applicable. To take account of all scenarios, the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention should be attached to this Regulation.

    (19) The rules on international jurisdiction and on applicable law in respect of the protection of adults should be those set out in the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, to avoid discrepancies and ensure, to the extent possible, that the same rules apply to a case involving Member States and third countries that are party to that Convention. Some Member States may not be contracting Parties to the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention at the time this Regulation will be applicable. To take account of all scenarios and to ensure that this Regulation can be applied regardless of the status of ratification by Member States of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention should be attached to this Regulation. Similarly, to facilitate the interpretation of the UNCRPD that Convention should be attached to this Regulation as well.

    Amendment  14

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 21

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (21) The establishment of an additional ground of jurisdiction based on the choice of the adult should not disrupt the mechanism established by the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, nor affect the effectiveness of communication between authorities, and should avoid positive and negative conflicts of jurisdiction. The mechanisms established by Articles 7, 9, 10 and 11 of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention giving priority to certain grounds of jurisdiction, limiting the effects of certain measures, and setting up an exchange of information between the authorities of the habitual residence and the authorities with subsidiary or concurrent jurisdiction, should therefore also apply in the Union to authorities exercising their jurisdiction according to the choice made by the adult. Thus, those provisions should apply in respect of the authorities chosen by an adult in the same way as they apply in respect to the authorities of the habitual residence.

    (21) The establishment of an additional ground of jurisdiction based on the choice of the adult should not disrupt the mechanism established by the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention, nor affect the effectiveness of communication between courts, and should avoid positive and negative conflicts of jurisdiction. The mechanisms established by Articles 7, 9, 10 and 11 of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention giving priority to certain grounds of jurisdiction, limiting the effects of certain measures, and setting up an exchange of information between the courts of the habitual residence and the courts with subsidiary or concurrent jurisdiction, should therefore also apply in the Union to exercised their jurisdiction according to the choice made by the adult. Thus, those provisions should apply in respect of the courts chosen by an adult in the same way as they apply in respect to the courts of the habitual residence.

    Amendment  15

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (22) The authorities contemplating the exercise of their jurisdiction according to the choice made by the adult should not exercise their jurisdiction where the authorities of the habitual residence of the adult have already exercised their jurisdiction, in particular where those authorities have taken a measure, or have decided that no measure should be taken, or where proceedings are pending before them.

    (22) The courts contemplating the exercise of their jurisdiction according to the choice made by the adult should not exercise their jurisdiction where the courts having jurisdiction over the substance of the matter or the court where jurisidiction was transferred have already exercised their jurisdiction, in particular where those courts have taken a measure, even if this measure related only to some aspects of protection of the person or property of the adult or have decided that no measure should be taken, or where proceedings are pending before them. Measures concerning adults are to be subject to regular review to remain tailored to the adult’s current circumstances. If, after the conclusion of initial proceedings, a new measure needs to be taken or an existing measure requires modification, replacement, or termination, jurisdiction should be verified and re-established again in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional rules. Adults should have the right to be heard and be meaningfully involved in proceedings affecting their legal status, including where multiple Member States could have jurisdiction. To avoid unnecessary difficulties, courts should provide for the possibility of remote participation and ensure that adults are informed about the jurisdictional criteria that apply to them. Where necessary, temporary cross-border protection measures should be available to prevent legal uncertainty while jurisdiction is being determined.

    Amendment  16

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (22a) To ensure that adults in cross-border situations can effectively exercise their rights and benefit from judicial protection, this Regulation introduces additional support measures that complement the framework for jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement, authentic instruments, and cooperation. Those measures aim to facilitate access to justice, enhance procedural efficiency, and ensure continuity of protective arrangements across Member States. Information on available procedural safeguards, remedies and existing support measures should be made available in one single place, in a so-called ‘one-stop shop’, in order to provide easy access to dedicated information free of charge to adults and those representing them. It is possible that adults in cross-border situations could suffer financial repercussions and harm. Therefore, the information provided through the ‘one-stop shop’ should cover existing support mechanisms, for example information on relevant organisations and associations which provide legal or any other form of relevant assistance or support to adults covered by this Regulation. In accordance with national procedural law, courts will ensure that the adult has access to appropriate legal support such as free assistance as regards the determination of jurisdiction, including guidance on the most appropriate forum in the event that jurisdiction is considered in multiple Member States. Where appropriate, accessible videoconferencing or other distance communication means will be granted by the judge where an adult is heard in judicial proceedings. This should be without prejudice to the the right of the adult concerned to be present in the room and protect their best interest in that case and the court should take into account the specific needs of persons with disabilities.

    Amendment  17

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (22b) Regarding applicable law, adults often face difficulties in understanding the legal implications of protection measures taken in different Member States. To address that problem, multilingual guidance tools should provide information free of charge in a language that the adult is expected to understand. Legal information should be made available to explain the relevant legal frameworks, particularly in cases where an adult has relied on advance planning instruments or other legal arrangements that necessitate cross-border recognition. Courts and competent authorities shall ensure adults have easy access to information on available procedural safeguards and remedies and existing support measures, such as legal aid and financial and psychological support, notably through measures for better accessibility of the digital public services. This information should include any available information on awareness-raising campaigns, where appropriate in cooperation with relevant civil society organisations and other stakeholders. To reinforce cross-border cooperation, this Regulation provides for the possibility to create multilingual guidance tools, in particular trough the use of the e-Justice Portal or the European Judicial Network, in order to inform adults and their representatives about the applicable law, ensuring they understand the legal consequences of protection measures in different Member States and dedicated legal information services for adults to understand how to deal with conflicts of law. Given the increasing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in legal and administrative processes, this Regulation provides for the responsible use of AI-assisted tools to support adults in cross-border situations with full transparency regarding the criteria on the basis of which automated decisions are taken. The support measures provided for in this Regulation should complement and strengthen the judicial cooperation framework established by this Regulation, ensuring that adults receive practical assistance while safeguarding their autonomy, dignity, and fundamental rights.

    Amendment  18

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 24

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (24) Mutual trust in the administration of justice in the Union justifies the principle that measures directed to the protection of adults given in a Member State should be recognised in all Member States without any special procedure being required. This should not preclude any interested person from applying for a decision that there are or that there are no grounds for refusal of recognition. It should be for the national law of the Member State where such application is made to determine who should be considered as an interested person entitled to make such application. To safeguard the right of the adults to access to justice and provide them with sufficient remedies, and irrespective of the nature and the extent of the measure, adults should have the right to apply for a decision that there are or that there are no grounds for refusal.

    (24) Mutual trust in the administration of justice in the Union justifies the principle that measures directed to the protection of adults given in a Member State should be recognised in all Member States without any special procedure being required. This should not preclude any interested person from invoking a measure either as an incidental question before a court or by applying for a decision that there are or that there are no grounds for refusal of recognition. It should be for the national law of the Member State where such application is made to determine who should be considered as an interested person entitled to make such application. To safeguard the right of the adults to access to justice and provide them with sufficient remedies, and irrespective of the nature and the extent of the measure, adults should have the right to apply for a decision that there are or that there are no grounds for refusal.

    Amendment  19

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 25

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (25) The recognition and enforcement of measures should be based on the principle of mutual trust. Therefore, the grounds for non-recognition should be kept to the minimum in the light of the underlying aim of this Regulation which is to facilitate recognition and enforcement of measures and the circulation of powers of representation and to effectively safeguard the rights of the adults. In particular, the jurisdiction of the authorities of the Member State of origin should not be reviewed.

    (25) The recognition and enforcement of measures should be based on the principle of mutual trust. Therefore, the grounds for non-recognition should be kept to the minimum in the light of the underlying aim of this Regulation which is to facilitate recognition and enforcement of measures and the circulation of powers of representation and to effectively safeguard the rights of the adults, in particular with the rights and principles enshrined in the UNCRPD, particularly those relating to respect for autonomy, dignity, and legal capacity. In particular, the jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State of origin should not be reviewed.

    Amendment  20

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 27

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (27) Proceedings directed to the protection of an adult should, as a basic principle, be guided by the views expressed by the adult. Adults should thus be given an effective and genuine opportunity to express their views freely in accordance with Articles 20, 25, 26, and 47 of the Charter and Articles 3, 9, 12, 13 and 19 of the UNCRPD. The opportunity for the adult to express his or her views should be given, except in cases of urgency, including cases where the adult is absolutely unable to express his or her views. A measure taken without the adult having had an opportunity to be heard, apart from the exceptional circumstances of urgency and the demonstrated incapacity to express himself or herself, may not be recognised. The fact that the adult has had an opportunity to be heard should be assessed uniformly in the Union, and should not be assessed against the fundamental procedural principles of the Member State where recognition is sought. An example of a case of urgency is a situation where the adult needs to undergo urgent surgery and is not, because of his or her medical condition, in a position to express his or her views.

    (27) Proceedings directed to the protection of an adult should, as a basic principle, be guided by the views expressed by the adult. Adults should thus be given an effective and genuine opportunity to express their views freely in accordance with Articles 20, 25, 26, and 47 of the Charter and Articles 3, 9, 12, 13 and 19 of the UNCRPD. The opportunity for the adult to express their views should be given, including through the opportunity to participate by means of technical equipment, remotely, except in cases of urgency, including cases where the adult is absolutely unable to express their views. A measure taken without the adult having had an opportunity to be heard, apart from the exceptional circumstances of urgency and the demonstrated incapacity to express themselves, may not be recognised. The fact that the adult has had an opportunity to be heard should be assessed uniformly in the Union, and should not be assessed against the fundamental procedural principles of the Member State where recognition is sought. An example of a case of urgency is a situation where the adult needs to undergo urgent surgery and is not, because of their medical condition, in a position to express their views.

    Amendment  21

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 28

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (28) The question of the procedure and the method of the hearing of the adult should be left to national law, with due respect for the rights of adults to accessibility. When a hearing is required in a cross-border context, Member States authorities should use the specific instruments of international judicial cooperation, including, where appropriate, those provided for by Regulation (EU) 2020/178312 .

    (28) The question of the procedure and the method of the hearing of the adult should be left to national law, with due respect for the rights of adults to accessibility. When a hearing is required in a cross-border context, Member States authorities should use the specific instruments of international judicial cooperation, including, where appropriate, those provided for by Regulation (EU) 2020/178312 and Regulation (EU) 2023/284412a. Thisshould be without prejudice to the right of the adult concerned to be present in the room and protect their best interest in that case and the court should take into account the specific needs of persons with disabilities.

    __________________

    __________________

    12 Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence) (OJ L 405, 2.12.2020, p. 1–39).

    12 Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence) (OJ L 405, 2.12.2020, p. 1–39).

     

    12a Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters, and amending certain acts in the field of judicial cooperation

    Amendment  22

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 29

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (29) In order to take account of the different systems for dealing with the protection of adults in Member States, authentic instruments directed to the protection of adults and their interests should be accepted in all Member States. An authentic instrument directed to the protection of an adult or his or her interests drawn up by an authority of a Member State may in particular record powers of representation granted by an adult for a time when that adult will not be in a position to protect his or her interests, or advance directives recording wishes and preferences of the adult or giving direct instructions in some matters including health, welfare or appointment of a representative by an authority. Those authentic instruments should have the same evidentiary effects in another Member State as they have in the Member State of origin, or the most comparable effects. When determining the evidentiary effects of a given authentic instrument in another Member State or the most comparable effects, reference should be made to the nature and the scope of the evidentiary effects of the authentic instrument in the law of the Member State of origin.

    (29) In order to take account of the different systems for dealing with the protection of adults in Member States, authentic instruments directed to the protection of adults and their interests should be recognised in all Member States. An authentic instrument directed to the protection of an adult or his or her interests drawn up by a court of a Member State may in particular record powers of representation granted by an adult for a time when that adult will not be in a position to protect his or her interests, or advance directives recording wishes and preferences of the adult or giving direct instructions in some matters including health, welfare or appointment of a representative by an authority. Those authentic instruments should have the same evidentiary effects in another Member State as they have in the Member State of origin, or the most comparable effects. When determining the evidentiary effects of a given authentic instrument in another Member State or the most comparable effects, reference should be made to the nature and the scope of the evidentiary effects of the authentic instrument in the law of the Member State of origin.

    Amendment  23

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 30

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (30) To facilitate the circulation of measures and authentic instruments in the Union, it is necessary to provide for attestations to accompany them where they need to be recognised, enforced, or, as the case may be, accepted abroad. The procedures for rectifying, withdrawing and challenging attestations used for the recognition and enforcement of measures and the acceptance of authentic instruments should be left to national law. In light of the case-law of the Court of Justice, authorities exercise judicial functions when issuing the attestations and issuance of forms part of the continuity of the previous judicial proceedings. Therefore, adequate and effective remedies in the context of this issuance should be made available by Member States.

    (30) To facilitate the circulation of measures and authentic instruments in the Union, it is necessary to provide for attestations to accompany them where they need to be recognised, enforced, or, as the case may be, accepted abroad. The procedures for rectifying, withdrawing and challenging attestations used for the recognition and enforcement of measures and the acceptance of authentic instruments should be left to national law. In light of the case-law of the Court of Justice courts exercise judicial functions when issuing the attestations and the issuance of attestation forms part of the continuity of the previous judicial proceedings. Therefore, adequate and effective remedies in the context of this issuance should be made available by Member States.

    Amendment  24

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 31

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (31) Central Authorities should be designated in all Member States. Central Authorities should in particular assist competent authorities in cross-border proceedings, and cooperate both in general matters and in specific cases. In individual cases, the cooperation should not be limited to a specific part of the judicial or administrative procedure, and should be initiated and continued where a cross-border element exists and there is a need for cooperation.

    (31) Central Authorities should be designated in all Member States. Central Authorities should in particular assist competent authorities in cross-border proceedings, and cooperate both in general matters and in specific cases. In individual cases, the cooperation should not be limited to a specific part of the judicial or administrative procedure, and should be initiated and continued where a cross-border element exists and there is a need for cooperation. This should be the case, for example, where the receiving Member State considers that alternative measures, consistent with the will, preferences, and autonomy of the adult concerned in line with the UNCRPD, could be applied, thereby prompting a consultation with the Member State of origin on the best legal and practical means to ensure respect for the adult’s rights and supported decision-making needs in that particular cross border case.

    Amendment  25

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 33

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (33) According to Article 19 of the UNCRPD, persons with disabilities are to have the opportunity to choose their place of residence and where and with whom they live, on an equal basis as others, and not to be obliged to live in a particular living arrangement. For the purposes of this Regulation, situations may arise where the authorities of a Member State need to take a measure concerning the place of residence or temporary placement of an adult. Examples of such situations are cases where authorities provide assistance to the adult in making a decision on his or her place of residence or where an adult is not in a position to express his or her views and has not granted powers to make a decision concerning his or her place of residence to a representative, and an admission to a care facility is required. Where such placement is to be implemented in another Member State, a consultation procedure for obtaining consent of the Central Authority of the Member State of implementation should be carried out prior to taking that measure. The request for consent made by the authority of origin should include the reasons for the proposed measure, and the views expressed by the adult concerned where possible, in light of Article 19 of the UNCRPD. The Central Authority of the Member State of implementation should be able to decide promptly whether to grant the consent or to refuse it. The absence of a reply within six weeks should not be understood as consent and without consent the measure should not be implemented. The consultation should not be carried out when the placement is with an individual and does not require the supervision of any public authority of the Member State of implementation.

    (33) According to Article 19 of the UNCRPD, persons with disabilities are to have the opportunity to choose their place of residence and where and with whom they live, on an equal basis as others, and not to be obliged to live in a particular living arrangement. For the purposes of this Regulation, situations may arise where the authorities of a Member State need to take a measure concerning formal support and living arrangements. In line with Article 19 of the UNCRPD, the courts of a Member State should obtain free and informed consent of the adult where a decision concerning the place of residence or temporary placement of that adult is contemplated in order to provide protection. Competent authorities should provide support at all times for adults to make decisions whenever possible in line with the best interpretation of their will and preferences. Where such formal support and living arrangements is to be implemented in another Member State, a consultation procedure for obtaining consent of the Central Authority of the Member State of implementation should be carried out prior to implementing those measures. The request for consent made by the authority of origin should include the reasons for the proposed measure, and the views expressed by the adult concerned where possible, in light of Article 19 of the UNCRPD. The Central Authority of the Member State of implementation should be able to decide promptly whether to grant the consent or to refuse it. The absence of a reply within six weeks should not be understood as consent and without consent the measure should not be implemented. The consultation should not be carried out when the placement is with an individual and does not require the supervision of any public authority of the Member State of implementation.

    Amendment  26

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 35

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (35) Representatives of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests, should be able to invoke their powers to represent those adults and to protect the interests of those adults without obstacles within the Union. Therefore, representatives should be able to demonstrate easily their status and powers in another Member State, for instance in a Member State in which adult’s real property or other assets are located. To enable them to do so, a European Certificate of Representation (‘the Certificate’) should be created. That Certificate should be a uniform certificate to be issued for use in another Member State. In order to respect the principle of subsidiarity, the Certificate should not take the place of internal documents, which may exist for similar purposes in the Member States.

    (35) Representatives of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests, should be able to invoke their powers to support those adults in exercising their legal capacity or represent those adults and to protect the interests of those adults without obstacles within the Union. Therefore, representatives should be able to demonstrate easily their status and powers in another Member State, for instance in a Member State in which adult’s real property or other assets are located. To enable them to do so, a European Certificate of Support and Representation (‘the Certificate’) should be created. That Certificate should be a uniform certificate to be issued for use in another Member State. In order to respect the principle of subsidiarity, the Certificate should not take the place of internal documents, which may exist for similar purposes in the Member States.

    Amendment  27

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 36

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (36) The Certificate can be requested by the adult’s representative on the basis of an existing measure or confirmed powers of representation (the ‘source measure’ and ‘source confirmed powers of representation’). It should thus only be issued in situations where an adult is effectively not in a position to protect his or her interests and the representative is entitled to actively represent that adult in one or more specific matters. The Certificate should include information on the extent of the powers which the representative is entitled to exercise on behalf of an adult and, where relevant, on the matters where the representative is not entitled to act or is entitled to act under certain conditions.

    (36) The Certificate can be requested by the adult or, where applicable, by the the adult’s representative on the basis of an existing measure or confirmed powers of representation (the ‘source measure’ and ‘source confirmed powers of representation’). It should thus only be issued in situations where an adult is being supported in their decision-making or where they are effectively not in a position to protect his or her interests and the representative is entitled to actively represent that adult in one or more specific matters. The Certificate should include information on the extent of the powers which the representative is entitled to exercise on behalf of an adult and, where relevant, on the matters where the representative is not entitled to act or is entitled to act under certain conditions.

    Amendment  28

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 37

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (37) The use of the Certificate should not be mandatory. This means that a representative of an adult entitled to apply for a Certificate should be under no obligation to do so but should be free to use national documents or other instruments available under this Regulation (a measure or an authentic instrument) when invoking his or her powers in another Member State. Persons acting on their own behalf should not be required to present a Certificate, so the Certificate should be issued only for representatives who need to demonstrate their powers to act in support or on behalf of an adult.

    (37) The use of the Certificate should not be mandatory. This means that a representative of a adult entitled to apply for a Certificate should be under no obligation to do so but should be free to use national documents or other instruments available under this Regulation (a measure or an authentic instrument) when invoking his or her powers in another Member State. Persons acting on their own behalf should not be required to present a Certificate, but should have the possibility of choosing when the Certificate should be used by a representative. It should be possible, however, for the Certificate to be used by representatives who need to demonstrate their powers to act in support or on behalf of an adult.

    Amendment  29

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 39

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (39) To ensure that the process of the issuance of the Certificate is uniform throughout the Union, this Regulation should provide rules on the issuance of the Certificate. The issuing authority should issue the Certificate upon application and after verifying the elements to be certified. The process for the application for and the issuance of the Certificate should be simplified by the fact that the authority issuing the Certificate has access to the source measure or source confirmed powers of representation and has knowledge concerning their continued validity and the information contained therein. Where feasible, the issuing authority should consult the system of interconnection of protection registers established in this Regulation before the issuance of the Certificate to verify whether a conflicting measure or powers of representation exist in another Member State. Where the applicant indicates in the application for a Certificate that the Certificate should serve to demonstrate their powers for a specific purpose or in a specific context, the issuing authority should, as far as possible, include in the Certificate sufficiently detailed information that reflects that purpose or context. The original of the Certificate should remain with the issuing authority, which should issue one or more certified copies of the Certificate to the applicant. The Certificate should be issued in a mandatory form set out in the annex to this Regulation. To reduce translation costs when the Certificate is presented in another Member State, the form for the Certificate set out in the annex to this Regulation should be available in all Union languages.

    (39) To ensure that the process of the issuance of the Certificate is uniform throughout the Union, this Regulation should provide rules on the issuance of the Certificate. The issuing authority should issue the Certificate upon application and after verifying the elements to be certified. The process for the application for and the issuance of the Certificate should be simplified by the fact that the authority issuing the Certificate has access to the source measure or source confirmed powers of representation and has knowledge concerning their continued validity and the information contained therein. Where the applicant indicates in the application for a Certificate that the Certificate should serve to demonstrate their powers for a specific purpose or in a specific context, the issuing authority should, as far as possible, include in the Certificate sufficiently detailed information that reflects that purpose or context. The original of the Certificate should remain with the issuing authority, which should issue one or more certified copies of the Certificate to the applicant. The Certificate should be issued in a mandatory form set out in the annex to this Regulation. To reduce translation costs when the Certificate is presented in another Member State, the form for the Certificate set out in the annex to this Regulation should be available in all Union languages.

    Amendment  30

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 41

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (41) The Certificate should produce the same effects in all Member States. It should not be an enforceable title in its own right but should have an evidentiary effect and should be presumed to demonstrate accurately elements included in the Certificate which have been established under the law applicable to the protection of a particular adult or under any other law applicable to specific elements. That presumption of accuracy is strengthened by the fact that before issuing the Certificate, the issuing authority should verify, including through the system of interconnection, that the source measure or the source confirmed powers of representation remain valid and have not been replaced by a later measure or confirmed powers of representation. However, the evidentiary effects of the Certificate should not extend to elements which are not governed by this Regulation, such as to the question whether or not a particular asset belonged to the adult.

    (41) The Certificate should produce the same effects in all Member States. It should not be an enforceable title in its own right but should have an evidentiary effect and should be presumed to demonstrate accurately elements included in the Certificate which have been established under the law applicable to the protection of a particular adult or under any other law applicable to specific elements. That presumption of accuracy is strengthened by the fact that before issuing the Certificate, the issuing authority should verify, that the source measure or the source confirmed powers of representation remain valid and have not been replaced by a later measure or confirmed powers of representation. However, the evidentiary effects of the Certificate should not extend to elements which are not governed by this Regulation, such as to the question whether or not a particular asset belonged to the adult.

    Amendment  31

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 42

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (42) Any person who deals with a representative indicated in a valid Certificate as being entitled to represent an adult in a specific matter should be afforded appropriate guarantees if he or she acted in good faith relying on the accuracy of the information certified in the Certificate. The same guarantee should be afforded to any person who, relying on the information certified in a valid Certificate, gives access to the adult’s representative to real property or other assets of the adult, makes payments to the representative, or buys or receives property from that representative, where the representative is indicated in a valid Certificate as being entitled to act on behalf of the adult in those matters. The protection should be ensured if certified copies which are still valid are presented.

    (42) Any person who deals with a representative indicated in a valid Certificate as being entitled to represent an adult in a specific matter should be afforded appropriate guarantees if they acted in good faith relying on the accuracy of the information certified in the Certificate. The same guarantee should be afforded to any person who, relying on the information certified in a valid Certificate, gives access to the adult’s representative to real property or other assets of the adult, makes payments to the representative, or buys or receives property from that representative, where the representative is indicated in a valid Certificate as being entitled to act on behalf of the adult in those matters. The protection should be ensured if certified copies which are still valid are presented.

    Amendment  32

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 44

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (44) To ensure a continuous protection of adults in cross-border situations in the Union, competent authorities and Central Authorities should have access to relevant information on the existence of measures taken by other authorities, including those measures that have been taken in another Member State. In addition, it is crucial for safeguarding of the right to autonomy and freedom to make one’s own choices that the will expressed by an adult in powers of representation is respected, even in cases where those powers of representation have been granted by the adult in another Member State or confirmed by competent authorities of another Member State. In order to improve the provision of information to relevant competent authorities and Central Authorities and to prevent parallel proceedings or failure to take account of powers of representation, Member States should be required to set up and maintain one or more registers recording data related to the protection of adults. Protection registers should record mandatory information concerning measures taken by their authorities and, where their national law provides for a confirmation by a competent authority of powers of representation, mandatory information concerning those confirmed powers of representation. To ensure interoperability and availability of information related to the protection of adults in the Union, those Member States that have established, prior to the adoption of this Regulation, registers of protection measures, of confirmed powers of representation, or other types of powers of representation which are registered under their national law, should make the same mandatory information available in those registers.

    (44) To ensure a continuous protection of adults in cross-border situations in the Union, competent authorities and Central Authorities should have access to relevant information on the existence of measures taken by other authorities, including those measures that have been taken in another Member State. In addition, it is crucial for safeguarding of the right to autonomy and freedom to make one’s own choices that the will expressed by an adult in powers of representation is respected, even in cases where those powers of representation have been granted by the adult in another Member State or confirmed by competent authorities of another Member State.

    Amendment  33

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (45) To ensure that the information provided through the system of interconnection is relevant, Member States should not be prevented from making available through the system of interconnection additional information besides the mandatory information. In particular, Member States should have the possibility to make available through the system of interconnection information in relation to the nature of the measure, the name of the representative, or historical data concerning measures and powers of representation recorded prior to the application of this Regulation.

    deleted

    Amendment  34

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (46) To facilitate access to the information recorded in protection registers or registers of other powers of representation for competent authorities and Central Authorities with a legitimate interest located in other Member States, those registers of measures, confirmed powers of representation, or other types of powers of representation should be interconnected. This Regulation should provide legal basis for that interconnection.

    deleted

    Amendment  35

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (47) The interconnection of Member States’ registers is an essential component of the cooperation mechanism to safeguard the rights of adults in cross-border cases and ensure legal certainty in the Union. Member States should hence ensure that the information stored in their registers is up-to-date. The authorities of a Member State, when amending or terminating a measure taken in another Member State, should ensure that appropriate information is provided to the authorities of that other Member State, in particular so that the other Member State can update its protection register(s).

    deleted

    Amendment  36

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 54 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (54a) In cases where a disclosure or confirmation of the relevant information could jeopardise the health, safety or liberty of the adult or another person, for example where the adult or his or her representative have been the victims of domestic violence and a court has ordered the new address of the adult not to be disclosed to the applicant, this Regulation should aim to ensure that a delicate balance is struck. While this Regulation should provide that a Central Authority, court or competent authority should not disclose or confirm to the applicant or to a third party any information gathered or transmitted for the purposes of this Regulation, where it determines that to do so could jeopardise the health, safety or liberty of the adult or another person, it should nonetheless provide that that should not impede the gathering and transmitting of information by and between Central Authorities, courts and competent authorities in so far as necessary to carry out the obligations laid down in this Regulation. This means that, where possible and appropriate, it should be possible for an application to be processed under this Regulation without the applicant being provided with all information necessary to process it. For example, where national law so provides, a Central Authority should be able to institute proceedings on behalf of an applicant without passing on the information about the adult’s whereabouts to the applicant. However, in cases where merely making the request could already jeopardise the health, safety or liberty of the adult or another person, this Regulation should prohibit such a request from being made.

    Amendment  37

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 55

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (55) Besides the above-described data processing, personal data should also be processed under this Regulation for the purposes of establishing the system for the interconnection of protection registers and other registers of powers of representation and of ensuring the maintenance and proper functioning of that system. This additional processing is justified by the need that Member States’ competent authorities and Central Authorities with a legitimate interest have access to information on whether a particular adult is protected in another Member State, with a view to ensuring continued protection of that adult in cross-border situations and to increasing legal certainty and predictability. Member States should be responsible for the technical management, maintenance, and security of their registers and, as far as their national law provides, for the correctness and reliability of the data included therein. Data relating to data subjects should be primarily stored in the registers maintained by Member States. In addition, the Commission may need to process data for the purposes of developing and maintaining the system of interconnection and temporarily store data that are accessed through the system of interconnection.

    deleted

    Amendment  38

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 58

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (58) Appropriate safeguards should exist for such processing of special categories of personal data and such data should be processed under this Regulation only where it is necessary for and proportionate to the purposes of processing identified under this Regulation. For instance, several safeguards should be introduced when establishing the system of interconnection. The data processed through the system of interconnection should be limited to what is necessary for accessing information about the measures and powers of representation concerning a particular adult. Data processed through the system of interconnection should thus be limited to the personal data included in the mandatory information defined in this Regulation, unless Member States give access through the system of interconnection to additional data, such as on registered powers of representation, or on the name of a representative and the extent of the representation. The system of interconnection should not store any personal data except for a temporary storage needed to ensure access to them. Access to data through the system of interconnection should not be public. Only the competent authorities and Central Authorities that are permitted, under their national law, to access the national registers should have access to the system of interconnection, as long as they also have a legitimate interest in accessing given data. Implementing acts should provide further data protection safeguards regarding the digital communication and the interconnection of registers.

    (58) Appropriate safeguards should exist for such processing of special categories of personal data and such data should be processed under this Regulation only where it is necessary for and proportionate to the purposes of processing identified under this Regulation.

    Amendment  39

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 60

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (60) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation as regards the establishment of the decentralised IT system and the decentralised system of interconnection provided for in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council20 .

    (60) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation as regards the establishment of the decentralised IT system provided for in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council20 .

    __________________

    __________________

    20 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

    20 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

    Amendment  40

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (65a) In line with UNCRPD, to which the Union and the Member States are parties, persons with disabilities must enjoy the right to legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life. The rules applicable for this Regulation should allow a shift from substitute decision-making regimes – such as guardianship, curatorship, and analogous institutions – toward supported decision-making arrangements that respect the rights, will, and preferences of the individual. In recognition of the need to ensure legal certainty and allow sufficient time for Member States to adjust their national legislation and administrative practices, this Regulation should continue to apply to existing protective measures of a substitute nature until 2035. This transitional provision should apply strictly within the scope of this Regulation, which is limited ratione materiae to the private international law rules governing the recognition, enforcement, and applicable law of such protection measures within the Union. It should not affect the procedural autonomy of the Member States or their competence to determine the substantive and procedural frameworks applicable to protection regimes under national law. Moreover, a similar policy orientation should be envisaged for related areas, such as the placement of adults in establishments, where the principles of autonomy and supported decision-making must also be progressively applied in full respect of the national traditions which are favourable to the adults in such situations. The long-term evolution toward support-oriented regimes should also extend to related areas, including cross-border placements of adults. In this regard, the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention remains an important international framework for cooperation in matters of international protection. However, its reference to concepts related to the adult’s capacity or functional abilities should be interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with the UNCRPD, ensuring that protective measures are based on respect for autonomy, inclusion, and individual rights. This Regulation, while engaging with such terminology, aims to promote a more human rights-oriented interpretation and application of protective measures, aligned with the long-term objectives of the UNCRPD. The objective remains to encourage, over time, a coherent and rights-based transition across the Union toward support-oriented systems that affirm the autonomy of adults.

    Amendment  41

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (65b) In order to ensure that this Regulation remains effective and aligned with evolving human rights standards, particularly those set out in the UNCRPD, the Commission should carry out an evaluation of its application. This review should pay particular attention to the functioning and advisability of decision-making regimes applied to adults, including the determination of their ability to act on their own behalf, the institution of protective measures, and the placement of adults in establishments. The evaluation should be based on information gathered from Member States and should assess whether further legislative measures are necessary. To ensure transparency and accountability, where no legislative proposal accompanies the report, the Commission should publicly justify its decision within two years of the report’s publication.

    Amendment  42

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) determine the Member State whose authorities have jurisdiction to take measures directed to the protection of the person or property of the adult;

    (a) determine the Member State whose courts have jurisdiction to take measures directed to the protection of the person or property of the adult;

    Amendment  43

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) determine which law is to be applied by such authorities in exercising their jurisdiction;

    (b) determine which law is to be applied by such courts in exercising their jurisdiction;

    Amendment  44

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) determine the law applicable to the representation of the adult;

    (c) determine the law applicable to the support and representation of the adult;

    Amendment  45

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (e) provide for the acceptance of authentic instruments in all Member States;

    (e) provide for the recognition of authentic instruments in all Member States in the matters falling under this Regulation

    Amendment  46

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (f) establish cooperation between the competent authorities and Central Authorities of the Member States to achieve the purposes of this Regulation;

    (f) establish cooperation between the courts, competent authorities and Central Authorities of the Member States to achieve the purposes of this Regulation;

    Amendment  47

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (g) digitalise the communications between competent authorities and Central Authorities, and provide digital means of communication between natural and legal persons and competent authorities;

    (g) digitalise the communications between courts, competent authorities and Central Authorities, and provide digital means of communication between natural and legal persons and courts and competent authorities;

    Amendment  48

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (ha) establish support measures for adults in the matters falling under this Regulation (23 Rapporteur);

    Amendment  49

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point i

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (i) establish a system of interconnection of the Member States’ protection registers.

    deleted

    Amendment  50

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. This Regulation shall apply in civil matters to the protection in cross-border situations of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests.

    1. This Regulation shall apply in civil matters to the protection in cross-border situations of adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests or require support and safeguards in the exercise of their legal capacity on a temporary or permanent basis (24 Rapporteur).

    Amendment  51

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) the determination of the incapacity of an adult and the institution of a protective regime;

    (a) determining the extent to which an adult is able to act on their own behalf and the institution of a protective regime;

    Amendment  52

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (aa) measures to provide access by adults to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity;

    Amendment  53

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (ab) powers of representation granted by adults for their support or representation, to be exercised when those adults require support in protecting their interests;

    Amendment  54

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) the placing of the adult under the protection of a judicial or administrative authority;

    deleted

    Amendment  55

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) guardianship, curatorship and analogous institutions;

    deleted

    Amendment  56

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (d) the designation and functions of any person or body having charge of the adult’s person or property, representing, or assisting the adult;

    (d) the designation and functions of any person or body providing support in decision making to an adult with regard to property, or other forms of assistance;

    Amendment  57

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (da) the designation and functions of any person or body that is granted the powers of representation;

    Amendment  58

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (db) the designation and functions of any person or body that is granted the powers of representation;

    Amendment  59

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (e) decisions concerning the placement of the adult in an establishment or other place where protection can be provided;

    deleted

    Amendment  60

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (f) the administration, conservation or disposal of the adult’s property;

    deleted

    Amendment  61

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (g) the authorisation of a specific intervention for the protection of the person or property of the adult.

    deleted

    Amendment  62

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    5. Paragraph (4) does not affect, in respect of the matters referred to therein, the entitlement of a person to act as the representative of the adult.

    5. Paragraph (4) does not affect, in respect of the matters referred to therein, the entitlement of a person to provide the adult support in decision making, nor the executing powers of representation.

    Amendment  63

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (2) ‘measure’ means any measure taken by an authority of a Member State, whatever it may be called, directed to the protection of an adult;

    (2) ‘measure’ means any measure taken by a court or a competent authority of a Member State, whatever it may be called, directed to the support or protection of an adult or their property;

    Amendment  64

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (5) ‘authentic instrument’ means a document in a matter of protection of an adult which has been formally drawn up or registered as an authentic instrument in a Member State and the authenticity of which:

    (5) ‘authentic instrument’ means a document in a matter of support or protection of an adult which has been formally drawn up or registered as an authentic instrument in a Member State and the authenticity of which:

    Amendment  65

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (6) authority’ means any judicial or administrative authority of a Member State with competence to take measures directed to the protection of an adult’s person or property;

    (6) court’ means any judicial or administrative authority of a Member State with jurisdiction in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation pursuant to Article 2;

    Amendment  66

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (9) ‘competent authority’ means a public authority of a Member State with responsibilities in matters of protection of adults;

    (9) ‘competent authority’ means a public authority or public office holder of a Member State with responsibilities in matters of protection of adults;

    Amendment  67

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (10) ‘system of interconnection’ means a system for the interconnection of protection registers and registers of other powers of representation;

    deleted

    Amendment  68

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (12) ‘protection register’ means a register where measures directed to the protection of an adult or confirmed powers of representation have been registered.

    deleted

    Amendment  69

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) the adult chose the authorities of that Member State, when he or she was still in a position to protect his or her interest;

    (a) the adult chose the authorities of that Member State, at the time when he or she was still in a position to protect his or her interest;

    Amendment  70

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (aa) the choice of court was, at the time when the choice was made, in favour of a Member State:

     

    i. of which the adult is a national;

     

    ii. of the adult’s habitual residence;

     

    iii. of habitual residence of a person close to the adult prepared to undertake their support and representation ; or

     

    iv. where the property of the adult is located.

    Amendment  71

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article7a

     

    Support measures

     

    In proceedings concerning the protection of an adult that fall within the scope of this Regulation, courts shall ensure, in accordance with national procedural law, that the adult has access to appropriate legal support, including:

     

    (a) free assistance as regards the determination of jurisdiction, including guidance on the most appropriate forum in the event that multiple Member States could be competent under this Chapter;

     

    (b) providing, where appropriate, accessible videoconferencing or other distance communication means, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2023/2844, where an adult is heard in judicial proceedings.

    The first paragraph, point (b), is without prejudice to the the right of the adult concerned to be present in the room and protect their best interest in that case and the court shall take into account the specific needs of persons with disabilities.

    Amendment  72

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 7b

     

    Incidental questions

     

    If the validity of a legal act undertaken or to be undertaken on behalf of an adult in succession proceedings before an authority of a Member State requires permission or approval by a court, a court in that Member State may decide whether to permit or approve such a legal act even if it does not have jurisdiction under this Regulation.

    Amendment  73

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 8 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 8a

     

    Support measures

     

    The competent authorities shall establish and provide accessible support measures free of charge including:

     

    (a) multilingual guidance tools to inform adults and their representatives about the applicable law under this Chapter, ensuring they understand the legal consequences of protection measures in different Member States;

     

    (b) dedicated legal information services for adults to understand and deal with conflicts of law, particularly when advance planning instruments or decisions made in one jurisdiction require recognition elsewhere.

    Amendment  74

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The recognition of a measure taken in another Member State may be refused in the following cases:

    The recognition of a measure taken in another Member State shall be refused in the following cases:

    Amendment  75

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (a) if the measure was taken, except in a case of urgency, in the context of a judicial or administrative proceedings, without the adult having been provided the opportunity to be heard;

    (a) if the measure was taken, except in a case of urgency, in the context of a judicial or administrative proceedings, without the adult having been provided the genuine and effective opportunity to be heard or without respecting the will and preference of the adult ;

    Amendment  76

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 12a

     

    Support measures

     

    Courts and competent authorities shall designate cross-border liaison officers to assist adults and their representatives in addressing enforcement-related difficulties.

    Amendment  77

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 14 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The authority before which a measure taken in another Member State is invoked or before which recognition or enforcement of a measure taken in another Member State is sought or contested, may, where necessary, require the applicant to provide a translation or a transliteration of the contents of the attestation referred to in paragraph (1), point (b).

    2. The authority before which a measure taken in another Member State is invoked or before which recognition or enforcement of a measure taken in another Member State is sought or contested, may, where necessary, only require the applicant to provide a translation or a transliteration of the contents of the attestation referred to in paragraph (1), point (b) where that authority considers that the information included in the form is not sufficient for processing the application.

    Amendment  78

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 16 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Acceptance of authentic instruments

    Recognition of authentic instruments

    Amendment  79

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Where a Member State has designated more than one Central Authority, communications shall be sent directly to the relevant Central Authority with competence. Where a communication is sent to a Central Authority without competence, the latter shall forward it to the Central Authority with competence and inform the sender accordingly.

    2. Where a Member State has designated more than one Central Authority, communications shall be sent directly to the relevant Central Authority with competence. Where a communication is sent to a Central Authority without competence, the latter shall forward it, without undue delay, to the Central Authority with competence and inform the sender accordingly.

    Amendment  80

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. Member States shall ensure that Central Authorities have sufficient and appropriate facilities in terms of staff, resources and modern means of communication to adequately fulfil their tasks under this Regulation.

    3. Member States shall ensure that Central Authorities have sufficient and appropriate facilities in terms of staff, resources and modern means of communication to adequately fulfil, without undue delays, their tasks under this Regulation. The Commission shall offer technical assistance to the Member States’ Central Authorities through online guides and shall respond in due time to requests from the Member States’ Central Authorities.

    Amendment  81

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. Central Authorities shall cooperate and promote cooperation among the competent authorities in their Member States in the application of this Regulation.

    1. Central Authorities shall carry out the following tasks:

    Amendment  82

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (a) cooperate and promote cooperation among the competent authorities in their Member States in the application of this Regulation;

    Amendment  83

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (b) communicate information on national laws, procedures and services in matters relating to the protection of adults, take the measures that they consider appropriate for improving the application of this Regulation;

    Amendment  84

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph – point 1 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (c) facilitate communications, by every means, between the competent authorities.

    Amendment  85

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Central Authorities shall communicate information on national laws, procedures and services in matters relating to the protection of adults, take the measures that they consider appropriate for improving the application of this Regulation.

    deleted

    Amendment  86

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. Central Authorities shall facilitate communications, by every means, between the competent authorities.

    deleted

    Amendment  87

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Placement

    Living and Support Arrangements

    Amendment  88

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. If an authority of a Member State contemplates the placement of the adult in another Member State in an establishment or other institution where protection can be provided, it shall first obtain the consent of a Central Authority of that other Member State. To that effect, it shall transmit to the Central Authority of the requested Member State a report on the adult together with the reasons for the proposed measure, using the form set out in Annex VI.

    1. If an authority of a Member State contemplates a decision on living and support arrangements, including, where applicable, the placement of the adult in another Member State in an establishment or other institution where protection can be provided, it shall, in accordance with national law, obtain the consent of the adult, and obtain the consent of a Central Authority of that other Member State. To that effect, it shall transmit to the Central Authority of the requested Member State a report on the adult together with the reasons for the proposed measure, using the form set out in Annex VI.

    Amendment  89

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Paragraph (1) shall not apply where the placement is contemplated with a private person.

    2. Paragraph (1) shall not apply where the placement is living and support arrangements are contemplated with a private person

    Amendment  90

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. Except where exceptional circumstances make this impossible, the decision granting or refusing consent shall be transmitted to the requesting authority no later than six weeks following the receipt of the request.

    3. Except where exceptional circumstances make this impossible, the decision of the Central Authority of the requested Member State granting or refusing consent shall be transmitted to the requesting authority no later than six weeks following the receipt of the request.

    Amendment  91

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    4a. Any living and support arrangements of adults covered by this Regulation shall be based on the obligations of the Member State emanating from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in particular with respect to avoiding segregation and limiting freedom of choice. Decisions on living and support must respect the will and preferences of the adult.

    Amendment  92

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 26 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. In the event that the adult is exposed to a serious danger, the competent authorities of the Member State where measures for the protection of the adult have been taken or are under consideration, if they are informed that the adult’s residence has changed to another Member State, or that the adult is present in another Member State, shall inform the competent authorities of that other Member State about the danger involved and the measures taken or under consideration.

    1. In the event that the adult is exposed to a serious danger, the competent authorities of the Member State where measures for the protection of the adult have been taken or are under consideration, if they are informed that the adult’s residence has changed to another Member State, or that the adult is present in another Member State, shall inform without undue delay the competent authorities of that other Member State about the danger involved and the measures taken or under consideration.

    Amendment  93

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 29 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 29a

     

    Cooperation for pre-authorised data sharing

     

    1. Persons or bodies providing support in decision-making or having power of representation shall be entitled to request for information on their appointment and the related decision to be transferred to an authority in another Member State. The request shall contain an explicit authorisation by that person or body to the authority in another Member State, which can be withdrawn at any point in time.

     

    2. Upon a request referred to in paragraph 1, the competent authority shall contact the authority in the country of origin to request this information.

    Amendment  94

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 30 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Without prejudice to Article 37(2), each Central Authority and each competent authority shall bear its own costs in applying this Regulation.

    2. Each Central Authority and each competent authority shall bear its own costs in applying this Regulation.

    Amendment  95

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 33 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 33a

     

    Support measures

     

    1. Member states shall:

     

    (a) appoint cross-border liaison contact persons specialising in adult protection and supported decision-making matters to participate in a European Network for the purpose of facilitating coordination between Member States;

     

    (b) establish online cooperation and training platforms to allow professionals assisting adults such as legal representatives, social workers or medical experts to exchange best practices;

     

    (c) consider the establishment of AI-assisted case management tools, where appropriate and in line with Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, to streamline communication between courts and competent authorities handling protection measures across jurisdictions. Such tools shall comply with EU fundamental rights, data protection, and transparency requirements and any decision-making based on such tools shall remain human-led.

     

    2. Where appropriate, and in line with Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, competent authorities may use AI-driven tools to enhance access to justice and support adults and their legal representatives in cross-border situations, provided such tools comply with EU fundamental rights, data protection, and transparency requirements. Such tools may be considered within the cooperation framework of the European Judicial Network and include cross border specific projects such as:

     

    (a) AI supported toolkits to provide, where appropriate, legal assistance to adults with accessible explanations of jurisdiction, applicable law, and recognition procedures in their preferred language;

     

    (b) cross-border jurisprudence references on the e-Justice portal , enabling adults and their representatives to follow the progress of jurisdictional, recognition, or enforcement proceedings across Member States;

     

    3. Competent authorities shall ensure adults have easy access to information on available procedural safeguards and remedies and existing support measures such as legal aid and financial and psychological support. The information referred to in the first subparagraph shall include any available information on awareness-raising campaigns, where appropriate in cooperation with relevant civil society organisations and other stakeholders.

     

    Such information shall be provided in one single place in an easily accessible format via an appropriate channel, such as an information centre, an existing focal point or an electronic gateway, including the European e-Justice Portal.

     

    __________________

     

    1a Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI:http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj).

    Amendment  96

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF REPRESENTATION

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF SUPPORT AND REPRESENTATION

    Amendment  97

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Creation of a European Certificate of Representation

    Creation of a European Certificate of Support and Representation

    Amendment  98

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. This Regulation creates a European Certificate of Representation (‘the Certificate’) which shall be issued for use in another Member State and shall produce the effects listed in Article 40.

    1. This Regulation creates a European Certificate of Support and Representation (‘the Certificate’) which shall be issued for use in another Member State and shall produce the effects listed in Article 40.

    Amendment  99

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Certificate shall be issued for use by representatives, who, in another Member State, need to invoke their powers to represent adults who, by reason of an impairment or insufficiency of their personal faculties, are not in a position to protect their interests.

    1. The Certificate shall be issued to the adult for use by her or his representatives, who, in another Member State, need to invoke their powers to support or represent the adult.

    Amendment  100

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The Certificate may be used to demonstrate that the representative is authorised, on the basis of a measure or confirmed power of representation, to represent the adult in particular in one or more of the following matters:

    2. The Certificate may be used to demonstrate that the representative is authorised, on the basis of a measure or confirmed power of representation, to support or represent the adult in particular in one or more of the following matters:

    Amendment  101

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Certificate shall be issued upon an application by a representative authorised, by means of a measure taken or powers of representation confirmed in a Member State, to represent the adult (hereinafter referred to as: ‘the applicant’).

    1. The Certificate shall be issued upon an application by the adult or a representative authorised, by means of a measure taken or powers of representation confirmed in a Member State, to represent the adult (hereinafter referred to as: ‘the applicant’).

    Amendment  102

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Member States shall ensure that the fee for obtaining the Certificate, if any, does not exceed the production cost of the Certificate.

    2. Member States shall ensure that the fee for obtaining the Certificate is issued free of charge.

    Amendment  103

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    2a. Member States shall ensure that the application process is accessible to persons with disabilities.

    Amendment  104

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. For the verification of the elements listed in paragraph (1), the issuing authority shall, where feasible, also consult the system of interconnection established in Chapter VIII.

    deleted

    Amendment  105

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    6a. The Certificate shall be available in formats accessible to persons with disabilities.

    Amendment  106

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 39 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Certificate shall indicate which powers the representative of an adult has or, as appropriate, in a negative fashion, which powers the representative does not have. Where applicable, the Certificate shall also indicate any limitations of such powers or conditions attached to such powers.

    1. The Certificate shall indicate which powers the representative of an adult has, and the extent of those powers, or, as appropriate, in a negative fashion, which powers the representative does not have. Where applicable, the Certificate shall also indicate any limitations of such powers or conditions attached to such powers.

    Amendment  107

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VIII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Establishment and inteconnection of protection registeres

    deleted

    Amendment  108

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 45

    deleted

    Establishment of protection registers

     

    1. By [two years after the date of the start of application] at the latest, Member States shall establish and maintain in their territory one or several registers in which information is recorded concerning protection measures and, where their national law provides for the confirmation of powers of representation by a competent authority, concerning those powers of representation (‘protection registers’).

     

    2. The information recorded in the registers referred to in paragraph (1) shall include the following (‘mandatory information’):

     

    (a) an indication that a measure has been taken or, where applicable, that powers of representation have been granted or confirmed;

     

    (b) the date of the first measure as well as the date of the subsequent measures taken, or, where applicable, the date when the powers of representation were granted by an adult or were confirmed by a competent authority;

     

    (c) where a measure or a decision on the powers of representation are provisionally applicable, the date on which the time limit for challenging the measure or the decision on the powers of representation expires;

     

    (d) the date of expiration or reviewal of the measures or of the powers of representation, if any;

     

    (e) the competent authority which has taken, modified or terminated the measure or registered, confirmed, modified or terminated the powers of representation;

     

    (f) the adult’s name, place and date of birth and, where applicable, national identification number.

     

    3. The information referred to in paragraph (1) shall be published in the protection registers as soon as possible after the following conditions are met:

     

    (a) the authorities of the Member State have:

     

    (i) taken, modified or terminated a measure; or

     

    (ii) confirmed, modified or terminated powers of representation granted by an adult;

     

    (b) the time limit for appealing the measure or the decision on the powers of representation has expired, unless the measure or the powers of representation are provisionally applicable.

     

    4. Paragraph (1) shall not preclude Member States from including additional documents or additional information in their protection registers, such as the name of the representative or the nature and extent of the representation.

     

    Amendment  109

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 46

    deleted

    Interoperability of registers of other powers of representation

     

    By [two years after the date of start of application] at the latest, Member States where national law provides for electronic registers recording information concerning other powers of representation which are registered by a competent authority, and where national law does not provide for the confirmation of such powers of representation, shall ensure that those registers record the mandatory information referred to in Article 45(2).

     

    Amendment  110

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 47

    deleted

    Interconnection of registers

     

    1. By means of implementing acts, the Commission shall establish a decentralised system for the interconnection (‘system of interconnection’) that is composed of:

     

    (a) Member States’ protection registers of measures referred to in Article 45 and, where applicable, Member States’ protection registers of confirmed powers of representation referred to in Article 45 and Member State’s registers of other powers of representation Article 46;

     

    (b) a central electronic access point to the information in the system.

     

    2. The system of interconnection shall provide a search service in all the official languages of the Union in order to make available the following:

     

    (a) the mandatory information set out in Article 45(2);

     

    (b) any other documents or information included in the protection registers or other registers of powers of representation, which the Member States choose to make available through the system of interconnection.

     

    Amendment  111

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 48

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 48

    deleted

    Condition of access to information via the system of interconnection

     

    1. Member States shall ensure that the information referred to in Article 47(2) is available free of charge via the system of interconnection.

     

    2. The information available through the system of interconnection shall only be available to those competent authorities or Central Authorities of a Member State which:

     

    (a) have access to the mandatory information under their national law;

     

    (b) have a legitimate interest in accessing this information.

     

    3. For the purposes of paragraph (2), point (a), Member States shall provide the means to authorise those competent authorities or Central Authorities to access to the system of interconnection.

     

    4. Upon a request made by those competent authorities or Central Authorities, the system of interconnection shall automatically make the information referred to in Article 47(2) accessible to them.

     

    Amendment  112

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    1a. Competent and central authorities shall ensure that information transmitted pursuant to this Regulation and deemed confidential under the law of the Member State from which the information is being sent, is subject to the rules on confidentiality laid down by Union law and the national law of the sending and receiving Member States. Member States shall take appropriate measures to prevent unauthorised access.

    Amendment  113

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The use of the decentralised IT system may not be appropriate for direct communication between authorities carried out pursuant to Article 27(1), and any other means of communication may be used instead.

    2. Communication may, however, be carried out by competent authorities by alternative means where electronic communication in accordance with paragraph 1 is not possible due to:

     

    (a) the disruption of the decentralised IT system;

     

    (b) the physical or technical nature of the transmitted material; or

     

    (c) force majeure.

     

    For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the competent authorities shall ensure that the alternative means of communication used are the swiftest and most appropriate and that they ensure a secure and reliable exchange of information.

    Amendment  114

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. Where electronic communication in accordance with paragraph (1) is not possible due to the disruption of the decentralised IT system, the nature of the transmitted material or exceptional circumstances, the transmission shall be carried out by the swiftest, most appropriate alternative means, taking into account the need to ensure a secure and reliable exchange of information.

    3. Where the use of the decentralised IT system referred to in paragraph 1 is not appropriate for direct communication between authorities carried out pursuant to Article 27(1), any other means of communication may be used instead, provided that such means of communication respect the procedural rights of the parties to the proceedings and the confidentiality of the information communicated.

    Amendment  115

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The European electronic access point established on the European e-Justice Portal pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation EU […] [the Digitalisation Regulation] may be used for electronic communication between natural and legal persons and Member States’ competent authorities and issuing authorities in connection with the following:

    1. The European electronic access point established on the European e-Justice Portal pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 may be used for electronic communication between natural and legal persons, or their representatives, and Member States’ competent authorities and issuing authorities in connection with the following:

    Amendment  116

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. Article 4(3), Article 5(2) and (3), and Article 6 of Regulation EU […] [the Digitalisation Regulation] shall apply to electronic communications pursuant to paragraph (1).

    2. Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 shall apply to electronic communications pursuant to paragraph (1).

    Amendment  117

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 54

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. Notwithstanding Article 53, processing of personal data under Chapter VIII on the establishment of protection registers and interconnection of registers shall be governed by the paragraphs 2 to 5 of this Article.

    deleted

    2. Processing of personal data under Chapter VIII shall be limited to the extent necessary for the purposes of facilitating the cross-border provision of information about a measure or powers of representation concerning a particular adult. Without affecting Article 47(2), point (b), the processing shall be limited to the personal data included in the mandatory information set out in Article 45(2).

     

    3. Personal data shall be stored in the Member States’ protection registers referred to in Article 45(1) or registers of other powers of representation referred to in Article 46. The retention period of data in the system of interconnection shall be limited to what is necessary to interconnect those registers and to enable the retrieval of and the access to the data from them.

     

    4. Member States shall be responsible, in accordance with Article 4(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, for the collection and storage of data in registers referred to in Article 45 and Article 46 and for decisions taken to make that data available in the system of interconnection referred to in Article 47.

     

    5. With respect to the system of interconnection referred to in Article 47, the Commission shall be regarded as controller within the meaning of Article 3(8) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. It shall adopt necessary technical solutions to fulfil its responsibilities within the scope of this function. The Commission shall in particular implement technical measures required to ensure the security of personal data while in transit, especially their confidentiality and integrity.

     

    Amendment  118

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 55 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 56 concerning the amendment of Annexes I to X in order to update or make technical changes to those Annexes.

    The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 56 concerning the amendment of Annexes I to XIa new in order to update or make technical changes to those Annexes.

    Amendment  119

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 58 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. This Regulation shall not affect the application of international conventions to which one or more Member States are party at the time of adoption of this Regulation and which concern matters covered by this Regulation.

    1. This Regulation shall not affect the application of international conventions, in particular the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, to which one or more Member States are party at the time of adoption of this Regulation and which concern matters covered by this Regulation.

    Amendment  120

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 59 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (b) even if the adult concerned has his or her habitual residence in the territory of a State, which is a Party to that Convention, and in which this Regulation does not apply, as concerns the recognition and enforcement of a measure taken, or the acceptance of an authentic instrument drawn up by a competent authority of a Member State in the territory of another Member State.

    (b) even if the adult concerned has his or her habitual residence in the territory of a State, which is a Party to that Convention, and in which this Regulation does not apply, as concerns the recognition and enforcement of a measure taken, or the recognition of an authentic instrument drawn up by a competent authority of a Member State in the territory of another Member State.

    Amendment  121

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a decentralised system for the interconnection of registers referred to in Article 47 (‘system of interconnection’) setting out the following:

    deleted

    (a) the technical specification defining the methods of communication and information exchange by electronic means on the basis of the established interface specification for the system of interconnection;

     

    (b) the technical measures ensuring the minimum information technology security standards for communication and distribution of information within the system of interconnection;

     

    (c) minimum criteria for the search service provided by the system of interconnection based on the information set out in Article 45;

     

    (d) minimum criteria for the presentation of the results of the searches in the system of interconnection based on the information set out in Article 45;

     

    (e) the means and the technical conditions of availability of services provided by the system of interconnection;

     

    (f) a technical semantic glossary containing a basic explanation of the Member States’ of protection measures or of powers of representation;

     

    (g) specification of the categories of data that can be accessed, including pursuant to Article 47(2), point (b); and

     

    (h) data protection safeguards.

     

    Amendment  122

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. The implementing acts establishing the system of interconnection pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be adopted by [3 years after the entry into force].

    deleted

    Amendment  123

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 62

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 62

    deleted

    Costs of establishing protection registers and interconnecting Member States’ registers

     

    1. The establishment, maintenance and development of the system of interconnection established under Chapter VIII shall be financed from the general budget of the Union.

     

    2. Each Member State shall bear the costs of establishing and adjusting its registers referred to in Articles 45 and 46 to make them interoperable with the decentralised system for the interconnection of registers, as well as the costs of administering, operating and maintaining those registers. This shall not affect the possibility to apply for grants to support such activities under the Union’s financial programmes.

     

    Amendment  124

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 65

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 65

    deleted

    Transitional provisions

     

    1. This Regulation shall apply only to measures taken, to authentic instrument formally drawn up or registered, and to powers of representation confirmed after [date of application].

     

    2. Notwithstanding paragraph (1), this Regulation shall apply as from [date of application] to powers of representation previously granted by an adult under conditions corresponding to those set out in Article 15 of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention.

     

    3. Chapter VI on cooperation between Central Authorities shall apply to requests and application received by the Central Authorities as from [date of application].

     

    4. Chapter VII on the European Certificate of Representation shall apply to applications for the Certificate received by the issuing authority as from [date of application].

     

    5. Member States shall use the decentralised IT system referred to in Article 49(1) to procedures instituted from the first day of the month following the period of two years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(5).

     

    6. Chapter VIII on the establishment and interconnection of protection registers and registers of other powers of representation shall apply to the measures taken and the powers of representation confirmed or registered from the first day of the month following the period of two years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(4).

     

    Amendment  125

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 66 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    1. By [10 years after the entry into force], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and present to the European Parliament, to the Council [and to the European Economic and Social Committee] a report on the evaluation of this Regulation supported by information supplied by the Member States and collected by the Commission. The report shall be accompanied, where necessary, by a legislative proposal.

    1. By [5 years after the entry into force], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and present to the European Parliament, to the Council [and to the European Economic and Social Committee] a report on the evaluation of this Regulation supported by information supplied by the Member States and collected by the Commission. The report shall include, in particular, an evaluation of the effectiveness of decision-making regimes such as the determination of the extent to which an adult is able to act on their own behalf and the institution of a protective regime or the placement of an adult in an establishment. The report shall be accompanied, where necessary, by a legislative proposal. If the report is not accompagned by a legislative proposal, the decision not to present a legislative proposal shall be submitted with a justification no later than 2 years from the date of the publication of the evaluation report, and that justification shall be made public.

    Amendment  126

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point k

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (k) fees, if any, that Member States charge for the issuance of the European Certificate of Representation in accordance with Article 37(2);

    deleted

    Amendment  127

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point m

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (m) authorities referred to in Article 48(2), point (a) having access to information via the system of interconnection of registers.

    deleted

    Amendment  128

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. The Member States shall communicate the information referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) to (l) by the first day of the month following a period of 15 months after the start of application at the latest, and the information referred to in paragraph 1, point (m), by the first day of the month following the period of two years after the date of entry into force of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(4).

    2. The Member States shall communicate the information referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) to (l) by the first day of the month following a period of 15 months after the start of application at the latest.

    Amendment  129

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    2. It shall apply from [the first day of the month following a period of 18 months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

    2. It shall apply from [the first day of the month following a period of 12 months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

    Amendment  130

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    2a. This Regulation shall cease to apply to measures of protection taking the form of guardianship, curatorship and analogous institutions, on … [15 years after the entry into force of this Regulation].

    Amendment  131

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    3. Article 49 and Article 50 shall apply from the first day of the month following the period of two years after the date of entry into force of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(2).

    3. Article 49 and Article 50 shall apply from the first day of the month following the period of one year after the date of entry into force of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(2).

    Amendment  132

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    4. Articles 45 and 46 shall apply from [two years after the date of entry into application].

    deleted

    Amendment  133

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    5. Article 47 shall apply from the first day of the month following the period of two years after the date of entry into force of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(1).

    deleted

    Amendment  134

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    6. Article 38(3) shall apply from the first day of the month following the period of two years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 60(4).

    deleted

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

     

    Amendment  135

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    6a. This Regulation shall apply only to measures taken, to authentic instruments formally drawn up or registered, and to powers of representation confirmed from … [date of application of this Regulation].

    Amendment  136

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    6b. Notwithstanding paragraph (6a), this Regulation shall apply from … [date of application of this Regulation] to powers of representation previously granted by an adult under conditions corresponding to those set out in Article 15 of the HCCH 2000 Protection of Adults Convention.

    Amendment  137

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    6c. Chapter VI shall apply to requests and applications received by the Central Authorities from … [date of application of this Regulation].

    Amendment  138

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 d (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    6d. Chapter VII shall apply to applications for the Certificate received by the issuing authority from … [date of application of this Regulation].

    Amendment  139

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Annex XI a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    ANNEX XIa (new)

     

    [Text of the UNCRPD1a]

     

    __________________

     

    1a https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/crpd/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-articles

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News