NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Justice

  • MIL-OSI Africa: SAPS intensifies efforts in the fight against GBVF

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Friday, June 20, 2025

    The South African Police Service (SAPS) is continuing to intensify its efforts in the fight against gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF).

    Over the past week, a total of 201 suspects were arrested for rape in police operations across the country. Of the arrests, 56 were wanted individuals tracked down in various provinces.

    “Among the arrests was that of a man and woman in Bloubergstrand, Western Cape, for the alleged sexual abuse of their daughters, aged three and eight,” the SAPS said in a statement. 

    Police seized multiple electronic devices during their arrest, and they face several charges, including the production of child sexual abuse material (child pornography), rape, sexual assault and sexual grooming.

    More recently, a 24-year-old suspect was arrested by the Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences (FCS) Unit in Tonga, Mpumalanga on 19 June 2025 following the gang rape of a 27-year-old woman. Investigations into the matter are ongoing.

    Notable convictions include:
    •    On 09 June 2025, the Polokwane High Court sentenced serial rapist Lesley Morwamashobe Mohlala (33) to 222 years’ imprisonment. He was found guilty on multiple counts of rape and aggravated robbery.
    •    The East London High Court sentenced a 42-year-old accused to life imprisonment for the rape of a 13-year-old girl, who became pregnant as a result of the assault.
    •    The Bloemfontein Regional Court sentenced a 51-year-old accused to life imprisonment for raping his niece, who was 10 years old at the time. During sentencing, it emerged that he was on parole for a previous rape conviction at the time of the offence, an aggravating factor that influenced the court’s decision.
    •    On 18 June 2025, the Watervaal Regional Court sentenced a 25-year-old accused from Tshiozwi, Limpopo to life imprisonment for raping his nine-year-old cousin in 2021.

    “The SAPS remains committed to ensuring justice prevails for victims by removing sexual predators from our communities,” the police said. – SAnews.gov.za

    Share this post:

    MIL OSI Africa –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Stein Announces More Than $52 Million of Investment in Rural Communities

    Source: US State of North Carolina

    Headline: Governor Stein Announces More Than $52 Million of Investment in Rural Communities

    Governor Stein Announces More Than $52 Million of Investment in Rural Communities
    lsaito
    Fri, 06/20/2025 – 08:04

    Raleigh, NC

    Governor Josh Stein today announced that the Rural Infrastructure Authority (RIA) has approved nine grant requests for local governments totaling $2,941,000. The grants include commitments creating a total of 137 jobs. The public investment in these projects will attract more than $52 million in additional private and public investment.

    “North Carolina’s rural communities are excellent places to live, work, and do business,” said Governor Josh Stein. “The latest rural infrastructure grants strengthen these communities even more by helping to create jobs, access to health care, and strengthen downtowns.”

    The RIA is supported by the rural economic development team at the North Carolina Department of Commerce. RIA members review and approve funding requests from local communities. Funding comes from a variety of specialized grant and loan programs offered and managed by the North Carolina Department of Commerce’s Rural Economic Development Division, which is led by Assistant Secretary for Rural Development Reginald Speight. Grants support a variety of activities, including infrastructure development, building renovation, expansion and demolition, and site improvements.

    “We are excited by the opportunities to partner with our state’s rural communities through these infrastructure grant projects,” said Commerce Secretary Lee Lilley. “These investments will help rural North Carolina grow jobs, expand opportunity, and improve people’s quality of life.”

    The RIA approved five grant requests under the state’s Building Reuse Program in three categories: 

    Vacant Building Category 

    • Rockingham County: A $500,000 grant will support the reuse of a 216,086-square-foot building in Reidsville. The facility is set to be occupied by Joyalways Corporation, a manufacturer of wet wipes including baby wipes and non-alcoholic variants. The company plans to create 44 jobs while investing $10,757,500 in this project.
    • Transylvania County: A $75,000 grant will support the reuse of a 4,100-square-foot building in Brevard. This facility will be occupied by Nature Trails NC, LLC, an outdoor recreation business that fabricates structures used in outdoor trails such as benches, kiosks, and bike ramps. With this project, the company is expected to create 16 jobs while investing $80,745.

    Existing Business Building Category 

    • Hertford County: A $280,000 grant will support the expansion of a building in Cofield that is occupied by Structural Coating Hertford, LLC. The company, which provides technologically advanced processes for blast cleaning and coating steel plates, plans to add 5,026 square feet to the existing facility. The project is expected to create 35 jobs with a private investment of $1,674,659.

    Rural Health Building Category

    • City of Rocky Mount (Edgecombe County): A $375,000 grant will support the reuse of a 13,330-square-foot former Memorial Hospital building as a facility for the Opportunities Industrialization Center (OIC) of Rocky Mount. Through its Family Medical Center, OIC provides a variety of affordable health services and is the medical home to approximately 14,000 patients. The center plans to create 30 jobs and invest $13,426,500 in this project.
    • Town of Pembroke (Robeson County): A $150,000 grant will support the construction of a 29,000-square-foot building, where Robeson Health Care Corporation plans to expand their existing operations. The health care provider plans to serve 1,000 additional patients yearly at this new facility, which will include a new eye care center and additional exam rooms to create a functional, patient-friendly environment. With this project, the organization expects to create 12 jobs while investing $11,442,615. 

    The Building Reuse Program provides grants to local governments to renovate vacant buildings, renovate and/or expand buildings occupied by existing North Carolina companies, and renovate, expand, or construct health care facilities that will lead to the creation of new jobs in Tier 1 and Tier 2 counties, as well as rural census tracts of Tier 3 counties.

    The RIA approved four grant requests under the state’s Rural Downtown Economic Development program in two categories:

    Public Buildings Category

    • Town of Williamston (Martin County): A $200,000 grant will support the Town’s Old Police Department Reuse Project, which is intended to rehabilitate and repurpose property that is connected to Town Hall. The 3,304-square-foot building will undergo renovations to create a public space for meetings and become a hub for community events. Renovations include ADA compliance and updates to the space, including updating an existing kitchen. The project is expected to leverage an investment of $11,364.
    • Town of Stoneville (Rockingham County): A $200,000 grant will support the town’s Fidelity Building Revitalization/Reuse Project, which aims to rehabilitate a vacant building for a fully operational financial institution. Improvements include HVAC, electrical, roofing, plumbing, ADA upgrades, and interior/exterior renovations, while also restoring the original brickwork and repairing damaged masonry. This project is expected to leverage an investment of $12,500.

    Public Infrastructure Category 

    • Town of Pembroke (Robeson County): A $311,000 grant will help the town transform a vacant property into a vibrant public space at the intersection of W. 3rd and Vance Streets. The project includes site preparation, a brick paver walkway, electrical upgrades, and tree grates and is a direct result of the town’s participation in the North Carolina Department of Commerce’s Rural Community Capacity program. The town will leverage an investment of $15,550 with this project.
    • Town of Boone (Watauga County): An $850,000 grant will assist the town in prioritizing pedestrian safety by converting the westbound lane of Howard Street from Appalachian Street to Burrell Street into a pedestrian and bicycle-only corridor. Phase Two of the project includes water, sewer, and stormwater improvements, as well as burying utilities. The project is expected to leverage an investment of $15,111,703. 

    The Rural Downtown Economic Development Grants program provides grants to local governments to support downtown revitalization and economic development initiatives. These grants are intended to help local governments grow and leverage downtown districts as assets for economic growth, economic development, and prosperity by providing public improvements to help retain businesses and leverage main street assets for community-wide use.

    In addition to reviewing and approving funding requests, the N.C. Rural Infrastructure Authority formulates policies and priorities for grant and loan programs administered by the Commerce Department’s Rural Economic Development team. Its 17 voting members are appointed by the Governor, Speaker of the House, and Senate President Pro Tem. The North Carolina Secretary of Commerce serves as a member of the authority, ex officio.

    Visit the Rural Economic Development Division webpage for more information.  

    Jun 20, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Donald De Lucca Joins Advisory Board of Alternative Ballistics Corporation to Enhance Law Enforcement Growth Strategy

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Las Vegas, Nevada, June 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Alternative Ballistics Corporation, an innovative public safety technology company, is proud to announce that Donald De Lucca, former President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and a seasoned law enforcement executive, has joined the company’s Advisory Board.

    Chief De Lucca brings over three decades of distinguished law enforcement experience, including leadership roles as Chief of Police for the cities of Doral, Golden Beach, and Miami Beach, Florida. He is currently a partner at V2 Global, where he leads domestic and international risk consulting and crisis management initiatives, in addition to heading the firm’s Law Enforcement Advisory Group.

    Throughout his career, Chief De Lucca has demonstrated a deep commitment to advancing law enforcement strategies, professional development, and community engagement. His tenure as the 104th President of the IACP – representing 33,000 police leaders in over 170 countries – underscores his global influence and dedication to modern policing. Under his leadership, agencies he commanded earned national recognition for implementing best practices from the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.

    “I am honored to join the Advisory Board of Alternative Ballistics Corporation,” said Chief De Lucca. “I believe deeply in the mission to provide law enforcement with tools that enhance officer and public safety while supporting responsible and effective use of force. The Company is advancing a critical innovation, and I look forward to helping guide its growth and impact.”

    Steve Luna, CEO of Alternative Ballistics Corporation, welcomed the appointment: “Chief De Lucca’s unmatched leadership and experience in policing, both in the U.S. and internationally, will be instrumental as we continue expanding our reach and delivering mission-critical technology to law enforcement agencies. We are excited to have his insight and guidance on our Advisory Board.”

    About Alternative Ballistics Corporation

    Alternative Ballistics Corporation (“ABC”) produces The Alternative®, a patented less-lethal device designed to help law enforcement de-escalate potential lethal threats and reduce fatalities. The device attaches quickly to a service weapon and uses bullet capture technology to convert a live round into a non-penetrating impact projectile that can temporarily incapacitate an individual, allowing officers the opportunity to safely effect an arrest. It is intended for use when confronting non-compliant individuals who are in possession of a non-firearm weapon, oftentimes involving a person in crisis. After deployment, the firearm instantly reverts to standard use. A commercial version for civilian home-defense may also be available in the future.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This document contains forward-looking statements. In addition, from time to time, we or our representatives may make forward-looking statements orally or in writing. We base these forward-looking statements on our expectations and projections about future events, which we derive from the information currently available to us. In evaluating these forward-looking statements, you should consider various factors, including: our ability to advance the direction of the Company; our ability to keep pace with new technology and changing market needs; and the competitive environment of our business. These and other factors may cause our actual results to differ materially from any forward-looking statement.

    Company Contact:
    info@alternativeballistics.com 
    www.alternativeballistics.com

    For Investor Inquiries, please contact:
    Hanover International, Inc.
    Kathy Cusumano, President
    ka@hanoverintlinc.com

    The MIL Network –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Information on the voting rights attached to the shares issued by Invalda INVL

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Considering that on 17 June 2025 Invalda INVL has entered into agreements to transfer 41,678 treasury shares in order to exercise stock options granted in 2022 to the employees of Invalda INVL and companies in which Invalda INVL holds more than 50% of the shares and that all the transfers have been recorded in the securities accounts, the number of treasury shares of Invalda INVL has decreased to 240,906 units, representing 1.96% of the total number of issued shares of the company, and therefore the number of votes for the calculation of the quorum for the General Meeting of Shareholders of Invalda INVL has changed as of the date of this notice.

    Data on shares issued by Invalda INVL:

    Type of shares Ordinary registered shares
    ISIN code LT0000102279
    LEI code 52990001IQUJ710GHH43
    Nominal value of 1 share, EUR 0.29
    Number of shares, units 12,299,375
    Authorised capital, EUR 3,566,818.75
    Number of votes granted by all issued shares, units 12,299,375
    Number of votes calculating the quorum of the General Meeting of Shareholders * 12,058,469

    * according to Article 27 (4) of the Law on Companies’ version which is in force at the time of publishing this information, in determining the quorum of the General Meeting of Shareholders, it is considered that the acquired own shares do not grant voting rights.

    The person for additional information:
    Raimondas Rajeckas
    CFO of Invalda INVL
    raimondas@invaldainvl.com

    The MIL Network –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: Constitutional Court a beacon of justice and national unity

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    President Cyril Ramaphosa has praised the Constitutional Court for its critical role in deepening democracy, advancing human rights, and promoting national cohesion and reconciliation over the past three decades.

    Speaking at a special event marking the 30-year anniversary of the court’s establishment on Friday in Johannesburg, President Ramaphosa described the apex court as not only a legal institution but a “noble symbol of our democratic order; both immortal and legal compass”.

    “This moment calls not only for celebration, but also for reflection, for recommitment, and for a renewed vision of constitutionalism in action in South Africa,” the President said. 

    Reflecting on the court’s founding in 1994, the President noted its symbolic location, built on the ruins of the infamous Old Fort prison in Braamfontein as a reminder of South Africa’s painful past and a testament to the transformative promise of constitutional justice.

    “This court was established on the ruins of an oppressive legal system and was built on the grounds of a former prison, embodying the hope that law could become an instrument of justice rather than repression,” he said.

    Recalling the adoption of the Constitution on 8 May 1996, President Ramaphosa, who then chaired the Constitutional Assembly, likened the document to “our new nation’s birth certificate”, describing it as a legal foundation that affirms dignity, equality, and freedom for all South Africans.

    “Just like a person cannot enjoy their rights without a birth certificate, without the Constitution our country would be cast adrift, and be vulnerable to the excesses of unchecked power.

    “We celebrate the existence of this court over the 30 years in which it has defended our democratic vision as set out in our birth certificate, our Constitution. This court has been the guardian, watching over our nation’s legal health just as a parent would attend to the health of their growing child,” he said.

    Building a culture of rights

    The President credited the court for cultivating a rights-based culture by issuing transformative and far-reaching judgments, including in S v Makwanyane that abolished the death penalty; the Grootboom case that centred on the right to housing; and Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign that dealt with the right to healthcare and access to HIV/Aids treatment.

    “The Constitutional Court has developed a rich and transformative jurisprudence. These judgements are not merely legal decisions – they are decisions that have changed lives, shaped our society, and strengthened our democracy,” he said. 

    He praised the court’s jurisprudence for affirming the rights of the vulnerable, including same-sex couples, women in traditional marriages, children, the poor, and the infirm.

    “The court’s judgments have advanced the rights of same-sex couples, of women in traditional marriages, of the sick and infirm, of children, of voters, and of the most marginalised members of society. They have affirmed that dignity, equality and freedom are not reserved for the powerful, but guaranteed to all,” he said. 

    He acknowledged the international legal influences that helped shape South Africa’s Constitution, with insights drawn from jurisdictions such as Canada, Germany, India and the United States.

    Quoting former Justice Albie Sachs, President Ramaphosa said: “We borrowed ideas, concepts and structures from Canada, Germany, India and the United States, but made them South African.”

    Challenges and shortcomings

    While lauding the court’s role, President Ramaphosa also acknowledged ongoing challenges in realising the full promise of constitutionalism, particularly in the delivery of socio-economic rights. 

    “It will forever remain a blight on our democracy that the applicant in the ground-breaking Grootboom judgment, Ms. Irene Grootboom, died in 2008 without her dream of a decent house being fulfilled,” he said.

    He stressed that citizens should not have to resort to litigation to claim rights that the state is obligated to fulfil.

    “There is a disconnect between the promise of our Constitution and the lived realities of South Africans. Persistent inequality, threats to judicial independence, lack of implementation of court orders, and erosion of trust in institutions remain pressing challenges,” he warned.

    Commitment to the judiciary

    President Ramaphosa reaffirmed government’s commitment to supporting the judiciary and upholding its independence. He cited budget allocations to improve court services, judicial education, and infrastructure as part of efforts to bolster the judiciary’s effectiveness.

    “To ensure that the judiciary execute their duties independently, effectively, and with dignity – government must and will provide a range of institutional, infrastructure, financial, administrative, and legal support. The support is crucial to maintaining judicial independence, which is a cornerstone of democracy and the rule of law,” he said.

    He confirmed that a joint committee between the executive and judiciary will finalise an action plan in the coming weeks to strengthen the judicial system and institutional independence.

    Tribute to pioneers

    The President paid tribute to current and former Constitutional Court Justices, legal clerks, scholars, and practitioners who have contributed to the court’s legacy.

    Among those honoured were retired Justices Albie Sachs and Kate O’Regan, who were part of the inaugural bench. He also recalled stories shared by his legal advisor, Advocate Nokukhanya Jele, who clerked for the court in its early days, sharing memories of operating in cramped temporary offices, and of rain leaking onto legal papers during the Court’s relocation to its current premises in 2004.

    “For all who had the privilege of being part of those early days working at the court, there was a sense of elation at being part of history in the making. Of being part of something far greater; something that all one’s years of legal training had prepared one for. 

    “As a nation we can be nothing short of immensely proud of the constitutional court, of what it has achieved, and of its ongoing and pre-eminent role in our society,” he said.

    Looking ahead

    President Ramaphosa called on legal professionals, government leaders and citizens alike to recommit to the Constitution and its values of accountability, ethics, and public service.

    “Thirty years on, the Constitutional Court remains a beacon of democracy. A compass for our future journey. May it continue to stand as a testament to justice, accountability, and the resilience of the South African people,” the President said. 

    He added that the country faces many challenges including poverty, inequality, joblessness and under-development. 

    “Yet we move forward as a collective with confidence, fortified by the knowledge that that you, the guardians of our constitutional order, are with us, alongside us, guiding us.

    “As we look to the next 30 years, let us ensure that the Constitutional Court remains a living institution—responsive, principled, and deeply rooted in the values of ubuntu, accountability, and human dignity. We wish the court well on this auspicious occasion, and into the future,” the President said. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: President reaffirms commitment to judicial independence

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    President Cyril Ramaphosa has reaffirmed government’s commitment to judicial independence, assuring the nation that funding for the judiciary will be made available despite South Africa’s tightening fiscal environment. 

    Speaking to the media at the 30-year anniversary celebrations of the Constitutional Court in Braamfontein, the President acknowledged the financial challenges facing the state but said these would not deter the empowerment of key democratic institutions.

    “Money is getting tighter and tighter because our fiscal situation is challenged with the lacklustre growth of our economy. So, the revenues that come into government are becoming slimmer and slimmer. However, we do need to empower various arms of the state,” the President said on Friday.

    WATCH | President addresses Constitutional Court celebrations 

    [embedded content]

    The President emphasised that the judiciary, along with Parliament and the Executive, would be prioritised in government’s budgetary considerations. 

    “Parliament and the judiciary are one of those and the executive, of course, plays a leading role of the arms of the state, so money will be made available, and of course, to the extent that we are able to mobilise the resources as we grow the economy,” he said. 

    Responding to concerns over the National Prosecuting Authority’s (NPA) ability to prosecute cases effectively due to resource constraints, President Ramaphosa noted the importance of judicial independence and outlined plans to ensure that the judiciary has direct control over its finances.

    “The judiciary will have the money, and they will be in control, just as parliament is in control of its own budget. They will be able to embark on infrastructure projects, administrative capability training and all this without having to always go and ask for permission from the Minister of Justice.”

    President Ramaphosa credited both the current Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mmamoloko Kubayi, and Chief Justice Mandisa Maya for driving progress in securing financial autonomy for the judiciary. 

    “But I need to say that the Minister of Justice and the Chief Justice are the ones who have actually moved the needle on this matter. So, if you have to pay any tribute to anyone, its these two ladies who have really moved mountains,” he said. 

    He further acknowledged the work done by former Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, noting that the framework for financial independence began taking shape under Zondo’s leadership.

    “Having said that, former Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, sought to have this put in place and I think the foundation and the framework was set in place from 2013. It was consolidated during Chief Justice Zondo’s time, and it’s now been put in place during Chief Justice Maya’s time,” President Ramaphosa explained. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Singapore Prime Minister to Pay Official Visit to China /detailed version-1/

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, June 20 (Xinhua) — At the invitation of Chinese Premier Li Qiang, Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong will pay an official visit to China from June 22 to 26, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on Friday.

    Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong chose China as the destination for his first visit outside ASEAN since taking office in May, fully demonstrating the importance he attaches to developing China-Singapore relations, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said at a regular ministry press conference.

    During the visit, Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet with Liu Wong. Premier of the State Council Li Qiang will hold talks with him, and Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) Zhao Leji will meet with him. According to Guo Jiakun, the two sides will hold in-depth exchanges of views on China-Singapore relations as well as international and regional issues of common interest.

    Under the strategic guidance of the leaders of both countries, China-Singapore relations have maintained a positive momentum, the Chinese diplomat said. He added that in 2023, the leaders of the two countries announced the establishment of China-Singapore relations as a comprehensive high-quality prospective partnership, which clearly outlined the direction of development of bilateral relations.

    This year marks the 35th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Singapore, Guo Jiakun said. He noted that through this visit, China hopes to strengthen strategic communication with Singapore, deepen cooperation in various fields, jointly uphold the principles of multilateralism and free trade, and promote the further development of China-Singapore relations from a new starting point. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: AFRICA/UGANDA – “Voices of Peace”: campaign by Sudanese youth to launch a sustainable peace process

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Friday, 20 June 2025

    Internet

    Kampala (Agenzia Fides) – “Stopping the war has become a national demand”. This is the goal of a group of Sudanese youth who have launched the “Voices of Peace” campaign in Kampala, Uganda. Inaugurated on Saturday, June 14 by Sa’ad Mohamed, Executive Director of the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS), seeks to engage young Sudanese in building a sustainable peace process.“Through this campaign, we plan to build a comprehensive peace process, with youth at its heart, benefiting from the power and influence of social media in shaping public opinion” said one of the young Sudanese present. The aim is to leverage social media and traditional arts to foster reconciliation and end the ongoing conflict in their homeland (see Fides, 17/4/2023).According to organizers, the initiative will use digital media and traditional arts – including the role of “Hakamats” (traditional female praise singers and storytellers) – to spread messages of peace and coexistence, while also monitoring and documenting human rights violations across Sudan.The note sent to Fides also states that Sudanese civil and political groups have extensive experience using digital media and social networking sites, which played a pivotal role in mobilizing the Sudanese Revolution from December 2018 to April 2019. Faced with media suppression, social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp became crucial for organizing protests and coordinating actions. The revolution effectively broke the official media blockade, transforming social media into a popular tool for communication and unifying revolutionary slogans. Sudanese activists gained international support, particularly on Twitter, turning it into a space for global solidarity. Digital platforms also became a vital medium for youth to discuss state-building, transitional justice, and human rights, fostering a culture of digital resistance.Asjad Bahaa, a founder and participant in the campaign, said “Voices of Peace” is the second phase of an ACJPS project, which began in April focusing on documenting enforced disappearances. She explained that the campaign will train youth as monitors and documenters of human rights violations, addressing the exodus of many activists due to security threats.Youth are “the fuel of war and peace,” often easily recruited by armed groups. “We are trying to reverse this by training youth to be peace advocates,” she said. “We are also working to reorient the role of Hakamats to be symbols of peace instead of incitement,” she said.The campaign launches as the conflict between the Army and the Rapid Support Forces enters its third year, with violence escalating and little sign of a political settlement. Humanitarian conditions continue to worsen, and civilian violations are widespread.Examples from other countries highlight the potential of arts and media in peacebuilding. Following the 1994 genocide, Rwanda used traditional arts, community theater, and radio broadcasts to promote love, reconciliation, and forgiveness. Sierra Leone after the 2002 civil war, mobile youth music groups used traditional music to reintegrate child soldiers and foster tolerance. In Colombia media campaigns incorporating traditional arts and music played a role in ending the conflict with FARC rebels. These initiatives, using popular songs broadcast via planes, radio, and social media, encouraged dozens of fighters to disarm and rejoin society. In Niger the role of “Hakamats” was empowered in peacebuilding through folk songs. Trained in reconciliation concepts, these women became key messengers, using songs in markets and at weddings to informally convey messages urging an end to violence and promoting coexistence in pastoral communities. (AP) (Agenzia Fides, 20/6/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Met officers appeal for witnesses after man dies following a shooting in Croydon

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    An investigation has been launched after police were called to reports of a shooting on Imperial Way at 17:04hrs on Thursday, 19 June.

    A man in his 40s was found with gunshot wounds. He was treated by paramedics but sadly died at the scene.

    His next of kin have been informed and are being supported by specially trained officers.

    Detectives from the Met’s Major Incident team are leading the investigation and enquiries are ongoing.

    Detective Chief Inspector Dan Whitten, leading the investigation from the Met’s Specialist Crime Command, said:

    “This was a tragic incident and my thoughts are with the man’s family at this difficult time. Our team of specially trained officers are supporting them as are our investigation progresses.

    “Our enquiries are ongoing and we would urge any witnesses to come forward and share information with us.”

    Anyone who witnessed the incident, or has any information that could help the investigation, please contact the police on 101 quoting CAD 6530/19JUN.

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

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: How artificial intelligence controls your health insurance coverage

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jennifer D. Oliva, Professor of Law, Indiana University

    Evidence suggests that insurance companies use AI to delay or limit health care that patients need. FatCameraE+ via Getty Images

    Over the past decade, health insurance companies have increasingly embraced the use of artificial intelligence algorithms. Unlike doctors and hospitals, which use AI to help diagnose and treat patients, health insurers use these algorithms to decide whether to pay for health care treatments and services that are recommended by a given patient’s physicians.

    One of the most common examples is prior authorization, which is when your doctor needs to
    receive payment approval from your insurance company before providing you care. Many insurers use an algorithm to decide whether the requested care is “medically necessary” and should be covered.

    These AI systems also help insurers decide how much care a patient is entitled to — for example, how many days of hospital care a patient can receive after surgery.

    If an insurer declines to pay for a treatment your doctor recommends, you usually have three options. You can try to appeal the decision, but that process can take a lot of time, money and expert help. Only 1 in 500 claim denials are appealed. You can agree to a different treatment that your insurer will cover. Or you can pay for the recommended treatment yourself, which is often not realistic because of high health care costs.

    As a legal scholar who studies health law and policy, I’m concerned about how insurance algorithms affect people’s health. Like with AI algorithms used by doctors and hospitals, these tools can potentially improve care and reduce costs. Insurers say that AI helps them make quick, safe decisions about what care is necessary and avoids wasteful or harmful treatments.

    But there’s strong evidence that the opposite can be true. These systems are sometimes used to delay or deny care that should be covered, all in the name of saving money.

    A pattern of withholding care

    Presumably, companies feed a patient’s health care records and other relevant information into health care coverage algorithms and compare that information with current medical standards of care to decide whether to cover the patient’s claim. However, insurers have refused to disclose how these algorithms work in making such decisions, so it is impossible to say exactly how they operate in practice.

    Using AI to review coverage saves insurers time and resources, especially because it means fewer medical professionals are needed to review each case. But the financial benefit to insurers doesn’t stop there. If an AI system quickly denies a valid claim, and the patient appeals, that appeal process can take years. If the patient is seriously ill and expected to die soon, the insurance company might save money simply by dragging out the process in the hope that the patient dies before the case is resolved.

    Insurers say that if they decline to cover a medical intervention, patients can pay for it out of pocket.

    This creates the disturbing possibility that insurers might use algorithms to withhold care for expensive, long-term or terminal health problems , such as chronic or other debilitating disabilities. One reporter put it bluntly: “Many older adults who spent their lives paying into Medicare now face amputation or cancer and are forced to either pay for care themselves or go without.”

    Research supports this concern – patients with chronic illnesses are more likely to be denied coverage and suffer as a result. In addition, Black and Hispanic people and those of other nonwhite ethnicities, as well as people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, are more likely to experience claims denials. Some evidence also suggests that prior authorization may increase rather than decrease health care system costs.

    Insurers argue that patients can always pay for any treatment themselves, so they’re not really being denied care. But this argument ignores reality. These decisions have serious health consequences, especially when people can’t afford the care they need.

    Moving toward regulation

    Unlike medical algorithms, insurance AI tools are largely unregulated. They don’t have to go through Food and Drug Administration review, and insurance companies often say their algorithms are trade secrets.

    That means there’s no public information about how these tools make decisions, and there’s no outside testing to see whether they’re safe, fair or effective. No peer-reviewed studies exist to show how well they actually work in the real world.

    There does seem to be some momentum for change. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, which is the federal agency in charge of Medicare and Medicaid, recently announced that insurers in Medicare Advantage plans must base decisions on the needs of individual patients – not just on generic criteria. But these rules still let insurers create their own decision-making standards, and they still don’t require any outside testing to prove their systems work before using them. Plus, federal rules can only regulate federal public health programs like Medicare. They do not apply to private insurers who do not provide federal health program coverage.

    Some states, including Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Maine and Texas, have proposed laws to rein in insurance AI. A few have passed new laws, including a 2024 California statute that requires a licensed physician to supervise the use of insurance coverage algorithms.

    But most state laws suffer from the same weaknesses as the new CMS rule. They leave too much control in the hands of insurers to decide how to define “medical necessity” and in what contexts to use algorithms for coverage decisions. They also don’t require those algorithms to be reviewed by neutral experts before use. And even strong state laws wouldn’t be enough, because states generally can’t regulate Medicare or insurers that operate outside their borders.

    A role for the FDA

    In the view of many health law experts, the gap between insurers’ actions and patient needs has become so wide that regulating health care coverage algorithms is now imperative. As I argue in an essay to be published in the Indiana Law Journal, the FDA is well positioned to do so.

    The FDA is staffed with medical experts who have the capability to evaluate insurance algorithms before they are used to make coverage decisions. The agency already reviews many medical AI tools for safety and effectiveness. FDA oversight would also provide a uniform, national regulatory scheme instead of a patchwork of rules across the country.

    Some people argue that the FDA’s power here is limited. For the purposes of FDA regulation, a medical device is defined as an instrument “intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease.” Because health insurance algorithms are not used to diagnose, treat or prevent disease, Congress may need to amend the definition of a medical device before the FDA can regulate those algorithms.

    If the FDA’s current authority isn’t enough to cover insurance algorithms, Congress could change the law to give it that power. Meanwhile, CMS and state governments could require independent testing of these algorithms for safety, accuracy and fairness. That might also push insurers to support a single national standard – like FDA regulation – instead of facing a patchwork of rules across the country.

    The move toward regulating how health insurers use AI in determining coverage has clearly begun, but it is still awaiting a robust push. Patients’ lives are literally on the line.

    Jennifer D. Oliva currently receives funding from NIDA to research the impact of pharmaceutical industry messaging on the opioid crisis among U.S. Military Veterans. She is affiliated with the UCSF/University of California College of the Law, San Francisco Consortium on Law, Science & Health Policy and Georgetown University Law Center O’Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law.

    – ref. How artificial intelligence controls your health insurance coverage – https://theconversation.com/how-artificial-intelligence-controls-your-health-insurance-coverage-253602

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: How artificial intelligence controls your health insurance coverage

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jennifer D. Oliva, Professor of Law, Indiana University

    Evidence suggests that insurance companies use AI to delay or limit health care that patients need. FatCameraE+ via Getty Images

    Over the past decade, health insurance companies have increasingly embraced the use of artificial intelligence algorithms. Unlike doctors and hospitals, which use AI to help diagnose and treat patients, health insurers use these algorithms to decide whether to pay for health care treatments and services that are recommended by a given patient’s physicians.

    One of the most common examples is prior authorization, which is when your doctor needs to
    receive payment approval from your insurance company before providing you care. Many insurers use an algorithm to decide whether the requested care is “medically necessary” and should be covered.

    These AI systems also help insurers decide how much care a patient is entitled to — for example, how many days of hospital care a patient can receive after surgery.

    If an insurer declines to pay for a treatment your doctor recommends, you usually have three options. You can try to appeal the decision, but that process can take a lot of time, money and expert help. Only 1 in 500 claim denials are appealed. You can agree to a different treatment that your insurer will cover. Or you can pay for the recommended treatment yourself, which is often not realistic because of high health care costs.

    As a legal scholar who studies health law and policy, I’m concerned about how insurance algorithms affect people’s health. Like with AI algorithms used by doctors and hospitals, these tools can potentially improve care and reduce costs. Insurers say that AI helps them make quick, safe decisions about what care is necessary and avoids wasteful or harmful treatments.

    But there’s strong evidence that the opposite can be true. These systems are sometimes used to delay or deny care that should be covered, all in the name of saving money.

    A pattern of withholding care

    Presumably, companies feed a patient’s health care records and other relevant information into health care coverage algorithms and compare that information with current medical standards of care to decide whether to cover the patient’s claim. However, insurers have refused to disclose how these algorithms work in making such decisions, so it is impossible to say exactly how they operate in practice.

    Using AI to review coverage saves insurers time and resources, especially because it means fewer medical professionals are needed to review each case. But the financial benefit to insurers doesn’t stop there. If an AI system quickly denies a valid claim, and the patient appeals, that appeal process can take years. If the patient is seriously ill and expected to die soon, the insurance company might save money simply by dragging out the process in the hope that the patient dies before the case is resolved.

    Insurers say that if they decline to cover a medical intervention, patients can pay for it out of pocket.

    This creates the disturbing possibility that insurers might use algorithms to withhold care for expensive, long-term or terminal health problems , such as chronic or other debilitating disabilities. One reporter put it bluntly: “Many older adults who spent their lives paying into Medicare now face amputation or cancer and are forced to either pay for care themselves or go without.”

    Research supports this concern – patients with chronic illnesses are more likely to be denied coverage and suffer as a result. In addition, Black and Hispanic people and those of other nonwhite ethnicities, as well as people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, are more likely to experience claims denials. Some evidence also suggests that prior authorization may increase rather than decrease health care system costs.

    Insurers argue that patients can always pay for any treatment themselves, so they’re not really being denied care. But this argument ignores reality. These decisions have serious health consequences, especially when people can’t afford the care they need.

    Moving toward regulation

    Unlike medical algorithms, insurance AI tools are largely unregulated. They don’t have to go through Food and Drug Administration review, and insurance companies often say their algorithms are trade secrets.

    That means there’s no public information about how these tools make decisions, and there’s no outside testing to see whether they’re safe, fair or effective. No peer-reviewed studies exist to show how well they actually work in the real world.

    There does seem to be some momentum for change. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, which is the federal agency in charge of Medicare and Medicaid, recently announced that insurers in Medicare Advantage plans must base decisions on the needs of individual patients – not just on generic criteria. But these rules still let insurers create their own decision-making standards, and they still don’t require any outside testing to prove their systems work before using them. Plus, federal rules can only regulate federal public health programs like Medicare. They do not apply to private insurers who do not provide federal health program coverage.

    Some states, including Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Maine and Texas, have proposed laws to rein in insurance AI. A few have passed new laws, including a 2024 California statute that requires a licensed physician to supervise the use of insurance coverage algorithms.

    But most state laws suffer from the same weaknesses as the new CMS rule. They leave too much control in the hands of insurers to decide how to define “medical necessity” and in what contexts to use algorithms for coverage decisions. They also don’t require those algorithms to be reviewed by neutral experts before use. And even strong state laws wouldn’t be enough, because states generally can’t regulate Medicare or insurers that operate outside their borders.

    A role for the FDA

    In the view of many health law experts, the gap between insurers’ actions and patient needs has become so wide that regulating health care coverage algorithms is now imperative. As I argue in an essay to be published in the Indiana Law Journal, the FDA is well positioned to do so.

    The FDA is staffed with medical experts who have the capability to evaluate insurance algorithms before they are used to make coverage decisions. The agency already reviews many medical AI tools for safety and effectiveness. FDA oversight would also provide a uniform, national regulatory scheme instead of a patchwork of rules across the country.

    Some people argue that the FDA’s power here is limited. For the purposes of FDA regulation, a medical device is defined as an instrument “intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease.” Because health insurance algorithms are not used to diagnose, treat or prevent disease, Congress may need to amend the definition of a medical device before the FDA can regulate those algorithms.

    If the FDA’s current authority isn’t enough to cover insurance algorithms, Congress could change the law to give it that power. Meanwhile, CMS and state governments could require independent testing of these algorithms for safety, accuracy and fairness. That might also push insurers to support a single national standard – like FDA regulation – instead of facing a patchwork of rules across the country.

    The move toward regulating how health insurers use AI in determining coverage has clearly begun, but it is still awaiting a robust push. Patients’ lives are literally on the line.

    Jennifer D. Oliva currently receives funding from NIDA to research the impact of pharmaceutical industry messaging on the opioid crisis among U.S. Military Veterans. She is affiliated with the UCSF/University of California College of the Law, San Francisco Consortium on Law, Science & Health Policy and Georgetown University Law Center O’Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law.

    – ref. How artificial intelligence controls your health insurance coverage – https://theconversation.com/how-artificial-intelligence-controls-your-health-insurance-coverage-253602

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Gorham Man Pleads Guilty to Distributing and Possessing Child Sexual Abuse Material

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PORTLAND, Maine: A Gorham man pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Portland to distributing and possessing child sexual abuse material. 

    According to court records, Cody J. Merrill, 33, who had been previously convicted of unlawful sexual conduct involving a minor in York County Superior Court, sent a video file depicting child sexual abuse material to an undercover Special Agent from Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) over a messaging application. In February 2025, HSI executed a search warrant at his residence, resulting in the seizure of multiple digital media devices that contained child sexual abuse material files. During a recorded interview with investigators, Merrill admitted to accessing, viewing, and distributing child sexual abuse material over the internet.

    Merrill faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years in prison and a maximum term of imprisonment of 40 years, a maximum fine of $250,000, and a maximum supervised release term of life. He will be sentenced after the completion of a presentence investigative report by the U.S. Probation Office. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    HSI investigated the case.

    To report an incident involving the possession, distribution, receipt or production of child sexual abuse material: Child sexual abuse material – referred to in legal terms as “child pornography” – captures the sexual abuse and exploitation of children. These images document victims’ exploitation and abuse, and they suffer revictimization every time the images are viewed. In 2023, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children received 36 million reports of the possession, manufacture, or distribution of child sexual abuse materials. To file a report with NCMEC, go to https://report.cybertip.org or call 1-800-843-5678. If you are in Maine and you or someone you know has been sexually assaulted or abused, you can get help by calling the free, private 24-hour statewide sexual assault helpline at 1-800-871-7741.

    Project Safe Childhood: This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, 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, visit https://www.justice.gov/usao-me/psc.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Two Men Who Trafficked Pills Containing Meth and Fentanyl, Fentanyl Powder Mixed with Xylazine, Sentenced to Prison

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    David X. Sullivan, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, announced that two men were sentenced today by U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall in New Haven for offenses related to their distribution of counterfeit pills containing methamphetamine and fentanyl, and fentanyl powder laced with xylazine.  MARKEYESE KELLY, also known as “Curry” and “Keyse,” 46, of West Haven, was sentenced to 138 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release, and JAQUAN PRICE, also known as “Sub,” 34, of New Haven, was sentenced to 120 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, in October 2023, the FBI New Haven Safe Streets Gang Task Force began investigating a drug trafficking organization led by Kelly.  The investigation, which included controlled purchases of narcotics in February and March 2024, revealed that Kelly, Price, and their associate Robert Covington sold various controlled substances, including multi-colored pills pressed to look like ecstasy that actually contained methamphetamine, counterfeit oxycodone pills containing fentanyl, powder fentanyl laced with xylazine, and PCP.

    Kelly, Price, and Covington were arrested on May 14, 2024.  On that date, investigators executed multiple search warrants and seized more than a kilogram of methamphetamine pills, and an additional quantity of meth powder, more than 100 grams of fentanyl pills and powder, approximately 50 grams of cocaine, three handguns, two loaded gun magazines, ammunition, and more than $11,000 in cash.

    On February 21, 2025, Kelly pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute, and to possess with the intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine and 40 grams or more of fentanyl.  On March 21, 2025, Price pleaded guilty to possession with the intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine.

    Kelly and Price have been detained since their arrests.

    In April 2015, Price was sentenced in Bridgeport federal court to 30 months of imprisonment for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.

    Covington pleaded guilty and awaits sentencing.

    This matter has been investigated by the FBI New Haven Safe Streets Gang Task Force, the New Haven Police Department, the West Haven Police Department, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.  The Task Force includes personnel from the East Haven Police Department, Milford Police Department, Wallingford Police Department, Connecticut State Police, and Connecticut Department of Correction.

    The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephanie T. Levick and Nathan Guevremont through the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) Program.  Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at https://www.justice.gov/OCDETF.

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: United States Attorney John A. Sarcone III Attacked by a Salvadorian National with a Knife in Downtown Albany

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Saul Morales-Garcia, an Illegal Alien, Charged with Attempted Second-Degree Murder

    ALBANY, NEW YORK – Tuesday June 17, after leaving his office in downtown Albany, United States Attorney John A. Sarcone III was the victim of a life-threatening incident.  Saul Morales-Garcia, an illegal alien from El Salvador, who entered the United States in 2021 after a prior deportation, lunged at Sarcone while brandishing a knife and yelling aggressively in a foreign language Sarcone could not readily identify.  Sarcone ran to the lobby of the Hilton Hotel and Morales-Garcia stopped and still shouting in a foreign language turned and started to walk away.  Sarcone immediately contacted Albany County Sheriff Craig D. Apple Sr.  Sarcone went back to the street and maintained a safe distance and yelled out to Garcia-Morales to gain his attention to prevent Morales-Garcia from disappearing as Sarcone believed an innocent person would be killed by Morales-Garcia.  Before law enforcement arrived, Morales-Garcia charged at Sarcone again screaming and yelling at Sarcone in a foreign language while wielding the knife to make a slitting-the-throat gesture at Sarcone. Sarcone again ran to the lobby of the Hilton where again Morales-Garcia stopped, turned and began to walk away but was apprehended when Sheriff’s deputies arrived.  Morales-Garcia was taken into custody and the knife was recovered.

    Sarcone was physically unharmed, but emotionally rattled and stated, “I felt an obligation to the public as the chief Federal law enforcement officer in the district that includes the city of Albany.  I feared for my life but I couldn’t let this individual harm and potentially kill others.”

    Albany County Sheriff Craig Apple said: “U.S. Attorney John Sarcone’s selfless actions likely saved lives.”

    Morales-Garcia was charged with attempted second-degree murder, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and menacing in the second degree and remanded without bail.  He made an appearance in Albany City Court yesterday and an order of protection was issued for Sarcone. Morales-Garcia may also face federal charges; the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Homeland Security Investigations are involved in the ongoing investigation. 

    Sarcone was appointed U.S. Attorney in the Northern District of New York by Attorney General Pamela Bondi in March.  “Public safety is our highest priority,” said U.S. Attorney Sarcone.  “I am relieved that no one was harmed.  I appreciated the swift response by the Albany County Sheriff’s office which was within minutes although it seemed like an eternity.”  Sarcone emphasized that such brazen and violent behavior underscores the importance of public vigilance and the need for a strong collaboration between federal and local authorities. At Sarcone’s request, his office is recused from prosecuting Morales-Garcia for illegal re-entry into the country, which is a felony, and the case has been assigned to the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York for prosecution. 

    Sarcone stated, “I have spent the last three months going to 27 of the 32 counties thus far in my district conducting meetings with the District Attorneys, Sheriffs, State Police and local police Chiefs accompanied by the heads of all the Federal law enforcement agencies in the Northern District to offer assistance from federal law enforcement and my office to help combat the infiltration of gangs, drug, human traffickers, and sexual predators.  My offer of help has been well-received, and the results have been tremendous in helping these communities get rid of violent criminals. The citizens of Albany, and visitors who come to Albany, should be able to feel safe walking down our streets.”

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: THREE BATON ROUGE MEN FACE FEDERAL CHARGES IN CONNECTION WITH ARMED ROBBERY AND SHOOTING OF FEDERAL AGENT

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

    Acting United States Attorney Ellison C. Travis announced that federal criminal complaints and arrest warrants were issued charging three Baton Rouge men with multiple offenses stemming from an undercover firearm-trafficking operation that turned violent on Tuesday, June 17, 2025. Torion Bobbs, age 20, and Cordell Simms, age 19, are each charged with assault on a federal officer and robbery, and Caylup Anderson, age 18, is charged robbery and aiding and abetting. 

     The criminal complaints and supporting affidavits allege that on June 17, 2025, agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) Task Force arranged two separate purchases of a firearm equipped with a machine-gun conversion device (sometimes called a “Glock switch”) outside the Triple S Food Mart on North Foster Drive. When agents moved to detain the suspects, an exchange of gunfire followed, injuring one ATF agent and Sims. All three suspects fled before Sims was arrested nearby, with Anderson and Bobb being apprehended thereafter.

    “Our office has zero tolerance for assaults on law enforcement officers,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Travis. “When criminals raise a gun at those who protect our communities, we will answer with the full force of federal law. Yesterday’s swift federal charges reflect the seamless teamwork of the FBI, ATF, Baton Rouge Police Department, East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office, and Louisiana State Police. Their rapid, coordinated response ensured these defendants were taken off the streets within hours of the crime.”

    “ATF’s primary focus is to support public safety and address violent crime with our federal, state, and local partners. This is particularly true when it comes to crimes perpetuated through illegal possession and use of firearms,” said ATF New Orleans SAC Joshua Jackson. “These swift charges represent another example of ATF working with our law enforcement partners to hold those accountable who choose to use firearms to engage in violent crime within our communities.”

    “The rapid response of the FBI and our law enforcement partners to the events on North Foster Street proves that we will not tolerate any assault on law enforcement officers nor will we tolerate violent criminals who put the community in danger,” said Special Agent in Charge Jonathan Tapp of the FBI New Orleans Field Office. “With the continued assistance of the public, the FBI and our law enforcement partners will continue to get violent criminals off our streets.”

    This case is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Eli Abad. 

    A criminal complaint is merely an accusation.  The defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Jury convicts Du Quoin felon of possessing a firearm

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

    BENTON, Ill. – A southern Illinois jury found a Du Quoin man guilty of possessing a firearm as a felon in Franklin County.

    A jury convicted Marcus T. Moore, 42, of one count of felon in possession of a firearm.

    “To help protect the public and keep guns away from dangerous individuals, convicted felons lose the right to legally possess firearms. As this case demonstrates, the U.S. Attorney’s Office will continue to work to hold repeat criminal offenders accountable,” said U.S. Attorney Steven D. Weinhoeft.

    According to court documents, a Sesser police officer initiated a traffic stop on Moore’s vehicle on Sept. 10, 2023. After Moore failed a field sobriety test, he fled on foot as officers attempted to take him into custody. He was apprehended after being tased, and a firearm was discovered secured to his ankle.

    Moore had a prior federal conviction from 2007, which prohibited him from legally possessing a firearm. Moore was on federal supervised release at the time of his arrest.

    Moore’s sentencing hearing is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on Oct. 7 at the federal courthouse in Benton. Convictions for felon in possession of a firearm are punishable by up to 15 years’ imprisonment.

    The Sesser Police Department led the investigation with support from ATF. Assistant U.S. Attorneys David Sanders and Tom Leggans are prosecuting the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Four months of Operation Take Back America results in criminal charges against 39 defendants in Alaska

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

    Charges against defendants include serious drug trafficking, firearm and other offenses.

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska – U.S. Attorney Michael J. Heyman announced today the immediate success of Operation Take Back America in Alaska. In just over four months since its inception, the District of Alaska has already criminally charged 39 defendants under Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative to achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations, repel the invasion of illegal immigration, and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime and drug trafficking.

    “Operation Take Back America has already been a huge success in Alaska. By concentrating our efforts on national law enforcement priorities and aggressively charging individuals for perpetrating crimes that most significantly impact public safety, our communities are becoming safer,” said U.S. Attorney Michael J. Heyman for the District of Alaska. “The road ahead will be challenging, but I want to thank our federal, state and local partners for these early successes and look forward to the continued mission.”

    “DEA’s core mission is protecting America from drug traffickers and others who seek to do harm to our communities,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “We are proud to collaborate with our partners in Alaska as we work collectively to aggressively implement Operation Take Back America.  The amazing results so far speak to DEA’s commitment to work with our partners to make Alaska safe.”

    “Transnational criminal organizations responsible for violent crime and drug trafficking in Alaska not only endanger communities, but are also a threat to our national security,” said Special Agent in Charge Rebecca Day of the FBI Anchorage Field Office. “Through Operation Take Back America, Alaskans can expect to see continued results in our mission to disrupt and dismantle criminal enterprises in furtherance of public safety.”

    “When law enforcement agencies at all levels unite, each contributing its distinct strengths, the collective effort enhances the safety of all Americans in the fight against violent crime,” said Special Agent in Charge Jonathan Blais of the ATF Seattle Field Division.

    Among the 28 cases charged between Jan. 21, 2025, and June 10, 2025, the following three cases highlight the impact of Operation Take Back America in Alaska:

    U.S. v. Mobley

    On Nov. 14 and 15, 2024, Sean Mobley, 45, allegedly distributed carfentanil to two people, one adult and one minor. Carfentanil is a highly potent opioid not approved for human use. It is 10,000 times more potent than morphine and 100 times more potent than fentanyl. Both victims allegedly used the substance and overdosed. The adult victim was revived by Narcan, but the minor victim died. Mobley then allegedly dumped her body onto a secluded ATV trail in Wasilla in the middle of the night. If convicted, he faces a minimum of 20 years and up to life in prison.

    U.S. v. Clifton et al

    Between August 2024 and February 2025, Corey Clifton, 51, and Elizabeth Cruickshank, 44, allegedly conspired together, and with others, to distribute and possess with intent to distribute over 4.5 kilograms of fentanyl in Alaska. Specifically, on one occasion, Clifton allegedly shipped a parcel from Washington to Cruickshank in Alaska. The parcel contained over 4.2 kilograms of fentanyl pills (over approximately 42,000 pills) packaged in small baggies with stickers inside drink mix containers. The indictment also alleges that between April 2024 to 2025, Clifton and Cruickshank conspired together to launder over one-half million dollars in drug proceeds. Clifton is also accused of possessing two firearms and ammunition as a felon. If convicted, they face a minimum of 10 years and up to life in prison.

    U.S. v. Kawanishi

    On Oct. 21, 2024, Alexander Kawanishi, 32, allegedly purchased illegal narcotics from an individual at an Anchorage motel. Court documents allege that Kawanishi provided the individual with $100 in cash, but later demanded the money back. When the individual refused, Kawanishi allegedly shot the individual with a pistol in the lower back/hip area before fleeing the scene. On Nov. 15, 2024, law enforcement located Kawanishi slumped over the wheel of a vehicle that was stuck on a snowbank. When Kawanishi woke up and exited the vehicle, he was wearing body armor and had two pistols on his person.  During Kawanishi’s arrest, law enforcement, discovered a third firearm, methamphetamine, fentanyl and cocaine. At the time of the alleged conduct, Kawanishi had two felony convictions in Alaska Superior Court, making him a felon in possession of multiple firearms. If convicted, he faces up to 15 years in prison.

    Below is the full list of cases charged as part of Operation Take Back America in Alaska (in alphabetical order):

    U.S. v. Benson (DT) U.S. v. Melvin(VC) U.S. v. Santiago-Martinez (I)
    U.S. v. Carroll (VC) U.S. v. Miles et al. (DT) U.S. v. Schaefer et al. (DT)
    U.S. v. Clifton et al (DT) U.S. v. Mobley(DT) U.S. v. Cody Severance (VC)
    U.S. v. Cotton(DT) U.S. v. Owens (VC) U.S. v. Sergio Severance (VC)
    U.S. v. Facey(DT) U.S. vs. Parker (DT) U.S. v. Spann (VC)
    U.S. v. Garrett (DT) U.S. v. Ritchie (DT) U.S. v. Steffensen  (DT)
    U.S. v. Greydanus et al. (DT) U.S. v. Rodgers et al. (DT) U.S. v. Walker (VC)
    U.S. v. Katelnikoff et al. (DT) U.S. v. Ronquillo (I) U.S. v. Washington et al. (DT)
    U.S. v. Kawanishi (VC) U.S. v. Rowcroft-Ivy (VC) U.S. v. Woods (DT)
    U.S. v. Lemana (VC)    

    *Drug Trafficking (DT)
    *Violent Crime (VC)
    *Immigration (I)

    In making today’s announcement, U.S. Attorney Heyman commends the FBI Anchorage Field Office, DEA Seattle Field Division, U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Seattle Field Division, U.S. Postal Inspection Service Anchorage Domicile and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations for their investigations that lead to these charges. He also thanks the state and local law enforcement partners that assisted with the operations in these cases.

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys with the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Alaska are prosecuting the cases.

    A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Singaporean PM to visit China

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong will pay an official visit to China from June 22 to 26 at the invitation of Chinese Premier Li Qiang, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson announced on Friday.

    Prime Minister Lawrence Wong chooses China as his first visit destination outside ASEAN since taking office in May, and this fully demonstrates the great importance he attaches to the development of China-Singapore relations, spokesperson Guo Jiakun told a regular press briefing.

    During the visit, Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet with Wong. Premier Li Qiang will hold talks with Wong, and Zhao Leji, chairman of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee, will meet with him. The two sides will engage in an in-depth exchange of views on China-Singapore relations, as well as international and regional issues of mutual concern, Guo said.

    Under the strategic guidance of the leaders of both countries, China-Singapore relations have maintained positive momentum, Guo said, adding that in 2023, the leaders of the two countries announced the establishment of an all-round high-quality future-oriented partnership between China and Singapore, which provides direction for the development of bilateral relations in the new era.

    This year marks the 35th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Singapore, Guo noted, adding that China looks forward to enhancing strategic communication with Singapore through this visit. It is also looking forward to deepening cooperation with Singapore in various fields, jointly upholding multilateralism and free trade, and promoting the greater development of China-Singapore relations at a new starting point. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Steering Committee Meeting of Regional Trial Monitoring Project Shows Unified Commitment to Justice Reform in Kosovo

    Source: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe – OSCE

    Headline: Steering Committee Meeting of Regional Trial Monitoring Project Shows Unified Commitment to Justice Reform in Kosovo

    Steering Committee Meeting of Regional Trial Monitoring Project Shows Unified Commitment to Justice Reform in Kosovo | OSCE

    Skip navigation

    Navigation

    Navigation

    Home Newsroom News and press releases Steering Committee Meeting of Regional Trial Monitoring Project Shows Unified Commitment to Justice Reform in Kosovo

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: UConn Magazine: Educating the Educators

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    It took only a few minutes for Lawrence Ward ’92 (BUS) and Andrea Chapdelaine ’91 MA, ’93 Ph.D. to develop a friendship over, of all things, the construction of Gampel Pavilion.

    As Huskies in the late ’80s to early ’90s, they didn’t know each other, but both lived close to the stadium and watched it being built prior to its 1990 grand opening. Chapdelaine describes watching construction workers eat lunch through the windows of her dorm. Ward vividly recalls chanting U-C-O-N-N with Big Red during the inaugural basketball game — when the UConn men beat St. John’s 72–58.

    “In those days you could walk into the games without a ticket,” Chapdelaine says, moving on to Memorial Stadium memories. “My friends and I always went to the football games — to be seen,” says Ward, laughing.

    In a fateful twist, these two higher education leaders returned to Connecticut to start new jobs last July. Ward left Babson College in Massachusetts to become president of the University of Hartford; Chapdelaine left the presidency of Hood College in Maryland to lead Connecticut College.

    Although they’d been introduced once at an event, this virtual interview is the first chance they’ve had to get to know each other, sharing their views of higher education from the top and the ways they try to balance tremendous responsibilities with some serious fun.

    Q: What drew you to Connecticut? Was it more than the job?

    Chapdelaine: I was in my ninth year as president at Hood and was committed to several more. But I had taught at Trinity in the past, and I loved the similarities at Connecticut College, and also the distinctions. I felt I could do well here, and coming to Connecticut was a bonus. I’m only about an hour from my hometown of Chicopee, Massachusetts, and my husband is from that area too. It’s really nice to be close to family again.

    Ward: There is something special about coming home. My family lived in Hartford since the 1940s. My father escaped the Klan in deep Georgia, and Hartford became his landing place. So for me, it is powerful to come back to the place that was a refuge for my father. The city provided refuge and new beginnings for both of my parents. My mother came to Hartford as a young girl after her father died. My grandmother worked for the Hartford Electric Company here as a chambermaid. I had some of my grandmother’s HELCO service pins made into cufflinks and wore them at my inauguration.

    Read on for more.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Council tax shake-up to deliver fairer billing and support

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Council tax shake-up to deliver fairer billing and support

    Changes to the administration of council tax will make life easier for working people

    • Changes to the administration of council tax will make life easier for working people  

    • 12 monthly payments by default, fairer treatment for those struggling and clearer support for vulnerable households being considered 

    • Part of wider reforms to drive efficiency in local councils, deliver better public services and value for money, as part of the Plan for Change. 

    Working families across the country are set to benefit from these changes to the administration of council tax as government unveils plans to modernise the billing process to make it fairer, simpler and more supportive. 

    More manageable 12 monthly billing by default, action to crack down on punitive punishment for missed payments and fairer treatment for the most vulnerable households are all being considered by the government in the biggest changes to the operation of the council tax system since 1993. 

    The revamp could see better protection for those falling behind on bills by stopping debts spiralling while potentially capping the fees added to debt when going to court and changing  when a household may become liable for a full-year’s bill.  

    The government is already reviewing debt enforcement practices more widely including the conduct of bailiffs, that can be deployed when council tax bills go unpaid, to deliver a fairer system for those in need. 

    Minister for Local Government and English Devolution, Jim McMahon OBE said:  

    As part of our Plan for Change, we’re putting working people first.  

    We are listening and taking action to make council tax fairer, more transparent and easier to manage. Under our plans, local government will be there to support, and not to punish, people who fall behind.

    Today’s move follows a long running campaign by MoneySavingExpert.com founder Martin Lewis and his charity the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute (MMHPI) which have called for action on the “outdated” escalation that can happen when someone falls behind with their Council Tax payments. 

    Martin Lewis, founder of MoneySavingExpert.com and The Money & Mental Health Policy Institute Charity, said:

    Many parts of the Council Tax system are broken, and having called for some of these fixes for nearly 20 years, I’m delighted the government has listened and rapidly launched this long-due consultation, including many of the administration areas I hear the most complaints on.  “Council Tax rapid and aggressive debt collection methods currently hurt millions and disproportionately affect those with mental health problems. Within three weeks of missing a monthly payment many councils say you must pay for the whole year… ridiculous, how can people who can’t afford to pay for a month, suddenly pay for a year? After a further three weeks councils can call bailiffs in and rack up charges on charges. No commercial lender is allowed to behave like this, meaning constituents are treated worse than consumers. Worse, it’s counter-productive, can add to council’s costs and still doesn’t mean people can pay it back. The government has listened to our evidence, and this consultation thankfully looks at slowing it down, adding-in consideration, capping added costs, and pointing people towards help to pay.

    Plus, as council tax bands haven’t been revalued since the stop-gap drive-by valuations first done back in 1991 – while looking at that isn’t in the scope of this consultation – it’s only right that if people think they’re wrongly in too high a band, as 100,000s likely are, the government is consulting on making it easier to challenge, so people can pay the right price. The consultation is also proposing help for some of the most vulnerable – we’ve long campaigned on the horribly-named Severe Mental Impairment discount, which is underclaimed, overcomplex and underpublicised, and this gives an opportunity to move towards a simpler, more universal, less off-putting application process.

    To help vulnerable families manage bills, the government intends to move billing to 12 monthly payments by default, rather than the current 10 monthly, this will spread the annual cost across a longer period meaning lower monthly payments for the average Band D household’s bill by £38 per month. This consultation is part of wider action being taken to support the financial resilience of families in our Child Poverty Strategy. 

    The government plans to modernise support available, including updating the definition of the Severe Mentally Impaired exemption and reviewing  whether current disregards for care workers and apprentices could be improved. Providing more information on what council tax bills are paying for and how to increase awareness of the support available is also being explored to boost transparency.   

    Council tax is essential for funding over 800 vital public services delivered by local authorities daily – but it has failed to keep pace with the changing needs of taxpayers. A renewed, more supportive, council tax billing system will enable households to better manage their bills, keep up with payments and help councils deliver improved front-line services.  

    Further information  

    • Minister McMahon Written Ministerial Statement can be read here. 

    • The consultation can be viewed on Gov.uk here and will be open for 12 weeks. 

    • The Ministry of Justice is also consulting on the regulation of the debt enforcement sector (private bailiffs). Local authorities sometimes use bailiffs when council tax bills go unpaid. The consultation is open until the 21 July and can be found here.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Skunk Captured in Kaka‘ako

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    Skunk Captured in Kaka‘ako

    Posted on Jun 19, 2025 in Main

    NR25-15
    June 19, 2025

    HONOLULU – A live skunk was captured last night at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park by Honolulu police after they responded to a call reporting that a skunk was running around the park near Keawe St. Police contacted the Hawai‘i Department of Agriculture and three agriculture inspectors were dispatched at about 10:30 p.m. When the inspectors arrived at the scene, police officers had contained the skunk in a plastic trash bin. Inspectors took custody of the skunk and it has been humanely euthanized to test for the rabies virus.

    The origin of the skunk is not known; however, the park is adjacent to Honolulu Harbor where skunks have been previously captured after apparently hitchhiking aboard cargo ships. Skunks were spotted and captured by stevedores at Honolulu Harbor in February 2018, January 2021, July 2021 and June 2022.

    On Maui, a live skunk was captured at Kahului Harbor in December 2020 and one was captured at a trucking company in August 2018. Also on Maui, the Department of Land and Natural Resources captured a skunk at Kanahā Pond State Wildlife Sanctuary in August 2022. In February 2023, a Hilo resident caught a skunk in a mongoose trap. All previously captured skunks have tested negative for rabies.

    Skunks are prohibited in Hawai‘i. They are avid egg-eaters and would pose a threat to Hawai‘i’s native ground-nesting birds if they become established. They inhabit the mainland U.S., Canada, South America, Mexico and other parts of the world. In the U.S., they are recognized as one of the four primary wild carriers of rabies, a fatal viral disease of mammals that is often transmitted through the bite of an infected animal. Hawai‘i is the only state in the U.S. and one of the few places in the world that is free of rabies.

    Sightings or captures of illegal and invasive species should be reported to the state’s toll-free Pest Hotline at 808-643-PEST (7378).

    # # #

    Skunk Found at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park

    Skunk found at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: News release on skunk captured at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    News release on skunk captured at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park

    Posted on Jun 19, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom

        

         

    STATE OF HAWAIʻI

    KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI

     

    JOSH GREEN, M.D.
    GOVERNOR

    KE KIAʻĀINA

    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

    ʻOIHANA MAHIʻAI

     

    SHARON HURD
    CHAIRPERSON

    KA LUNA HOʻOKELE

     

    DEAN M. MATSUKAWA
    DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRPERSON

    KA HOPE LUNA HOʻOKELE

     

     

    SKUNK CAPTURED AT KAKA‘AKO WATERFRONT PARK

     

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                       

    June 19, 2025

    NR25-15

    HONOLULU – A live skunk was captured last night at Kaka‘ako Waterfront Park by Honolulu police after they responded to a call reporting that a skunk was running around the park near Keawe St. Police contacted the Hawai‘i Department of Agriculture and three agriculture inspectors were dispatched at about 10:30 p.m. When the inspectors arrived at the scene, police officers had contained the skunk in a plastic trash bin. Inspectors took custody of the skunk and it has been humanely euthanized to test for the rabies virus.

    The origin of the skunk is not known; however, the park is adjacent to Honolulu Harbor where skunks have been previously captured after apparently hitchhiking aboard cargo ships. Skunks were spotted and captured by stevedores at Honolulu Harbor in February 2018, January 2021, July 2021 and June 2022.

    On Maui, a live skunk was captured at Kahului Harbor in December 2020 and one was captured at a trucking company in August 2018. Also on Maui, the Department of Land and Natural Resources captured a skunk at Kanahā Pond State Wildlife Sanctuary in August 2022. In February 2023, a Hilo resident caught a skunk in a mongoose trap. All previously captured skunks have tested negative for rabies.

    Skunks are prohibited in Hawai‘i. They are avid egg-eaters and would pose a threat to Hawai‘i’s native ground-nesting birds if they become established. They inhabit the mainland U.S., Canada, South America, Mexico and other parts of the world. In the U.S., they are recognized as one of the four primary wild carriers of rabies, a fatal viral disease of mammals that is often transmitted through the bite of an infected animal. Hawai‘i is the only state in the U.S. and one of the few places in the world that is free of rabies.

     

    Sightings or captures of illegal and invasive species should be reported to the state’s toll-free Pest Hotline at 808-643-PEST (7378).

    # # #

    Attachments: Two photos of the skunk

    Media Contact:
    Janelle Saneishi
    Public Information Officer
    Hawaiʻi Department of Agriculture
    Phone: 808-973-9560
    Cell: 808-341-5528
    Email:
    [email protected]
    Website:
    http://hdoa.hawaii.gov

    Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information.  Any review, use, disclosure, or distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient(s), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 21, 2025
  • British lawmakers to vote on landmark assisted dying law

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    British lawmakers held their final debate ahead of a historic vote on Friday on whether to legalise assisted dying for terminally ill people, in what would be a major step toward the biggest social reform in the country for a generation.

    The vote is expected at about 2:30 p.m. (1330 GMT) and if it goes in favour, the proposed new law will have cleared its biggest parliamentary hurdle. That would pave the way for Britain to follow Australia, Canada and other countries, as well as some U.S. states in permitting assisted dying.

    A vote against would stop the bill in its tracks.

    Last November, lawmakers voted 330 to 275 in favour of the principle of allowing assisted dying, but since then the bill has been scrutinised and amended, and some lawmakers have publicly changed their position, citing changes to provisions that they say weaken protections for vulnerable people.

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government is neutral on the legislation meaning politicians can vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Last year, Starmer voted in favour of the legislation and has indicated he continues to support it.

    The law was proposed under a process led by an individual member of parliament rather than being government policy, which has limited the amount of parliamentary time allocated to it.

    Some lawmakers have said that such a major social change should be allocated more parliamentary time for debate and involve a greater degree of ministerial involvement and accountability.

    If Friday’s vote is in favour, assisted dying stays on the road to legalisation, a process that could still take months.

    The Labour lawmaker who proposed the new law, Kim Leadbeater, said there could be a reduction in the number of members of parliament who support the bill on Friday compared with last year’s vote, but that she was confident it would still be approved.

    Opening the debate, Leadbeater said that the legislation was “desperately needed” and would provide dignity and compassion to people suffering. She argued it had robust safeguards that made it practical and safe.

    “This is not a choice between living and dying. It is a choice for terminally ill people about how they die,” she said.

    On Thursday, four Labour lawmakers switched sides to oppose the bill, joining the dozens who earlier this month said there had not been enough time to debate the details of such a consequential law change.

    “The bill before us simply does not do enough to safeguard people who may want to choose to live,” the four lawmakers said in a letter.

    Leadbeater said her biggest fear was that if the legislation was voted down, it could be another decade before the issue returns to parliament. It was last considered in 2015, when lawmakers voted against it.

    PUBLIC SUPPORT

    Opinion polls show that a majority of Britons back assisted dying, and supporters say the law needs to catch up with public opinion.

    Under the proposed law, mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months or less to live would be given the right to end their lives with medical help.

    In the original plan, an assisted death would have required court approval. That has been replaced by a requirement for a judgement by a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist, which is seen by some as a watering down.

    Lawmakers have also raised questions about the impact of assisted dying on the finances and resources of Britain’s state-run National Health Service and on the need to improve palliative care.

    If the vote passes, the proposed new law is sent to the House of Lords, parliament’s upper chamber. But the unelected Lords will be reluctant to block legislation that has been passed by elected members of the House of Commons.

    (Reuters)

    June 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Martyrs Fund and principle of budgetary unity – E-002882/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The EU bilateral allocation for Palestine[1] under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument — Global Europe amounted to approximately EUR 1.36 billion for 2021-2024.

    During this period, commitments to the Mécanisme Palestino-Européen de Gestion de l’Aide Socio-Économique (PEGASE mechanism), for direct financial support to the Palestinian Authority (PA), amounted to EUR 516.75 million (yearly average approximately EUR 130 million).

    The overall EU funding for 2021-2024 supported the financing of the most essential services for Palestinians, contributed to the PA’s recurrent expenditures, via PEGASE, by supporting payments of salaries for civil servants, social allowance payments, funding for the East Jerusalem hospitals, and also supported various development projects and financial assistance to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees .

    The EU has never contributed to the Palestinian ‘Martyr Fund’ of the PA, which was discontinued with the new social protection law entering into force on 10 February 2025[2].

    The PA was running the Prisoner’s Fund off-budget, while PEGASE contributed to the budget of the PA. The Commission’s extended screening vetting system ensured that no EU funding went to the beneficiaries of the Prisoners Fund. The detainees and families (a list is provided by the PA) were categorically excluded from any payment made through PEGASE.

    Finally, Member States’ contributions to the EU budget are not earmarked for specific purposes. Instead, they are pooled and allocated proportionally across all expenditure categories.

    • [1]  This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual positions of the Member States on this issue.
    • [2]  Decree-Law No. (4) of 2025, which amends Decree-Law No. (1) of 2019 regarding the Palestinian National Economic Empowerment Institution.
    Last updated: 19 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Colombia: One year on, women searchers for victims of enforced disappearance are still waiting for the country to deliver for them

    Source: Amnesty International –

    • A year ago, the Colombian government approved Law 2364 of 2024, recognizing the work and rights of women searchers for victims of enforced disappearance. National and international social organizations are calling on the government to make progress on its implementation. 
    • According to official sources, between 100,000 and 200,000 persons have been forcibly disappeared in Colombia. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has recorded that even today one person disappears every 36 hours in the country. Their loved ones dedicate their lives to search for them in the midst of violence. Most of those searching are women. 
    • Amnesty International acknowledges that Colombia marked a first in the world when it approved this law, but a year has now gone by, and implementation is still pending. Organizations of women searchers such as the Nydia Erika Bautista Foundation emphasize that the risks and threats involved in searching make progress in the implementation of the law a matter of urgency. 

    Bogotá, 18 June 2025. A year ago, the Colombian government passed Law 2364 of 2024, which recognizes and provides for the integral protection of the work and rights of women searchers for victims of enforced disappearance. The Congress of the Republic debated and approved this law following the advocacy initiative of organizations of women searchers throughout the country. Amnesty International joined the Nydia Erika Bautista Foundation and the many other organizations of women searchers for forcibly disappeared persons in Colombia to demand that the law be implemented and the promise of state protection for the women who dedicate their lives to searching for their loved ones in the midst of violence be upheld.

    Although social organizations acknowledge the importance of Colombia having a law that recognizes and protects women searchers, it is concerning that the timelines provided for its implementation have not yet been met one year on. The law mandated the government to issue a regulatory decree on the participation of women searchers in developing, applying and evaluating public peace policies within three months from its entry into force. It also granted the Ministry of Health and Social Protection a period of six months for regulating access to age-related health and social protection programmes for women searchers, and the ministries of Internal Affairs and Equality the same period for promoting prevention and protection measures to ensure their safety. Finally, the law mandated that the government develop regulations for a Single Register of Women Searchers – to be managed by the Victims Unit (UARIV) – within one year, but such register has not yet been created. 

    The Nydia Erika Bautista Foundation and Amnesty International have emphasized that it is crucial that the regulations governing the law, which are currently being developed, are finalized and implemented, as significant risks persist in the search for disappeared persons. 

    MIL OSI NGO –

    June 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Emergency measures to combat avian influenza in Poland, part 3 – E-001522/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The animal health measures (including regionalisation measures with movement restrictions) available to combat animal diseases relevant for Union intervention are laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/429[1] (Animal Health Law) and its delegated and implementing acts.

    As the epidemiological situation of different diseases evolve continuously, harmonised measures are regularly discussed and decided at the Standing Committee of Plants, Animals Food and Feed[2] (the Committee).

    The Commission is aware that during the last months Poland has faced a specific deterioration in the epidemiological situation regarding highly pathogenic avian influenza in poultry, having difficulties in controlling the disease in certain areas with high density of poultry establishments.

    As a consequence of that situation, the Polish competent authorities are implementing certain national measures in the zones of major concern.

    These measures were agreed with the Commission and presented at the Committee. These measures aim to contain the spread of the disease and operate within the framework of EU rules, according to the Animal Health Law.

    The Commission then adopted Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/896[3], amending the annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447[4], demarcating the areas listed as protection, surveillance and further restricted zone in view of the evolution of the disease situation.

    As stated above, the corresponding extent of restrictions is updated regularly according to the evolution of the epidemiological situation.

    • [1] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj.
    • [2] https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/2f28853a-4693-4f9a-aca3-ee464dc2cdac_en?filename=reg-com_ahw_20250328_pres-18.pdf.
    • [3] http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/896/oj.
    • [4] http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2023/2447/oj.
    Last updated: 20 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Green Deal undermining the operational efficiency of police forces – E-001286/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The EU’s net greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 and the climate neutrality target by 2050, enshrined in the European Climate Law, require a swift decrease in emissions from all sectors. The regulation on CO2 emission standards for new passenger cars and vans[1] sets targets for the average emissions per manufacturer, which get stricter over time, up to a 100% emission reduction target for new vehicles registered in the EU from 2035 onwards. The regulation creates long-term certainty so that investments can be channelled in clean technologies, new value chains in the EU, recharging infrastructure, and the reskilling of users.

    Over the past years, the efficiency and range of zero-emission vehicles has steadily improved — reaching an average of close to 350 km already in 2022[2], and the availability of recharging and refuelling infrastructure has strongly increased. As the technology develops, further improvements of these aspects are expected in the coming years.

    2. The Commission notes that the above-mentioned Regulation does not impose the use of any specific technology.

    3. The EU is not competent to determine the specific working conditions and equipment used by law enforcement authorities, including the type of patrol cars they use. It is for the relevant national authorities to do so.

    • [1] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/631/2024-01-01.
    • [2] https://alternative-fuels-observatory.ec.europa.eu/policymakers-and-public-authorities/electric-vehicle-model-statistics.
    Last updated: 20 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Thursday, 19 June 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

    Source: European Parliament

    Verbatim report of proceedings
     391k  736k
    Thursday, 19 June 2025 – Strasbourg
    1. Resumption of the sitting
      2. Institutional and political implications of the EU enlargement process and global challenges (debate)
      3. The United Kingdom accession to the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (debate)
      4. Resumption of the sitting
      5. Voting time
        5.1. Media freedom in Georgia, particularly the case of Mzia Amaglobeli (RC-B10-0282/2025, B10-0282/2025, B10-0283/2025, B10-0287/2025, B10-0288/2025, B10-0289/2025, B10-0290/2025, B10-0295/2025) (vote)
        5.2. Case of Ahmadreza Jalali in Iran (RC-B10-0284/2025, B10-0280/2025, B10-0284/2025, B10-0285/2025, B10-0286/2025, B10-0296/2025, B10-0299/2025, B10-0300/2025) (vote)
        5.3. Dissolution of political parties and the crackdown on the opposition in Mali (RC-B10-0291/2025, B10-0281/2025, B10-0291/2025, B10-0292/2025, B10-0293/2025, B10-0294/2025, B10-0297/2025, B10-0298/2025) (vote)
        5.4. Welfare of dogs and cats and their traceability (A10-0104/2025 – Veronika Vrecionová) (vote)
        5.5. Electricity grids: the backbone of the EU energy system (A10-0091/2025 – Anna Stürgkh) (vote)
        5.6. Clean Industrial Deal (B10-0277/2025, B10-0278/2025) (vote)
        5.7. The United Kingdom accession to the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (B10-0273/2025) (vote)
      6. Resumption of the sitting
      7. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
      8. Protecting bees: advancing the EU’s New Deal for Pollinators (debate)
      9. Oral explanations of vote (Rule 201)
        9.1. Electricity grids: the backbone of the EU energy system (A10-0091/2025 – Anna Stürgkh)
        9.2. Clean Industrial Deal (B10-0277/2025, B10-0278/2025)
      10. Explanations of votes in writing (Rule 201)
      11. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted
      12. Dates of the next part-session
      13. Closure of the sitting
      14. Adjournment of the session

       

    SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE
    Priekšsēdētāja vietnieks

     
    1. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Sēde tika atsākta plkst. 09.00.)

     

    2. Institutional and political implications of the EU enlargement process and global challenges (debate)

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, the global balance of power is shifting rapidly, challenging our democratic values and institutions. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine is a stark reminder of the importance of enlargement. Now, more than ever, a larger and stronger EU is a strategic imperative. It is clearly in the EU’s interests. Both the EU and future Member States should be ready at the time of accession.

    In March last year, the Commission therefore adopted a first communication of the pre‑enlargement policy reviews covering four strands: values, policies, budget and governance. That communication was our contribution to the discussion that led to the adoption by EU leaders of a roadmap for future work on enlargement and reform in June 2024.

    In July last year, President von der Leyen announced that the new college will present the pre‑enlargement policy reviews focusing on individual sectors such as the rule of law, the single market, food security, defence and security, climate and energy, and migration, as well as social, economic and territorial cohesion more broadly.

    As announced in our work programme for 2025, the Commission is currently carrying out in-depth policy reviews in view of future enlargement. Allow me to make a few comments without prejudging the outcome of the reviews, in particular on institutional reform.

    Mr President, honourable Members, I am aware that the question of institutional reform and treaty change has been key to Parliament in particular during the last legislature. In November 2023, this House adopted a resolution with proposals for amendments of the treaties. As President von der Leyen stated in her political guidelines, we need treaty change where it can improve our Union. So in order to prepare the Union for enlargement, we need to examine all options, starting with using the full potential of the current treaties.

    We first need to focus on what can already be done under the current treaties. In that regard, the Commission believes we need to extend the use of qualified majority voting in the Council in some areas, moving away from unanimity. This could in particular mean activating so-called passerelle clauses. The position of the Commission is well known: if the Union wants to play its role quickly, efficiently and therefore strategically, we need we need to decrease the number of decisions where unanimity is needed. But we also need to acknowledge the sensitivities among Member States on this topic. We have to discuss the question of unanimity with the objective of finding a way to address Member States’ legitimate concerns.

    We remain committed to engage in a constructive dialogue with both Parliament and the Council on these important matters. The Commission welcomes the ongoing reflections on these issues in the AFCO Committee, and in particular, the upcoming report on the institutional consequences of the EU enlargement negotiations.

     
       

     

      Željana Zovko, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, u posljednja dva desetljeća Europska unija suočila se s nizom kriza: od financijske krize 2008., preko migrantske krize 2015., do pandemije COVID-a te rata u Ukrajini. Unatoč svemu, Europska unija je iz tih izazova izašla izgubivši samo jednu članicu, ali sačuvala je jedinstvo svojih temeljnih vrijednosti.

    Kao posljednja zemlja koja je pristupila Europskoj uniji, Hrvatska itekako dobro zna koliko je vrijedilo prolaziti kroz nužne reforme i ispunjavati kriterije za punopravno članstvo te na kraju, u ključnim trenucima imati zaštitu i sigurnost koju članstvo u Europskoj uniji donosi.

    S jedne strane imamo zemlje Istočnog partnerstva koje zbog svojih demokratskih težnji plaćaju visoku cijenu životima svojih građana zbog autoritativnih režima u susjedstvu. S druge strane, zemlje zapadnog Balkana koje su već prošle kroz ratna razaranja, a danas su žrtve birokratske inertnosti Europske unije i neriješenih povijesnih nesuglasica koje usporavaju njihovu integraciju i potkopavaju njihovu institucionalnu obnovu.

    Poštovane kolege, naš najveći izazov danas je nedostatak vizije. Vizije koja će Uniju vratiti njezinim izvorištima – ideji mira i sigurnosti, ne samo unutar Europske unije već i na njezinim granicama. Ako zemlje kandidatkinje ostavimo u rukama onih koji žele razgraditi Europu izvana i iznutra, mir i sigurnost više neće imati tko braniti. Naš ego mora odstupiti pred zajedničkom odgovornošću u odnosima stare i nove Europe.

    Često se postavlja pitanje je li moguće proširenje bez produbljenja. Ta dilema je apsurdna. Nijedan čovjek nije otok, kako je rekao engleski pjesnik John Donne. Tako ni jedna zemlja ne može sama. Od samih početaka europskog kontinenta stvarale su se unije s ciljem zaštite građana. Najuspješniji projekt u toj povijesti upravo je Europska unija, koja je kroz proces proširenja postala najpoželjnije mjesto za življenje. Kao što se naš mir brani na ukrajinskoj granici, tako se i naša sigurnost čuva na granicama zapadnog Balkana.

    Ovo nije mjesto na kojem odlučujemo tko je više, a tko manje privilegiran da bude Europljanin. Ovo je mjesto na kojem odlučujemo što mi možemo učiniti za Europsku uniju kako bi ostala kao projekt mira, solidarnosti i pomirenja.

     
       

     

      Kathleen Van Brempt, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, EU enlargement – when it’s done right – is a game changer. It brings peace, prosperity, strength across Europe. And today, with Russia tightening its grip in the Western Balkans and Eastern Partnership countries, the stakes are even higher.

    The momentum is real and we cannot afford to make the same mistakes we made in the past. So no shortcuts on our values. The rule of law, independent courts, freedom of speech, freedom of media, fundamental rights, democracy: they are non-negotiable. Even now – especially now – if a candidate country slides back on these values, we must act.

    When Serbia’s President shows up at Putin’s parade, while silencing democracy back home, the EU must respond. No more appeasement! Our credibility is on the line, and so is Serbia’s future.

    And at the same time – as you mentioned, Commissioner – we need to reform ourselves. We can’t demand from others when we ignore it ourselves. We need stronger tools to address democratic backsliding in the EU itself.

    And let’s be honest: enlargement means readiness on our side, too. As candidate countries prepare, so must we, by reforming our institutions in parallel, updating the EU budget, making it fit for a bigger Union and, yes, moving beyond unanimity, as you mentioned.

    Dear Commissioner, people also need to see the benefits of enlargement – both in the EU and in the candidate and future Member States. So let’s act: speed up access to the single market, give candidate countries observer seats in the EU institutions and let them be part of the project as they work towards full membership.

    And I would like you to convey the message to the Commissioner for Enlargement that she has the backing of the S&D Group to do all that in the coming months and years.

     
       

     

      Kinga Gál, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! A Patrióták nem támogatják a bővítéspolitika geopolitikai érdekek szerinti gyorsítását. Ez hitelteleníti az Uniót a térség azon országainak szemében, mint a Nyugat-Balkán országai, amelyek évek óta kitartóan dolgoznak a tagság feltételeinek teljesítésén.

    Nem ez az első eset, hogy az Unió politikai iránytűje rossz irányba fordul, figyelmen kívül hagyva az európai polgárok valós érdekeit. Például szükséges lenne, hogy a Bizottság haladéktalanul készítsen egy átfogó hatástanulmányt Ukrajna esetleges csatlakozásának várható következményeiről. Ukrajna semmilyen csatlakozási kritériumnak nem felel meg. Egy háború sújtotta országról beszélünk, így a gyorsított csatlakozásával a háborút is importálnánk. Elégtelen például a nemzeti kisebbségi jogok helyzete. Az ukrán munkaerő beáramlása veszélyezteti a munkahelyeket, az agrártermékek tömeges beáradása és az agrártámogatások elvesztése pedig a gazdák megélhetését. Aránytalanul nagymértékben vonnának el kohéziós forrásokat más tagállamoktól.

    Az emberek feje felett nem születhetnek meg elhamarkodott döntések. Ezért kezdeményeztünk Magyarországon, Európában egyedülálló módon véleménynyilvánító népszavazást erről. Nem engedjük, hogy a kierőltetett ukrán uniós tagság árát a magyar emberek fizessék meg, mint ahogy azt sem engedhetjük meg, hogy újabb lopakodó hatáskörelvonással csorbuljon a szuverenitásunk. A bővítéspolitikában csak egyhangúsággal lehet döntéseket hozni, nem pedig a tagállamokat megkerülve, politikai alapon. Ez a tagállamok és az egész Unió alapvető érdeke.

     
       

     

      Alberico Gambino, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, l’allargamento dell’Unione europea è una delle grandi sfide geopolitiche e politiche del nostro tempo. Non riguarda solo i paesi candidati. Riguarda il futuro dell’Europa stessa e la sua capacità di essere protagonista nello scenario globale, di difendere i suoi interessi e garantire stabilità.

    L’Italia ha sempre sostenuto con convinzione il cammino europeo dei Balcani occidentali e degli altri paesi candidati. Ma è giusto che questo percorso sia serio, graduale, basato su impegni concreti e su un’autentica volontà di avvicinamento ai valori e agli standard europei. Perché chi chiede di entrare nell’Unione deve dimostrare di voler essere parte integrante di una comunità politica, non solo economica.

    In questo processo strumenti come Twinning, TAIEX e il Fondo INCE, che l’Italia finanzia interamente, hanno un ruolo fondamentale. Progetti reali che aiutano questi paesi a costruire amministrazioni solide, capaci ed efficienti.

    Ma l’allargamento è anche una questione strategica, vista la situazione geopolitica che viviamo, piena di instabilità e di minacce ibride. Rafforzare i legami con i paesi del vicinato è anche un modo per rendere più sicura e resiliente l’Unione europea.

    L’Italia continuerà a contribuire con determinazione a questo percorso comune. In questo scenario è l’intera Europa che deve riaffermare il proprio ruolo da protagonista, promuovendo un allargamento che sia realmente utile, credibile e sostenibile.

     
       

     

      Sandro Gozi, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, chaque jour on fait le constat d’une Union pas assez efficace, pas assez puissante et pas assez démocratique. Ceci est d’autant plus vrai face aux défis de l’unification continentale et du nouveau désordre mondial. Comment pouvons-nous convaincre nos citoyens et nous-mêmes que tout d’un coup, l’Europe peut survivre à ces nouveaux défis sans résoudre les anciens problèmes?

    Nous avons besoin d’une Union plus efficace, avec moins de veto et plus de vote à la majorité, d’une Union plus puissante, avec plus de ressources pour une véritable Europe de la défense et des investissements. D’une Union plus démocratique avec une nouvelle loi électorale. Si les réformes sont nécessaires à 27, elles le deviennent encore plus dans une Union à 30, 32 ou davantage de pays. Il n’y a jamais eu un élargissement dans l’histoire de l’Union européenne qui n’a pas été précédé par des réformes institutionnelles et des réformes des traités.

    Donc, je dis à la Commission: plus de courage, plus de courage. Soyez explicites, vous savez bien que la réforme des traités est nécessaire. Assumez vos responsabilités et, ensemble, réformons l’Union pour unifier l’Europe.

     
       

     

      Daniel Freund, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zwischen Trumps America First und Putins Angriffen auf Zivilisten in der Ukraine – es zeigt doch: Wir brauchen ein stärkeres Europa. Bei allen großen Fragen unserer Zeit, ob nun beim Kampf gegen den Klimawandel, dafür zu sorgen, dass auch die größten Konzerne ihren fairen Anteil an Steuern zahlen, und leider ja auch wieder bei der Frage, für die die Europäische Union mal gegründet wurde – die Frage von Stabilität, von Frieden, von Freiheit, von Demokratie auf diesem Kontinent –, bei all diesen Fragen können wir wenig bis gar nichts machen ohne eine starke Europäische Union. Kleinstaaterei ist ein Sicherheitsrisiko. Nur gemeinsam sind wir stark. Wir können auch den Verteidigungshaushalt von Estland oder Litauen verdoppeln, wir können ihn verdreifachen – es wird Putin nicht abschrecken.

    Was Putin abschrecken wird, ist, wenn wir in Europa stärker zusammenarbeiten – auch in Verteidigungsfragen. Und vor allen Dingen, wenn wir ein paar grundsätzliche Konstruktionsfehler der Europäischen Union endlich angehen. Die Einstimmigkeit abzuschaffen, die ist doch das größte Geschenk an Putin: Er muss nur einen einzigen von 27 Staats- und Regierungschefs bestechen, erpressen, irgendwie auf seine Seite ziehen.

    Wir müssen endlich bei der Demokratie Fortschritte machen. Denn wenn die Demokratie von außen und von innen angegriffen wird, dann müssen wir doch in der Europäischen Union damit reagieren, dass wir die EU demokratischer machen, dass wir endlich ein Initiativrecht bekommen für dieses Europäische Parlament, dass wir endlich wirkliche Europawahlen bekommen, dass wir endlich sehen können, was die Regierungen im Rat eigentlich genau machen, wo stimmen sie zu, wo lehnen sie ab. Und für all diese Fragen braucht es am Ende Vertragsänderungen, und das wollen die Bürgerinnen und Bürger; die Zustimmungswerte für die Europäische Union sind so hoch, wie wir sie noch nie gesehen haben in der Geschichte der Europäischen Union. Lassen Sie uns diesen Moment nutzen!

    Das Europäische Parlament hat ja bereits Vorschläge gemacht. Wir wollen die Verträge ändern. Und wenn wir es am Ende ernst meinen mit unserem Versprechen an die Ukraine, an den Balkan, an die Länder, die in die Europäische Union wollen, wenn wir dieses Versprechen ernst meinen, dann müssen wir die Verträge ändern. Und es ist der Rat, der blockiert, der heute nicht mal hier zu dieser Debatte auftaucht, Sonntagsreden hält, am Ende aber nicht das liefert, was die Bürgerinnen und Bürger wollen. Das müssen wir angehen.

     
       

     

      Anthony Smith, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Madame la Commissaire, l’élargissement ne sera un succès que s’il est au service des peuples et de l’amélioration des conditions de vie, et non uniquement vu comme un outil géopolitique au service de votre logique bloc contre bloc, logique guerrière qui est à des années-lumière des aspirations des peuples d’Europe. La clé du succès de l’élargissement sera d’abord conditionnée par une Europe plus démocratique, avec des institutions au service des citoyens et non un marché au service des industriels.

    Mais, disons le d’emblée, votre Union européenne peut aujourd’hui se résumer à un ensemble de moyens permettant une concurrence libre et non faussée au service d’une vision impérialiste. Notre Europe, celle que nous défendons, porte un projet de paix, de partage des richesses, de démocratie, d’accueil et d’humanité. À l’heure où les extrêmes droites arbitrent les décisions de notre institution, nous ne pouvons que constater les régressions de toutes parts, acclamées par les conservateurs et par les libéraux.

    Voilà l’Europe que vous proposez aux peuples de notre continent, celle de la catastrophe climatique et de la pauvreté généralisée, celle de la corruption et des discriminations, bref, une union à l’image d’Orbán et de Nawrocki. L’accueil de nouveaux États doit se faire autour d’un socle commun ambitieux de droits sociaux dans lequel la démocratie sociale, et notamment la négociation collective, doivent jouer tout leur rôle. Sinon, c’est l’exploitation des travailleurs, la course au moins‑disant social et environnemental qui s’imposera.

    Cela exige que les aides de préadhésion servent aussi à construire cette Europe du commun, avec des institutions fortes, transparentes, intègres, des inspections efficaces, des systèmes judiciaires indépendants. L’élargissement doit être un levier de construction d’un continent plus juste, où les droits sociaux et les contre-pouvoirs démocratiques soient la règle, qui rejette la concurrence généralisée, le dumping social, la corruption. En un mot, pas d’élargissement sans projet social ambitieux.

     
       

     

      Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik, w imieniu grupy ESN. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Ostatnie rozszerzenie Unii Europejskiej miało miejsce w 2013 r., gdy do Wspólnoty dołączyła Chorwacja. W kolejce do wejścia w tym momencie czeka 10 państw. Tylko pytanie: do czego jest ta kolejka? Od 2015 r. Unia Europejska pogrąża się w coraz większym kryzysie. To wtedy najeźdźcy napływali masowo do Europy, niszcząc bezpieczeństwo wewnętrzne Grecji i Włoch w nieodwracalny sposób. To była pierwsza fala uderzeniowa multikulti. Fala, której skutki odczuwamy do dziś.

    Od tego momentu Unia Europejska ma twarz Junckera, który pijany wychodził na międzynarodowe konferencje. Ma twarz Timmermansa, który zaciekle atakował Polskę i Węgry i bardzo agresywnie forsował szkodliwą, niebezpieczną, zieloną politykę. Unia Europejska ma twarz korupcji, autorytarnego zamordyzmu, moralnego zepsucia, lobbingu zagranicznego, niebezpieczeństwa, głupoty i nakrętek przymocowanych do plastikowych butelek. Unia Europejska ma twarz Ursuli von der Leyen, która nie nadąża za światowymi zmianami i pcha Europę ku samozagładzie.

    To nie jest ta sama Unia Europejska, do której Polska wchodziła w 2004 r. Wchodziliśmy na konkretnych zasadach, które dziś leżą w koszu, zastąpione autorytaryzmem i lewacką agendą. Dziś Unia Europejska przestaje być dobrym miejscem do życia. I pytanie: czy do takiej struktury rzeczywiście jakieś państwo chce wejść i powinno wejść? Najpierw trzeba Unię Europejską naprawić.

    Musimy wrócić do naszego DNA, do wspólnoty suwerennych państw narodowych. Cywilizacja życia musi wygrać z cywilizacją śmierci. Musimy ochronić nasze rodziny, nasze bezpieczeństwo i nasze granice. W przeciwnym razie po prostu nie będzie do czego wchodzić. I tyle.

     
       

     

      Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Mr President, I’ll start with a Ursula von der Leyen quote: ‘EU enlargement is an investment in our collective security’. I completely agree. A bit late, but very true words.

    One of the reasons why Putin started this war is the grey areas of insecurity in Europe. If we had had such an understanding and decisions, at least immediately after the annexation of Crimea, there is a high probability that Ukraine would not be attacked today.

    Not too late. We have that chance. It is necessary to seek consensus in our societies that enlargement is as important for the future of the EU as defence. In essence, enlargement is an integral part of our defence union. The unification of the European continent on the basis of democracies is in our own interests. Either a larger, secure, strong EU or Russia and China closer to our borders.

    Such an understanding requires leaders in each Member State. That’s why I end my speech with a James Freeman Clark quote: ‘A politician thinks of the next election, a statesman of the next generation’. At least, let’s think about both, about the elections and about the next generations.

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

     
       

     

      Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, hace escasas fechas, el 12 de junio, se cumplieron cuarenta años de la adhesión de España y Portugal a las entonces Comunidades Europeas.

    Esto muestra con claridad el éxito de la política de ampliación, ¿verdad? Porque supuso no solamente un impulso a reformas políticas y a la modernización económica, sino también, y sobre todo, a la estabilización de las democracias en los dos países ibéricos, que contribuyeron desde su adhesión a mejorar la construcción europea.

    De modo que la política de cohesión debe muchísimo a España y Portugal. El refuerzo de la política agrícola y también la ciudadanía y el programa Erasmus tienen, por tanto, una deuda clara con esta adhesión.

    Pero, cuarenta años después, la Unión Europea creció. ¡Vaya si creció! Llegamos a ser veintiocho, y ahora somos veintisiete. Pero hay, al menos en estos momentos, candidatos en la lista de espera hasta sumar treinta y cinco.

    Y lo primero que hace falta es un ejercicio de realismo, no engañarse con placebos. Es una hipocresía que Turquía continúe formalmente en la lista de espera como país candidato, cuando es evidente que hace tiempo que abandonó toda expectativa y se ha cualificado como un actor regional por sí mismo.

    Pero hay otros países candidatos a los que hay que exigir, por supuesto, la adhesión a los valores europeos: artículo 2 del Tratado; esa idea europea de democracia que incluye pluralismo, que incluye pluralismo informativo, que incluye independencia judicial y estrategias contra la corrupción.

    Y, por eso, la adhesión tiene que ser muy exigente. Pero, para empezar, tiene que ser exigente para la propia Unión Europea. Y esto exige, si queremos ser treinta y cinco, cambiar los métodos de decisión. Porque, si el contraste entre nuestros objetivos y ambiciones proclamados y nuestro método de decisión disfuncional e impracticable es insoportable a veintisiete, ¿cómo será a treinta y cinco?

    Lo pone de manifiesto Hungría: cuando hace falta unanimidad, Hungría es el missing link, el eslabón fallido de la cadena, y obliga a todos los demás a formar una coalition of the willing para hacer lo que Hungría veta.

    Por tanto, es imprescindible un ejercicio de seriedad para que esa reforma institucional sea previa a toda ampliación de la construcción europea. Esa es la exigencia.

     
       

     

      António Tânger Corrêa (PfE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caros colegas, o alargamento é estrategicamente essencial para a União Europeia.

    Nós falamos por nós próprios e por aquilo que Portugal ganhou em aderir à União Europeia, e queremos que os outros países candidatos também ganhem quando aderirem à União Europeia. Mas essa adesão tem de ser feita no estrito cumprimento dos critérios de Copenhaga e nos timings exatamente iguais uns aos outros. Não deve haver primeiras e segundas velocidades, não deve haver filhos e enteados nessa adesão, por um lado.

    Por outro lado, é preciso que nós arrumemos a casa –– a nossa casa europeia –– porque a nossa casa europeia, como qualquer outra casa, precisa de manutenção, e essa manutenção não tem sido feita. Essa manutenção é absolutamente necessária, antes de qualquer alargamento.

    Temos de rever os Tratados, temos de rever a nossa própria União e os princípios e valores pelos quais nos regemos, pois muitos anos se passaram desde o início deste grande projeto que é a União Europeia, e o mundo mudou. O mundo global mudou.

    Estrategicamente, temos outros desafios que não tínhamos nessa altura, e é preciso enfrentar esses desafios de uma forma mais moderna, mais proativa e, principalmente, de uma forma mais eficaz e ativa para nós próprios europeus.

    Portanto, queria deixar aqui esta mensagem e dizer sim ao alargamento, mas a um alargamento à medida do século XXI e não a um alargamento à medida do século XX.

     
       

     

      Ивайло Вълчев (ECR). – Г-н Зиле, г-жо Захариева, ще започна с един цитат от г-жа Марта Кос. Тя наскоро заяви, че Македония е цитирам „тъжна приказка“. Тя забрави обаче да спомене, че на Балканите ние имаме една поговорка: „Каквото си направиш сам и Господ не може да ти го направи“.

    Ситуацията, в която се намира Скопие в момента, е резултат единствено и само на техните собствени действия или по-право – бездействия. Днес Скопие можеше да бъде рамо до рамо с Тирана и Подгорица, можеха да бъдат здраво стъпили на своя европейски път. Не го направиха, защото в крайна сметка не искат. Няма отстъпки, които биха довели до това те да изпълнят своите вече поети ангажименти. Ето защо аз бих помолил госпожа Кос следващия път да попита правителството в Скопие директно: „Искате ли да бъдете част от Европейския съюз или не?“ Защото отговорът е прост: ако искате, просто изпълнете своите ангажименти. България вече направи компромиси и няма да отстъпи и на йота от тях, защото няма причина да вярва, че официално Скопие ще промени политиката си и говора си на омраза спрямо българите и България.

    Последните събития – присъдата срещу Любчо Георгиевски и тежкото състояние на македонските българи, са най добрата илюстрация за това защо искахме допълнителните условия от Скопие в преговорната рамка.

     
       

     

      Thomas Waitz (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, in times of rising authoritarianism, in times where we see brutal warfare in our immediate neighbourhood on European soil, if we European states want to defend our way of life, the rule of law, democracy, human rights, we have to stand together and we have to speak with a united voice. And yes, for this, we need to rethink whether majority voting in terms of foreign policy should not be the next step for reforms.

    But we also have to see that most of these countries that are seeking accession are making great progress. And we have two candidate states that have a realistic chance to join this European Union until 2028: clearly Montenegro and maybe – if they keep the ambition – Albania. I want to say these are two countries that have been reliable partners, that have been sharing our CFSP, so foreign policy, standpoints. They have shown their commitment to the European Union and they have a realistic chance to come as 28th and 29th members into the European Union.

    Yes, we need reforms of the Treaty, but we also need a signal to the region that enlargement is possible based on merits, based on the rule of law, but that we’re acting in terms of enlargement and we’re not kicking the can down the road when it comes to reforms. So, let’s keep the door open for Montenegro and Albania. The region needs this signal.

     
       

     

      Li Andersson (The Left). – Arvoisa puhemies, oikeistolaiset voimat tekevät tällä hetkellä parhaansa muuttaakseen EU:n sellaiseksi, mitä se huonoimmillaan voi olla: vain markkinoiden ja suuryritysten unioniksi. Mutta Itä-Euroopassa ja Balkanilla monet katsovat meitä kuitenkin toisesta syystä. He hakevat turvallisuutta poliittisesta yhteistyöstä. He haluavat vahvaa suojaa oikeusvaltioperiaatteelle, ihmisoikeuksille ja riittäville ympäristövaatimuksille.

    Putinin autoritaarisuuden voimistuessa ihmiset ovat valmiita lähtemään kaduille puolustamaan oikeuttaan valita, vapauttaan ja eurooppalaisia arvoja, ja siksi laajentuminen on nyt niin tärkeä kysymys.

    Kysymys on myös Ukrainasta. Jos ja kun ukrainalaiset haluavat liittyä EU:hun, meidän on oltava valmiina toivottamaan heidät tervetulleeksi. Samalla meidän tulee varmistaa, että jäsenyyskriteerit täyttyvät. Me tarvitsemme avointa keskustelua laajentumisen tuomista muutoksista unionin päätöksentekoon ja budjettiin.

    Mutta aiempien laajentumisprosessien virheistä pitää myös oppia. Tarvitsemme parempia välineitä ja yhteisiä digitaalisia järjestelmiä rajatylittävän työvoiman hyväksikäytön torjumiseksi. Kun otetaan huomioon, kuinka kauan sisämarkkinoilla on ollut vapaata liikkuvuutta, on käsittämätöntä, ettemme ole edistyneet tämän pidemmälle tämän ongelman ratkaisussa.

     
       

     

      Thomas Geisel (NI). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Erweiterungsdiskussion schadet der Europäischen Union vor allem deshalb, weil sie unehrlich ist. Sie ist unehrlich, weil sie politisch motiviert ist. Über eine EU‑Mitgliedschaft der Ukraine beispielsweise würden wir ohne den russischen Angriffskrieg gar nicht diskutieren, denn sie würde das Ende der gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik bedeuten – das will niemand, und deswegen wird es dazu auch nicht kommen.

    Die Diskussion ist auch unehrlich, weil wir sie uns nicht leisten können. Kein Mitgliedstaat wird bereit sein, seinen Beitrag zum EU‑Haushalt zu erhöhen oder auf Leistungen der Union zu verzichten. Wie auch, wenn 5 % der nationalen Etats für Verteidigungsausgaben ausgegeben werden sollen!

    Und sie ist drittens unehrlich, weil sie in Wahrheit keiner will, nicht einmal die Menschen in den Beitrittskandidatenländern. Schauen Sie sich doch nur die letzten Wahlergebnisse in Georgien und Moldawien an!

    Die Wachstumsschmerzen der Europäischen Union sind schon heute unverkennbar. Noch mehr Mitgliedsländer sind keine geeignete Therapie – im Gegenteil, dadurch werden sie weiter verschlimmert.

     
       

     

      Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, we need a Europe with more strength to the outside and more freedom to the inside. And at the moment, we are experiencing an era when the European Commission contributes a lot to a Europe with more freedom to the inside: deregulation, simplification, competitiveness – that’s what we were thriving for for a long time and what’s happening now.

    But we also need a Europe with more strength to the outside for the sake of European values, for the sake of the interests of the Europeans of this generation and of generations to come, and that means fostering the enlargement process.

    We have to be aware of the fact that the so-called ‘methodologies’ of accession to the European Union just haven’t worked. They haven’t worked for many years. I remember at the beginning of the last mandate, here, we were more or less obliged to define a new methodology for the enlargement process. Did it help? No, not at all.

    While many European countries, nearly all of them, want to be part of the integrated Europe, of the European Union, the best shape our continent ever had in history, while this is the case on one side, on the other side, we are reluctant and stuck in bureaucracy, in so-called ‘methodologies’, when it comes to enlargement. We need a more holistic and a more visionary approach here.

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

     
       

     

      Petras Gražulis (ESN), pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas pirmininke, pranešėjau, aš jau gal ketvirtą kartą klausiu ir negaunu atsakymo. Europos Parlamentas ir Europos Komisija labai myli Ukrainą ir nėra dienos, kad nepriimtume kokios nors rezoliucijos dėl meilės Ukrainai. Tačiau prezidentas Zelenskis neprašo rezoliucijų, prašo narystės Europos Sąjungoje. Kas kaltas, kad po šiai dienai nėra priimta Ukraina į Europos Sąjungą – Putinas, Trumpas, Ukraina ar Europos Sąjunga? Ir pasakykit, galų gale, kada nuo žodžių prieisite prie realių darbų?

     
       

     

      Кристиан Вигенин (S&D). – Г-жо Комисар, разширяването е не само исторически ангажимент, но и стратегически приоритет. То е инвестиция в сигурността, стабилността и просперитета на целия континент. Разширяването на Съюза обаче поставя пред нас и редица институционални предизвикателства: по-сложни механизми за взимане на решения, необходимост от адаптиране на бюджета и засилване на демократичната легитимност. В този контекст често се предлага премахването на принципа на единодушие като универсално решение. Но нека бъдем честни, това няма да отстрани най-съществения проблем –липсата на достатъчно доверие между страните членки. Договорите и сега предлагат редица инструменти като засилено сътрудничество, конструктивно въздържане, които можем да използваме. Те дават възможност да се премине към решение с квалифицирано мнозинство по всеки въпрос, стига това да се реши с единодушие.

    Промяната на договорите е сложен и бавен процес без гаранции за крайния резултат. Затова трябва да използваме максимално сегашната правна рамка, иначе има риск да отслабим Европейския съюз и да блокираме процеса на разширяване за неопределено време.

    Като представител на България – една от последните присъединили се държави, искам ясно да подчертая: отговорността, в случая, е двустранна. Кандидатките за членство също трябва да си свършат работата и да предприемат необходимите промени, за да прилагат европейските стандарти във всяка една сфера. Само така процесът ще запази подкрепата на гражданите, което е най-важно, както в страните кандидатки, така и в държавите членки, за да постигнем заедно едно демократично, солидарно и добро бъдеще за всеки един европеец.

     
       

     

      Anders Vistisen (PfE). – Mr President, before we open the door to yet another massive EU enlargement, let’s take a sober look at the facts. We are talking about eight candidate countries with a combined population of more than 90 million people, and at extra cost for the European taxpayers of above EUR 75 billion.

    And all the countries are below EU standards in all key areas. Take corruption: according to Transparency International, these countries rank among the worst in Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina is at 108th place, lower than countries like Algeria or Zambia. Ukraine and Serbia share 104th place, and Albania ranks 98th. By comparison, Denmark is number one!

    In terms of median income, these countries are light years behind: Ukraine has an average monthly salary of only EUR 380, Moldova EUR 330, and even the most developed, Montenegro, has an average below EUR 800.

    Opening the single market to these countries will only lead to massive social dumping and welfare tourism in Europe.

     
       

     

      Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, proiectul european a fost vizionar, inițiat de lideri creștini practicanți după Al Doilea Război Mondial. Ei au visat la o comunitate de state suverane unite prin libertatea circulației bunurilor, persoanelor, serviciilor și capitalului, o unire care să aducă prin prosperitatea tuturor, pacea ‑ și au reușit. De la șase state vest-europene fondatoare, această comunitate, începută în 1951, a tot crescut, iar cu fiecare extindere toate statele membre și-au consolidat stabilitatea, solidaritatea și bunăstarea.

    Din păcate, cortina de fier și ocupația sovietică a estului Europei au blocat peste 200 de milioane de europeni în afara acestui spațiu al libertății și prosperității. A fost nevoie să cadă comunismul și să treacă aproape 50 de ani de la înființare, pentru ca fostele state comuniste captive să înceapă să facă parte din această comunitate. Astăzi, integrarea Republicii Moldova, Ucrainei și a Balcanilor de Vest este pasul firesc al unui proiect politico-economic care a demonstrat că unitatea aduce forță și crește prosperitatea tuturor statelor membre.

     
       

     

      Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, what could the EU look like in 2030? A new European Union from Greenland in the Atlantic to Ukraine in the Black Sea, a new Union with more countries. For the countries joining, it means new opportunities, new freedoms and new responsibilities – 35 countries collaborating together. But we know the EU is already dysfunctional.

    There’s only one solution: reform, treaty reform. Let’s create a Europe 2.0 with a European Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, free from the oppressive veto, a Europe that speaks with one voice. This could become a reality by enlarging and reforming the Union – in other words, a new Europe that is bigger and better. Parliament voted for treaty reform already, but the Council refuses to act. They are not even present at this debate, only thinking about the next election, not thinking about the next generation.

     
       

     

      Alexander Sell (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Deutschland ist pleite. Die Rentenversicherung ist pleite, Kranken- und Pflegeversicherung – pleite, Arbeitslosenversicherung – pleite. Wir Deutschen zahlen mit die höchsten Steuern weltweit, 1000 Milliarden Euro im Jahr, und trotzdem fehlt es an allen Ecken und Enden. Brücken und Straßen verfallen, Schulen sind marode, über 7 Millionen Rentner haben weniger als 1000 Euro im Monat, Wohneigentum gibt es kaum. Gleichzeitig zahlen wir auch den höchsten Beitrag zur EU, mit weitem Abstand, fast 30 Milliarden Euro im Jahr, obwohl wir laut Europäischer Zentralbank eines der ärmsten Länder Europas sind.

    Aber statt die deutschen Steuerzahler zu entlasten, wollen Sie uns immer neue Lasten aufbürden. Moldawien, Albanien oder die Ukraine sollen jetzt Mitglied in der Europäischen Union werden, weil sich Frau von der Leyen mehr Gewicht auf der weltpolitischen Bühne erhofft. Das wird nicht funktionieren; wir Deutschen werden uns nicht länger ausplündern lassen. Wir werden Ihrem Größenwahnsinn den Geldhahn abdrehen. Darauf können Sie sich verlassen, denn dafür wird meine Partei gewählt. Sagen Sie bitte Ihrer Kommissionspräsidentin: Wer untergehen soll, der wird vorher hochmütig, und Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall.

     
       

     

      Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, ieri au fost bătuți preoți la Cernăuți, în Ucraina, preoți ortodocși ai comunității românești. Anul trecut, mitropolitul Longhin Jar a fost bătut și este târât prin procese fictive de ani de zile. Minoritatea românească a fost întotdeauna oropsită în Ucraina. Eu acum nu înțeleg, statele acestea care urmează să adere la Uniunea Europeană nu trebuie să respecte drepturile minorităților? Tot timpul vorbim de minoritățile LGBT, dar nu vorbim de o minoritate atât de importantă, ca cea românească, de peste jumătate de milion de oameni din Ucraina.

    Au inventat încă și o limbă moldovenească. Nu există o limbă moldovenească, după cum nu există o republică moldovenească. Moldova este o regiune din România. Faptul că există o Republică Moldova, asta se întâmplă doar pentru că un bolșevic și cu un nazist au făcut un Pact Ribbentrop-Molotov și un Dictat de la Viena acum 85 de ani și pentru România acest pact nu este încă denunțat. Așa că, să nu fiu prost înțeles, eu sunt de acord ca Moldova să adere și am votat în acest sens la Uniunea Europeană, dar totuși, nu era mai simplu să se unească cu România? Era mult mai simplu, mă gândesc.

     
       

     

      Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, ruski utjecaj, kineske investicije i protueuropski regionalni akteri koji ne dijele naše europske vrijednosti jačaju svoju prisutnost upravo ondje gdje Europa oklijeva. Vjerodostojnost europske politike proširenja gradi se upravo kroz čvršće partnerstvo s državama i akterima koji dijele težnju prema zajedničkoj budućnosti, ali isto tako i čvršćim politikama prema onima koji podrivaju Europu i koji podrivaju europske vrijednosti.

    U tom kontekstu, plan rasta za zapadni Balkan svakako predstavlja priliku za dublju integraciju i konkretne promjene, no bez jasne političke poruke, bez jasne težnje i traženja jasnog opredjeljenja, ostat će tek okvir bez sadržaja.

    Sjeverna Makedonija, država koja unatoč višestrukim preporukama Komisije još uvijek čeka početak pregovora, primjer je političke nepravde koja također potkopava vjeru u europski projekt. U Bosni i Hercegovini iscrpljuju se separatističke poruke, separatističke politike s jedne strane, ali isto tako nerealne unitarističke ambicije s druge. Crna Gora bori se za svoju europsku i prozapadnu orijentaciju.

    Naivno i u ovoj raspravi zvuče iluzije da će preglasavanje unutar Europske unije dovesti do većeg jedinstva. To nije moguće, to je kontraproduktivno ne samo za manje i srednje velike države članice nego isto tako i za cijelu Europu. Zbog toga moramo biti jasni, moramo biti prisutni, ali isto tako moramo zajedno raditi na uvažavanju svih stajališta.

    (Govornik je pristao odgovoriti na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice.)

     
       

     

      Petras Gražulis (ESN), pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas Pirmininke. Aš jūsų, kolegos iš EPP partijos, klausiau, kada priimsite Ukrainą į Europos Sąjungą. Jis atsakė, kad reakcingas mano klausimas. O tų rezoliucijų, kaip ir minėjau, Ukrainos prezidentas Zelenskis, kurias mes kasdien priiminėjame, kaip mylime Ukrainą, neprašo. Tai gal jūs galite tada viešai visiems pasakyti, kad jūs nežadate priimti Ukrainos į Europos Sąjungą? Ir kas tai trukdo? Ar tai ne tokia veidmainystė, kada viena kalbam, o visiškai veiksmai yra kitokie? Tik rezoliucijomis mes mylim… (posėdžio pirmininkas iš kalbėtojo atima žodį)

     
       

     

      Karlo Ressler (PPE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Ne čini mi se dobronamjernim, zapravo, vaše pitanje. Ono što svakako možemo reći je da i Ukrajina, koja se bori i za svoju opstojnost, ali koja se bori tj. njezin narod i za europske vrijednosti, ima ambiciju ući u Europsku uniju. Kada i kako će se to dogoditi nije jednostavno odgovoriti, neće se u svakom slučaju dogoditi preko noći.

    Međutim, ono što postoji kao ambicija mislim da treba poštivati i s naše strane da moramo napraviti reda i kod politike proširenja. I u tom smislu, državi koja je sada u ratnom stanju trebamo učiniti sve da joj pomognemo, a nadamo se da će jednoga dana naši kolege ovdje dolaziti i iz Ukrajine.

     
       

     

      Tonino Picula (S&D). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, geopolitička situacija u svijetu je dobar argument u korist nastavka politike proširenja. Međutim, to ne znači da treba odstupati od „kopenhaških kriterija”, upravo suprotno – treba ih dosljedno provoditi u praksi.

    Europska unija treba pružati podršku samo stvarnim, a ne fiktivnim reformama, i odmah pozitivno reagirati kada se kriteriji ispune.

    Premda je proširenje opet strateški prioritet Europske unije, gotovo transakcijski se dugo odnosila prema ovoj politici, vođena pogrešnim uvjerenjem da će europskim novcem riješiti sve unutarnje probleme država kandidata.

    Tako na liste strateški važnih projekata stavljamo one koje građani ne podržavaju ili preporučujemo zatvaranje poglavlja o javnoj nabavi neposredno nakon sklapanja ugovora s trećom zemljom koji se izuzima od tih pravila.

    Inzistiranje na vladavini prava i europskim vrijednostima, ali usklađenom geopolitičkom orijentacijom, moraju biti temelji za nastavak politike proširenja.

    Ako se politika proširenja provodi na taj način, interna reforma institucija Europske unije ne bi trebala biti ni prepreka ni alibi za odgađanje novog proširenja Europske unije.

     
       

     

      Tomislav Sokol (PPE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. – Gospodine Picula, često se govori da je novo proširenje nemoguće bez institucionalnih reformi koje bi, između ostalog, značile ukidanje prava jednoglasnosti u Vijeću, dakle ukidanje prava veta za male države članice.

    Vi ste mnogo puta govorili o toj temi, ali znamo da postoje različiti pogledi na samo to pitanje. Recimo, predsjednik Republike Hrvatske Zoran Milanović je rekao da oni koji su za ukidanje prava veta čine veleizdaju ili nešto u tom smislu.

    Možete li mi Vi ovdje reći, jeste li Vi za ukidanje prava veta za male države članice, nešto što ide protivno njihovim nacionalnim interesima, ili ste za to da male države uspiju zaštititi svoja prava i dalje u Europskoj uniji? Hvala lijepa.

     
       

     

      Marjan Šarec (Renew). – Gospod predsednik, širitev Evropske unije danes ni več samo birokratski postopek, Je ključni geopolitični korak, ki pomeni utrjevanje stabilnosti, varnosti in demokratičnih vrednot Evropske unije.

    Države, ki že dokazujejo evropsko zavezanost, potrebujejo jasna sporočila in spodbudne korake iz Bruslja. Obljuba članstva v Evropski uniji mora biti resnična in zanesljiva. Sicer tudi sistem postavljanja zahtev ne deluje.

    Poznamo primere držav kandidatk, ki so sledile pomembnim reformam, nato pa obtičale v vmesnem prostoru. Severna Makedonija je kričeč primer.

    Medtem pa drugi akterji krepijo svoj vpliv in alternativne poti, ki lahko ogrozijo stabilnost in dragocene vrednote Evropske unije. Tiste vrednote, ki jih prepogosto jemljemo za samoumevne. To moramo znova in znova sporočati tudi evropskim državljankam in državljanom.

    Skupna prihodnost z državami kandidatkami pomeni močnejšo, varnejšo in bolj enotno Evropo.

     
       

     

      Marc Botenga (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, quand je vous entends parler de l’élargissement de l’Union européenne, ça a l’air chouette comme idée, mais je trouve que vous passez un peu vite sur les conséquences réelles que cela peut avoir sur les travailleurs. Parce que le salaire minimum en Ukraine n’arrive pas à 200 euros, je pense, en Moldavie, ça dépasse un peu les 300 euros.

    Dans le contexte des règles actuelles du marché européen, qui ne garantit même pas qu’aujourd’hui un travailleur qui va travailler dans un autre État membre ait droit aux mêmes règles de protection, à la même sécurité sociale qu’un autre, que va-t-il se passer dans le cadre d’un élargissement? Tout simplement que des entreprises – d’ailleurs, il y a pas mal de sociétés «boîtes aux lettres», comme on les appelle – vont en profiter pour faire baisser, pour faire empirer les conditions de travail des travailleurs un peu partout en Europe.

    Et ça, ça serait l’impact concret en Europe, aujourd’hui, d’un élargissement pour les travailleurs. Ne cachez pas ça, ne faites pas des rêves de grandeur sur combien l’Europe sera jolie à 200 États. C’est pas ça, ce que vivent les travailleurs. Les travailleurs veulent aujourd’hui que vous changiez cette Europe; non plus de la concurrence, mais de la coopération, de la sécurité sociale.

     
       

     

      Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, u izmijenjenim geopolitičkim okolnostima proširenje Europske unije je ponovno postalo aktualno. Međutim, jasno treba reći da se proces proširenja treba promatrati za svaku državu zasebno i temeljiti se isključivo na sposobnostima države kandidatkinje da usvoji europske standarde.

    Nažalost, po tom pitanju ne da ne vidimo napredak, nego, nažalost, uglavnom vidimo nazadovanje. Srbija je i dalje apsolutno najveći destabilizacijski faktor u jugoistočnoj Europi. Hegemonistička politika koju vodi Beograd ugrožava neovisnost i suverenost okolnih država te je jasno da ovakvoj Srbiji nije mjesto u Europskoj uniji.

    Nadalje, Bosna i Hercegovina razapeta je između bošnjačkog unitarizma i srpskog separatizma. U toj državi Hrvati su jedini narod koji istinski, bez fige u džepu gleda prema Europskoj uniji i zapadu.

    Crna Gora i Albanija, pak, najdalje su odmakle na europskom putu, s time da je Crna Gora ipak spremnija za zaključenje pregovora, iako je pred njom još uvijek puno posla.

    Međutim, ono što je važno reći je da proširenje Europske unije nema apsolutno nikakve veze s ukidanjem jednoglasnosti odlučivanja. Tvrdnja da je proširenje nemoguće bez ukidanja prava veta je naprosto netočna. 2004., kada je pravo veta bilo puno raširenije, dogodilo se najveće proširenje Europske unije u povijesti.

    Ukidanje prava veta i uvođenje preglasavanja negiralo bi temeljne dimenzije nacionalnog suvereniteta, povećalo podjele u Europskoj uniji te ugrozilo sam njezin opstanak. U konačnici, ako netko smatra da proširenjem uvodimo trojanskog konja u Uniju, onda do takvog proširenja vjerojatno ne treba niti doći. Europa mora ostati zajednica slobodnih suverenih naroda, a ne zajednica u kojoj veliki odlučuju umjesto malih.

     
       

     

      Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o processo de alargamento é intrínseco ao projeto europeu e até ao próprio espírito europeu que subjaz a esse projeto.

    Não foram só os países que foram entrando que beneficiaram das vantagens da integração europeia; os próprios países fundadores beneficiaram, desde logo, dessa vantagem.

    Basta olhar para o caso alemão: foi a sua integração nas instituições europeias que permitiu a sua reinserção na comunidade internacional após o tenebroso período nazi.

    Trata-se, afinal, de acolher agora no seio da UE novos países e novos povos. O novo alargamento que temos agora no horizonte deve inspirar-se no mesmo espírito de partilha e fraternidade. Mas dificilmente poderemos acomodar novos membros com a mesma arquitetura institucional e o mesmo acervo tratadístico.

    O problema é que andamos a navegar as águas tumultuosas dos últimos anos –– o Brexit, a pandemia, a crise energética, a invasão da Ucrânia –– com uma carta de marear desenhada há quase 15 anos para um clima previsível e pacificado.

    Nesse sentido, quero aqui recordar o pedido formal feito por esta Casa em 2022, e pela primeira vez na sua história, apelando ao Conselho para iniciar uma convenção para a revisão dos Tratados, em linha com as conclusões da Conferência sobre o Futuro da Europa. Esse pedido tem sido menosprezado pelo Conselho.

    Está, provavelmente, na hora de este Parlamento ser mais ouvido pelo Conselho Europeu.

     
       

     

      Marieke Ehlers (PfE). – Voorzitter, opnieuw klinkt de roep om méér Europese Unie. Meer landen, meer bureaucratie, maar minder inspraak voor de landen die deze Unie hebben opgebouwd. De eurocraten bestempelen uitbreiding als een noodzaak en zien het vetorecht als een hinderpaal. Terwijl het systeem kraakt in zijn voegen, stormt Brussel vooruit, alsof uitbreiding een morele plicht is en geen politieke keuze.

    De EU verder uitbreiden is als het toelaten van passagiers op een zinkend schip. Wat ons te wachten staat, is een versnelde weg richting een transferunie, omdat nieuwe lidstaten vrijwel zonder uitzondering netto-ontvanger zullen zijn. En wie draait op voor de kosten? Nettobetalers zoals Nederland.

    Als we dan ook nog het vetorecht afschaffen, creëren we een systeem waarin nettobetalers steeds meer betalen, maar steeds minder te zeggen hebben. Dit is niet het Europa waar wij voor gekozen hebben. Het is de hoogste tijd dat we het roer terugpakken, vóór onze belangen definitief overboord gaan.

     
       

     

      Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Rozszerzenie Unii Europejskiej o nowe państwa, takie jak Ukraina, jest uzasadnione z punktu widzenia geopolitycznego. Niesie jednak za sobą poważne konsekwencje gospodarcze, szczególnie dla takich krajów jak Polska. Już teraz obserwujemy wpływ rosnącej konkurencji ze strony Ukrainy w kluczowych sektorach, takich jak transport drogowy czy rolnictwo.

    W odpowiedzi na rosyjską agresję Unia Europejska w 2022 r. zliberalizowała dostęp Ukrainy do jednolitego rynku, całkowicie znosząc cła i kontyngenty oraz rezygnując z systemu licencji w transporcie drogowym. Działania te, oficjalnie motywowane solidarnością, wywołały istotne napięcia społeczne w państwach członkowskich. Największymi beneficjentami tych działań okazały się potężne agroholdingi, w tym te kontrolowane przez międzynarodowy kapitał.

    Twierdziliście, że troszczycie się o ukraińskich rolników, że to wyraz solidarności z walczącym krajem. W rzeczywistości było to wsparcie dla międzynarodowych graczy w umacnianiu ich pozycji na rynku europejskim kosztem naszych rolników, kosztem naszych przetwórców. Nie na tym polega solidarność międzynarodowa. Nie tak powinien przebiegać proces rozszerzania Unii Europejskiej.

     
       

     

      Илхан Кючюк (Renew). – Г-жо Комисар, от началото на дебата се опитвам да разбера за какво не е този дебат: не е „за“ или „против“ за политиката по разширяване, не е за Украйна, за Турция, не и за готовността на страните членки да бъдат част от Европейския съюз. То е за нещо друго: за институционалната и политическата подготвеност на Европейския съюз да приеме нови страни членки.

    Нека заедно да си зададем този въпрос и тук не гледам крайното ляво или крайното дясно, политическият център, който трябва да донесе необходимите реформи за бъдещето на Европейския съюз. Можем ли при тази институционална подредба да си позволим 35 държави в рамките на Европейския съюз? Отговорът е „не“. Погледнете само дебата, който тече в момента за Многогодишната финансова рамка. Искаме старите приоритети, искаме нови приоритети и на всичкото отгоре трябва да вземем решение в един Съюз с 35 държави в едно обозримо бъдеще. Как е възможно това?

    Погледнете санкционната политика на Европейския съюз. Колко пъти ние се проваляме в идеята си да имаме еднопосочно послание към нас в Европейския съюз и към тези, които искат да се присъединят към нас? И да ми кажете, че това е демократично? Орбан постоянно да ни изнудва за нещо. Не го приемаме. Трябва да има реформа …

    (Председателят отнема думата на оратора)

     
       

     

      Sebastian Everding (The Left). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn wir über EU‑Erweiterungsstrategien reden, dann müssen wir viel mehr über den Umwelt‑, Klima‑ und auch den Tierschutz sprechen. Es ist schockierend, dass in vielen Berichten zu Kandidatenländern diese Themen nur am Rande oder, wie im Falle des Tierschutzes, gar nicht erwähnt werden. Selbstverständlich müssen alle Kandidatenländer Kriterien in Bezug auf Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Korruptionsbekämpfung usw. erfüllen, aber es ist inakzeptabel, dass in Ländern wie der Türkei, Albanien, dem Kosovo, Moldau, Serbien oder auch Bosnien streunende Hunde und Katzen brutal getötet werden. Es gibt einen chronischen Mangel an Tierheimen, keine Maßnahmen zur Populationskontrolle wie Kastrationsprogramme und keine Aufklärungs‑ und Sensibilisierungskampagnen für die Bevölkerung.

    Darüber hinaus dürfen Abfallwirtschaft und Umweltschutz bei Beitrittskandidaten nicht vernachlässigt werden. Profit darf dort niemals vor der Umwelt stehen, wie es im Fall des Lithiumabbaus im Jadar‑Tal in Serbien oder beim Bau des Flughafens in einem Naturschutzgebiet in der Vjosa-Narta in Albanien der Fall ist. Wir müssen diesen Ländern eine klare Botschaft vermitteln, dass Tierschutz- und Umweltschutzstandards ebenso wichtig sind. Diesen Stellenwert sollten sie auch hier im Parlament bekommen.

     
       

     

      Андрей Ковачев (PPE). – Г-жо Комисар, пред лицето на нарастващата заплаха от Русия и усилващото се влияние на Китай, интеграция на страните кандидат членки в нашия Съюз е наложителна като стратегическа инвестиция в обединена и силна Европа. В този исторически момент разширяването на Европейския съюз е един от най-силните ни външнополитически инструменти. Но ако този инструмент не се използва внимателно, ако правим компромиси със собствените си принципи и ценности, ще подкопаем бъдещето си, като се опитваме да изградим нещо единно, а в същото време внесем повече разединение в Европейския съюз.

    И тук бих искал да се спра на актуалния пример с Република Северна Македония. За съжаление, манипулативното интерпретиране от страна на министър-председателя г-н Мицковски на проектотекстове на този Парламент води до повече напрежение и повече разединение, освен че поставя в неудобно положение докладчиците.

    Г-н Мицковски, в проектотекстовете, които явно Вие имате, никъде Европейският парламент не сертифицира многовековна идентичност или език. Това не е институт по история или академия на науките. Затова пък има международноправни договори и това е договорът между България, където има платформа, това е мултидисциплинарната академична комисия, където тези две решения трябва да бъдат взети от специалистите. Затова призовавам: вместо да инвестираме толкова много време и енергия – дипломатична и финансова в лобизъм и борба, да се концентрираме в изпълнение на преговорната рамка, започване на преговори, договорите между двете страни и разбира се, взаимно уважение между нас.

    Тук не мога да не кажа и крещящия например за присъдата срещу Любчо Георгиевски, един македонски българин, който беше осъден на първа инстанция само за това, че във Фейсбук поста си беше цитирал историческа личност и истината за нашата обща история.

     
       

     

      Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, if enlargement is the EU’s strongest geopolitical tool, we must urgently make it credible again.

    History shows enlargement works only when domestic reformers see real rewards and when backsliding carries consequences, when citizens feel tangible benefits, and when EU institutions and Member States speak with one voice – clearly, consistently and honestly, to reinforce local ownership.

    Instead, what we see is shifting goalposts, appeasement and double standards, especially on Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, North Macedonia, Kosovo and Georgia. This Parliament has sounded the alarm again and again. Reforms cannot succeed without deep democratic transformation. And yet, too often, the EU enables autocrats, excuses kleptocrats and ignores those fighting for the rule of law.

    Citizens are not blind. They won’t wait forever. Enlargement processes have a shelf life and we are close to the expiry date. And meanwhile, Russia and China are more than happy to fill the vacuum we are leaving.

    So let’s be honest, with ourselves and our partners. We need a hard look at what has worked, what has not and what needs fixing. And we need to show enlargement is real by ensuring that at least two countries can join the Union before 2030.

    Let enlargement become the transformative force it was meant to be, fulfilling the promise of a united Europe as we started working on over 75 years ago.

     
       

     

      Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Úgy beszélnek itt az ukrán bővítésről, mintha már eldöntött tény lenne. Gyorsított eljárást akarnak, és a bővítési biztos azt is elmondta, hogy a Bizottságnál ezer ember dolgozik ezen. Ráadásul, amint ma is hallhattuk, ki akarják iktatni a tagállami vétó lehetőségét. Igazán demokratikus, mondhatom.

    Egyvalamiről azonban nem beszélnek. A gazdasági következményekről.

    Az itteni Költségvetési Bizottságnak vannak számításai, amelyek szerint a kohéziós források 24%-kal, az agrártámogatások pedig 15%-kal csökkennének a mostani tagországokban.

    Azután történne ez, hogy Európa elköltött 150 milliárd eurót a háborúra.

    Miért gondolják azt itt, hogy az európai emberek minden pénzügyi terhet elbírnak? Ki fog a szemükbe nézni és bevallani, hogy milyen terhekkel járna mindez?

    Magyarországon már több mint kétmillióan vettek részt az ukrán tagságról szóló szavazáson. Mi megkérdeztük, hogy mit gondolnak a bővítésről azok, akik a számlát állják.

    A választól egy kicsit félve teszem fel a kérdést: Önök meg merik ezt tenni?

     
       

     

      Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, extinderea Uniunii Europene este un proiect cu implicații strategice și istorice profunde. Avem datoria să sprijinim aspirațiile europene ale unui stat precum Republica Moldova, care împărtășește cu România aceeași limbă și cultură, și destin istoric.

    Din punctul nostru de vedere, ajutorul acordat Moldovei în procesul de integrare este mai mult decât un obiectiv de politică externă, este o datorie față de identitatea și dreptul istoric al națiunii române. Dar tocmai pentru că ne pasă atât de mult, trebuie să spunem adevărul: Uniunea Europeană nu este astăzi pregătită instituțional pentru o extindere masivă. Fără o reformă reală a mecanismelor decizionale, a alocării bugetare, fără un control democratic real, riscăm să transformăm extinderea într-o nouă amenințare pentru stabilitatea Uniunii.

    Așadar, susținem extinderea, dar cerem o reformă serioasă și o consolidare a proceselor decizionale în structurile Uniunii, respect pentru suveranitatea statelor membre și o viziune clară asupra viitorului european.

     
       

     

      Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, history has shown us the value of European unification and the importance of preparing EU institutions to address emerging challenges. Although managing a union of 30 or more members may seem challenging, these are the same concerns we had 20 years ago, prior to the big bang enlargement.

    However, improving the EU’s institutional functioning and political processes cannot be postponed or made dependent on enlargement, budgeting or other issues.

    Colleagues, I find today’s debate, with the extreme focus on enlargement only, a bit misleading. It’s too narrow. Let’s look broader, face all the challenges we have. We must look into a long, be ready to face any future challenges to the security and prosperity of our citizens in the long term, when our bold actions will bear fruit, and seize the opportunity to improve the efficiency of EU decision-making and policy implementation. So let’s look at the broader picture.

     
       

     

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin agus a Choimisinéir, tá sé tábhachtach dóchas a thabhairt do thíortha a bhfuil ag teastáil uathu teacht isteach san Aontas, because enlargement is one of the EU’s greatest achievements. It has extended peace, democracy and shared prosperity across Europe, making it stronger, more united and better equipped to face global challenges. Ireland has always backed enlargement, but on principle. Accession must be earned: each candidate must meet our agreed standards in the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. That remains essential.

    The strategic case is clearer than ever. Russia’s war in Ukraine shows that peace in Europe cannot be assumed. Bringing in countries like Ukraine and Moldova, and the Western Balkans, once ready, serves both their interests and ours. It strengthens our security, economy and global influence. We cannot let radical voices hijack this debate with fearmongering about migration or budgets. That distorts the truth.

    Past enlargements reduced poverty, grew trade and created new opportunities, including for Ireland, which has been transformed and modernised since we joined in 1973. Conversely, the United Kingdom has suffered greatly since it left the European Union a few years ago. The path ahead must be rigorous, but the door must stay open.

    Míle buíochas á Uachtaráin, agus go n-éirí libh. Maith thú.

     
       

     

      Marc Angel (S&D). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, every single enlargement of our Union has been a major success story, and enlargement has now become a geopolitical necessity to protect ourselves and our neighbours against interference from autocratic regimes.

    It is important and good that enlargement is, again, high on the agenda. War on our continent, the rise of fascism, the shift in transatlantic relations – all this reminds us that enlargement is in our own strategic interest.

    There will be no shortcuts on EU values and fundamental principles. Accession to the EU must always remain a merit-based process and, therefore, as EU institutions and Member States, we must support the candidate countries.

    We also have homework to do: institutional and financial reforms are needed to absorb new members. Our Union is barely functioning at the current state with 27, so what about 30, 32 or 35? We need to change our way of working so that every citizen, every worker, every business and society as a whole can continue to benefit from our European project.

    So let’s have the courage to adopt targeted treaty changes, move away from unanimity, deepen the social dimension of our Union and strengthen the union of equality, and we must live up to our promises to citizens and to the candidate countries.

     
       

     

      Pascale Piera (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, l’élargissement de l’Union européenne devait être un catalyseur de progrès, nous promettait Ursula von der Leyen. Qui peut encore le croire?

    Si l’élargissement de l’Union européenne est un catalyseur, c’est celui de la dilapidation de l’argent public. Des milliards dont on perd la trace, alors qu’on enjoint aux peuples européens de se serrer la ceinture. Une note du Conseil européen chiffre le coût de cet élargissement à la somme de 264 milliards d’euros sur sept ans.

    Si l’élargissement de l’Union européenne est un catalyseur, c’est celui de l’instabilité et de l’insécurité pour nos concitoyens avec les gangs venus de pays qui ne respectent pas nos lois. Ne soyons pas dupes.

    L’élargissement, et notamment celui à l’Ukraine, est enfin le catalyseur de la destruction de notre agriculture. En cas d’adhésion, l’Ukraine deviendrait le premier bénéficiaire de la politique agricole commune, avec 10 à 12 milliards d’euros d’aides par an, c’est 20 % du budget de la PAC.

    Cette concurrence si déloyale, venue de pays qui ne respectent ni nos normes environnementales ni nos normes sociales, c’est un crime organisé contre notre agriculture et nous n’accepterons pas cela.

     
       

     

      Mario Mantovani (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, l’allargamento dell’Unione europea è un processo di grande rilevanza strategica, che va affrontato con realismo e con rigore, soprattutto alla luce delle crescenti sfide economiche e geopolitiche.

    L’ingresso di nuovi Stati membri comporta senza dubbio opportunità per promuovere e consolidare quei valori di democrazia e di libertà propri di questa Unione, ma anche opportunità di crescita ed espansione dei mercati e rafforzamento del proprio peso politico europeo.

    In quest’ottica occorre una revisione delle politiche comuni, affinché non diventino strumenti di ridistribuzione di inefficienza, ma leve per innovazione, produttività e sviluppo dell’occupazione.

    È altresì essenziale una governance economica, che garantisca condizioni eque di concorrenza del mercato interno e garantisca la tutela degli investimenti comunitari che faremo in quei paesi.

    In conclusione, un allargamento non governato indebolisce, un allargamento accompagnato da riforme aiuta l’Unione europea.

     
       

       

    PRESIDE: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS
    Vicepresidente

     
       

     

      Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisat kollegat, Eurooppa on uhattuna. Vapautemme on vaakalaudalla. Laajentuminen ei ole hyväntekeväisyyttä. Se on kylmää, kovaa, strategista harkintaa.

    Vahvan Ukrainan tuominen joukkoomme on suoraan meidän turvallisuutemme tae. Venäjän uhka vaanii porteillamme odottaen otollista hetkeä. Suomi tietää tämän historiansa kautta. Meillä on puolet EU:n ja Naton Venäjä-rajasta. Suomi on se valli, jonka on kestettävä, tai kansojen vapaus on vaakalaudalla. Samoin on Ukrainan laita. Yhtenäisyys on voimaa. Integroimalla Ukrainan lähetämme Putinille selkeän viestin: emme anna periksi, emme pelkää.

    Muistakaamme Winston Churchilliä, jonka muistoksi täällä on rakennus nimettynä. Hän ymmärsi integraation geopoliittisen syvän ytimen: padota idän uhkaa ja torjua totalitarismin vaaroja. Meidän on ymmärrettävä, että EU ei ole pelkkä rauhanprojekti, vaan ytimessä on pelote, jonka pitää ylläpitää rauhaa. Epäröinnin aika on ohi. Meidän on toimittava – tarvittaessa myös ilman Yhdysvaltoja.

     
       

     

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiamas posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiama komisare, kolegos. Europos Sąjunga trūkčioja vietoje. Pasauliniai iššūkiai ir Europos Sąjungos piliečiai reikalauja stipresnės ir veiksmingesnės Europos ir veiksmų. Europos Parlamentas dar 2023 m. pateikė konkrečius pasiūlymus Europos Vadovų Tarybai su rekomendacijomis, atsižvelgdamas ir į piliečių, ir į Konferencijos dėl ateities siūlymus, ir į Rusijos karą prieš Ukrainą. Ukrainos pergalės laidas yra jos narystė Europos Sąjungoje – šimtu procentų. Vadovų Tarybai perduoti pasiūlymai reikalauja veiksmų iš jos pusės. Komisijos Pirmininkės, Draghi, Lettos pranešimuose yra pasakyta, kad sutarčių keitimas yra būtinas viskam – ir investicijoms, ir taip toliau. Europoje yra tik dvi rūšys valstybių – mažos ir tos, kurios nesupranta, kad jos yra mažos. Ir čia nacionalistai ir patriotai nesupranta šito ir patys kalba niekus tam, kad Europos Sąjungą atvestų į dar didesnę krizę. Todėl mums reikia žengti abu žingsnius – ir sutarčių keitimą, ir plėtrą, sinchronizuoti, daryti pagal kriterijus. Ir tik toks kelias sustiprins Europos Sąjungą kaip pasaulinį žaidėją.

    (Kalbėtojas sutiko atsakyti į mėlynosios kortelės klausimą)

     
       

     

      Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Kollege, danke, dass Sie die Frage annehmen! Ich weiß nicht, aus welchem Land Sie kommen, aber ich komme aus dem größten Mitgliedsland, dem stärksten Mitgliedsland der EU, und ich stelle nicht fest, dass die Bürger meines Landes in der Mehrheit mehr EU wollen. Also das zur Einordnung.

    Sie haben gesprochen vom Sieg der Ukraine, und der Sieg der Ukraine hängt von deren Mitgliedschaft in der EU ab. Ist Ihnen eigentlich bewusst, dass Sie dort eines der größten korrupten Regimes derzeit an der Regierung haben, die zusammen mit Bandera, also mit ehemaligen Faschistenverehrern, die Regierung bilden? Wollen Sie wirklich dieses Land um den Preis dieser Gemeinschaft in die …

    (Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

     
       

     

      Marie Dauchy (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, qui oserait dire que l’Union européenne est une institution qui fonctionne? Aucune crise, qu’elle soit migratoire, sanitaire ou économique, n’a été résolue par le secours de l’Union. Pire encore, sur le pacte vert, sur la montée de l’islamisme ou sur les délocalisations, vous n’avez été qu’un accélérateur du chaos.

    Comme l’URSS à la fin de sa vie qui pensait résoudre les problèmes du communisme par plus de communisme, vous persistez à croire que l’Union réglera les échecs de l’Union et vous vous acharnez à nous imposer votre modèle que le peuple refuse. Vous voulez encore élargir cette machine folle à des pays comme la Turquie ou la Moldavie, qui ne partagent ni notre culture ni nos intérêts.

    Ce que les Français attendent, ce n’est pas plus d’intégration, c’est plus de protection. Et ce que l’histoire retiendra, c’est que votre idéologie aura détruit l’idée européenne bien plus sûrement que tous vos adversaires réunis.

     
       

     

      Hildegard Bentele (PPE). – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Erweiterung der Europäischen Union ist kein Selbstzweck, sie ist ein strategisches Angebot für Frieden, Demokratie, Rechtsstaatlichkeit und wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Am Beginn von Beitrittsverhandlungen steht eine erste, einladende politische Entscheidung der EU, sie sind aber kein technokratischer Automatismus; sie beruhen auf klaren Bedingungen und auf politischem Willen. Wenn es dabei auch um Geopolitik gehen sollte, dürfen wir uns nicht hinter den einzelnen Verhandlungskapiteln verstecken.

    Gerade auf dem Westbalkan ist Vertrauen ein knappes Gut. Wenn wir es verspielen, gefährden wir die europäische Perspektive dieser Region. Das Beispiel Serbien zeigt, wie schwierig das Gleichgewicht ist. Einerseits steht der Kurs der serbischen Führung zu Russland und zum Kosovo in direktem Widerspruch zu unseren europäischen Werten, andererseits sprechen geostrategische Überlegungen dafür, Serbien enger an Europa zu binden, etwa als potenziellen Partner im Bereich kritischer Rohstoffe. Doch gerade in diesem sensiblen Sektor sind funktionierende, unabhängige Institutionen sowie das Vertrauen und die Unterstützung der Bevölkerung für das Gelingen gemeinsamer Projekte entscheidend.

    Die EU sollte hier sehr viel entschiedener auftreten. Sie könnte in den Augen der Bevölkerung viel an Ansehen gewinnen, wenn sie denn über den Hebel des Beitrittsprozesses ganz klar auf Korruptionsbekämpfung, Pressefreiheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit dringen würde, die ja auch für eine echte, gesunde wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und damit für die Zukunftsfähigkeit des Landes entscheidend sind. Wir müssen Handlungsbereitschaft, Glaubwürdigkeit und strategische Verlässlichkeit zeigen – nur dann werden wir als der Partner wahrgenommen, der wir sein wollen und sein müssen.

    (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

     
       

     

      Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Frau Kollegin, vielen Dank! Sie sprachen vom Frieden in der EU. Ich nehme das im Barbarossa-, also im Verteidigungsausschuss, ganz anders wahr: Dort wird in regelmäßiger Einheit von Kriegstüchtigkeit, Kriegsfähigkeit gesprochen. Ihr Parteichef und unser Bundeskanzler sprach davon, dass aktuell Israel die Drecksarbeit für uns mache. Wie passt denn das zusammen, einmal die Rhetorik Krieg, Aufrüstung, Kriegstüchtigkeit und das Friedensgesäusel, was Sie gerade hier präsentieren? Wie passt das zusammen?

     
       

     

      Nicola Zingaretti (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l’Europa è l’unico processo della storia che ha unito 450 milioni di persone, non perché costrette, ma perché convinte, contro le guerre, senza violenza, ma proponendo la forza della democrazia. Passare da 6 a 27 Stati ha rappresentato uno straordinario processo che ha garantito pace, prosperità e benessere.

    L’Europa dunque ci è servita ad arrivare fino a qui, ma la sua crescita senza riforme e un salto in avanti nell’integrazione rappresenta un rischio per la sua stessa esistenza. Quindi bene continuare ad aprirsi, ma è fondamentale rilanciare i suoi valori, un’identità comune europea e darsi regole nuove per essere più efficaci: riforma del diritto di veto, politica estera e di difesa davvero comuni, nuove risorse proprie destinate a investimenti per il nostro sistema produttivo e modello sociale e quindi riforme verso gli Stati Uniti d’Europa.

    L’Europa non è una cappa, come dicono i nazionalisti, è lo scudo che ci ha permesso di esistere da persone libere. Ma ora, per non tradire la sua storia, deve cambiare ed andare avanti. E se non si vuole andare avanti in 27, con cooperazioni rafforzate, cominciamo con chi ci sta a cambiare questa Europa.

     
       

     

      Alexandre Varaut (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, l’Union européenne aime à croire qu’elle incarne le sens de l’histoire et qu’il ne peut pas en être autrement. La gifle du Brexit, qui démentait cette prétention de la manière la plus nette, l’a un temps sonnée, mais l’étrange illusion a repris. Elle s’est même aggravée, comme le prouve le débat de ce matin, qui associe l’élargissement de l’Union aux défis mondiaux. Cette association est une plaisanterie. Qui peut croire que l’Union européenne cherche à s’émanciper de la tutelle américaine?

    Lorsque les États-Unis ont menacé de s’emparer par la force du Groenland, l’Union européenne n’a rien fait, sinon acheter tout de suite davantage d’armes aux Américains en pensant les amadouer. Et même si l’Union européenne s’émancipait, il ne faut pas que ce soit pour devenir elle-même un bloc qui écraserait les peuples et les nations qui la composent.

    À ce messianisme politique et à cette boulimie impuissante, nous opposons un pragmatisme qui s’appuie sur la raison. Les peuples européens sont une famille que rapprochent des liens civilisationnels naturels. Poursuivre l’intégration ne sera envisageable qu’une fois le cadre intégrateur lui-même redressé. Réparons l’Europe d’abord, voyons le reste après.

     
       

     

      Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, uspjeh proširenja ovisi o četiri ključna čimbenika: političkoj volji država članica, volji kandidata, apsorpcijskom kapacitetu Unije i administrativnom kapacitetu kandidata. Situacija je tu različita i zato pristup mora ostati individualan.

    U slučaju Ukrajine suočavamo se s problemom donošenja odluka u Vijeću, a njezino članstvo vjerojatno traži i prilagodbu nekih europskih politika poput poljoprivredne. No, EU bi strateški pogriješio ako ne bi uočio da unatoč ratu, Ukrajina pokazuje kapacitet za EU reforme i svaki dan na bojištu pokazuje privrženost europskoj ideji.

    Moldova također pokazuje snažnu političku volju, dok je proces s Gruzijom morao biti zaustavljen zbog potpunog nedostatka političke volje vlasti.

    Kod Srbije problem je također u političkoj volji, no u ovom slučaju bilo bi kontraproduktivno zaustaviti pregovore. Ali moramo biti svjesni da sama Srbija zasad ne želi ispuniti ključne kriterije, posebice u vanjskoj politici i u području vladavine prava. Stoga, umjesto grandioznih izjava i nerealnih očekivanja i kasnijih frustracija, puno je bolje prihvatiti realnost da je Srbija država koja se ne želi svrstati s Europskom unijom, a tu ni opozicija ne nudi jasnu alternativu. I stoga, na temelju te realnosti moramo pragmatično oblikovati naše odnose.

    No, EU mora istovremeno više učiniti da takva nesvrstana politika Beograda ne utječe negativno na BiH, Crnu Goru, Kosovo i Sjevernu Makedoniju i na njihov europski put.

    Na kraju, važno je nastaviti s novim tempom pregovora s Albanijom. Ona postaje lider u procesu i tu treba inzistirati na kriterijima, ali ostati ambiciozan za završetak pregovora u ovom mandatu.

     
       

     

      Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Pirmininke, pone komisare, kolegos. Mano šalies Lietuvos prisijungimas prie Europos Sąjungos prieš dvidešimt vienerius metus išgelbėjo šalį nuo Ukrainos likimo. Mes tapome stipresni tiek ekonomiškai, tiek politiškai bei labiau atsparūs išorės grėsmėms. To paties tikisi ir Ukraina, Moldova, Balkanų šalys. Taipogi plėtra yra reikalinga ir Europos Sąjungai. Todėl Europos Sąjunga privalo būti pasirengusi plėtrai, kaip ir tos šalys, kurios siekia narystės. Tačiau plėtra tikrai nebus įmanoma be sutarčių keitimo, be išsamių institucinių reformų. Matome, kad dabar jau yra sudėtinga Taryboje greitai priimti sprendimus. Kai kurie sprendimai yra vilkinami, kai kurios valstybės naudojasi veto teise vien dėl savo siaurų interesų, ir tai tikrai neprisideda prie Europos Sąjungos gebėjimo laiku ir veiksmingai reaguoti bei prisitaikyti prie pokyčių. Kad išliktume reikšmingi politiniame žemėlapyje, privalome keistis patys, keisti savo institucijas ir užtikrinti greitą ir veiksmingą sprendimų priėmimą.

     
       

     

      Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Svarstydami įstrigusios plėtros šiandieninę būklę, turime sau atsakyti – ar yra politinė valia plėtrai. Kai ji būdavo, tai ir institucinės problemos išsispręsdavo. Sakome, kad šiandien europinių institucijų veiklą trikdo viena valstybė narė ar netgi vienas politikas, ir daro tai sistemiškai, o mes nerandame teisinių būdų tam įveikti. Bet, kita vertus, tai liudytų apie „beveik konsensusą“. Panašiai būta daugelį kartų: ir de Golio sukelta tuščios kėdės krizė, ir Danijos išlygos Mastrichto sutarčiai, ir Konstitucijos Europai sustojęs ratifikavimas, ir poros valstybių užsispyrimas neatsitraukti nuo QMV pagal Nicos sutartį. O triumfuodavo daugumos sutarimas.

    Per tai visa ligšiolinė plėtros istorija beveik išimtinai – sėkmės istorija. Europa kaskart tapdavo ir stipresnė, ir labiau integruota. Struktūriniai fondai, sanglauda – tasai pozityvas radosi kaip tik per plėtros iššūkius.

    Be abejo, būtų idealu iš anksto eksplicitiškai sutarti dėl palankiausios institucinės sąrangos, bet prisiminkime ratifikavimo trikdžius, ypač, kai, nepaisant oficialios valstybės pozicijos, ji būdavo paneigiama referendumais. Man tikrai skaudu, kad tiesioginės išmokos Lietuvos ūkininkams per mažos, bet tokia gi ir būna derybų dėl narystės kaina.

    Dėl institucinės sąrangos diskutuokime, bet netrukdykime brandinti politinę valią plėtrai.

     
       

     

      Łukasz Kohut (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Kto stoi w miejscu, ten się cofa. Dlatego Europa musi ruszyć z kopyta! Prawdziwym celem Unii na 2035 rok powinien być konkret, czyli przyłączenie Islandii i Norwegii do Unii – oczywiście, jeżeli społeczeństwa tych krajów będą za.

    Europa potrzebuje nowego, mocnego impulsu. Unia powinna pokazać, że jest atrakcyjna nie tylko dla biedniejszych, ale także dla zamożnych krajów. Bo rozszerzenie to nie tylko Wschód i Południe – dalsza integracja to powinna być przede wszystkim Północ.

    To Północ jest kluczowa dla bezpieczeństwa Europy. Norwegia to żelazny sojusznik z NATO, z którym łączą nas nie tylko wspólne wartości, ale także wspólne zagrożenie – agresywna Rosja.

    Flagi NATO-wskie w Sztokholmie i w Helsinkach to był czarny sen Putina, który się ziścił. Warto być konsekwentnym. Pora, żeby kolejny sen o europejskich flagach w Oslo i w Reykjaviku się spełnił. To jest możliwe.

     
       

       

    Solicitudes incidentales de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»)

     
       

     

      Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, proširenje Europske unije nije samo tehnički proces, to je duboka politička odluka s dalekosežnim posljedicama. U vremenu kada se Europa suočava s ratom na istoku, pritiscima s juga i rastućim globalnim rivalstvima, proširenje je i ulaganje u sigurnost.

    Hrvatska je najmlađa članica Europske unije, ali ima i posebnu odgovornost da bude most između Unije i naših susjeda. U Bosni i Hercegovini, primjerice, i Crnoj Gori žive aktivne hrvatske zajednice koje nisu samo most identiteta već i most povjerenja. Njihova integracija, pravna i kulturna vidljivost moraju ostati dio europske agende.

    Ako proširenje ne napreduje, prostor neće ostati prazan i ispunit će ga drugi koji nemaju interes za demokraciju, već za utjecaj. Zato moramo ubrzati integracijske procese, ali uz jasna pravila, institucionalnu sigurnost i političku volju.

    Ako želimo da Europa ostane globalni akter, a ne birokratski projekt, proširenje mora biti strateški prioritet, ali uz paralelnu reformu institucija i jačanje unutarnje kohezije. Jer ako se ne širimo, to znači da stagniramo, a stagnacija u geopolitici znači povlačenje. Europa se ne smije povući.

     
       

     

      Viktória Ferenc (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Pontosan egy éve megkezdődtek a csatlakozási tárgyalások Ukrajnával, és a magyar diplomácia sikere nyomán a Nyugat-Ukrajnában élő kárpátaljai magyar közösség védelmében megfogalmazott tizenegy pontból álló javaslatainkat beépítették az általános csatlakozási tárgyalási keretbe. Ezzel a kárpátaljai magyarság jogainak védelme hivatalosan is Ukrajna csatlakozási folyamatának részévé vált.

    Csalódottan látjuk azonban, hogy az elmúlt 365 nap során nem történt érdemi előrelépés ebben a kérdésben, csupán látszatintézkedések történtek. A nemzeti kisebbségek jogainak védelmére irányuló cselekvési tervet ugyan elfogadta a kijevi vezetés, azonban diszkriminatív módon a kárpátaljai magyar közösség legnagyobb érdekvédelmi szervezetét nem vonták be a tárgyalásokba. Így Önök, kollégáim, amikor az európai uniós vezetők, politikusok szemet hunynak Ukrajna nemzeti kisebbségeit érintő kirakatintézkedései fölött, sőt támogatják azokat, veszélybe sodorják az uniós intézmények hitelességét, és valójában Önök saját maguk akadályozzák Ukrajna valódi demokratizálását.

     
       

     

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear people of Europe, it really drives me crazy when some people here in this debate say that the EU was never able to fix the big problems of our time, when it’s the same people that, when we ask for a strong and robust financial mandate for the European Union, say no. When we asked to unify the European Union’s competences on cross-border challenges, they say no. So the same people that sabotage the constant updating of this Union now claim that this Union is not able to solve anything and therefore should not be extended.

    The second thing that drives me crazy every time I hear it is when they say, ‘Oh, we cannot do this enlargement because it will cost us money’, and they throw around these big numbers. I’m a jurist; I do not come from the economy, but what I understand is that you have to invest if you want to grow your business. And investing in enlargement is investing in the future of Europe, of the European Union.

     
       

       

    (Fin de las intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»))

     
       

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for this debate, and comments certainly confirmed the importance and necessity to reflect on how to prepare the Union for enlargement.

    And I also think that this debate confirmed that most of you support enlargement, and it shows that an enlarged Union will be a stronger and more efficient Union.

    But to do so, we should really reflect on how we prepare our Union for environment. As I mentioned in my introduction, actually, later this year, the Commission will present the communication on pre-enlargement policy review. And we are always ready to debate with this House, how best to ensure that the Unions remains able to take decisions fast, swiftly, efficiently in benefits of our citizens.

    So once again, thanks for this debate, it was really very, very needed, and we are going to present the pre-enlargement policy review later this year.

     
       

     

      President. – Thank you very much, Commissioner.

    The debate is closed.

     

    3. The United Kingdom accession to the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (debate)

     

      Ilhan Kyuchyuk, author. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, on 27 June 2024, the United Kingdom signed and ratified the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil or commercial matters, known as the Judgments Convention, which has also been signed by Uruguay, Israel, Costa Rica, Russia, the United States and Ukraine. The Judgments Convention entered into force on 1 September 2023, one year after the first two parties deposited their instruments of ratification.

    In accordance with Article 29(2) of the Judgments Convention, the EU can notify the depositary, before 27 June 2025, that the ratification by the UK does not have the effect of establishing treaty relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union. If no such notification is issued – that is, if the EU tacitly accepts the UK’s accession – the Judgments Convention will begin to apply between the two parties on 1 July 2025.

    Parliament understands that the Commission’s assessment of the UK’s accession is positive and that the Commission would be in favour of tacitly accepting it. However, the significance of private international law rules for EU citizens in this particular area also has a political and legal impact, not only on the area of judicial cooperation but also beyond, bearing in mind the relevance of relations between the UK and the European Union in a volatile international context.

    With respect for each EU institution’s prerogatives and Parliament’s consistent position, a statement would allow the Commission to tacitly accept the UK’s accession to the Judgments Convention on the EU’s behalf, under the relevant provisions of that Convention.

    Given the deadline laid down in the Judgments Convention, the need for the EU institutions to act without delay to ascertain the EU’s acceptance of the UK’s accession to the Convention, and Parliament’s intention to make an appropriate statement in this regard, could the Commission confirm its assessment of the UK’s accession to the Convention?

    Secondly, Madam Zaharieva, having regard to the commitments made here in November 2024 by Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič with regard to third countries’ accession to conventions and respect for Article 218(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, what concrete steps does the Commission intend to take in future to ensure that Parliament’s prerogatives relating to third countries’ accession to the Judgments Convention are always fully and formally respected under the Treaties, and what timetable does it envisage for taking these steps?

     
       

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for this debate on the accession of the United Kingdom to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters.

    In its written assessment of the United Kingdom’s certification of the Judgments Convention, which the Commission transmitted to the Committee of Legal Affairs of the European Parliament and to the Council, the Commission concluded that the UK has systematic capability to apply the Judgments Convention and to deal satisfactorily with individual problematic cases.

    The Commission therefore sees no obstacle for the European Union to establish Treaty relations with the United Kingdom based on the Judgments Convention.

    As regards the procedure to be followed when a third country joins the Judgments Convention, this issue was discussed during the process leading to the EU accession to the Judgments Convention with the European Parliament consent and on several occasions after that. The Judgments Convention is based on the principle of the acceptance of accession by other contracting parties, and only envisages an objection procedure in exceptional cases.

    The Commission therefore takes the view that formal decisions under Article 218 of the Treaty are required only where the EU intends to object to the establishment of such Treaty relations. This approach is in line with the need to implement the EU obligations under international law in good faith.

    At the same time, the Commission is committed to consulting Parliament and to take its views into account in full compliance with the Treaties and, notably, the duty of sincere cooperation. This is why, when deciding whether to propose an objection decision, we committed to consistently inform the Parliament of each intended accession of a third country to the Judgments Convention, taking full account of the views expressed by this House.

    I therefore look forward to the Parliament’s views in the debate today.

     
       

     

      Axel Voss, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Es ist mir eine große Freude, unter Ihrer Aufsicht heute hier auch entsprechend vortragen zu können. Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lassen Sie mich eines bitte klarstellen: Es geht hier nicht nur um die Bereitschaft des Vereinigten Königreiches, dem Übereinkommen über Gerichtsstandsvereinbarungen beizutreten; wir sind uns, glaube ich, alle darüber einig, dass Großbritannien dazu in der Lage ist. Die eigentliche Frage ist, wie die Kommission mit dem Beitritt von Drittstaaten umgeht und ob sie die Rolle des Parlaments entsprechend respektiert.

    Die schriftliche Bewertung, die wir erhalten haben, folgt nicht dem Verfahren gemäß Artikel 218 Absatz 6 AEUV. Es gibt keinen Vorschlag an den Rat, kein Ersuchen um die Zustimmung des Parlaments, lediglich eine Informationsnotiz. Das mag der derzeitigen Praxis durchaus entsprechen, aber ist eben nicht wirklich geltendes Recht. Und der Gerichtshof hatte ja bereits schon einmal klargestellt: Selbst eine sogenannte Nichtbeanstandung stellt ein internationales Abkommen dar. Also, das Parlament muss einbezogen werden, und das ist keine freiwillige Entscheidung.

    Deshalb hat der Rechtsausschuss eine Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung mit der Entschließung eingebracht, um die Kommission aufzufordern, ihren rechtlichen Ansatz zu bestätigen, und sie daran zu erinnern, dass Gesetzgebungsbefugnisse des Parlaments in diesem Bereich auch nicht umgangen werden sollten. Wir unterstützen natürlich den Beitritt des Vereinigten Königreiches, aber diese Unterstützung darf eben nicht zulasten eines ordnungsgemäßen Verfahrens gehen.

     
       

     

      Ana Catarina Mendes, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caros colegas, julgo que a Cimeira, de 19 de Maio de 2025, entre a União Europeia e o Reino Unido marca uma nova etapa das nossas relações após o Brexit de reforço da nossa cooperação em diversas áreas.

    Seja o reforço na área da segurança e da juventude, que deve ser mesmo feito, seja o reforço no domínio da política de defesa e segurança –– sabemos como o contexto internacional o exige ––, seja o reforço das históricas relações com o Reino Unido.

    Assim, desse ponto de vista, e da parte do S&D, queria deixar aqui um sublinhado de congratulação pelo êxito desta cimeira, mas também pelo regresso às boas relações de cooperação, de solidariedade e de vizinhança, se quisermos, com o Reino Unido.

    É nesse quadro que se insere esta vontade expressa do Reino Unido de aderir à Convenção de Haia, que também quero aqui, em nome do S&D, saudar. Aquilo que se espera, como o colega anterior aqui disse, é saber qual é a posição da Comissão e se a Comissão, tão brevemente quanto possível, aceita esta vontade expressa e confirma com brevidade a sua avaliação favorável da aceitação da adesão do Reino Unido à Convenção de Haia.

    No entanto, como o colega anterior também disse, Senhora Comissária, é preciso que as relações institucionais sejam respeitadas; o artigo 218.º, parágrafo seis, estabelece muito claramente que este Parlamento tem também um papel a desempenhar neste contexto, não apenas para aplaudir, não apenas para saudar, mas sobretudo para estar empenhado e comprometido no reforço desta relação.

    Por isso, Senhora Comissária, a minha intervenção visa solicitar que a boa cooperação institucional continue a existir e que não se ignore o papel extraordinário que o Parlamento Europeu também pode ter na ratificação desta Convenção por parte do Reino Unido, a qual, volto a dizer, saúdo com grande alegria.

     
       

     

      Dainius Žalimas, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, we cannot defend the rule of law externally, failing to follow it in our own decision-making. The third country’s accession to the Judgements Convention is a test of our compliance with the EU Constitution, the founding Treaties. The EU acceded to the Judgements Convention with Parliament’s consent. Indeed, the consent to be bound by international agreements is a typical function of a democratic parliament. This consent has to be required also when the convention’s scope – including scope of application – is changed, for example by the accession of third countries.

    However, as in the case of Ukraine’s accession, we are again confronted with the Commission’s refusal to recognise this inherent function of the Parliament as provided by the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In this way, the Commission undermines the principle of representative democracy, including institutional balance and accountability to EU citizens. The Commission, as a guardian of the Treaties, must fully respect them without improvisation beyond its mandate.

    Therefore, with today’s oral question and resolution, we not only support the accession of the UK, but we also are defending our parliamentary prerogatives and the rule of law.

     
       

     

      Ville Niinistö, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, today we welcome a step forward for Justice Beyond Borders. The UK’s accession to the Hague Convention is not just good news, it’s a win for legal certainty for businesses, families and individuals on both sides of the Channel.

    But let’s be clear: this debate is not about the UK today. It is about us, about our role as Parliament in shaping how the EU builds binding legal ties with the rest of the world.

    We believe in the rule of law. We believe that judgments recognised across borders must be rooted in fairness, due process and human rights. And we also believe that the European Parliament must have a say when those decisions impact millions of Europeans. The Commission should take the legal role of the co-legislators properly into account in this ratification process.

    That’s why we are here today, to make sure our democratic role isn’t sidelined, to ensure that Parliament’s voice is heard, respected and empowered. Let’s build bridges, yes, but let’s build them strong, transparent and with full democratic oversight, because Europe works best when it works together.

     
       

     

      Mary Khan, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Dieser Antrag zeigt, wie internationale Zusammenarbeit auch ohne Brüsseler Bevormundung funktionieren kann. Großbritannien ist nicht mehr Teil der EU. Das haben wir der Geduld und Durchsetzungsfähigkeit eines freien Volkes zu verdanken; darauf können die Briten auch stolz sein. Und dennoch gelingt es, auf Augenhöhe Rechtssicherheit zu schaffen.

    Ein souveräner Staat, ein völkerrechtlicher Vertrag, klare Regeln, ganz ohne milliardenteuren Beamtenapparat, ohne Ideologie – genau das ist unser Weg. Wir müssen die europäische Zusammenarbeit auf das Wesentliche reduzieren: Binnenmarkt, Schutz der Außengrenzen und freiwillige bilaterale Verträge zwischen souveränen Nationalstaaten.

    Stattdessen erleben wir eine EU, die sich zu einem politischen Superstaat aufbläht, der Milliarden kostet und sich immer tiefer in nationale Entscheidungen einmischt. Wir stimmen zu, weil es zeigt, wie echte Partnerschaft aussieht: rechtsstaatlich, freiwillig und souverän.

     
       

       

    (Se suspende la sesión a las 11:16 horas).

     
       

       

    VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY
    Vizepräsidentin

     

    4. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Die Sitzung wird um 12:00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

     

    5. Voting time

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Abstimmungsstunde.

     

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die folgende Abstimmung betrifft die Medienfreiheit in Georgien, insbesondere den Fall von Msia Amaghlobeli (siehe Punkt 5.1 des Protokolls).

     

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die folgende Abstimmung betrifft den Fall von Ahmadreza Djalali in Iran (siehe Punkt 5.2 des Protokolls).

     

       

    – Vor der Abstimmung über Änderungsantrag 3:

     
       

     

      Matthieu Valet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, en tant que coordinateur du groupe des Patriotes pour l’Europe au sein de la sous-commission des droits de l’homme, je propose d’ajouter un amendement oral à la résolution sur le Mali, dont le texte, à notre sens, ne dénonce pas avec suffisamment de clarté le terrorisme islamiste. Cet amendement vise ainsi à rendre hommage et à honorer le sang versé de nos 58 soldats français, ainsi que celui de nos partenaires européens tombés dans la lutte contre les terroristes islamistes au Mali et pour la liberté que nous défendons tous ici au sein de ce Parlement.

    Je propose donc la formulation suivante: «considérant que l’Union européenne et plusieurs États membres ont déployé des efforts et perdu des vies dans la lutte contre le djihadisme, à la demande des anciennes autorités maliennes, dont 58 soldats français, cinq soldats néerlandais, deux soldats allemands, un soldat espagnol et un soldat portugais». Je vous remercie. Cela sera un signal fort pour nos soldats qui, souvent si jeunes, s’engagent pour nos libertés et tombent pour défendre des démocraties.

     
       

       

    (Das Parlament lehnt es ab, den mündlichen Änderungsantrag zur Abstimmung zu stellen.)

     

    5.4. Welfare of dogs and cats and their traceability (A10-0104/2025 – Veronika Vrecionová) (vote)

       

    – Nach der Abstimmung:

     
       

       

    (Das Parlament billigt den Antrag auf Rücküberweisung an den Ausschuss.)

     

    5.5. Electricity grids: the backbone of the EU energy system (A10-0091/2025 – Anna Stürgkh) (vote)

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die folgende Abstimmung betrifft Stromnetze als Rückgrat des Energiesystems der EU (siehe Punkt 5.5 des Protokolls).

     

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die folgende Abstimmung betrifft den Deal für eine saubere Industrie (siehe Punkt 5.6 des Protokolls).

     

    5.7. The United Kingdom accession to the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (B10-0273/2025) (vote)

       

    (Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen)

     
       

       

    (Die Sitzung wird um 12:34 Uhr unterbrochen.)

     

    6. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Die Sitzung wird um 15.01 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

     

    7. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Das Protokoll der gestrigen Sitzung und die angenommenen Texte sind verfügbar.

    Gibt es Einwände dagegen? Das ist nicht der Fall.

    Das Protokoll ist somit genehmigt.

     

    8. Protecting bees: advancing the EU’s New Deal for Pollinators (debate)

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, pollination is a free but invaluable service that insects provide. Without it, our food security, our livelihoods and nature would be threatened.

    Yet, pollinator populations have dramatically declined in the recent decades. Populations of 1 in 3 bee, butterfly and hoverflies species are collapsing. Many species are on the verge of extinction. This has a direct impact on the productivity and competitiveness of the EU’s agriculture sector and on our food security.

    As highlighted in the EU 2020 biodiversity strategy, in the EU pollinators initiative and in the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, we need to take urgent action to restore pollinator populations. To step up efforts and reverse this decline of pollinators, we reinforced two years ago the EU pollinators initiative by revising its action plan. We have also enshrined a target to reverse the decline of pollinators by 2030 in the Nature Restoration Regulation.

    Together, those efforts constitute the new deal for pollinators – our response to society’s demand to take decisive action. This demand was manifested in the European citizens’ initiative ‘Save bees and farmers’. This House has been a strong and vocal advocate of the EU pollinator agenda. I thank you for that and for the opportunity to update you today on the progress in the implementation of the new deal for pollinators.

    We are currently implementing more than 40 actions through the revised EU pollinators initiative. These actions aim to mitigate the drivers of pollinator decline, generate knowledge, foster Member States’ actions and mobilise society.

    Agriculture is the essential sector. It depends on pollinators the most, and at the same time it exerts the highest pressure on them. That is why we have been working closely with Member States to increase support for pollinator‑friendly farming under the common agricultural policy.

    We want to support farmers to restore nature and pollinator populations, including through the development of nature credits and through enhanced farm advisory services. We are working on strengthening the pesticide authorisation process to increase protection of pollinators from the use of pesticides. We are also supporting Member States in reducing the risk in use of pesticide by increasing the uptake of integrated pest management and availability of low-risk plant protection products.

    EU sales of pesticides in 2023 were at the lowest level since the start of Eurostat data series in 2011. Still, the work is not over. Despite our efforts, pesticide use remains a major driver of pollinator decline. We count on your continued support for strict regulatory framework on pesticides. Meanwhile, we have substantially improved our understanding of pollinator decline through comprehensive assessment of pollinator species and the European ‘red list’ and thanks to numerous projects launched through Horizon Europe.

    We are currently preparing a delegated act on pollinator monitoring, as required under the Nature Restoration Regulation. I call on Parliament and Member States to support a robust scientific monitoring method. Good data will enable smart and well-guided investment in the restoration of pollinators and ecosystems, yielding substantial savings in the long term.

    In addition, the preparatory action for the European Biodiversity Observation Coordination Centre, initiated by Parliament will help Member States implement a monitoring system for pollinators.

    To conclude, a word on our outreach efforts. We have built a strong and dedicated community of experts from Member States, authorities and stakeholder organisations through our working group on pollinators. We also continue to strongly support citizens’ engagement, especially youth engagement in actions for pollinators.

    Youth is our future and the future needs pollinators. That is why in the coming months we will launch the Young Citizens Assembly on Pollinators, the European Fund for Youth Action on Pollinators and ‘buzzing schools’. This is part of the pilot project initiated by the European Parliament. I thank you for your support and the overall commitment to the EU’s action on pollinators.

     
       

     

      Tomislav Sokol, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, Europska komisija je 2023. predstavila novi plan za oprašivače s ključnim ciljem preokrenuti alarmantan pad broja divljih kukaca oprašivača u Europi. Ova mjera nije samo ekološka, ona je duboko strateška. Bez oprašivača nema ni sigurnosti hrane ni zdravog okoliša. Podržavam ovu inicijativu i naglašavam važnost zaštite prirodnih staništa i poticanja biološke raznolikosti.

    Međutim, novi plan za oprašivače mora ići ruku pod ruku sa strategijom za europske pčelare koji svakodnevno vode borbu s nelojalnom konkurencijom, uvoznicima patvorenog i nekvalitetnog meda iz trećih zemalja, a tu su podaci porazni. Naime, prema istraživanjima, gotovo svaka druga staklenka meda na europskom tržištu sadrži krivotvoreni med. Naši pčelari koji proizvode kvalitetan prirodni med ne mogu konkurirati damping cijenama, nedefiniranim standardima i lažnim deklaracijama.

    Zato smo u prošlom mandatu izmjenom Direktive o medu uspjeli zabraniti zavaravajuće označavanje mješavina meda i uvesti obvezu navođenja točnog postotka i zemlju porijekla svake komponente mješavine meda. To je velik korak za transparentnost i zaštitu potrošača, ali i za opstanak naših pčelara.

    Međutim, ne smijemo stati na tome. Moramo koristiti trgovinske i carinske mehanizme, pojačati kontrole na granicama, uvesti strože nadzore uvoza i zatražiti uključivanje interesa pčelara u trgovinske sporazume s trećim državama.

    Također, novi plan za oprašivače neće biti djelotvoran bez borbe protiv upotrebe štetnih pesticida i novih genskih tehnika kojima ne smijemo dozvoliti da naruše sigurnost hrane i zdravlje potrošača. Zato je ključno poticati lokalnu proizvodnju hrane i prirodan uzgoj.

    S tim u vezi, treba već sada analizirati učinke strategije „od polja do stola”, za koju sam bio izvjestitelj Kluba EPP-a u odboru IMCO, i predložiti njezinu nadopunu u svjetlu izazova s kojima se pčelari susreću. Kolegice i kolege, zaštitimo pčele, ali i interese naših pčelara.

     
       

     

      Günther Sidl, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, geschätzte Frau Kommissarin! Es ist höchste Zeit, dass wir hier im Europäischen Parlament wieder über die Bienen reden, denn die Biene ist eine der nützlichsten und wichtigsten Tierarten, die es gibt, und braucht unseren besonderen Schutz. Aber genau den hat sie derzeit leider nicht – im Gegenteil. Die Probleme, denen die Bienen gegenüberstehen, werden immer größer. Die milden Winter befördern das Milbenwachstum und damit die Krankheitsübertragung auf die Bienen, was alleine dieses Jahr zu immensen Verlusten geführt hat; Verlustraten von 30 % sind keine Seltenheit. Aber selbst die Bienenvölker, die den Winter überstehen, haben keine rosigen Aussichten, denn sie müssen sich ihre Nahrung zwischen immer größeren Monokulturen und pestizidbelasteten Pflanzen suchen. Kurz gesagt: So kann es nicht weitergehen!

    Wir brauchen endlich ein ernsthaftes Programm zum Schutz der Bienen. Ich bin froh, dass die EU‑Kommission dieses Thema aufgreift, aber ich hoffe, Sie verstehen, dass ich skeptisch bin. Denn bis jetzt war die Kommission nicht die große Beschützerin der Bienen, sonst hätte sie nicht ein ums andere Mal den Einsatz von Pestiziden wie Glyphosat zugelassen, sonst hätten Sie schon längst mit der Praxis der Notfallzulassungen für problematische Mittel aufgeräumt. Ich verstehe, dass Landwirte Ertragssicherheit brauchen, aber wenn wir das nur mit Mitteln erreichen, die den Bienen schaden, hat am Ende niemand etwas davon.

    Wir müssen endlich allen klarmachen, und es muss uns allen klar sein, dass Pestizide nicht die alleinige Lösung sind, sondern ein gravierendes Problem. Ein Problem, das sich überall festsetzt – in Böden, in Gewässern, in unserem Trinkwasser und letztlich auch in unserem Körper, und genau da haben Umweltgifte und Ewigkeitschemikalien nichts zu suchen. Suchen wir endlich nach einer Lösung, die allen hilft: der Natur, den Bienen und damit auch uns.

    Wir brauchen endlich eine europäische Forschungsstrategie für wirksame und ökologische Pestizidalternativen. Nur damit geben wir der Landwirtschaft neue Instrumente in die Hand, mit denen sie nachhaltig und ertragssicher arbeiten kann. Packen wir das Problem an den Wurzeln und geben wir unserer Umwelt eine echte Chance, sich zu erholen!

     
       

     

      Valérie Deloge, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, la Commission européenne présente aujourd’hui un nouveau pacte pour les pollinisateurs. Le constat est partagé par tous. Les abeilles, les syrphes, les papillons disparaissent à un rythme inquiétant. Ce déclin fragilise notre agriculture, notre souveraineté alimentaire et la biodiversité en Europe. Mais à y regarder de plus près, ce texte reflète surtout les travers habituels de la technocratie bruxelloise: des objectifs déconnectés des réalités agricoles, une avalanche de directives et un transfert toujours plus massif de responsabilités des États membres vers l’Union européenne.

    On demande aux agriculteurs français de renoncer à certains traitements, d’intégrer des bandes fleuries, de diversifier leurs cultures et c’est une bonne chose si on les accompagne. Mais pendant ce temps, on continue d’importer sans vergogne des produits agricoles venus de pays qui utilisent des substances interdites chez nous. Où est la cohérence? Où est la justice?

    Soyons clairs protéger les pollinisateurs, c’est aussi défendre l’avenir de notre agriculture. Il ne s’agit pas de choisir entre les abeilles et les agriculteurs, mais de sortir de cette logique de punition et d’hypocrisie. La pollution qui menace les insectes pollinisateurs ne vient pas uniquement des champs. Elle vient aussi de l’air que nous respirons, des polluants persistants, des microplastiques, des métaux lourds et d’un effet cocktail de substances chimiques dont l’Union européenne ne mesure pas encore sérieusement les interactions. Ce sont autant de facteurs qui affaiblissent les insectes, mais aussi la santé humaine.

    Et là, le texte de la Commission reste timide. Il traite longuement des pesticides, mais presque rien n’est dit sur l’impact des grandes zones industrielles, de la pollution de l’air ou de la charge chimique globale. Or, les agriculteurs ne doivent pas devenir les boucs émissaires d’un système de production mondialisé qui échappe à tout contrôle. Il est temps de changer votre logiciel, inspirez-vous des États membres qui sont les plus vertueux en la matière, comme la France. Oubliez votre vision vision en silo et réfléchissez plutôt à une approche globale sur les polluants invisibles.

    Au delà des produits phytosanitaires, c’est toute la question de la qualité de notre air qui doit se poser. Soutenez les agriculteurs qui ont déjà pris conscience du problème et œuvrez déjà à protéger les habitats des pollinisateurs. Encouragez la recherche sur les alternatives aux intrants chimiques pour ne pas que nos agriculteurs se retrouvent privés de solutions. Il est temps de défendre à la fois nos agriculteurs et la biodiversité avec des politiques réalistes, cohérentes et souveraines.

     
       

     

      Thomas Waitz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, yes, indeed, our pollinators are declining. And why is it so? It was just mentioned by the far right: it’s because of chemical pollution, because of pesticides. Well, the Commission came up with the so-called Sustainable Use Directive to reduce pesticides. But do you remember why it failed? It was very much on the right side of the House that the Sustainable Use Directive was actually killed here in the House. Yes, it was you guys. This would have been one of the main measures that we would have needed to take to reduce the decline of pollinators.

    And it’s not just honeybees – I’m a beekeeper and a farmer at the same time – it’s also about wild pollinators. The Commission – under the rule of simplification – has reduced the fallow land that we need for wild pollinators. Is there real support for organic farming? Because this is the way of farming that safeguards natural pollinators, wild pollinators and our bees as well.

    Is there real support for beekeepers in the European Union? Well, let’s see the new CAP proposal. We need real support for beekeepers because, due to climate crisis and pesticides, it’s harder and harder to keep a beekeeper’s business going. I can say that from my very own experience. But I’m ready to work on this, and I’m happy to contribute if there are concrete proposals to safeguard wild pollinators and bees.

     
       

     

      Sebastian Everding, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Honigbienen haben für die Biodiversität keinerlei Relevanz. Auch wenn uns Schulbücher und Medien oftmals ein anderes Bild vermitteln und die meisten Menschen beim Wort Biene direkt an die Honigbiene denken: Diese ist nicht bedroht; allein in Deutschland sind rund 100 000 Imker um sie bemüht. Auf der anderen Seite steht die Hälfte der 561 Wildbienenarten als vom Aussterben bedroht auf der Roten Liste. Reden wir über Bestäuber, dann müssen wir schwerpunktmäßig über Wildbienen, über Wespen, Schmetterlinge und Fliegen reden. Honigbienen können diese maximal ergänzen, aber niemals ersetzen. Wenn sich Unternehmen Honigbienen aufs Dach stellen, ist das mehr Greenwashing als ein Beitrag zum Artenschutz.

    Viele Menschen haben die Problematik erkannt und möchten Insekten helfen. Sie kaufen gutgläubig sogenannte Insektenhotels, gefüllt mit Holzwolle, mit Tannenzapfen, mit Baumrinde, weil dies Natürlichkeit vermittelt. Aber diese sind ganz oft ein Fall für den Biomüll, werden nicht angenommen und können im schlimmsten Fall sogar Insekten schaden. Hier müssen ganz dringend nachvollziehbare Siegel für die Orientierung geschaffen werden.

    Vergesst Biene Maja, kümmert Euch um die Gehörnte Mauerbiene, die Dunkelfransige Hosenbiene, schafft Lebensräume und Blühstreifen und verbietet Pestizide wie Glyphosat!

     
       

     

      Marcin Sypniewski, w imieniu grupy ESN. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Nie wiem, czy widzieli państwo komedię „Człowiek kontra pszczoła” z Rowanem Atkinsonem w roli głównej. Tam główny bohater, goniąc jedną pszczołę, demoluje cały dom. A dzisiaj jednak to nie pszczoła przeszkadza człowiekowi, a człowiek, a konkretnie również unijna polityka, przeszkadza pszczołom. Pszczoła nie ma swojego biura w Brukseli. Nie zatrudnia żadnego lobbysty. Nie pisze sprawozdań i nie czeka na kolejną dyrektywę, na kolejny plan, kolejny ład. Ona po prostu żyje, zapyla i robi to, co umie najlepiej – wspiera naturę i daje ludziom zdrową żywność.

    Tymczasem w Unii tworzymy pakty, strategie, zielone łady, konsultacje, a zapominamy, że najlepszym sojusznikiem pszczoły nie jest żaden biurokrata, tylko po prostu pszczelarz i rolnik – ten, który wie, że bez zapylaczy nie będzie żadnych plonów. Chcecie ratować pszczoły, to przestańcie w końcu szkodzić rolnikom. Przestańcie wspierać konkurencję spoza Unii. Nie zamęczajcie ich kolejnymi regulacjami, zakazami i sprawozdawczością. Przestańcie karać ich za to, że chcą produkować żywność, a nie wypełniać arkusze Excela. Pszczoły potrzebują ciszy, spokoju, równowagi w krajobrazie, a nie chaosu legislacyjnego. Potrzebują lasów, łąk, pasiek, nie – Zielonego Ładu, który niszczy to, co miał chronić. Nie powielajmy scenariusza z filmu, w którym człowiek niszczy wszystko, żeby pozbyć się jednej pszczoły. Chrońmy naturę razem z tymi, którzy ją naprawdę rozumieją – z rolnikami i pszczelarzami.

     
       

     

      Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Noriu pacituoti, ką šioje tribūnoje kalbėjau dėl apdulkintojų 2019 m. gruodžio 17 d.: „biologinės įvairovės nykimo prevencija turi būti grindžiama mokslu ir ambicingais, bet įvykdomais tikslais“. Taip pat griežtai siūliau Bee Guidance atnaujinimą ir jog naujoms augalų apsaugos priemonėms būtų vykdomi chroninio toksiškumo tyrimai. Tiriamas poveikis ne tik bitėms, bet ir kitiems apdulkintojams.

    Per tą laiką priimtas New Deal for Pollinators, atnaujintas Bee Guidance, o 2023-iaisiais Reglamentas dėl gamtos atkūrimo suteikė apdulkintojams – tarp jų ir bitėms – teisinį apsaugos statusą. Tai reikšmingas žingsnis, kuris įpareigoja valstybes nares stebėti jų populiacijas pagal standartizuotą metodiką; iki 2030 m. turi būti sustabdytas apdulkintojų nykimas, vėliau – užtikrintas jų tvarus gausėjimas. Svarbus klausimas – Europos raudonasis sąrašas bitėms. Jis turi būti atnaujintas ir atspindėti dabartines rūšių būklės tendencijas. Be kita ko, minėtam tikslui grėsmę kelia invazinės rūšys. Tokios rūšies kaip Azijos vapsva viena kolonija per sezoną gali sunaikinti iki 90 tūkstančių apdulkintojų. Tad jau būtų laikas imtis atitinkamų veiksmų, grįstų rizikos vertinimu. Pesticidų atveju žiediniai bandymai vienišėms bitėms yra žingsnis pirmyn, tačiau vis dar trūksta ilgalaikių tyrimų kolonijų lygmeniu. Subletaliniai ir chroniniai poveikiai, deja, tebelieka neįvertinti. O juk tik visapusiški tyrimai suteiks galimybę priimti mokslu pagrįstus sprendimus. Teigiamai vertinu tai, kad duomenų bazės apie bites tampa vis plačiau prieinamos ir vis dėlto jos turi būti ne tik atviros, bet ir išsamios, nuolat atnaujinamos bei integruotos į sprendimų priėmimą – tiek sudarant Europos raudonąjį bičių sąrašą, tiek planuojant buveinių atkūrimą. Pasikartosiu, kad tik remdamiesi patikimais moksliniais duomenimis galime pasiekti savo tikslų ir sustabdyti bičių nykimą.

     
       

     

      Maria Noichl (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Ja, die Kommission ist derzeit unterwegs mit einem Banner „Bienenschutz″; dieses Banner „Bienenschutz“ soll ganz oben stehen. Es ist aber wichtig zu sagen, dass die jüngsten Vorschläge der Kommission zur europäischen Agrarpolitik genau im Gegensatz stehen. Bienenpolitik wird nicht in Ihrem Ausschuss oder in Ihrer Kommission gemacht, sondern Bienenpolitik – die echte Bienenpolitik – wird im Agrarausschuss gemacht. Wenn im Agrarausschuss weiterhin Deregulierung voranschreitet, wenn im Agrarausschuss weiterhin die Bestäuber-, die Biodiversitätsstrategie und andere Dinge, aber auch die Naturwiederherstellungsrichtlinie an die Wand gefahren werden – denn die wird momentan massiv angegriffen im Agrarausschuss –, wenn die Vereinfachungspakete keine Vereinfachungspakete, sondern Bienenangriffspakete sind, dann merken wir, dass der Agrarausschuss der Ausschuss ist, der für die Bienengesundheit zu sorgen hat.

    Wir alle wissen, dass die Hauptursache für den Rückgang der Bienen die landwirtschaftliche Intensivhaltung ist. Wir alle wissen, dass die Aufgabe der extensiven landwirtschaftlichen Systeme ein Problem ist, dass der Klimawandel, aber auch die invasiven Arten, die Urbanisierung und die Intensivierung der Forstwirtschaft alles Gründe sind. Diesen Gründen wird man nur zuvorkommen.

    Man wird die Bienen nicht mit kleinen Bienen‑Hotspots, sondern nur mit einer flächendeckenden, guten, nachhaltigen Landwirtschaft in ganz Europa unterstützen können. Deswegen: Bienenpolitik ist Landwirtschaftspolitik, Landwirtschaftspolitik ist Bienenpolitik. Ein großes Banner oben drüber hilft uns nichts, wir brauchen es jeden Tag.

     
       

     

      Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Der Schutz von Bienen und anderen Bestäubern muss eine Priorität für die EU sein. 78 % der heimischen Pflanzenarten und 84 % der Nutzpflanzen sind entweder teilweise oder vollständig auf Insekten zur Bestäubung angewiesen, aber wenn wir so weitermachen wie bisher, fördern wir den dramatischen Rückgang von bestäubenden Wildinsekten massiv. Die öffentliche Meinung ist eindeutig. Mit der erfolgreichen Europäischen Bürgerinitiative Save bees and farmers fordern Bürgerinnen und Bürger eine bienenfreundliche Landwirtschaft, frei von giftigen Pestiziden, nicht nur der Bienen wegen, sondern wegen der Zukunft von Landwirtinnen und Landwirten, die auf ein funktionierendes Ökosystem angewiesen sind.

    Klimawandel, der Verlust und die Verschlechterung der Lebensräume, massive Auswirkungen von Pestiziden auf die Umwelt, auf unsere Gesundheit – das sind alles Phänomene, die mit konservativen Politiken und Handlungsunwilligkeit nicht angegangen werden können. Wir brauchen einen zukunftsgerichteten EU‑Pakt für Bestäuber, eine gemeinsame Agrarpolitik, die für Landwirtinnen und Landwirte und die Umwelt funktioniert, und klare Vorschriften zur Pestizidreduzierung.

     
       

     

      Valentina Palmisano (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le api, oltre ad essere preziosi impollinatori, sono sentinelle della salute ambientale. Quando spariscono è l’intero ecosistema a lanciare un grido d’allarme. Oggi quel grido è fortissimo. A novembre 2023 questo Parlamento ha accolto con favore il nuovo patto europeo per gli impollinatori e oggi dobbiamo dare seguito a quell’impegno.

    Le principali minacce degli impollinatori sono ben conosciute: l’agricoltura intensiva, l’uso dei pesticidi, la perdita di habitat, così come sono conosciute anche le misure per contrastarle. Serve solo il coraggio politico di applicarle con coerenza e in tempi rapidi. Dobbiamo incentivare pratiche agricole amiche delle api, rafforzare la tutela degli apicoltori nella PAC, limitare l’uso di pesticidi, salvaguardare gli impollinatori selvatici, rafforzare il programma LIFE, che già oggi finanzia degli strumenti efficaci per proteggere gli habitat e le biodiversità.

    Ci sono anche esperienze urbane da valorizzare, ad esempio il progetto UrBees, nato a Torino, dimostra che le api possono aiutarci a monitorare l’ambiente e a costruire comunità più consapevoli.

    Ecco, proteggere gli impollinatori significa proteggere l’equilibrio tra natura, agricoltura e salute pubblica. È una responsabilità che ci riguarda tutti. Oggi abbiamo gli strumenti e il dovere per agire.

     
       

     

      Anja Arndt (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Der neue Deal für Bestäuber ist der nächste zentralistische Irrsinn aus Brüssel. Dieselbe Kommission, die Landwirte mit Auflagen überschüttet, vernichtet mit ihrer eigenen Energiewende selbst massenhaft Insekten. Jedes Windrad tötet jedes Jahr 40 Millionen Insekten, und wir haben in der Europäischen Union 280 000 Windräder. Unsere Windkraftanlagen töten also jedes Jahr hochgerechnet 9 Billionen Insekten. Bevor Brüssel neue Vorschriften erlässt, sollte die Kommission ihre eigenen Fehler kritisch aufarbeiten.

    Der neue Deal für Bestäuber ist nichts anderes als ein weiteres Bürokratiemonster, das nationale Kompetenzen ignoriert und Landwirte drangsaliert. Statt echter Hilfe soll ein teures, EU‑weites Überwachungssystem eingeführt werden, ohne praktischen Nutzen für Insekten. Gleichzeitig will man die Pestizideinsätze einfach mal pauschal halbieren, und das wurde hier schon angesprochen, dass das letztes Jahr zum Glück abgewendet wurde. Ohne Rücksicht auf die Landwirte soll das geschehen, regionale Unterschiede sollen nicht berücksichtigt werden oder die Ernährungssicherheit unserer Bürger.

    So etwas muss gestoppt werden. Deutschland braucht deshalb die AfD, und Europa braucht die ESN.

    (Die Rednerin lehnt eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ von Lukas Sieper ab.)

     
       

     

      Pär Holmgren (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Här står jag, klockan är ganska exakt halv fyra på torsdagseftermiddagen. Jag är näst sista talaren i den sista debatten i Strasbourg den här veckan, om något så extremt viktigt som bin och pollinering.

    Det är verkligen pollinering och andra liknande ekosystemtjänster som är helt avgörande för vår matförsörjning, för att vi ska kunna arbeta med klimatanpassning och faktiskt också för att vi ska kunna lindra effekterna av själva den globala uppvärmningen i sig.

    Men de allra flesta av mina kollegor är på väg hem. Många sitter säkert redan på sina flygplan på väg till sina hemländer. En torsdag eftermiddag som det här så blir det för mig, och säkert för många andra gröna, mer övertydligt än vanligt, att det är i princip inga andra av mina kollegor som bryr sig om de här helt grundläggande, viktiga existentiella frågorna: klimat, biologisk mångfald, pollinering, ekosystemtjänster.

    Vi måste se till att försörja och försvara dem så att vi faktiskt har ett fungerande samhälle även i framtiden.

     
       

     

      Younous Omarjee (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la commissaire, elles ne parlent pas, mais sans elles, le monde se tairait. Et pourtant, déjà les abeilles meurent massivement et leur bourdonnement s’épuise dans le vacarme de nos pesticides et d’un choix d’un modèle agricole productiviste et intensif dont nous savons aujourd’hui qu’il faut tourner la page. Chaque ruche qui se vide, c’est un champ qui s’épuise. Une fleur qui ne fructifie pas et, en totalité, une promesse de vie qui s’évanouit. Les abeilles tissent en vol l’équilibre du vivant, des couleurs et des saisons aussi.

    J’appelle donc la Commission européenne à ne pas céder au sabordage du Pacte vert européen et à bannir les substances les plus dangereuses et à soutenir les pratiques agroécologiques. Il est tout à fait vital que les insectes demeurent, il est vital d’interdire ce qui les tue, d’aimer et de protéger ce qui permet la vie.

     
       

       

    Spontane Wortmeldungen

     
       

     

      Alexander Jungbluth (ESN). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, danke für das erhaltene Wort! Ich möchte mich ganz kurz auf Herrn Waitz beziehen. Herr Waitz hat ja eben angedeutet, dass irgendwie die Rechten schuld seien, dass die Bienen sterben; belegt haben Sie das Ganze irgendwie nicht. Deshalb möchte ich Ihnen einmal etwas belegen, nämlich, es gibt ja eine Studie des Zentrums für Luft‑ und Raumfahrttechnik (DLR), geschrieben von Herrn Dr. Franz Trieb, und Herr Dr. Franz Trieb hat in dieser Studie festgestellt, dass im Jahr durchschnittlich etwa 1200 Tonnen Insekten durch Windräder sterben. Wir sprechen hier von Milliarden von Insekten, die jährlich durch Windräder sterben. Insofern möchte ich an dieser Stelle einmal feststellen: Grüne Politik ist eben nicht nur für die Wirtschaft tödlich, sondern eben leider auch für Bienen.

     
       

     

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas! Ich persönlich finde in diesem Europäischen Parlament immer die Debatten am interessantesten, wo sich eigentlich alle einig sind, wo aber auch gleichzeitig der allergrößte Unsinn erzählt wird. Alle sind sich hier einig, dass die Bienen gerettet werden müssen, auf die eine oder die andere Art. Manche sagen, die Landwirtschaft ist schuld, andere sagen, die Pestizide sind schuld.

    Frau Kommissarin, ich möchte Ihnen ganz kurz sagen: Das, was ich am besten finde an dem Vorschlag, den Sie da machen, ist die urbane Begrünung. Denn das ist ja der Lebensraum, aus dem wir die Tiere quasi komplett vertrieben haben, und wenn wir da wieder ein bisschen mehr Grün in die Städte holen – das ist nicht nur für die mentale Gesundheit der Menschen gut, das ist auch für die Natur gut. Also möchte ich, da sich eigentlich alle einig sind, das Haus hier dazu aufrufen, ein bisschen mehr diese ideologischen Grabenkämpfe sein zu lassen.

    Das Witzigste, was ich gehört habe, der größte Schuss ist das mit den Windrädern. Es ist wirklich so dermaßen bescheuert zu sagen, Windräder sind böse, weil dadurch Tiere sterben. Rechnen Sie doch mal durch, wenn Sie so gerne mit Zahlen um sich schmeißen, wie viele Tiere sterben, wenn der Klimawandel einmal so richtig reinknallt bei uns! Dann ist nämlich gar nichts mehr mit der Biodiversität. Also, stehen wir zusammen, halten wir uns an die Ratio! Schönes Wochenende!

     
       

     

      Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Nie jestem ani skrajnym prawicowcem, ani skrajnym lewicowcem. Jestem zwyczajnie konserwatystą. Konserwatyści mają spokojne spojrzenie na to wszystko, co dzieje się wokół nas. Bardzo lubimy mądrych rolników, mądrych pszczelarzy, mądrych naukowców, tych, którzy są także praktykami, którzy potrafią wnosić swoje doświadczenie do oceny każdej sytuacji.

    I tu chcę zwrócić uwagę Państwa na wielką niekonsekwencję Unii Europejskiej. Mianowicie, jeśli dzisiaj otwieramy w Unii Europejskiej rynek na produkty z Ameryki Południowej, to pamiętajmy, że tam są karczowane lasy, tam są niszczone łąki, gdzie właśnie są siedliska zapylaczy. I tam będą ginąć te zapylacze. Tam będzie przyrost pestycydów. A my będziemy mówić, że mamy żywność z Ameryki Południowej w ramach umowy z Merkosurem. To jest wielki błąd i myślę, że wszystkie środowiska też na to powinny zwrócić uwagę. Słuchajmy mądrych rolników, mądrych pszczelarzy. Życie będzie lepsze.

     
       

       

    (Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

     
       

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Frau Präsidentin, dear Members of the Parliament, thank you once again for your continuous commitment to advance the implementation of the new deal of pollinators.

    It’s really a game changer, this new deal, and we are at a crucial moment of its implementation. I think we need to keep the momentum, ensuring that the Member States and the stakeholders continue implementing the actions that we agreed. We are not there yet, unfortunately: 2030 is not far away and we have a long way to go to stop – and ultimately reverse – the decline of pollinators in the EU.

    Societal expectations are high: the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Save bees and farmers’ – which gathered more than 1 million statements of support – has sent us a clear message, which is: ‘act now, act decisively’.

    The Commission is committed to meet those expectations, and for that, we need your support.

     
       

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

     

    9. Oral explanations of vote (Rule 201)

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen zur Abstimmung.

     

    9.1. Electricity grids: the backbone of the EU energy system (A10-0091/2025 – Anna Stürgkh)

     

      Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, toimivat sähköverkot pitävät Euroopan turvallisena. Ilman niitä huoltovarmuutemme ja resilienssimme romahtaisivat. Rajatylittävällä sähkönjakelulla on tässä myös tärkeä rooli. Toimivuudesta vastaavat kuitenkin aina jäsenvaltiot itse – jäsenvaltiot, jotka vieläpä osaavat hoitaa jakelunsa esimerkillisen loistokkaasti.

    Fingridin tilastojen mukaan kantaverkkojen luotettavuusaste Suomessa oli viime vuonna 99,9995 prosenttia – päätähuimaavan hieno luku. Olisiko se ollut näin korkea, jos sähköverkoista olisikin vastanneet virkamiehet Brysselissä eikä Suomen olosuhteet parhaiten tuntevat kotimaiset toimijat? Ei varmasti, sanon minä.

    Kaikkein parasta Euroopan huoltovarmuudelle on antaa jäsenvaltioiden hoitaa asiansa ja tehdä sellaista kansainvälistä yhteistyötä, mistä kaikki osapuolet varmasti hyötyvät. Tämän vuoksi päätin äänestää esitystä vastaan, sillä vaikka siirtäisimmekin sähköä kauas, tulee päätäntävallan säilyä lähellä.

     

     

      Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, m-am abținut la votul privind rezoluția Clean Industrial Deal pentru că, deși conține câteva idei aparent bune, nu abordează cauza reală a scumpirii energiei în UE. Sub lozinci înșelătoare precum „energie verde”, „regenerabilă” sau „decarbonizare”, se ascund politici ideologice care au transformat Europa în regiunea cu cea mai scumpă energie din lume. Așa zisa decarbonizare accelerată s-a făcut, în fapt, prin închiderea accelerată a capacităților tradiționale de producție energetică pe bază de cărbune sau gaz, ce nu au fost înlocuite cu surse stabile, sustenabile și accesibile de energie.

    Energia solară sau eoliană, pretins curată, se produce intermitent. Ce să facă europenii însă când nu e soare sau când nu bate vântul? Mai grav, s-au respins amendamente în acest raport care recunoșteau energia nucleară drept curată. După ce Germania și-a închis centralele atomice, acum importă energie din Franța, produsă în centrale atomice. Aceasta nu e tranziție verde, ci o sinucidere economică a Europei, asistată politic și birocratic de la Bruxelles.

    Sub pretextul „verdelui”, distrugeți competitivitatea Europei pe altarul unei iluzii de sorginte marxistă, care a împins și condamnat deja milioane de europeni la sărăcie. Opriți această nebunie utopică înainte să fie prea târziu!

     
       

     

      Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, tänään meillä oli pitkä lista äänestettävänä erilaisia tarkistuksia Clean Industrial Deal -päätöslauselmaan ja jouduin pettymään. Olisin odottanut, että tämä olisi ollut paljon kunnianhimoisempi teollisuuden hyväksi ja teollisuuden palauttamiseksi Eurooppaan.

    Viime kaudella puhuttiin Green Dealistä. Huomattiin, että siinä mentiin pikkaisen väärään suuntaan nimenomaan teollisuuden näkökulmasta, ja tällä kaudella nyt sitten ollaan puhuttu tästä Clean Industrial Dealistä. Mutta tässä päätöslauselmassa, jota käsiteltiin tänään ja josta äänestettiin, oli niin paljon – kuten harmikseni jouduin huomaamaan – vihreätä agendaa, vääränlaista ideologista agendaa, ei markkinaehtoista säätelyä, että valitettavasti jouduin tulemaan siihen johtopäätökseen, että en voi tämän paperin puolesta äänestää. Ehkä ensi kaudella me voimme saada päätöslauselman nimeltään pelkästään Industrial Deal.

     

    10. Explanations of votes in writing (Rule 201)

       

    (Schriftliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung werden auf die den Mitgliedern vorbehaltenen Seiten auf der Website des Parlaments aufgenommen.)

     

    11. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Das Protokoll dieser Sitzung wird dem Parlament zu Beginn der nächsten Sitzung zur Genehmigung vorgelegt.

    Wenn es keine Einwände gibt, werde ich die in der heutigen Sitzung angenommenen Entschließungen den in diesen Entschließungen genannten Personen und Gremien übermitteln.

     

    12. Dates of the next part-session

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Die nächste Tagung findet vom 7. bis zum 10. Juli 2025 in Straßburg statt.

     

    13. Closure of the sitting

       

    (Die Sitzung wird um 15.41 Uhr geschlossen.)

     

    14. Adjournment of the session

     

      Die Präsidentin. – Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Angus Shareholders Approve Arrangement With Wesdome

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORONTO, June 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Angus Gold Inc. (TSX-V: GUS, OTC: ANGVF) (“Angus” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce that its shareholders (the “Shareholders”) have approved the resolution required to consummate the previously announced statutory arrangement under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario) (the “Transaction”) with Wesdome Gold Mines Ltd. (“Wesdome”). At Angus’ special meeting of Shareholders held on June 19, 2025 (the “Meeting”), the resolutions supporting the Transaction were approved by approximately 99.8% of the votes cast by Shareholders present or represented by proxy at the Meeting.

    Voting Results

    The following is a detailed breakdown of the voting results of the Meeting:

    Shareholder vote:

    Total Common Share Eligible to be Voted 60,331,050
    Common Shares Voted Total (%) 43,241,013 (71.67%)
    Total Shares Voted FOR Arrangement Resolution 43,172,113
    Percent of Shares Voted FOR Arrangement Resolution 99.84%


    Shareholder vote, excluding votes attached to shares held by Wesdome, Patrick Langlois and Dennis Peterson which are required to be excluded pursuant to Multilateral Instrument 61-101
    – Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions:

    Total Common Share Eligible to be Voted 48,656,050(1)
    Common Shares Voted Total (%) 31,566,013 (64.88%)
    Total Shares Voted FOR Arrangement Resolution 31,497,113
    Percent of Shares Voted FOR Arrangement Resolution 99.78%

    Note:
              (1)   For more information on excluded votes, refer to the Company’s press release dated June 2, 2025.

    Anticipated Timeline for Completion of the Transaction

    With Shareholder approval, Angus will seek a final order from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (“Court”) to approve the plan of arrangement expected to be held on June 25, 2025. The Transaction remains subject to final court approval and the satisfaction of certain other customary closing conditions for transactions of this nature. The Transaction is expected to close on or about June 27, 2025.

    At closing, each Angus Shareholder (other than any dissenting Angus Shareholders and Wesdome) will receive 0.0096 of a Wesdome common share and $0.62 in cash for each Angus common share held. Following the completion of the Transaction at the end of June, Angus will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wesdome.

    Further Information

    For further information regarding the Transaction, please refer to the management information circular dated May 7, 2025, which is filed under the Company’s profile on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).

    About Angus Gold

    Angus is a Canadian mineral exploration company focused on the acquisition, exploration, and development of highly prospective gold properties. The Company’s flagship project, which is the Golden Sky Project near Wawa, Ontario, is situated immediately adjacent to Wesdome’s Eagle River mine.

    Contacts    
         
    Breanne Beh   Lindsay Dunlop
    President and CEO   Vice President, Investor Relations
    Phone: +1.807.356.6330   Phone: +1.647.259.1790
    Email: bbeh@angusgold.com   Email: info@angusgold.com
         

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This news release contains “forward-looking information” which may include, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the future financial and operating performance of the Company and its projects. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, or “believes” or variations (including negative variations) of such words and phrases, or state that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this press release and the Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or results or otherwise. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.

    Forward-looking statements or information contained in this press release include, but are not limited to, statements or information with respect to: (i) the consummation and timing of the Transaction, (ii) the satisfaction of the conditions precedent to the Transaction, (iii) expectations regarding the timing, receipt and anticipated effects of court approval and other consents and approvals (including receipt of all applicable stock exchange approvals), (iv) the impact of the Transaction on Angus, Wesdome and their respective shareholders and other stakeholders, and (v) expectations for other economic, business, and/or competitive factors.

    Furthermore, should one or more of the risks, uncertainties or other factors materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described in forward-looking statements or information. These risks, uncertainties and other factors including those risk factors discussed in the sections titled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Information” and “Risks and Uncertainties” in the Company’s most recent Annual Information Form. Readers are urged to carefully review the detailed risk discussion in our most recent Annual Information Form which is available on SEDAR+ and on the Company’s website.

    The MIL Network –

    June 20, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 169 170 171 172 173 … 1,005
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress