Category: Law

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

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

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

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

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

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

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

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

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

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

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

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

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

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

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

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

     

    Amendment  1

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Citation 3 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  2

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  4

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 11

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  8

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  9

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  10

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 14

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  11

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 16

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  12

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 18

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  13

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 19

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  14

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 21

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  15

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  16

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  17

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  18

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 24

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  19

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 25

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  20

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 27

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  21

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 28

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

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

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

     

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

    Amendment  22

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 29

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  23

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 30

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  24

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 31

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  25

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 33

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  26

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 35

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  27

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 36

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  28

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 37

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  29

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 39

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  30

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 41

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  31

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 42

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  32

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 44

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  33

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  34

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  35

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  36

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 54 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  37

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 55

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  38

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 58

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  39

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 60

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

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

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

    Amendment  40

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  41

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  42

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  43

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  44

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  45

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  46

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  47

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  48

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  49

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point i

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  50

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  51

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  52

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  53

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  54

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  55

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) guardianship, curatorship and analogous institutions;

    deleted

    Amendment  56

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  57

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  58

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  59

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  60

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  61

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  62

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  63

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  64

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  65

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  66

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  67

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  68

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  69

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  70

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    i. of which the adult is a national;

     

    ii. of the adult’s habitual residence;

     

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

     

    iv. where the property of the adult is located.

    Amendment  71

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article7a

     

    Support measures

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

    Amendment  72

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 7b

     

    Incidental questions

     

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

    Amendment  73

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 8 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 8a

     

    Support measures

     

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

     

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

     

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

    Amendment  74

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  75

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  76

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 12a

     

    Support measures

     

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

    Amendment  77

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 14 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  78

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 16 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Acceptance of authentic instruments

    Recognition of authentic instruments

    Amendment  79

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  80

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  81

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    1. Central Authorities shall carry out the following tasks:

    Amendment  82

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  83

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  84

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph – point 1 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  85

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  86

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  87

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Placement

    Living and Support Arrangements

    Amendment  88

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  89

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  90

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  91

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  92

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 26 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  93

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 29 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 29a

     

    Cooperation for pre-authorised data sharing

     

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

     

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

    Amendment  94

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 30 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  95

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 33 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 33a

     

    Support measures

     

    1. Member states shall:

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  96

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF REPRESENTATION

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF SUPPORT AND REPRESENTATION

    Amendment  97

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Creation of a European Certificate of Representation

    Creation of a European Certificate of Support and Representation

    Amendment  98

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  99

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  100

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  101

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  102

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  103

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  104

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  105

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  106

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 39 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  107

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VIII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Establishment and inteconnection of protection registeres

    deleted

    Amendment  108

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 45

    deleted

    Establishment of protection registers

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    (a) the authorities of the Member State have:

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  109

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 46

    deleted

    Interoperability of registers of other powers of representation

     

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

     

    Amendment  110

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 47

    deleted

    Interconnection of registers

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  111

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 48

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 48

    deleted

    Condition of access to information via the system of interconnection

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  112

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  113

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

     

    (a) the disruption of the decentralised IT system;

     

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

     

    (c) force majeure.

     

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

    Amendment  114

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  115

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  116

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  117

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 54

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  118

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 55 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  119

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 58 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  120

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 59 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  121

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    (h) data protection safeguards.

     

    Amendment  122

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  123

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 62

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 62

    deleted

    Costs of establishing protection registers and interconnecting Member States’ registers

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  124

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 65

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 65

    deleted

    Transitional provisions

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  125

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 66 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  126

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point k

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  127

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point m

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  128

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  129

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  130

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  131

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  132

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  133

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  134

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

    Amendment  135

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  136

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  137

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  138

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 d (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  139

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Annex XI a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    ANNEX XIa (new)

     

    [Text of the UNCRPD1a]

     

    __________________

     

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

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

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

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

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

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

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

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

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

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

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

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

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

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

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

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

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

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

     

    Amendment  1

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Citation 3 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  2

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  3

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  4

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  5

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    11 OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 37

    Amendment  6

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 10 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  7

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 11

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  8

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  9

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  10

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 14

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  11

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 16

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  12

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 18

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  13

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 19

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  14

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 21

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  15

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  16

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  17

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 22 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  18

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 24

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  19

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 25

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  20

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 27

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  21

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 28

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

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

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

     

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

    Amendment  22

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 29

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  23

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 30

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  24

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 31

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  25

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 33

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  26

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 35

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  27

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 36

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  28

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 37

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  29

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 39

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  30

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 41

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  31

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 42

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  32

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 44

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  33

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  34

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  35

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  36

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 54 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  37

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 55

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  38

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 58

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  39

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 60

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    __________________

    __________________

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

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

    Amendment  40

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  41

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 65 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  42

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  43

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  44

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  45

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  46

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  47

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  48

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  49

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point i

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  50

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  51

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  52

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  53

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  54

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  55

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    (c) guardianship, curatorship and analogous institutions;

    deleted

    Amendment  56

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  57

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  58

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  59

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  60

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point f

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  61

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point g

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  62

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 2 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  63

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  64

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  65

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  66

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  67

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  68

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  69

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  70

     

    Proposal for a regulation

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

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

     

    i. of which the adult is a national;

     

    ii. of the adult’s habitual residence;

     

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

     

    iv. where the property of the adult is located.

    Amendment  71

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article7a

     

    Support measures

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

    Amendment  72

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 7 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 7b

     

    Incidental questions

     

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

    Amendment  73

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 8 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 8a

     

    Support measures

     

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

     

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

     

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

    Amendment  74

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  75

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  76

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 12 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 12a

     

    Support measures

     

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

    Amendment  77

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 14 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  78

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 16 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Acceptance of authentic instruments

    Recognition of authentic instruments

    Amendment  79

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  80

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 18 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  81

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    1. Central Authorities shall carry out the following tasks:

    Amendment  82

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  83

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  84

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph – point 1 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  85

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  86

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 19 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  87

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Placement

    Living and Support Arrangements

    Amendment  88

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  89

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  90

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  91

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  92

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 26 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  93

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 29 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 29a

     

    Cooperation for pre-authorised data sharing

     

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

     

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

    Amendment  94

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 30 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  95

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 33 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    Article 33a

     

    Support measures

     

    1. Member states shall:

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    __________________

     

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

    Amendment  96

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF REPRESENTATION

    EUROPEAN CERTIFICATE OF SUPPORT AND REPRESENTATION

    Amendment  97

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Creation of a European Certificate of Representation

    Creation of a European Certificate of Support and Representation

    Amendment  98

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 34 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  99

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  100

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  101

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  102

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  103

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 37 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  104

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  105

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 38 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  106

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 39 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  107

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Chapter VIII – title

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Establishment and inteconnection of protection registeres

    deleted

    Amendment  108

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 45

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 45

    deleted

    Establishment of protection registers

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    (a) the authorities of the Member State have:

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  109

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 46

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 46

    deleted

    Interoperability of registers of other powers of representation

     

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

     

    Amendment  110

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 47

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 47

    deleted

    Interconnection of registers

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  111

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 48

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 48

    deleted

    Condition of access to information via the system of interconnection

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  112

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  113

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

     

    (a) the disruption of the decentralised IT system;

     

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

     

    (c) force majeure.

     

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

    Amendment  114

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 49 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  115

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  116

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 50 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  117

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 54

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  118

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 55 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  119

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 58 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  120

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 59 – paragraph 1 – point b

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  121

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    (h) data protection safeguards.

     

    Amendment  122

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 60 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  123

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 62

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 62

    deleted

    Costs of establishing protection registers and interconnecting Member States’ registers

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  124

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 65

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

    Article 65

    deleted

    Transitional provisions

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

    Amendment  125

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 66 – paragraph 1

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  126

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point k

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  127

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 1 – point m

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  128

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 69 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  129

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  130

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 2 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  131

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 3

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

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

    Amendment  132

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 4

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  133

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 5

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

    Amendment  134

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

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

    deleted

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

     

    Amendment  135

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  136

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  137

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 c (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  138

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 70 – paragraph 6 d (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

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

    Amendment  139

     

    Proposal for a regulation

    Annex XI a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    ANNEX XIa (new)

     

    [Text of the UNCRPD1a]

     

    __________________

     

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

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: £5.6million project launched to explore how man-made structures affect our seas University researchers will work alongside a range of institutions from across the UK and in Norway on the £5.6 million initiative, which will be led by Plymouth Marine Laboratory (PML). The ValMAS (Value of Marine Artificial Structures) project is a major new research effort to understand the full impact of man-made…

    Source: University of Aberdeen

    University researchers will work alongside a range of institutions from across the UK and in Norway on the £5.6 million initiative, which will be led by Plymouth Marine Laboratory (PML).
    The ValMAS (Value of Marine Artificial Structures) project is a major new research effort to understand the full impact of man-made structures in the ocean, ranging from offshore oil, gas and wind energy infrastructure to shipwrecks. These are collectively known as marine artificial structures (MAS).
    The project, which will focus on the North Sea with wider applicability across the UK and beyond, aims to create tools and evidence that will help decision-makers manage these structures in ways that support clean energy, protect nature, and benefit society.
    MAS have potentially significant footprints at all stages of their lifecycle through demonstration, construction, operation, and finally decommissioning. As marine space is increasingly squeezed, this large-scale development will inevitably lead to environmental, social and economic trade-offs.
    While these structures can provide habitat, support blue carbon capture, or enhance biodiversity, they can also pose risks that are not yet fully understood.
    Professor Nicola Beaumont, project lead from PML, said: “Thousands of artificial structures have been installed in the marine environment, and many more are on the horizon as part of the UK’s transition to a clean energy future.
    “ValMAS will give policymakers and industry the tools they need to make informed decisions that align with both net zero targets and nature recovery goals.”
    The research is co-funded by Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and the industry-sponsored INSITE Programme.
    Professor Astley Hastings CEng, from the School of Biological Sciences, will lead work in Aberdeen alongside marine eco-toxicologist Dr Rebecca von Hellfeld, and Dr Kate Gormley, an interdisciplinary researcher specialising in coastal and marine environmental management, working to fill the experimental knowledge gaps on marine contaminants mobilisation and marine growth on structures. Professor Anne-Michelle Slater, from the University’s School of Law, will work on the policy and legislation relating to the environment surrounding marine structures.
    Professor Hastings said: “ValMAS will map marine artificial structures to develop a natural capital framework that reflects their ecological, economic, and social value, identify research gaps and foster collaboration, and model future climate scenarios to assess impacts on biodiversity, fisheries, and carbon storage. The project will also examine public perceptions and economic trade-offs to support a fair energy transition and create advanced decision support tools for use by policymakers, regulators, and industry.
    “While evidence, tools and models around natural capital and MAS exist, access to and uptake of these resources remains limited. There is a pressing need to translate this knowledge into strategic, value-based decision-making that is practical, user-driven, and ready for real-world application.”
    Other project partners include the Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Cardiff University, Natural England – the government’s adviser for the natural environment in England, SUERC – Centre For The Isotope Sciences, University of Glasgow, the University of Strathclyde, EFTEC, Ecologos, NIRAS, Marine Energy Wales, the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, The Shellfish Association of Great Britain, and the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations. It also brings together another 20+ partners from academia, government, NGOs and industry, including major energy operators.
    Tracy Shimmield, Director of Research and Skill at the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) said: “NERC is delighted to announce the launch of ‘The Value of Marine Artificial Structures (ValMAS)’ programme, which seeks to inform nature positive policy solutions for the management of all life stages of Marine Artificial Structures (MAS). The ValMAS project, which is cofounded with industry, builds on the work achieved by the INSITE programme. It will deliver evidence of the interplay between the ecological, economic and social values of MAS, to build a better understanding of their environmental value across sectors in the North Sea. Evidence generated will inform decision making on the best outcomes for the environment when it comes to decommissioning.”
    Professor Beaumont added: “This is not just about infrastructure, it’s about people, nature, and building a future where sustainable energy systems work in harmony with marine life.”
    The project will begin in August 2025 and run for four years.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Greenpeace International begins groundbreaking Anti-SLAPP case to protect freedom of speech

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    Amsterdam, Netherlands – In a first, landmark test case of the European Union’s new legislation to protect freedom of expression and stop abusive lawsuits, Greenpeace International today challenges the US oil pipeline company, Energy Transfer, in court in the Netherlands.[1] The multi-billion dollar company brought two back-to-back SLAPP suits against Greenpeace International and Greenpeace in the US, after showing solidarity with the 2016 peaceful Indigenous-led protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The first case was dismissed, but the Greenpeace organisations continue to defend against the second case, which is ongoing, after a North Dakota jury recently awarded over 660 million USD in damages to the pipeline giant.

    Activists from Greenpeace International and allies were present outside the courthouse in Amsterdam for the first hearing in the case with a banner reading “ENERGY TRANSFER, WELCOME TO THE EU – WHERE FREE SPEECH IS STILL A THING”.

    Mads Christensen, Executive Director, Greenpeace International said:
    “Energy Transfer’s attack on our right to protest is an attack on everyone’s free speech. Greenpeace has been the target of threats, arrests and even bombs over the last 50 years and persevered. We will continue to resist all forms of intimidation and explore every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for this attempt at abusing the justice system. This groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands is just the beginning of defeating this bullying tactic being wielded by billionaires and fossil fuel giants trying to silence critics all over the world. Something absolutely vital is at stake here: people’s ability to hold corporate polluters to account for the devastation they’re causing.”

    The lawsuit is an important test of the European Union’s Anti-SLAPP Directive — adopted in April 2024.[2] The Directive is designed to protect journalists, activists, civil society organisations, or anyone else speaking out about matters of public concern, from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) — unfounded intimidation lawsuits brought by powerful corporations or wealthy individuals seeking to suppress public debate.[3] Since Greenpeace International is a Netherlands-based foundation and the damage caused by Energy Transfers’s US SLAPP suit is occurring in the Netherlands, both Dutch and EU law applies.

    Amy Jacobsen, Senior Legal Counsel, Greenpeace International said:
    “This case paves the way for protections from bullying lawsuits being implemented throughout Europe and beyond. The lawsuits that Energy Transfer have brought against Greenpeace International are the perfect example of the kind of abusive legal proceedings that the anti-SLAPP Directive is designed to protect against. By calling upon the EU anti-SLAPP Directive’s protections, Greenpeace International refuses to allow the bullying tactics of wealthy fossil fuel corporations like Energy Transfer to compromise our fundamental free speech rights.”

    At the time of the press release it was still uncertain whether Energy Transfer would appear in the hearing. The next steps are for the judge to agree on a schedule for the case.

    ENDS

    Photos and videos are available in the Greenpeace Media Library

    Notes:

    [1] The new EU rules are aimed at addressing the growing number of abusive lawsuits against journalists, media outlets, environmental activists and human rights defenders. 

    In February 2025, Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, meritless lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. 

    [2] EU Member States have until 7 May 2026 at the latest to transpose the rules into their national laws, but the Dutch government has indicated that the Directive’s  protections can already be applied under existing Dutch legal frameworks.

    [3] Big Oil companies Shell, Total, and ENI have also filed SLAPPs against Greenpeace entities in recent years. Some of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024. Greenpeace Romania was being sued by the energy company Romgaz in 2025 – with the aim of dissolving the organisation, but their claims were withdrawn and they were forced to pay the court expenses to Greenpeace Romania. Greenpeace Italy and Greenpeace Netherlands are facing the Italian oil giant Eni in an ongoing court case in Italy.

    Contacts:

    Daniel Bengtsson, Communications Lead, Greenpeace Nordic
    + 46 703009510, [email protected]

    Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), [email protected]

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Greenpeace International begins groundbreaking Anti-SLAPP case to protect freedom of speech

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    Amsterdam, Netherlands – In a first, landmark test case of the European Union’s new legislation to protect freedom of expression and stop abusive lawsuits, Greenpeace International today challenges the US oil pipeline company, Energy Transfer, in court in the Netherlands.[1] The multi-billion dollar company brought two back-to-back SLAPP suits against Greenpeace International and Greenpeace in the US, after showing solidarity with the 2016 peaceful Indigenous-led protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The first case was dismissed, but the Greenpeace organisations continue to defend against the second case, which is ongoing, after a North Dakota jury recently awarded over 660 million USD in damages to the pipeline giant.

    Activists from Greenpeace International and allies were present outside the courthouse in Amsterdam for the first hearing in the case with a banner reading “ENERGY TRANSFER, WELCOME TO THE EU – WHERE FREE SPEECH IS STILL A THING”.

    Mads Christensen, Executive Director, Greenpeace International said:
    “Energy Transfer’s attack on our right to protest is an attack on everyone’s free speech. Greenpeace has been the target of threats, arrests and even bombs over the last 50 years and persevered. We will continue to resist all forms of intimidation and explore every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for this attempt at abusing the justice system. This groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands is just the beginning of defeating this bullying tactic being wielded by billionaires and fossil fuel giants trying to silence critics all over the world. Something absolutely vital is at stake here: people’s ability to hold corporate polluters to account for the devastation they’re causing.”

    The lawsuit is an important test of the European Union’s Anti-SLAPP Directive — adopted in April 2024.[2] The Directive is designed to protect journalists, activists, civil society organisations, or anyone else speaking out about matters of public concern, from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) — unfounded intimidation lawsuits brought by powerful corporations or wealthy individuals seeking to suppress public debate.[3] Since Greenpeace International is a Netherlands-based foundation and the damage caused by Energy Transfers’s US SLAPP suit is occurring in the Netherlands, both Dutch and EU law applies.

    Amy Jacobsen, Senior Legal Counsel, Greenpeace International said:
    “This case paves the way for protections from bullying lawsuits being implemented throughout Europe and beyond. The lawsuits that Energy Transfer have brought against Greenpeace International are the perfect example of the kind of abusive legal proceedings that the anti-SLAPP Directive is designed to protect against. By calling upon the EU anti-SLAPP Directive’s protections, Greenpeace International refuses to allow the bullying tactics of wealthy fossil fuel corporations like Energy Transfer to compromise our fundamental free speech rights.”

    At the time of the press release it was still uncertain whether Energy Transfer would appear in the hearing. The next steps are for the judge to agree on a schedule for the case.

    ENDS

    Photos and videos are available in the Greenpeace Media Library

    Notes:

    [1] The new EU rules are aimed at addressing the growing number of abusive lawsuits against journalists, media outlets, environmental activists and human rights defenders. 

    In February 2025, Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, meritless lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. 

    [2] EU Member States have until 7 May 2026 at the latest to transpose the rules into their national laws, but the Dutch government has indicated that the Directive’s  protections can already be applied under existing Dutch legal frameworks.

    [3] Big Oil companies Shell, Total, and ENI have also filed SLAPPs against Greenpeace entities in recent years. Some of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024. Greenpeace Romania was being sued by the energy company Romgaz in 2025 – with the aim of dissolving the organisation, but their claims were withdrawn and they were forced to pay the court expenses to Greenpeace Romania. Greenpeace Italy and Greenpeace Netherlands are facing the Italian oil giant Eni in an ongoing court case in Italy.

    Contacts:

    Daniel Bengtsson, Communications Lead, Greenpeace Nordic
    + 46 703009510, [email protected]

    Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), [email protected]

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Reappointment of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    News story

    Reappointment of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

    His Majesty The King has approved the reappointment of Douglas Marshall as the Judcial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman.

    His Majesty The King, on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor, has approved the reappointment – for 5 years from 1 March 2026 – of Douglas Marshall as Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman.

    The reappointment of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman is regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments and has been made under Paragraph 1 of Schedule 13 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.

    Biography

    Douglas Marshall is Pathways to Impact Manager at Childlight; Global Child Safety Institute based in Edinburgh, working to combat the global pandemic of child abuse. His previous career included 30 years’ service with Cumbria Constabulary retiring as a senior detective. At the latter end of his service, he was the Deputy National Co-ordinator on Operation Hydrant (the national policing response, oversight, and co-ordination of non-recent child sexual abuse). He returned to Cumbria Constabulary completing five years as a Police Staff Senior Investigating Officer. During his police service he was Senior Investigating Officer on several high-profile cases in Cumbria. He is formerly a director of a private investigation company in Scotland and has a consultancy for investigations.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: LCQ10: Combating abuse of public welfare and public housing

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         Following is a question by the Hon Steven Ho and a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Housing, Mr Victor Tai, in the Legislative Council today (July 2):

    Question:

         Under the existing system, applicants of the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Scheme (excluding the Guangdong Scheme and the Fujian Scheme) and the Social Security Allowance (SSA) Scheme must satisfy the residence requirements and the permissible limits of absence from Hong Kong (absence limits). In addition, tenants of public rental housing (PRH) must continuously reside in the units. However, it is learnt that some people are still enjoying benefits such as old age allowances and PRH despite residing abroad. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

    (1) as it is learnt that while the Social Welfare Department only uses identity card numbers to verify CSSA and SSA recipients’ travel records with the Immigration Department (ImmD), some people enter and exit Hong Kong with their passports in order to circumvent checks against the absence limits, taking advantage of the loophole in the absence of connection between travel records based on identity cards and those based on passports, whether the Government has investigated the veracity of the aforesaid situation; whether the Government has assessed the annual loss of public money arising from this loophole, and whether it has enhanced the verification mechanism to plug the loophole; if it has enhanced the verification mechanism, of the details (including the effectiveness of the enhanced mechanism); if not, the reasons for that;

    (2) whether the Government has considered using biometric features (e.g. fingerprint and face) as the only proof of identification for travel records, so as to prevent individuals from taking advantage of the loophole in travel records mentioned in (1) to conceal the fact that they reside abroad; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (3) given that the Office of The Ombudsman mentioned a number of cases of “not retaining regular and continuous residence in the flats” in its report dated January this year on the direct investigation operation into the Government’s work in combating abuse of public housing resources, what specific mechanisms it has currently put in place to monitor and prevent abuse of PRH by individuals residing abroad, and how the effectiveness of such mechanisms is assessed; as regards tenants who deliberately conceal their residence abroad in order to keep their PRH flats, what other legal measures the Government has put in place, apart from demanding surrender of the flats, to bring them to account, and whether it has assessed if such measures have sufficient deterrent effect; and

    (4) given that all the principal tenants and household members in the multiple cases of “not retaining regular and continuous residence in the flats” mentioned in (3) reside outside Hong Kong, whether the Government has examined the reasons for not being able to uncover their abuse of PRH in time through their travel records back then; in order to combat abuse of PRH by tenants residing abroad, whether the Government has explored setting up an cross-departmental cooperation mechanism for the Housing Department, the Hong Kong Housing Society and ImmD to carry out data sharing, so as to enhance the procedure for accessing the records of PRH residents’ stay in Hong Kong?

    Reply:

    President,

         In response to the question raised by Hon Steven Ho, in consultation with the Security Bureau and the Labour and Welfare Bureau, our reply is as follows:

    (1) Applicants and recipients of the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) or the Social Security Allowance must meet the relevant residence requirements and other eligibility criteria, and are required to declare all travel documents and provide other relevant information to the Social Welfare Department (SWD). If applicants and recipients fail to provide all relevant documents or information truthfully, once such cases are found, the SWD will take follow-up actions and may refer the cases to the law enforcement department for handling if necessary. It is a criminal offence for an applicant and a recipient to deliberately provide false information or omit information in order to obtain cash assistance by deception. In addition to becoming ineligible for cash assistance, the applicant and the recipient may be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a maximum of 14 years under the Theft Ordinance (Cap. 210 of the Laws of Hong Kong).

         Besides, in accordance with the existing established mechanism, the Immigration Department (ImmD) provides, on a regular basis or upon request by the SWD, the travel records of applicants and recipients, including the travel records of these persons using their Hong Kong identity card, travel document issued by ImmD (including Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passports) and travel document issued by other countries/territories, to the SWD for verification of the compliance with the relevant residence requirements of the persons concerned.

    (2) Section 5 of the Immigration Ordinance (Cap. 115) stipulates that individuals entering or leaving Hong Kong at immigration control points must present a valid travel document. When entering into or exiting from Hong Kong, Hong Kong residents may use their Hong Kong identity card or a valid travel document to complete immigration clearance at traditional counters at control points. Eligible holders of smart identity card may also use their smart identity cards or encrypted QR codes, together with fingerprint or facial recognition technology, for self-service immigration clearance at e-Channels.

         To implement effective immigration control, the ImmD adopts biometric recognition technologies (such as fingerprints and facial images) in its immigration control operations to verify the identity of individuals using Hong Kong identity card or travel document for entry into or exit from Hong Kong.

        Under the existing established mechanism, the immigration records of relevant individuals provided by the ImmD to the SWD and the Housing Department (HD) have already encompassed information related to Hong Kong identity cards, travel documents issued by the ImmD (including Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passports), and travel documents issued by other countries or regions. The information provided would facilitate verification by the relevant departments of whether the recipients continue to meet the eligibility criteria for receiving relevant social welfare benefits.

    (3) and (4) The Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) has adopted multi-pronged approach to combat tenancy abuse of public rental housing (PRH). HD has all along addressed the issue of tenancy abuse through various means including daily estate management, routine home visits, random checks and in-depth investigations of suspected cases, as well as publicity and education. These efforts aim to reduce the chance of tenancy abuse of PRH, thereby expediting turnover of PRH flats and allowing those in genuine need of housing to move into PRH as soon as possible.

         To ensure the optimal use of PRH resources, the HD has established a regular mechanism with Immd, under which Immd regularly reports the death records of PRH tenants to the HD so that the HD can proactively monitor tenants’ occupancy status and take appropriate actions. The Immd also provides travel records of relevant individuals (such as PRH principal tenants and household members) upon request by the HD, with a view to enabling the HD to verify whether the individuals concerned continue to meet the eligibility criteria for residing in PRH.
     
         To strengthen the monitoring, the HD has set up a new computer system to store case information about tenancy abuse, including the processes and investigation results. Estate management staff also conducts unannounced home visits outside office hours. Investigations will be initiated, if there are suspected cases of PRH abuse or upon receipt of reports from the public on suspected cases of PRH abuse. The HD also selects cases on a random basis for in-depth investigation.

         In addition, to expedite the verification of occupancy status of tenancy abuse cases and enforcement actions, the HD liaises with other government departments to obtain key information in accordance with relevant ordinances and regulations (such as enquiry with the ImmD about the immigration records of tenants who are suspected of not retaining regular and continuous residence, enquiry with the Water Supplies Department about households with unusual water consumption, etc) so as to verify cases of tenancy abuse and accelerate the handling of such cases.

         In fact, since 2023, the HA has rolled out a series of new measures to strengthen efforts to combat tenancy abuse of PRH. Starting from October 2023, the HA requires all PRH households to declare their occupancy status and ownership of domestic property in Hong Kong every two years since admission to PRH. They are required to declare whether they have retained continuous residence in their units, and whether the units have been left vacant or used for unauthorised purposes. If households have made false statement, the HA will consider terminating the tenancy agreement. The family member(s) who has made false statement will be subject to the restrictions of a five-year debarment from applying for PRH, no offer of a PRH flat with better quality, and even prosecution. Since the introduction of the measures, some PRH tenants were sentenced to imprisonment of 30 days by the court, and some tenants have voluntarily returned their units. The HA is confident that these measures will continue to strengthen its efforts against tenancy abuse of PRH.

         To collect intelligence for better targeting in combating PRH abuse, the HA launched the “Report Public Housing Abuse Award” (the Award) in January 2025. Since the launch of the Award, as at end March 2025, out of the total reported cases of around 3 900, about 1 700 cases have opted for participating in the Award. After initial screening, about 1 200 reported cases were eligible for joining the Award, and about 700 of them can be further followed up. There are cases where Notice-To-Quit were successfully issued. The first round of the Award presentation will be held in July 2025. The above demonstrated that the public has established a strong consensus to combat PRH tenancy abuse and to collectively safeguard the precious housing resources.

         In order to cope with the extra workload brought by the enhanced efforts in combating PRH abuse, in recent years, the HA has strengthened its collaboration with various government departments and has adopted different strategies and manpower deployment as appropriate in light of changing circumstances. This includes recruiting retired disciplined services officers to join the HD. From July 2022 to May 2025, over 8 700 PRH flats were recovered by the HA in view of tenancy abuse or breach of tenancy agreement. Compared to the recovery of about 1 400 flats in 2021/22, the average annual number of PRH flats recovered due to tenancy abuse and breach of tenancy agreement from 2022/23 to 2024/25 has more than doubled. This demonstrated the effectiveness of the strengthened measures implemented by the HA.

         To strengthen the intensity of combating PRH abuse and enhance the deterrent effect, the Housing Bureau has submitted the Housing (Amendment) Bill 2025 (the Bill) to the Legislative Council, and the Bill was passed on June 11, 2025. The Bill mainly includes three aspects: (i) introducing new offenses of serious tenancy abuse of PRH flats; (ii) empowering authorised officers to demand personal details from suspects; and (iii) extending the limitation of time for prosecution of offences of false statements, refusal to furnish information and unlawful alienations, thereby making measures against PRH abuse more deterrent. The relevant offenses will take effect from March 31, 2026. The HA will step up publicity efforts to ensure that the public fully understands and is aware of the consequences of violating the law.

         The HA/HD will continue to review the existing measures, including enhancing the investigation workflows and strengthening staff training, publicity and public education. We will also keep reviewing our strategies in combating PRH abuse and strengthening collaboration with other departments to safeguard the rational use of PRH resources.

         The Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS) has also been adopting a multi-pronged approach in combating abuse of PRH resources holistically, including conducting home visits on a regular basis and prioritising investigation of suspected cases of non-occupation (such as those with relatively low water and electricity consumption, backlog of uncollected notices and letters in mailboxes for a prolonged period, etc). In addition, the HKHS has regularised conducting home visits during non-office hours and strengthened training for frontline staff to further enhance their awareness of and sensitivity to breaches of tenancy agreements. In addition, HKHS leverages smart technology to step up its efforts in combating PRH tenancy abuse, such as the in-house development of “eHome Visit”. This digital platform digitises tenant information and home visit records to facilitate comparison, thereby allowing frontline staff to have a full picture during home visits and enabling prompt identification of suspicious cases. The HKHS will continue to keep pace with the times and regularly review the effectiveness of these measures, with additional initiatives introduced as and when necessary with a view to further enhancing the efficiency of home visits and the effectiveness of investigation of PRH tenancy abuse cases.

         The HKHS and the HA have maintained close communication and exchange on the efforts in combating abuse of PRH resources, and review and assess the effectiveness of the relevant measures from time to time. When tenants are suspected of not retaining regular and continuous residence in their units, the HKHS will request resident information such as travel records from ImmD depending on individual circumstances and investigation needs. Separately, the HKHS has since October 2005 established a notification mechanism with the ImmD on death records. Under this mechanism, the ImmD provides on a monthly basis records of persons who reside in rental estates of the HKHS yet with death registered in Hong Kong for the HKHS’s suitable follow-up actions. The HKHS will continue to strengthen its communication with the ImmD to help enhance the effectiveness of investigations on PRH tenancy abuse.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: LCQ17: Participation in the affairs of law enforcement-related international organisations

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         Following is a question by the Hon Chan Chun-ying and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, in the Legislative Council today (July 2):

    Question:

         This year’s Report on the Work of the Government of the country mentions for the first time that Hong Kong must deepen international exchanges and co-operation. There are views pointing out that international organisations are important platforms for exchanges and co-operation among countries and regions. Regarding Hong Kong’s participation in the affairs of law enforcement-related international organisations, will the Government inform this Council:

    (1) as the Independent Commission Against Corruption has indicated that it has formed a tripartite partnership with the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities and the Hong Kong International Academy Against Corruption, actively contributing to the advancement of the global anti-corruption cause through, among other means, exchanges and sharing of experience with other countries, as well as organising anti-corruption training programmes, whether, in addition to the aforesaid activities, the Government will consider expanding the scale of such activities by taking the lead in organising in Hong Kong larger-scale, integrated international events themed on anti-corruption; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (2) given that the Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department, in its capacity as the World Customs Organization (WCO) Vice-Chair for the Asia/Pacific (A/P) Region, successfully organised the 26th WCO A/P Regional Heads of Customs Administrations Conference in May this year, whether, in addition to actively organising the aforesaid representative event, the Government will consider taking the opportunity of its involvement in the affairs of this international organisation to invite personnel from customs-related agencies of various countries to visit Hong Kong more frequently, so as to foster exchanges and co-operation with other regions?

    Reply:

    President,

         In the Report on the Work of the Government delivered by the Premier of the State Council at the third session of the 14th National People’s Congress on March 5, 2025, “support Hong Kong and Macao in growing their economies, improving the lives of their people, and deepening international exchanges and co-operation” was mentioned. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region was most encouraged, and will better leverage the institutional strengths of “one country, two systems” and Hong Kong’s unique and internationalised advantages to open up new development opportunities, enhance Hong Kong’s international competitiveness, deepen international exchanges and co-operation, and strengthen Hong Kong’s role as a bridge linking the Mainland and global markets. As international organisations are important platforms for exchanges and co-operation among countries and regions, Hong Kong’s law enforcement agencies have deepened international exchanges and co-operation in recent years by participating in various international organisations, and even taking up leadership role, as well as hosting major international conferences, in a bid to contribute to the Belt and Road Initiative, and to tell the world the good stories of our country and Hong Kong.

         In consultation with the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the reply to the various parts of the question raised by the Hon Chan Chun-ying is as follows:

    (1) The ICAC actively supports the national development strategy and the Belt and Road Initiative and reinforces the tripartite partnership formed with the Hong Kong International Academy Against Corruption (HKIAAC) and the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA), deepening international exchanges and co-operation in the global fight against corruption. At the same time, the ICAC has forged strategic partnerships through memoranda of understanding with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and anti-corruption agencies in various Belt and Road countries. These partnerships facilitate the exchanges of anti-corruption expertise and enhance professional capacity building worldwide, supporting the implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). The ICAC’s efforts have garnered widespread international recognition.

         Under the tripartite partnership, the ICAC synergises its over 50 years of anti-corruption experience with the HKIAAC’s training platform and the IAACA’s extensive global network. Through a diversity of collaborative approaches, including organising tailored training programmes, sharing practical experiences, and undertaking bilateral or multilateral collaborations, the ICAC provides tailored support to overseas anti-corruption agencies, promoting Hong Kong’s anti-corruption expertise worldwide.

         The ICAC organises large-scale international events to exchange experiences with global anti-corruption partners while showcasing Hong Kong’s robust legal system and anti-corruption achievements. For instance, the ICAC and the IAACA co-hosted the 8th ICAC Symposium in Hong Kong in May 2024, gathering over 500 delegates from more than 180 anti-corruption and related organisations across nearly 60 jurisdictions. The Symposium doubled as the IAACA’s 11th Annual Conference, where the IAACA adopted the “Hong Kong Declaration on Strengthening International Cooperation in Preventing and Fighting Corruption”, which is the first-ever anti-corruption declaration named after Hong Kong. The declaration called on anti-corruption agencies worldwide to uphold the principles of the UNCAC and unite in their mission against corruption. Following the Symposium, the HKIAAC and the IAACA jointly organised an anti-corruption training course, including a study tour to Mainland China for around 50 anti-corruption practitioners from around the world, fostering deeper practical exchanges.

         To nurture anti-corruption awareness and drive innovation among youth in Asia, advance digital corruption prevention, and promote transnational collaboration, the ICAC, in partnership with the IAACA and the UNODC, will host the “Coding4Integrity Asian Youth Anti-Corruption Hackathon” in Hong Kong this September. The event will engage young participants from 15 Asian countries/territories, including Hong Kong, Macao, and various Belt and Road countries. Arrangements will be made for participants to visit Mainland China to learn about our country’s cutting-edge technological advancements and anti-corruption efforts. The winning team will also have the opportunity to present the solution at an event held in the margins of the 11th Session of the Conference of the States Parties to the UNCAC in Doha, Qatar, this December.

         The ICAC will continue to amplify the synergy of the tripartite partnership and expand collaboration with international partners. Through multifaceted exchanges and interactions, the ICAC will deepen co-operation in the anti-corruption field, and further solidify Hong Kong’s position as an international anti-corruption hub.

    (2) Since July 2024, the Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) representing Hong Kong, China, has taken up the role of World Customs Organization (WCO) Vice-Chairperson for the Asia/Pacific Region (APVC) again for a term of two years until June 2026. In May this year, the C&ED, in its capacity as the WCO APVC, successfully hosted the 26th WCO Asia/Pacific Regional Heads of Customs Administrations (RHCA) Conference. The Conference was the highest-level meeting held annually in the Asia/Pacific region, which gathered around 120 heads of customs organisations and senior officials from the region, along with delegates from the WCO’s regional entities.

         Hosting the RHCA Conference bore strategic significance for Hong Kong. During the Conference, the C&ED led discussions on the development of an innovative blockchain-based cross-validation platform. This platform will help speed up the logistic, economic and trade development in Hong Kong and the Asia/Pacific region. It will also facilitate customs administrations, logistics stakeholders, finance and capital chains, trade agreement processes and other related industries within the Asia/Pacific region to further integrate and collaborate. Taking the opportunity of hosting the Conference, the C&ED introduced Hong Kong’s key attractions and local food delicacies during the event, and showcased Hong Kong’s image as an international tourist city to the delegates, including the arrangement of a visit to the Victoria Harbour. These activities not only allowed the heads of customs organisations and senior officials from the Asia/Pacific region to personally experience Hong Kong’s distinctive charm and dynamic vibrancy as an international metropolis, but also enhanced their understanding of the city.

         Hosting the RHCA Conference is one of the key responsibilities of the C&ED serving as the WCO APVC. The C&ED has organised a number of other international or regional conferences, workshops, joint enforcement operations and capacity building programmes. From 2024 to the first half of 2025, the C&ED hosted 12 international or regional activities, covering areas such as intelligence exchange, enforcement against illicit cigarettes, canine enforcement, Authorised Economic Operators, data strategies and anti-money laundering, which gathered representatives from around the world to communicate and exchange views on relevant issues. In the future, the C&ED will organise meetings and co-operation programmes on Smart Customs, drug enforcement, and the protection of the environment and wildlife, with a view to fostering connections among law enforcement agencies in the Asia/Pacific region, and promote trade facilitation measures and development in the region. The C&ED will continue to take this opportunity to extend invitations to various customs administrations to come to Hong Kong for the events.

         Apart from actively organising the abovementioned significant events, the C&ED has leveraged its involvement in the WCO affairs to invite representatives from various customs administrations to visit Hong Kong. These efforts aim to foster greater exchange and co-operation with other regions. Since assuming the role of the WCO APVC, the C&ED has received delegations from 21 customs administrations. Beyond discussions on specific customs matters and exchanges, these visits have also enhanced delegates’ understanding of Hong Kong, with a view to strengthening future connections and collaboration, and laying a strong foundation for combating crime and facilitating trade.

         Looking ahead, the C&ED will be more proactive and seek to make greater impact as a “promoter” and “facilitator” in the WCO through telling the good stories of Hong Kong, upholding multilateralism, advancing international co-operation, and enhancing regional enforcement effectiveness.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: LCQ17: Participation in the affairs of law enforcement-related international organisations

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         Following is a question by the Hon Chan Chun-ying and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, in the Legislative Council today (July 2):

    Question:

         This year’s Report on the Work of the Government of the country mentions for the first time that Hong Kong must deepen international exchanges and co-operation. There are views pointing out that international organisations are important platforms for exchanges and co-operation among countries and regions. Regarding Hong Kong’s participation in the affairs of law enforcement-related international organisations, will the Government inform this Council:

    (1) as the Independent Commission Against Corruption has indicated that it has formed a tripartite partnership with the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities and the Hong Kong International Academy Against Corruption, actively contributing to the advancement of the global anti-corruption cause through, among other means, exchanges and sharing of experience with other countries, as well as organising anti-corruption training programmes, whether, in addition to the aforesaid activities, the Government will consider expanding the scale of such activities by taking the lead in organising in Hong Kong larger-scale, integrated international events themed on anti-corruption; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (2) given that the Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department, in its capacity as the World Customs Organization (WCO) Vice-Chair for the Asia/Pacific (A/P) Region, successfully organised the 26th WCO A/P Regional Heads of Customs Administrations Conference in May this year, whether, in addition to actively organising the aforesaid representative event, the Government will consider taking the opportunity of its involvement in the affairs of this international organisation to invite personnel from customs-related agencies of various countries to visit Hong Kong more frequently, so as to foster exchanges and co-operation with other regions?

    Reply:

    President,

         In the Report on the Work of the Government delivered by the Premier of the State Council at the third session of the 14th National People’s Congress on March 5, 2025, “support Hong Kong and Macao in growing their economies, improving the lives of their people, and deepening international exchanges and co-operation” was mentioned. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region was most encouraged, and will better leverage the institutional strengths of “one country, two systems” and Hong Kong’s unique and internationalised advantages to open up new development opportunities, enhance Hong Kong’s international competitiveness, deepen international exchanges and co-operation, and strengthen Hong Kong’s role as a bridge linking the Mainland and global markets. As international organisations are important platforms for exchanges and co-operation among countries and regions, Hong Kong’s law enforcement agencies have deepened international exchanges and co-operation in recent years by participating in various international organisations, and even taking up leadership role, as well as hosting major international conferences, in a bid to contribute to the Belt and Road Initiative, and to tell the world the good stories of our country and Hong Kong.

         In consultation with the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the reply to the various parts of the question raised by the Hon Chan Chun-ying is as follows:

    (1) The ICAC actively supports the national development strategy and the Belt and Road Initiative and reinforces the tripartite partnership formed with the Hong Kong International Academy Against Corruption (HKIAAC) and the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA), deepening international exchanges and co-operation in the global fight against corruption. At the same time, the ICAC has forged strategic partnerships through memoranda of understanding with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and anti-corruption agencies in various Belt and Road countries. These partnerships facilitate the exchanges of anti-corruption expertise and enhance professional capacity building worldwide, supporting the implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). The ICAC’s efforts have garnered widespread international recognition.

         Under the tripartite partnership, the ICAC synergises its over 50 years of anti-corruption experience with the HKIAAC’s training platform and the IAACA’s extensive global network. Through a diversity of collaborative approaches, including organising tailored training programmes, sharing practical experiences, and undertaking bilateral or multilateral collaborations, the ICAC provides tailored support to overseas anti-corruption agencies, promoting Hong Kong’s anti-corruption expertise worldwide.

         The ICAC organises large-scale international events to exchange experiences with global anti-corruption partners while showcasing Hong Kong’s robust legal system and anti-corruption achievements. For instance, the ICAC and the IAACA co-hosted the 8th ICAC Symposium in Hong Kong in May 2024, gathering over 500 delegates from more than 180 anti-corruption and related organisations across nearly 60 jurisdictions. The Symposium doubled as the IAACA’s 11th Annual Conference, where the IAACA adopted the “Hong Kong Declaration on Strengthening International Cooperation in Preventing and Fighting Corruption”, which is the first-ever anti-corruption declaration named after Hong Kong. The declaration called on anti-corruption agencies worldwide to uphold the principles of the UNCAC and unite in their mission against corruption. Following the Symposium, the HKIAAC and the IAACA jointly organised an anti-corruption training course, including a study tour to Mainland China for around 50 anti-corruption practitioners from around the world, fostering deeper practical exchanges.

         To nurture anti-corruption awareness and drive innovation among youth in Asia, advance digital corruption prevention, and promote transnational collaboration, the ICAC, in partnership with the IAACA and the UNODC, will host the “Coding4Integrity Asian Youth Anti-Corruption Hackathon” in Hong Kong this September. The event will engage young participants from 15 Asian countries/territories, including Hong Kong, Macao, and various Belt and Road countries. Arrangements will be made for participants to visit Mainland China to learn about our country’s cutting-edge technological advancements and anti-corruption efforts. The winning team will also have the opportunity to present the solution at an event held in the margins of the 11th Session of the Conference of the States Parties to the UNCAC in Doha, Qatar, this December.

         The ICAC will continue to amplify the synergy of the tripartite partnership and expand collaboration with international partners. Through multifaceted exchanges and interactions, the ICAC will deepen co-operation in the anti-corruption field, and further solidify Hong Kong’s position as an international anti-corruption hub.

    (2) Since July 2024, the Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) representing Hong Kong, China, has taken up the role of World Customs Organization (WCO) Vice-Chairperson for the Asia/Pacific Region (APVC) again for a term of two years until June 2026. In May this year, the C&ED, in its capacity as the WCO APVC, successfully hosted the 26th WCO Asia/Pacific Regional Heads of Customs Administrations (RHCA) Conference. The Conference was the highest-level meeting held annually in the Asia/Pacific region, which gathered around 120 heads of customs organisations and senior officials from the region, along with delegates from the WCO’s regional entities.

         Hosting the RHCA Conference bore strategic significance for Hong Kong. During the Conference, the C&ED led discussions on the development of an innovative blockchain-based cross-validation platform. This platform will help speed up the logistic, economic and trade development in Hong Kong and the Asia/Pacific region. It will also facilitate customs administrations, logistics stakeholders, finance and capital chains, trade agreement processes and other related industries within the Asia/Pacific region to further integrate and collaborate. Taking the opportunity of hosting the Conference, the C&ED introduced Hong Kong’s key attractions and local food delicacies during the event, and showcased Hong Kong’s image as an international tourist city to the delegates, including the arrangement of a visit to the Victoria Harbour. These activities not only allowed the heads of customs organisations and senior officials from the Asia/Pacific region to personally experience Hong Kong’s distinctive charm and dynamic vibrancy as an international metropolis, but also enhanced their understanding of the city.

         Hosting the RHCA Conference is one of the key responsibilities of the C&ED serving as the WCO APVC. The C&ED has organised a number of other international or regional conferences, workshops, joint enforcement operations and capacity building programmes. From 2024 to the first half of 2025, the C&ED hosted 12 international or regional activities, covering areas such as intelligence exchange, enforcement against illicit cigarettes, canine enforcement, Authorised Economic Operators, data strategies and anti-money laundering, which gathered representatives from around the world to communicate and exchange views on relevant issues. In the future, the C&ED will organise meetings and co-operation programmes on Smart Customs, drug enforcement, and the protection of the environment and wildlife, with a view to fostering connections among law enforcement agencies in the Asia/Pacific region, and promote trade facilitation measures and development in the region. The C&ED will continue to take this opportunity to extend invitations to various customs administrations to come to Hong Kong for the events.

         Apart from actively organising the abovementioned significant events, the C&ED has leveraged its involvement in the WCO affairs to invite representatives from various customs administrations to visit Hong Kong. These efforts aim to foster greater exchange and co-operation with other regions. Since assuming the role of the WCO APVC, the C&ED has received delegations from 21 customs administrations. Beyond discussions on specific customs matters and exchanges, these visits have also enhanced delegates’ understanding of Hong Kong, with a view to strengthening future connections and collaboration, and laying a strong foundation for combating crime and facilitating trade.

         Looking ahead, the C&ED will be more proactive and seek to make greater impact as a “promoter” and “facilitator” in the WCO through telling the good stories of Hong Kong, upholding multilateralism, advancing international co-operation, and enhancing regional enforcement effectiveness.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Judiciary set for full institutional independence

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Judiciary set for full institutional independence

    The process of placing the country’s judiciary under “full institutional independence” is expected to be rolled out in the 2025/26 financial year.

    This was announced by Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mmamoloko Kubayi, when she was presenting the budget vote of the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) in Parliament, on Tuesday afternoon.

    “[This] will enable the judiciary to be a fully-fledged Arm of the State. In line with the constitution, judicial governance and court administration will be placed under the authority of the Judiciary itself,” Kubayi said. 

    The proposed model will entail structural independence, which includes both financial and operational independence. With the vision to establish a single Judiciary, the administration of the Lower Courts, including the Magistrates Commission, will also be transferred the OCJ.

    Explaining the structure of the proposed model of the Judiciary, Kubayi highlighted that the Chief Justice will become the Executive Authority of the Office of the Chief Justice, while the Secretary-General will serve as the the accounting authority of the Judiciary. 

    “The OCJ will then be re-established outside the public service and be capacitated to appoint its staff in line with its own prescripts, human resource framework tailored to judicial operations and principles of independence,” the Minister explained.

    To carry out this process, the Minister announced that a task team comprising senior officials of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, Presidency, Office of the Chief Justice, National Treasury, Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), and the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI), has been established to chart a way for the institutional independence of the Judiciary.

    The team has been given until August to present a progress report to Cabinet on the judiciary’s institutional independence.

    “In the end, as envisaged by the founders of our democracy, we want to create a single judiciary that is an equal Arm of the State,” Kubayi affirmed.

    Budget allocation

    The Minister told Parliament that the OCJ has been allocated a budget increase of some 5.5%, which will “go a long way in ensuring efficiency and effectiveness of the courts and the judiciary as a whole”.

    “The OCJ provides direct support to the Judiciary and Superior Courts to ensure that the Judicial Arm of the State functions optimally. As such, the OCJ has been allocated a budget of R2.7 billion for the 2025/2026 Financial Year, which it operationalises through its three Programmes, namely: Administration, Superior Court Services as well as Judicial Education and Support. This allocation also includes the direct allocation for the remuneration of Judges.

    “This represents a budget increase of just over 5.5% compared to the previous financial year, which will go a long way in ensuring efficiency and effectiveness of the courts and the judiciary as a whole. In his Budget Speech, Minister of Finance has also made an undertaking to, later this year, make funds available for strengthening capabilities in the Office of the Chief Justice,” the Minister said.

    She added that the modernisation of the court system remains a key priority to “improve access to justice”, highlighting the continued rollout of the Court Online system following its successful pilot in the Gauteng Division of the High Court.

    “Court Online provides a platform for Law Firms/Litigants to file documents to the Courts electronically (E-Filing) over the Internet from anywhere, and is now operational in the Gauteng, Western Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, and Limpopo divisions. Eastern Cape is currently being rolled out and will be completed by end of July 2025. 

    “It [the system] is also being progressively implemented at the Land Court, Labour Court, and Labour Appeal Court. The envisaged full implementation of Court Online will enhance access to quality justice for all and the effectiveness of the courts,” Kubayi said.

    Another priority is the implementation of the department’s Fraud Prevention and Anti-Corruption Policy and Strategy during 2025/2026 financial year.

    This in line with the OCJ’s zero tolerance stance on corruption and fraud.

    “This policy creates a mechanism for reporting anonymously within the department and through the National Anti-Corruption Hotline, amongst other things.

    “We can inform members that following the reports of corruption in the Mthatha High Court, the OCJ has commenced with Lifestyle Audits of all employees over and above the work that is done by law enforcement agencies. Furthermore 4 officials have been suspended in Pretoria High court following allegations fraud and corruption,” Kubayi said. – SAnews.gov.za

    NeoB

    MIL OSI Africa

  • Warm welcome for first batch of Amarnath Yatra pilgrims in Kashmir

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Locals in Kashmir welcomed the first batch of Amarnath Yatra pilgrims with warmth and goodwill on Wednesday as they arrived in the Valley through the Navyug Tunnel.

    People from various sections of society, including members of civil society, traders, and residents of Anantnag and Kulgam districts, gathered with garlands and placards to greet the Yatris.

    The spontaneous gesture highlighted the enduring spirit of communal harmony in Kashmir and the region’s longstanding support for the annual pilgrimage.

    Earlier in the day, Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha flagged off the first batch of pilgrims from the Bhagwati Nagar Yatri Niwas in Jammu. Chanting slogans of ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’, ‘Bum Bum Bhole’ and ‘Har Har Mahadev’, enthusiastic devotees set out in two escorted convoys towards the Pahalgam and Baltal base camps.

    The Lt Governor, who also chairs the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board (SASB), was accompanied by senior civil and police officials during the flag-off ceremony.

    According to officials, a total of 5,892 pilgrims left Jammu for the Valley on Wednesday. Of these, 3,403 are bound for the Nunwan base camp at Pahalgam, while 2,489 are heading to Baltal.

    This year’s Yatra is being held under tight security arrangements, with an additional 180 companies of Central Armed Police Forces deployed following the April Pahalgam terror attack.

    The 36-day pilgrimage will formally commence on Thursday and conclude on August 9, coinciding with Shravan Purnima and Raksha Bandhan.

    Pilgrims undertake the journey to the holy cave shrine located at an altitude of 3,888 metres either through the traditional Pahalgam route or the shorter Baltal route. The Pahalgam route involves a 46-kilometre trek over four days, while those opting for the Baltal route complete a 14-kilometre trek and return the same day.

    This year, no helicopter services are available for security reasons.

    The cave shrine houses the naturally formed ice Shivling, believed by devotees to symbolise the mystical powers of Lord Shiva.

    -IANS

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Oxfam reaction to Spain, Brazil and South Africa launching a new coalition to tax the super-rich

    Source: Oxfam –

    In response to Spain, Brazil and South Africa’s new global coalition to tax the super-rich, launched today at the Fourth Financing for Development Conference in Seville, Oxfam Tax Justice Policy Lead Susana Ruiz said: 

    “We welcome the leadership of Brazil, Spain and South Africa in calling for taxes on the super-rich. People around the world are pushing for more countries to reject the corrupting political influence of oligarchies. Taxation of the super-rich is a vital tool to secure sustainable development and fight inequalities. The wealth of the richest 1% has surged $33.9 trillion since 2015, enough to end annual poverty 22 times, yet billionaires only pay around 0.3% in real taxes.  

    “This extreme inequality is being driven by a financial system that puts the interests of a wealthy few above everyone else. This concentration of wealth is blocking progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals and keeping over three billion people living in poverty: over half of poor countries are spending more on debt repayments than on healthcare or education. 

    “In a tense geopolitical environment, Spain, Brazil and South Africa have taken an important step in forging an alliance here at the UN conference in Seville to show political will for taxation of the super-rich. Now other countries must follow their lead and join forces. This year, the FFD in Seville, COP30 in Brazil and G20 in South Africa are key opportunities for international cooperation to tax the super-rich and invest in a sustainable future that puts human rights and equality at its core.”

    Download the Oxfam report “From Private Profit to Public Power: Financing Development, Not Oligarchy which was launched ahead of the Fourth Financing for Development Conference with new analysis on economic inequality.

    Greenpeace and Oxfam International commissioned a study this month on public opinion on taxing the super-rich. The research was conducted by first party data company Dynata in May-June 2025, in Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Kenya, Italy, India, Mexico, the Philippines, South Africa, Spain, the UK and the US. The survey had approximately 1200 respondents per country, with a margin of error of +-2.83%. Together, these countries represent close to half the world’s population. See the results here.

    Oxfam will be hosting a major high-level event together with Club de Madrid, at 7pm on July 1, 2025, in Seville, joined by high-level government representatives on the media briefing note. Journalists are invited to attend and will be prioritized for questions. Please register here.

    Moreover, an official side event on inequality and tax reform will take place at 2.30pm on July 1, 2025, at the FIBES Exhibition Centre room 20 joined by high-level government representatives from Brazil, Spain and South Africa, international organizations and global experts. See note here.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Security: NATO and Ukraine agree to exchange Military Police training expertise

    Source: NATO

    On 20 June 2025, NATO agreed to recognise the 25th Military Police Training Centre (MPTC) in Lviv, Ukraine as a NATO Partnership Training and Education Centre (PTEC).

    PTECs form a global network of institutions offering courses and academic seminars to civilian and military staff from NATO Allied and partner countries. Their goal is to improve the professionalism of national personnel, increase the ability of military personnel to operate well together, and conduct education and training activities carried out within the framework of NATO partnership programmes and policies. Since the PTEC community was launched in 1999, Ukraine has been an active member, thanks to the participation of its International Peacekeeping and Security Centre (IPSC).

    Despite the many challenges posed by Russia’s war against Ukraine, the 25th MPTC draws lessons learned from combat experience to refine courses and explore new training opportunities. It actively collaborates with the NATO Military Police community of interest and the NATO Military Police Centre of Excellence, based in Bydgoszcz, Poland, to develop high-quality courses. This helps to strengthen training initiatives in the discipline of Military Policing.

    Cooperation with NATO will also be enhanced through the NATO-Ukraine Joint Analysis, Training and Education Centre (JATEC), also based in Bydgoszcz. The 25th MPTC will create synergies with the JATEC and add value by identifying and applying lessons learned from Russia’s war of aggression. Cooperation between NATO and Ukraine is characterised by the common objective of increasing interoperability. Ukrainian officials have highlighted that they see NATO as the right platform for their defence institutions to share their unique and state-of-the-art capabilities with Allies and like-minded partners.

    Centres wishing to join the PTEC network must undergo thorough evaluation.  Evaluation of the 25th MPTC in March by experts from NATO Headquarters, Allied Command Operations and other NATO and Allied entities was, exceptionally, conducted in Bydgoszcz due to Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine. Representatives of the centre and NATO experts used the facilities of the NATO Military Police Centre of Excellence. NATO experts concluded that the centre demonstrated high expertise, professionalism and familiarity with NATO standards. The MPTC in Lviv, Ukraine is now the 36th member of the network of Partnership Training and Education Centres.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Africa: No fear or favour as Hawks swoop down on their own members

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Four police officials attached to the Hawks’ Serious Organised Crime Investigation in Gauteng and Gauteng Provincial SAPS have been arrested alongside two civilians for charges including fraud and corruption.

    All six suspects are expected to appear before the Johannesburg Magistrates Court today, where they are facing charges of theft, possession of suspected stolen money, extortion and corruption.

    The arrests was effected by members of the Hawks’ Serious Corruption Investigation (SCI) team based in Johannesburg. 

    On Monday afternoon, the complainant in the matter alleged that he had received a phone call from one of his employees informing him that police officers were at the complainant’s shop. It is further reported that the complainant instructed his employee to request the police to wait until he arrived at the shop.

    However, shortly after the conversation between the complainant and his employee, the call was disconnected. The complainant then made his way to the shop and upon his arrival, the shop was closed. 

    He then proceeded to Johannesburg Central Police Station, where he was informed that his employees were arrested for Contravention of Section 9 of the Currency Act, Act 9 of 1933. The employee that he was in conversation with was also arrested for interfering with police duties. 

    The arrest of the four police officials and two civilians came after the complainant reported the matter to the Hawks’ Serious Corruption Investigation. He alleged that the police officials took R900 000 from his shop while conducting their operations. 

    When following up on the information, the Hawks discovered that only 60 000 US dollars and R130 000 was booked into the South African Police Service (SAPS) register as the amount recovered by the police, instead of booking the entire amount of R900 000. 

    It is further alleged that the suspect, who was at the shop to exchange the money in question, also tried to entice the police officials with R60 000, which was also booked in the SAPS register. 

    After conducting a preliminary investigation, the Hawks’ SCI followed up the information and proceeded to Newtown, where they located the police officials involved in the theft. 

    The alleged corrupt officials were found in several vehicles. The Hawks searched the vehicles and found one of them with a substantial amount of cash. As a result, the four police officials and two civilians were arrested on the scene. 

    Meanwhile, the other six suspects, who are charged for contravention of Section 9 of the Currency Act, will also appear before the Johannesburg Magistrates Court today.

    ”The Hawks remain resolute in their commitment to uproot corruption, even within the ranks of law enforcement. No one is above the law. 

    “The arrest of these officers is a clear demonstration that we will act decisively and without fear or favour to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system and restore public trust in the SAPS,” said the Acting National Head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation, Lieutenant General Siphosihle Nkosi. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: SAPS welcomes ruling in Richmond municipal manager murder case

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Wednesday, July 2, 2025

    The South African Police Service (SAPS) has welcomed the judgment by the Pietermaritzburg High Court which found Sabelo Phewa guilty of murdering the late Richmond Local Municipality Manager, Sibusiso Sithole.

    Sentencing is expected to take place on 31 July 2025, at the Durban High Court.  

    Sithole was shot and killed at the Richmond licensing office in 2017 while on his way to attend a meeting with the then council to discuss issues he was investigating, which included fraud and corruption involving tenders and kickbacks in the municipality. 

    The SAPS Political Killings task team took over investigations in 2018 and this led to the arrest of Phewa. 

    “The firearm found in his possession at the time of his arrest was found to be linked to several other murders, including that of Amos Ngcobo, whose wife had ordered the hit. The wife turned State witness and was sentenced to five years imprisonment,” SAPS said in a statement. 

    the Pietermaritzburg High Court found Phewa guilty of the murder of Sithole and Ngcobo; the attempted murder of police officers at the time they were effecting his arrest; possession of an unlicensed firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Government to boost legal aid funding to support those at risk of eviction

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Government to boost legal aid funding to support those at risk of eviction

    Vulnerable individuals at risk of eviction and homelessness will find it easier to access legal services, thanks to a historic boost in civil legal aid funding confirmed today (2 July) by Minister Sarah Sackman. 

    • Response to consultation sees first major funding rise for housing and immigration legal aid fees in 30 years 

    • Funding uplift aimed at helping those facing homelessness and speeding up asylum processing 

    • An additional £20 million a year investment marks next step in government’s Plan for Change to rebuild legal aid sector 

    Following feedback from a consultation into civil legal aid, the Government will uplift the rates paid for all housing and immigration legal aid work. Providers will see significant increases in all fees, with the overall spending in these categories increasing by 24% for housing work and 30% for immigration work. This represents a significant investment – the first since 1996 – resulting in an increase of £20 million a year once fully implemented.   

    This extra funding means more people will get the support they need, when they need it – reducing stress and preventing delays in housing cases. At the same time, it will help speed up decision-making in immigration cases, ensuring a fairer, faster process for everyone involved. This is part of the Government’s Plan for Change to make the justice system more efficient, fair and accessible. 

    Justice Minister, Sarah Sackman KC MP, said:   

    This vital investment marks a turning point for civil legal aid by boosting funding to build capacity in the sector, helping to enable individuals, regardless of background or income, to uphold their legal rights.

    As part of our Plan for Change we are ensuring that our legal aid providers can deliver vital support where it’s needed most.

    This investment will help to ensure effective access to justice for some of the most vulnerable in our society, supporting a more stable and sustainable legal aid sector – one that is fit for the future and attracts and retains the brightest and the best practitioners.   

    Later this week a separate consultation on uplifting fees for criminal legal aid for solicitors by up to £92 million will conclude. It’s part of the Government’s wider work to invest in the legal aid system and deliver swifter justice for victims alongside Sir Brian Leveson’s independent review of criminal courts. 

    Notes to editors:   

    On Civil Legal Aid Consultation    

    • The Government ran a consultation on increasing legal aid fees for those working in the housing (housing and debt) and immigration (immigration and asylum) sectors, proposing to increase fees to a rate in the region of £65/£69 per hour (non-London/London), or provide a 10% uplift, whichever is higher. Fixed fees will be uplifted by the same percentage as the increase in the underlying hourly rate for that work. This will be implemented as soon as operationally possible with costs scaling up to £20m at steady state. This will increase overall spend by 24% for housing and 30% for immigration.  

    • The changes would mean for example that the fixed fee for Housing work will increase by 42% from £157 to £223 and the fixed fee for asylum legal help will increase by 35% from £413 to £559.  

    • Evidence from the Review of Civil Legal Aid (RoCLA) Call for Evidence included responses from providers that aspects of the current Civil Legal Aid contractual requirements can be unnecessarily restrictive. The consultation sought to gather further evidence for improvements to arrangements for remote advice and face-to-face advice based on client needs.    

    • We plan to implement these fee uplifts as soon as operationally possible.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Europe: NRRP: payment request for eighth instalment, equal to EUR 12.8 billion, sent to European Commission

    Source: Government of Italy (English)

    The payment request for the eighth instalment of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), equal to EUR 12.8 billion, was sent to the European Commission today.

    The request was submitted following the NRRP steering committee meeting held on 24 June, which verified the achievement of the 40 required objectives (28 targets and 12 milestones), including reforms and investments that are strategic for Italy’s economic and social growth. With the payment request for the eighth instalment, Italy has consolidated its leading position in Europe in terms of implementation of its NRRP, which will enable it to exceed EUR 153 billion over the coming months, corresponding to approximately 79% of the Plan’s total resources. 

    The measures implemented as part of the eighth instalment include: digitalisation of the Guardia di Finanza [Italian Finance Police], with innovative IT systems to fight economic crime; more than 1,000 language and methodology courses for school teachers; the launch of projects to update school curricula in over 8,000 schools and guide students towards STEM skills; implementation of culture and tourism enhancement projects by supporting approximately 2,000 small and medium-sized enterprises; redevelopment of around 50 historical parks and gardens. Furthermore, 1,400 km of rail infrastructure have been equipped with the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS); an advanced and integrated monitoring and forecasting system has been created to identify hydrogeological risks in Italy’s southern regions; marine habitat protection and coastal observation work has been carried out; improvements to the energy efficiency of public housing have been planned; with regard to universities, 5,000 research projects of national interest have been funded, approximately 2,300 new researchers have been hired, more than 550 research grants have been allocated, and financing has been provided for research programmes and projects on rare and severely debilitating diseases. 

    In addition to these investments, there are also important reforms to boost the economic competitiveness of companies, including the reform to reduce payment delays by central and local government authorities, regional authorities, autonomous provinces and national health service bodies, and the reform to launch simplification and streamlining for business incentives.

    In line with the previous payment requests, the eighth instalment will be disbursed upon completion of the standard assessment process provided for by European procedures, the aim of which is to verify that all required milestones and targets have been met.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • No fear or worry, say pilgrims as they embark on Amarnath yatra

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Jammu and Kashmir Lt Governor Manoj Sinha announced on Wednesday that over 4,000 devotees have begun their journey from Jammu for the Amarnath Yatra. He flagged off the first group of pilgrims from Jammu.

    ““More than four thousand devotees of Lord Bhole Nath have set out today in the first batch for Baba Barfani’s darshan,” said L-G Sinha.

    With chants of “Bam Bam Bhole” ringing through the air, the spiritual journey to the sacred Amarnath cave has officially begun.

    Pilgrims gathered in large numbers at the base camp, filled with emotion and enthusiasm.

    “Everything feels great, and I am very happy to be going with the first batch. There is no fear or worry because we have our Army and our leaders with us,” said one devotee.

    Another added, “There is great excitement among the first batch of pilgrims, and I want to tell all devotees to come at least once for darshan of Baba Amarnath.”

    The annual pilgrimage, a major spiritual event in the Hindu calendar, will see lakhs of devotees trek to the high-altitude cave shrine in the Himalayas over the coming weeks. This year’s yatra began with heightened preparations by the administration, ensuring a safe and seamless journey for all participants.

    L-G Sinha commended the efforts of the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board, the administration, and the security forces. “The Jammu and Kashmir administration, local residents, and the Shrine Board have made excellent arrangements for the Yatra. Jammu and Kashmir Police and security forces have ensured strict security measures,” he said.

    Along the Jammu-Srinagar National Highway, particularly near Ramban, security has been ramped up. The area has seen the deployment of additional forces, surveillance systems, and checkpoints. Only verified vehicles are being allowed to pass through key points to ensure the safety of pilgrims.

    Meanwhile, facilities including medical aid, sanitation, food distribution, and emergency response systems have been arranged along the route. The Shri Amarnath Shrine Board has worked closely with multiple agencies to monitor crowd flow and weather patterns, ensuring the safety and comfort of pilgrims throughout the yatra.

    (IANS)

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: President Lai meets delegation from 2025 Taiwan International Ocean Forum

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    Details
    2025-06-30
    President Lai meets Minister of State at UK Department for Business and Trade Douglas Alexander  
    On the morning of June 30, President Lai Ching-te met with Douglas Alexander, Minister of State at the Department for Business and Trade of the United Kingdom. In remarks, President Lai thanked the UK government for its longstanding support for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Noting that two years ago, Taiwan and the UK signed an enhanced trade partnership (ETP) arrangement, the president said that today Taiwan and the UK have signed three pillars under the ETP, which will help promote bilateral economic and trade cooperation. He expressed hope of the UK publicly supporting Taiwan’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) so that together we can create an economic and trade landscape in the Indo-Pacific characterized by shared prosperity and development. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, on behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend a warm welcome to Minister Alexander and wish a fruitful outcome for the 27th round of Taiwan-UK trade talks later today. Taiwan-UK relations have grown closer in recent years. We have not only continued to strengthen cooperation in such fields as offshore wind power, innovative technologies, and culture and education but also have established regular dialogue mechanisms in the critical areas of economics and trade, energy, and agriculture. The UK is currently Taiwan’s fourth-largest European trading partner, second-largest source of investment from Europe, and third-largest target for investment in Europe. Two years ago, Taiwan and the UK signed an ETP arrangement. This was particularly meaningful, as it was the first institutionalized economic and trade framework between Taiwan and a European country. Today, this arrangement is yielding further results. I am delighted that Taiwan and the UK have signed three pillars under the ETP covering investment, digital trade, and energy and net-zero. This will help promote bilateral economic and trade cooperation and advance industrial development on both sides. I also want to thank the UK government for its longstanding support for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. This month, the UK published its Strategic Defence Review 2025 and National Security Strategy 2025, which oppose any unilateral attempts to change the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. These not only demonstrate that Taiwan and the UK share similar goals but also show that security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region are inseparable from those of the transatlantic regions. In addition, last November, the House of Commons passed a motion which made clear that United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2758 neither established the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China over Taiwan nor determined Taiwan’s status in the United Nations. The UK government also responded to the motion by publicly expressing for the first time its position on UNGA Resolution 2758, opposing any attempt to broaden the interpretation of the resolution to rewrite history. For this, on behalf of the people of Taiwan, I once again want to extend my deepest gratitude. Taiwan and the UK have the advantage of being highly complementary in the technology sector. In facing the restructuring of global supply chains and other international economic and trade developments, I believe that Taiwan and the UK are indispensable key partners for one another. I look forward to the UK publicly supporting Taiwan’s accession to the CPTPP so that together, we can create an economic and trade landscape in the Indo-Pacific characterized by shared prosperity and development. In closing, I wish Minister Alexander a pleasant and successful visit. And I hope he has the opportunity to visit Taiwan for personal travel in the future. Minister Alexander then delivered remarks, saying that it is a great personal honor to meet with everyone today to discuss further deepening the UK-Taiwan trade relationship and explore the many opportunities our two sides can pursue together. He mentioned that he traveled to Taiwan in 2022 when he was a private citizen, a visit he thoroughly enjoyed, so he is delighted to be back to see the strength of the UK-Taiwan relationship and the strengthening of that relationship. He said that relationship is built on mutual respect, democratic values, and a shared vision for open, resilient, and rules-based economic cooperation. As like-minded partners, he pointed out, our collaboration continues to grow across multiple sectors, and he is here today to further that momentum. Minister Alexander stated that on trade and investment, he is proud that this morning we signed the ETP Pillars on Investment, Digital Trade, Energy and Net Zero, which will provide a clear framework for our future cooperation and lay the foundation for expanded access and market-shaping engagement between our two economies. The minister said he believes that together with our annual trade talks, this partnership will help UK’s firms secure new commercial opportunities, improve regulatory alignment, and promote long-term investment in key growth areas, which in turn will also support Taiwan’s efforts to expand high-quality trade relationships with trusted partners. Minister Alexander said that President Lai’s promotion of the Five Trusted Industry Sectors and the UK’s recently published industrial and trade strategies are very well-aligned, as both cover clean energy and semiconductors as well as advanced manufacturing. He then provided an example, saying that both sides plan to invest in AI infrastructure and compute power-creating opportunities for great joint research in the future. By combining our strengths in these areas, he said, we can open the door to innovative collaboration and commercial success for both sides. He mentioned that yesterday he visited the Taiwan Space Agency, commenting that in sectors such as satellite technology, green energy, and cyber security, British expertise and trusted standards can provide meaningful solutions. Noting that President Lai spoke in his remarks of the broader challenge of peace and security in the region, Minister Alexander stated that the United Kingdom has, of course, also continued to affirm its commitment to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, along with its G7 partners. The UK-Taiwan relationship is strategic, enduring, and growing, he stated, and they reaffirm and remain firm in their longstanding position and confident in their ability to work together to support both prosperity and resilience in both of our societies. Minister Alexander said that, as Taiwan looks to diversify capital and build global partnerships, they believe the UK represents a strong and ambitious investment destination, particularly for Taiwanese companies at the very forefront of robotics, clean tech, and advanced industry. He pointed out that the UK’s markets are stable, open, and aligned with Taiwan’s vision of a high-tech, sustainable future, adding that he looks forward to our discussion on how we can further deepen our cooperation across all of these areas and more. The delegation also included Martin Kent, His Majesty’s Trade Commissioner for Asia Pacific at the UK Department for Business and Trade. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by British Office Taipei Representative Ruth Bradley-Jones.   

    Details
    2025-06-27
    President Lai confers decoration on former Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Chairman Ohashi Mitsuo
    On the morning of June 27, President Lai Ching-te conferred the Order of Brilliant Star with Grand Cordon upon former Chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Ohashi Mitsuo in recognition of his firm convictions and tireless efforts in promoting Taiwan-Japan exchanges. In remarks, President Lai stated that Chairman Ohashi cares for Taiwan like a family member, and expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan continue to deepen their partnership, bring about the early signing of an economic partnership agreement (EPA), and jointly build secure and stable non-red supply chains as we boost the resilience and competitiveness of our economies and jointly safeguard the values of freedom and democracy. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Every meeting I have with Chairman Ohashi, with whom I have worked side by side for many years, is warm and friendly. I recall that when we met last year, Chairman Ohashi said that he often thinks about what Japan can do for Taiwan and what Taiwan can do for Japan, and that it is that mutual concern that makes us so close. This was a truly moving statement illustrating the relationship between Taiwan and Japan. Chairman Ohashi has also said numerous times that our bilateral relations may very well be the best in the entire world, and that in fact they may serve as a model to other countries. Indeed, Chairman Ohashi is himself an exemplary model for friendly relations between Taiwan and Japan. His spirit of always working tirelessly to promote Taiwan-Japan exchanges is truly admirable. Assuming the position of chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association in 2011, he served during the terms of former Presidents Ma Ying-jeou and Tsai Ing-wen, continuously making positive contributions to Taiwan-Japan relations. Over these past 14 years, Taiwan and Japan have signed over 50 major agreements, spanning the economy and trade, fisheries, and taxes, among other areas. In 2017, the Taiwan-Japan Relations Association and the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association underwent name changes, strengthening the essence and significance of Taiwan-Japan relations. These great achievements were all made possible thanks to the firm convictions and tireless efforts of Chairman Ohashi. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I am delighted to confer upon Chairman Ohashi the Order of Brilliant Star with Grand Cordon to express our deepest thanks for his outstanding contributions. Chairman Ohashi is not just a good friend of Taiwan, but someone who cares for Taiwan like a family member. When a major earthquake struck in 2016, he personally went to Tainan to assess the situation and meet with the city government. This outpouring of friendship and support across borders was deeply moving. As we look to the future, I hope that Taiwan and Japan can continue to deepen our partnership. In addition to bringing about the early signing of an EPA, I also hope that we can expand collaboration in key areas such as semiconductors, energy, and AI, continue building secure and stable non-red supply chains, and boost the resilience and competitiveness of our economies as well as peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific. As Chairman Ohashi has said, the close bilateral relationship between Taiwan and Japan is one the world can be proud of. I would like to thank him once again for his contributions to deepening Taiwan-Japan ties. Taiwan will continue to forge ahead side by side with Japan, jointly safeguarding the values of freedom and democracy and mutually advancing prosperous development. I wish Chairman Ohashi good health, happiness, peace, and success in his future endeavors, and invite him to return to Taiwan often to visit old friends. Chairman Ohashi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for his kind words. He stated that the Taiwan-Japan relationship is not only worthy of praise; it can also serve as a superb model in the world for bilateral relations that is worthy of study by other countries. He added that this is the result of the collective efforts of President Lai as well as many other individuals. Chairman Ohashi said that the current international situation is rather severe, with wars and conflicts occurring between many neighboring countries. He said that there is a growing trend of nuclear weapon proliferation, emphasizing that use of such weapons would cause significant harm between nations. He also pointed out that some countries even use nuclear weapons as a threat, leading to instability and impacting the global situation. Chairman Ohashi said that neither Taiwan nor Japan possesses nuclear weapons, which is something to be proud of. That is why, he said, we can declare that a world without nuclear weapons is a peaceful world. He also mentioned that during his tenure as chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association, he consistently upheld this principle in his work. Chairman Ohashi said that the mission of the World Federalist Movement (WFM) is to promote world peace. He said that the WFM has branches in countries worldwide, with the WFM of Japan being one of the most prominent, and that it also aspires to achieve the goal of world peace. Having served as chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association for 14 years, he said, he is now stepping down from this role and will serve as the chairman of the WFM of Japan, aiming to promote peace in countries around the world. Chairman Ohashi said that both Taiwan and Japan can take pride in our friendly bilateral relationship, emphasizing that if the good relationship between Japan and Taiwan could be offered as an example to countries around the world, there would be no more wars. He expressed his sincere hope that under President Lai’s leadership, Taiwan and Japan can work together to jointly promote world peace. Also in attendance at the ceremony was Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.

    Details
    2025-06-25
    President Lai meets Japan’s former Economic Security Minister Kobayashi Takayuki
    On the afternoon of June 25, President Lai Ching-te met with Kobayashi Takayuki, Japan’s former economic security minister and a current member of the House of Representatives. In remarks, President Lai expressed hope to combine the strengths of the democratic community to build resilient, reliable non-red supply chains, and ensure a resilient global economy and sustainable development. He also expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan can bring about the early signing of an economic partnership agreement (EPA), and that Japan will continue supporting Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), enhancing our own bilateral partnership, as doing so would create win-win situations and further contribute to regional economic security and stability. The following is a translation of President Lai’s remarks: I welcome Representative Kobayashi back to Taiwan for another visit after seven years. During his last visit, he was with a delegation from the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) Youth Division, and we met at the Executive Yuan. I am very happy to see him again today. Representative Kobayashi has long paid close attention to matters involving economic security, technological innovation, and aerospace policy. He also made a stunning debut in last year’s LDP presidential election, showing that he is truly a rising star and an influential figure in the political sphere. With this visit, Representative Kobayashi is demonstrating support for Taiwan with concrete action, which is very meaningful. Taiwan and Japan are both part of the first island chain’s key line of defense. We thank the many Japanese prime ministers, including former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo, Suga Yoshihide, and Kishida Fumio, as well as current Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru, for the many times they have highlighted the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait at important international venues, and for expressing opposition to the use of force or coercion to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. I hope that Taiwan and Japan can engage in more cooperation and exchanges to promote peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region in all aspects. In particular, China in recent years has been actively expanding its red supply chains, which threaten the global free trade system and advanced technology markets. Taiwan hopes to combine the strengths of the democratic community to build resilient, reliable non-red supply chains. In the semiconductor industry, for example, Taiwan has excellent advanced manufacturing capabilities, while Japan plays an important role in materials, equipment, and key technologies. I am confident that, given the experience that Taiwan and Japan have in cooperating, we can build an industrial supply chain composed of democratic nations to ensure a resilient global economy and sustainable development. I hope that Taiwan and Japan can bring about the early signing of an EPA in order to deepen our bilateral trade and investment exchanges and cooperation. I also hope that Japan will continue supporting Taiwan’s bid to join the CPTPP, enhancing our own bilateral partnership, as doing so would create win-win situations and further contribute to regional economic security and stability. Taiwan and Japan are democratic partners that share the values of freedom, democracy, and respect for human rights. I firmly believe that so long as we work together, we can certainly address the challenges posed by authoritarianism, and bring prosperity and development to the Indo-Pacific region. In closing, I welcome Representative Kobayashi once again. I am certain that this visit will help enhance Taiwan-Japan exchanges and deepen our friendship. Representative Kobayashi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for taking the time to meet with him, and noting that this was his second visit to Taiwan following a trip seven years prior, when he came with his good friend from college and then-Director of the LDP Youth Division Suzuki Keisuke, now Japan’s minister of justice. Representative Kobayashi mentioned a Japanese kanji that he is very fond of – 絆 (kizuna) – which means “deep ties of friendship.” He emphasized that a key purpose of this visit to Taiwan was to reiterate the deep ties of friendship between Taiwan and Japan. In addition to deep historical ties, he said, Taiwan and Japan also enjoy a like-minded partnership in terms of economic, personnel, and friendship-oriented exchanges. He went on to say that at the strategic level, Taiwan and Japan also have deep ties of friendship, and that for Japan, it is strategically important that Taiwan not be isolated under any circumstances. Representative Kobayashi emphasized that cooperation between Taiwan and Japan, and even cooperation among Taiwan, Japan, and the United States, are more important now than ever, and that another important focus of this visit is the non-red supply chains referred to earlier by President Lai. He said that as Japan’s first economic security minister and the person currently in charge of the LDP’s policy on economic security, he is acutely aware of the important impact of economic security on national interests, and therefore looks forward to further exchanging views regarding Taiwan’s concrete steps to build non-red supply chains. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Deputy Representative Takaba Yo.

    Details
    2025-06-16
    President Lai meets delegation led by Representative Bera, co-chair of US Congressional Taiwan Caucus
    On the morning of June 16, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Representative Ami Bera, co-chair of the US Congressional Taiwan Caucus. In remarks, President Lai thanked the representatives in Congress for actively voicing support for Taiwan and proposing numerous Taiwan-friendly initiatives to strengthen Taiwan-US ties, helping expand Taiwan’s international space and continuing to place focus on peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. The president said that we will continue to strengthen bilateral investment and industrial cooperation and create a more comprehensive environment for economic and trade exchanges to jointly enhance economic and developmental resilience. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to meet with the delegation and welcome Congressman Bera back to the Presidential Office. Last January, he visited after the presidential election, demonstrating the steadfast backing of the US Congress for democratic Taiwan. This time, as head of a delegation of new members of the House Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee, he is continuing to foster US congressional support for Taiwan. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend a sincere welcome to Congressman Bera and all our esteemed guests. Over the years, staunch bipartisan US congressional backing of Taiwan has been a key force for steadily advancing our bilateral relations. I thank the representatives in Congress for actively voicing support for Taiwan and proposing numerous Taiwan-friendly initiatives, thereby strengthening Taiwan-US ties, helping expand Taiwan’s international space, and continuing to place focus on peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. I want to emphasize that Taiwan has an unwavering determination to safeguard peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. Over the past year, the government and private sector have been working together to enhance Taiwan’s whole-of-society defense resilience and accelerate reform of national defense. The government is also prioritizing special budget allocations to ensure that our defense budget exceeds three percent of GDP this year. I hope that Taiwan-US security cooperation will evolve beyond military procurement to a partnership that encompasses joint research and development and joint production, further strengthening cooperation and exchange in the defense industry. Regarding industrial exchanges, last month, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) and Minister of Economic Affairs Kuo Jyh-huei (郭智輝) each visited Texas to see firsthand Taiwan-US collaboration in AI and semiconductors. And the delegation led by Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) sent by Taiwan to this year’s SelectUSA Investment Summit in Washington, DC, was again the largest of those attending. All of this demonstrates Taiwan’s commitment to working alongside the US to create mutual prosperity. In the future, we will continue to strengthen bilateral investment and industrial cooperation. And I hope that the legislation addressing the issue of Taiwan-US double taxation will become law this year. I want to thank Congressman Bera for co-leading a joint letter last November signed by over 100 members of Congress calling for such legislation. I believe that by creating a more comprehensive environment for economic and trade exchanges, Taiwan and the US can enhance economic and developmental resilience. In closing, I thank you all for making the long journey here to advance Taiwan-US relations. Let us continue working together to promote the prosperous development of this important partnership. Congressman Bera then delivered remarks, saying that on behalf of the delegation, it is an honor for him to be here once again, it being last January that he and Congressman Mario Díaz-Balart visited and congratulated President Lai on his election victory, noting that theirs was the first congressional delegation to do so. Congressman Bera said that this is an important time, not just for the US and Taiwan relationship, but for all relationships around the world. When we look at conflicts in Europe and in the Middle East, he said, it is incumbent upon democracies to hold the peace in Asia. He emphasized that is why it is important for them to bring a delegation of members of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee, adding that he believes for all of them it is their first trip to Taiwan.  Congressman Bera said that while this is a delegation of Democratic members of Congress, in a bipartisan way all of Congress continues to support the people of Taiwan. As such, in this visit he brings support from his co-chairs on the Taiwan caucus, Congressman Díaz-Balart and Congressman Andy Barr. He also took a moment to recognize the passing of Congressman Gerald Connolly, who was a longtime friend of Taiwan and one of their co-chairs on the caucus. Congressman Bera mentioned that there is always a special bond between himself and President Lai because they are both doctors, and as doctors, their profession is about healing, keeping the peace, and making sure everybody has a bright, prosperous future. In closing, he highlighted that it is in that spirit that their delegation visits with the president. The delegation also included members of the US Congress Gabe Amo, Wesley Bell, Julie Johnson, Sarah McBride, and Johnny Olszewski.

    Details
    2025-06-13
    President Lai meets delegation led by French National Assembly Taiwan Friendship Group Chair Marie-Noëlle Battistel
    On the morning of June 12, President Lai Ching-te met a delegation led by Marie-Noëlle Battistel, chair of the French National Assembly’s Taiwan Friendship Group. In remarks, President Lai thanked the National Assembly for its long-term support for Taiwan’s international participation and for upholding security in the Taiwan Strait, helping make France the first major country in the world to enact legislation to uphold freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait. The president also said that exchanges and cooperation between Taiwan and France are becoming more frequent, and that he hopes this visit by the Taiwan Friendship Group will inject new momentum into Taiwan-France relations and help build closer partnerships in the economy, trade, energy, and digital security.  A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, I would like to welcome Chair Battistel, who is once again leading a visiting delegation. Last year, Chair Battistel co-led a delegation to attend the inauguration ceremony for myself and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao. This is her fourth visit, and first as chair of the Taiwan Friendship Group, which makes it especially meaningful. This delegation’s visit demonstrates strong support for Taiwan, and on behalf of the people of Taiwan, I want to express my sincerest welcome and thanks. France is a pioneer in promoting free and democratic values. These are values that Taiwan cherishes and is working hard to defend. I want to express gratitude to the French Parliament for their long-term support for Taiwan’s international participation, and for upholding security in the Taiwan Strait. The French Parliament’s two chambers have continued to strongly support Taiwan, with the passage of a resolution supporting Taiwan’s participation in international organizations in 2021, as well as the passage of the seven-year Military Programming Law in 2023. This has made France the first major country in the world to enact legislation to uphold freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait. Through it all, the Taiwan Friendship Group has played a key role, and I want to thank all of our distinguished guests for their efforts. Over the past few years, Taiwan and France have continued to deepen cooperation in areas including the economy, technology, culture, and sports. At the Choose France summit held in Paris last month, Taiwanese and French enterprises also announced they will launch cooperation in the semiconductor and satellite fields. The VivaTech startup exhibition, now being held in France, also has many Taiwanese vendors participating. Exchanges and cooperation between Taiwan and France, whether official or people-to-people, are becoming more and more frequent. I hope that this visit by the Taiwan Friendship Group will inject new momentum into Taiwan-France relations, building closer partnerships in the economy, trade, energy, and digital security.  To address current geopolitical and economic challenges, Taiwan will continue to join forces with France and other like-minded countries to jointly safeguard peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, and contribute our concerted efforts to global prosperity and development. Once again, I want to welcome our visitors to Taiwan. I hope to continue our joint efforts to create a more prosperous future for both Taiwan and France.   Chair Battistel then delivered remarks, thanking President Lai for extending this invitation. Last year on May 20, she said, she and her delegation attended the presidential inauguration ceremony, so she was delighted to visit Taiwan once again with the French National Assembly’s Taiwan Friendship Group and bear witness to their friendship with Taiwan. Chair Battistel noted that this visit has given them an opportunity to strengthen Taiwan-France relations in areas including the economy, culture, the humanities, and diplomacy, and conduct exchanges with numerous heads of government agencies and research institutes. It has also been an opportunity, she said, to witness the importance of exchanges and cooperation with Taiwan in areas including energy, semiconductors, youth, and culture, and the impact created by important issues of mutual concern, including AI and disinformation, on the security of many countries. Chair Battistel praised Taiwan for its youth development efforts, and said that under the Taiwan Global Pathfinders Initiative, 30 Taiwanese young people have embarked on a visit to France, with itineraries including the United Nations Ocean Conference and the VivaTech exhibition, as well as the city of Toulouse, which is strategically important for the aerospace industry. Members of the group are also conducting exchanges at the French National Assembly, she said.  Chair Battistel stated that the Taiwan-France partnership is growing closer, and that she hopes to continue to strengthen bilateral exchanges and cooperation, as supporting peace for Taiwan supports peace around the world.  The delegation also included Taiwan Friendship Group Vice Chair Éric Martineau, as well as National Assembly Committee on Foreign Affairs Vice Chair Laetitia Saint-Paul and Deputies Marie-José Allemand and Claudia Rouaux. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by French Office in Taipei Deputy Director Cléa Le Cardeur.

    Details
    2025-05-20
    President Lai interviewed by Nippon Television and Yomiuri TV
    In a recent interview on Nippon Television’s news zero program, President Lai Ching-te responded to questions from host Mr. Sakurai Sho and Yomiuri TV Shanghai Bureau Chief Watanabe Masayo on topics including reflections on his first year in office, cross-strait relations, China’s military threats, Taiwan-United States relations, and Taiwan-Japan relations. The interview was broadcast on the evening of May 19. During the interview, President Lai stated that China intends to change the world’s rules-based international order, and that if Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted. Therefore, he said, Taiwan will strengthen its national defense, prevent war by preparing for war, and achieve the goal of peace. The president also noted that Taiwan’s purpose for developing drones is based on national security and industrial needs, and that Taiwan hopes to collaborate with Japan. He then reiterated that China’s threats are an international problem, and expressed hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war. Following is the text of the questions and the president’s responses: Q: How do you feel as you are about to round out your first year in office? President Lai: When I was young, I was determined to practice medicine and save lives. When I left medicine to go into politics, I was determined to transform Taiwan. And when I was sworn in as president on May 20 last year, I was determined to strengthen the nation. Time flies, and it has already been a year. Although the process has been very challenging, I am deeply honored to be a part of it. I am also profoundly grateful to our citizens for allowing me the opportunity to give back to our country. The future will certainly be full of more challenges, but I will do everything I can to unite the people and continue strengthening the nation. That is how I am feeling now. Q: We are now coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, and over this period, we have often heard that conflict between Taiwan and the mainland is imminent. Do you personally believe that a cross-strait conflict could happen? President Lai: The international community is very much aware that China intends to replace the US and change the world’s rules-based international order, and annexing Taiwan is just the first step. So, as China’s military power grows stronger, some members of the international community are naturally on edge about whether a cross-strait conflict will break out. The international community must certainly do everything in its power to avoid a conflict in the Taiwan Strait; there is too great a cost. Besides causing direct disasters to both Taiwan and China, the impact on the global economy would be even greater, with estimated losses of US$10 trillion from war alone – that is roughly 10 percent of the global GDP. Additionally, 20 percent of global shipping passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, so if a conflict breaks out in the strait, other countries including Japan and Korea would suffer a grave impact. For Japan and Korea, a quarter of external transit passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, and a third of the various energy resources and minerals shipped back from other countries pass through said areas. If Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted, and therefore conflict in the Taiwan Strait must be avoided. Such a conflict is indeed avoidable. I am very thankful to Prime Minister of Japan Ishiba Shigeru and former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo, Suga Yoshihide, and Kishida Fumio, as well as US President Donald Trump and former President Joe Biden, and the other G7 leaders, for continuing to emphasize at international venues that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are essential components for global security and prosperity. When everyone in the global democratic community works together, stacking up enough strength to make China’s objectives unattainable or to make the cost of invading Taiwan too high for it to bear, a conflict in the strait can naturally be avoided. Q: As you said, President Lai, maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is also very important for other countries. How can war be avoided? What sort of countermeasures is Taiwan prepared to take to prevent war? President Lai: As Mr. Sakurai mentioned earlier, we are coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII. There are many lessons we can take from that war. First is that peace is priceless, and war has no winners. From the tragedies of WWII, there are lessons that humanity should learn. We must pursue peace, and not start wars blindly, as that would be a major disaster for humanity. In other words, we must be determined to safeguard peace. The second lesson is that we cannot be complacent toward authoritarian powers. If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. They will keep growing, and eventually, not only will peace be unattainable, but war will be inevitable. The third lesson is why WWII ended: It ended because different groups joined together in solidarity. Taiwan, Japan, and the Indo-Pacific region are all directly subjected to China’s threats, so we hope to be able to join together in cooperation. This is why we proposed the Four Pillars of Peace action plan. First, we will strengthen our national defense. Second, we will strengthen economic resilience. Third is standing shoulder to shoulder with the democratic community to demonstrate the strength of deterrence. Fourth is that as long as China treats Taiwan with parity and dignity, Taiwan is willing to conduct exchanges and cooperate with China, and seek peace and mutual prosperity. These four pillars can help us avoid war and achieve peace. That is to say, Taiwan hopes to achieve peace through strength, prevent war by preparing for war, keeping war from happening and pursuing the goal of peace. Q: Regarding drones, everyone knows that recently, Taiwan has been actively researching, developing, and introducing drones. Why do you need to actively research, develop, and introduce new drones at this time? President Lai: This is for two purposes. The first is to meet national security needs. The second is to meet industrial development needs. Because Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines are all part of the first island chain, and we are all democratic nations, we cannot be like an authoritarian country like China, which has an unlimited national defense budget. In this kind of situation, island nations such as Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines should leverage their own technologies to develop national defense methods that are asymmetric and utilize unmanned vehicles. In particular, from the Russo-Ukrainian War, we see that Ukraine has successfully utilized unmanned vehicles to protect itself and prevent Russia from unlimited invasion. In other words, the Russo-Ukrainian War has already proven the importance of drones. Therefore, the first purpose of developing drones is based on national security needs. Second, the world has already entered the era of smart technology. Whether generative, agentic, or physical, AI will continue to develop. In the future, cars and ships will also evolve into unmanned vehicles and unmanned boats, and there will be unmanned factories. Drones will even be able to assist with postal deliveries, or services like Uber, Uber Eats, and foodpanda, or agricultural irrigation and pesticide spraying. Therefore, in the future era of comprehensive smart technology, developing unmanned vehicles is a necessity. Taiwan, based on industrial needs, is actively planning the development of drones and unmanned vehicles. I would like to take this opportunity to express Taiwan’s hope to collaborate with Japan in the unmanned vehicle industry. Just as we do in the semiconductor industry, where Japan has raw materials, equipment, and technology, and Taiwan has wafer manufacturing, our two countries can cooperate. Japan is a technological power, and Taiwan also has significant technological strengths. If Taiwan and Japan work together, we will not only be able to safeguard peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and security in the Indo-Pacific region, but it will also be very helpful for the industrial development of both countries. Q: The drones you just described probably include examples from the Russo-Ukrainian War. Taiwan and China are separated by the Taiwan Strait. Do our drones need to have cross-sea flight capabilities? President Lai: Taiwan does not intend to counterattack the mainland, and does not intend to invade any country. Taiwan’s drones are meant to protect our own nation and territory. Q: Former President Biden previously stated that US forces would assist Taiwan’s defense in the event of an attack. President Trump, however, has yet to clearly state that the US would help defend Taiwan. Do you think that in such an event, the US would help defend Taiwan? Or is Taiwan now trying to persuade the US? President Lai: Former President Biden and President Trump have answered questions from reporters. Although their responses were different, strong cooperation with Taiwan under the Biden administration has continued under the Trump administration; there has been no change. During President Trump’s first term, cooperation with Taiwan was broader and deeper compared to former President Barack Obama’s terms. After former President Biden took office, cooperation with Taiwan increased compared to President Trump’s first term. Now, during President Trump’s second term, cooperation with Taiwan is even greater than under former President Biden. Taiwan-US cooperation continues to grow stronger, and has not changed just because President Trump and former President Biden gave different responses to reporters. Furthermore, the Trump administration publicly stated that in the future, the US will shift its strategic focus from Europe to the Indo-Pacific. The US secretary of defense even publicly stated that the primary mission of the US is to prevent China from invading Taiwan, maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific, and thus maintain world peace. There is a saying in Taiwan that goes, “Help comes most to those who help themselves.” Before asking friends and allies for assistance in facing threats from China, Taiwan must first be determined and prepared to defend itself. This is Taiwan’s principle, and we are working in this direction, making all the necessary preparations to safeguard the nation. Q: I would like to ask you a question about Taiwan-Japan relations. After the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, you made an appeal to give Japan a great deal of assistance and care. In particular, you visited Sendai to offer condolences. Later, you also expressed condolences and concern after the earthquakes in Aomori and Kumamoto. What are your expectations for future Taiwan-Japan exchanges and development? President Lai: I come from Tainan, and my constituency is in Tainan. Tainan has very deep ties with Japan, and of course, Taiwan also has deep ties with Japan. However, among Taiwan’s 22 counties and cities, Tainan has the deepest relationship with Japan. I sincerely hope that both of you and your teams will have an opportunity to visit Tainan. I will introduce Tainan’s scenery, including architecture from the era of Japanese rule, Tainan’s cuisine, and unique aspects of Tainan society, and you can also see lifestyles and culture from the Showa era.  The Wushantou Reservoir in Tainan was completed by engineer Mr. Hatta Yoichi from Kanazawa, Japan and the team he led to Tainan after he graduated from then-Tokyo Imperial University. It has nearly a century of history and is still in use today. This reservoir, along with the 16,000-km-long Chianan Canal, transformed the 150,000-hectare Chianan Plain into Taiwan’s premier rice-growing area. It was that foundation in agriculture that enabled Taiwan to develop industry and the technology sector of today. The reservoir continues to supply water to Tainan Science Park. It is used by residents of Tainan, the agricultural sector, and industry, and even the technology sector in Xinshi Industrial Park, as well as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. Because of this, the people of Tainan are deeply grateful for Mr. Hatta and very friendly toward the people of Japan. A major earthquake, the largest in 50 years, struck Tainan on February 6, 2016, resulting in significant casualties. As mayor of Tainan at the time, I was extremely grateful to then-Prime Minister Abe, who sent five Japanese officials to the disaster site in Tainan the day after the earthquake. They were very thoughtful and asked what kind of assistance we needed from the Japanese government. They offered to provide help based on what we needed. I was deeply moved, as former Prime Minister Abe showed such care, going beyond the formality of just sending supplies that we may or may not have actually needed. Instead, the officials asked what we needed and then provided assistance based on those needs, which really moved me. Similarly, when the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 or the later Kumamoto earthquakes struck, the people of Tainan, under my leadership, naturally and dutifully expressed their support. Even earlier, when central Taiwan was hit by a major earthquake in 1999, Japan was the first country to deploy a rescue team to the disaster area. On February 6, 2018, after a major earthquake in Hualien, former Prime Minister Abe appeared in a video holding up a message of encouragement he had written in calligraphy saying “Remain strong, Taiwan.” All of Taiwan was deeply moved. Over the years, Taiwan and Japan have supported each other when earthquakes struck, and have forged bonds that are family-like, not just neighborly. This is truly valuable. In the future, I hope Taiwan and Japan can be like brothers, and that the peoples of Taiwan and Japan can treat one another like family. If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem; if Japan has a problem, then Taiwan has a problem. By caring for and helping each other, we can face various challenges and difficulties, and pursue a brighter future. Q: President Lai, you just used the phrase “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” In the event that China attempts to invade Taiwan by force, what kind of response measures would you hope the US military and Japan’s Self-Defense Forces take? President Lai: As I just mentioned, annexing Taiwan is only China’s first step. Its ultimate objective is to change the rules-based international order. That being the case, China’s threats are an international problem. So, I would very much hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war – prevention, after all, is more important than cure.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Arrests – Police vehicle rammed – Alice Springs

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    The Northern Territory Police Force has arrested two 14-year-old males after a police vehicle ramming incident occurred in Alice Springs yesterday.

    Around 5:40am on Tuesday 1 July, the Joint Emergency Services Communication Centre received a report that a red Mahindra station wagon had been stolen from a residence in Teatree Court in Sadadeen. The victim reported seeing two unknown persons inside the vehicle leaving the area.

    At 6am, police CCTV operators observed the vehicle at a service station on Railway Terrace. Two police vehicles responded and sighted one offender running from the scene on foot, and the second offender entering the stolen vehicle. The driver reversed at speed and rammed into the front of one of the police vehicles, before fleeing the area.

    No police member was injured as a result of the incident, however the police vehicle sustained substantial damage.

    The 14-year-old passenger was arrested nearby after a short foot chase.

    Earlier today, the 14-year-old driver was also arrested and the stolen motor vehicle was recovered by police.

    Commander Mark Grieve said, “This incident highlights the dangers that our members face every day while responding to violent behaviour.

    “It is appalling behaviour, and police do not deserve to be targeted while executing their duty of serving and protecting the community.

    “This could have easily resulted in serious injury or death, and I commend the officers for acting safely and professionally under challenging circumstances.”

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Hit and run driver at Gawler charged

    Source: New South Wales – News

    A driver has been charged following a hit and run crash at Gawler on 26 June.

    Just before 7pm on Thursday 26 June, emergency services responded to reports a pedestrian had been struck by a vehicle on Thirteenth Street, Gawler South.

    The pedestrian, a 52-year-old local woman, sustained life-threatening injuries and was rushed to hospital where she remains in a critical condition.

    This morning, Wednesday 2 July, a 56-year-old woman from Gawler attended at Gawler Police Station where she was arrested by Major Crash Investigators.

    She has been charged with careless driving cause serious harm, leave scene of serious crash having caused harm.

    She has been bailed to appear at Elizabeth Magistrates Court 13 August.

    Investigators attended a Gawler address where the vehicle involved was located and seized for forensic examination.

    MIL OSI News

  • J&K LG flags off first batch of Amarnath Yatra pilgrims from Jammu amid tight security

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha on Wednesday flagged off the first batch of pilgrims for the annual Amarnath Yatra from Jammu to the Kashmir Valley, marking the start of the 36-day pilgrimage, which officially begins on Thursday.

    Amid chants of “Bharat Mata Ki Jai,” “Bum Bum Bhole,” and “Barfani Baba Ne Bulaya Hai,” enthusiastic pilgrims from across the country departed in two escorted convoys from the Bhagwati Nagar Yatri Niwas on Canal Road. The pilgrims are heading towards the two main base camps – Pahalgam in Anantnag district and Baltal in Ganderbal district.

    The Lt Governor, who also serves as the Chairman of the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board (SASB), was accompanied by senior civil and police officials during the flag-off ceremony.

    This year’s Yatra is being conducted under unprecedented security arrangements, particularly in the wake of the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam. To ensure the safety of pilgrims, an additional 180 companies of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) have been deployed to reinforce the existing security grid, which includes the Indian Army, paramilitary forces, and the J&K Police.

    The Yatra will conclude on August 9, coinciding with Shravan Purnima and the festival of Raksha Bandhan.

    Pilgrims reach the holy cave shrine, located at an altitude of 3,888 metres, via two routes— the traditional Pahalgam route and the shorter Baltal route.

    Those taking the Pahalgam route undertake a four-day, 46-km trek passing through Chandanwari, Sheshnag, and Panchtarni before reaching the cave shrine. In contrast, pilgrims opting for the Baltal route complete a 14-km trek and usually return to the base camp the same day after having darshan at the shrine.

    The sacred cave houses a naturally formed ice stalagmite, believed by devotees to symbolize the mythical powers of Lord Shiva. The structure waxes and wanes with the phases of the moon, adding to its spiritual significance.

    Amarnath Yatra 2025: Route Options – Baltal vs Pahalgam

    There are two Amarnath Yatra routes to reach the Holy Cave: the Baltal route and the Pahalgam route.

    The Pahalgam route covers a distance of approximately 36 kilometers and typically takes between three to five days to complete. It is ideal for those who prefer a slower, more scenic trek through the breathtaking landscapes of the Kashmir Valley. This traditional route passes through key halting points such as Chandanwari, Sheshnag, and Panchtarni, making it well-suited for pilgrims who wish to experience the spiritual journey at a more relaxed pace.

    The Baltal route, on the other hand, is much shorter—about 14 kilometers – but significantly steeper and more challenging. It usually takes one to two days to complete and is best suited for physically fit individuals or those with limited time. Many pilgrims using this route complete the journey and return on the same day after having darshan at the cave shrine.

    Both routes offer unique experiences, and the choice depends on individual preferences, physical fitness, and time availability.

    (With inputs from IANS)

  • J&K LG flags off first batch of Amarnath Yatra pilgrims from Jammu amid tight security

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha on Wednesday flagged off the first batch of pilgrims for the annual Amarnath Yatra from Jammu to the Kashmir Valley, marking the start of the 36-day pilgrimage, which officially begins on Thursday.

    Amid chants of “Bharat Mata Ki Jai,” “Bum Bum Bhole,” and “Barfani Baba Ne Bulaya Hai,” enthusiastic pilgrims from across the country departed in two escorted convoys from the Bhagwati Nagar Yatri Niwas on Canal Road. The pilgrims are heading towards the two main base camps – Pahalgam in Anantnag district and Baltal in Ganderbal district.

    The Lt Governor, who also serves as the Chairman of the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board (SASB), was accompanied by senior civil and police officials during the flag-off ceremony.

    This year’s Yatra is being conducted under unprecedented security arrangements, particularly in the wake of the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam. To ensure the safety of pilgrims, an additional 180 companies of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) have been deployed to reinforce the existing security grid, which includes the Indian Army, paramilitary forces, and the J&K Police.

    The Yatra will conclude on August 9, coinciding with Shravan Purnima and the festival of Raksha Bandhan.

    Pilgrims reach the holy cave shrine, located at an altitude of 3,888 metres, via two routes— the traditional Pahalgam route and the shorter Baltal route.

    Those taking the Pahalgam route undertake a four-day, 46-km trek passing through Chandanwari, Sheshnag, and Panchtarni before reaching the cave shrine. In contrast, pilgrims opting for the Baltal route complete a 14-km trek and usually return to the base camp the same day after having darshan at the shrine.

    The sacred cave houses a naturally formed ice stalagmite, believed by devotees to symbolize the mythical powers of Lord Shiva. The structure waxes and wanes with the phases of the moon, adding to its spiritual significance.

    Amarnath Yatra 2025: Route Options – Baltal vs Pahalgam

    There are two Amarnath Yatra routes to reach the Holy Cave: the Baltal route and the Pahalgam route.

    The Pahalgam route covers a distance of approximately 36 kilometers and typically takes between three to five days to complete. It is ideal for those who prefer a slower, more scenic trek through the breathtaking landscapes of the Kashmir Valley. This traditional route passes through key halting points such as Chandanwari, Sheshnag, and Panchtarni, making it well-suited for pilgrims who wish to experience the spiritual journey at a more relaxed pace.

    The Baltal route, on the other hand, is much shorter—about 14 kilometers – but significantly steeper and more challenging. It usually takes one to two days to complete and is best suited for physically fit individuals or those with limited time. Many pilgrims using this route complete the journey and return on the same day after having darshan at the cave shrine.

    Both routes offer unique experiences, and the choice depends on individual preferences, physical fitness, and time availability.

    (With inputs from IANS)

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Rosanna Law to visit France

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    Secretary for Culture, Sports & Tourism Rosanna Law will depart tomorrow for France, where she will visit Paris and Bordeaux with a view to enhancing collaboration between Hong Kong and France in the areas of culture and tourism.

    Miss Law will meet French government officials and representatives of the wine trade to explore opportunities for co-operation and exchange. She will also visit museums and tourist landmarks.

    The culture chief will head back to Hong Kong on July 9. During her absence, Under Secretary for Culture, Sports & Tourism Raistlin Lau will be Acting Secretary.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: A look at Belconnen school upgrades

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    Hawker Primary School’s newly built ramp winds through the school’s garden.

    In brief:

    • There is a lot of work happening at public schools in Belconnen.
    • This includes building a brand-new school, school upgrades and an oval refresh project.
    • This story gives an overview of this work.

    There’s a lot happening at public schools in the Belconnen region.

    From facilities upgrades to a brand-new school, we look at some of the work that’s:

    • been recently completed
    • currently taking place
    • planned.

    This work will ensure every child has access to great, accessible, sustainable facilities and infrastructure that support high-quality education in the ACT.

    Progress on Strathnairn School

    Construction is well underway on what will be the ACT’s 93rd public school.

    The new Strathnairn School will be co-located with an early childhood education and care (ECEC) service.

    It will cater for:

    • 780 students from preschool to year 6
    • 130 ECEC places.

    The school’s foundation principal, Nicole Nicholson, and other executive staff have been announced.

    When will the school open?

    Strathnairn School will open in stages.

    • It will open for students in preschool to year 2 at the start of 2026.
    • It is expected students from all year levels will be able to attend in 2027.

    This will offer families in the Ginninderry region high-quality public education close to home.

    Who can enrol?

    The planned School Priority Enrolment Area (PEA) for the new school includes:

    • Strathnairn
    • Macnamara
    • Ginninderry Stage 3
    • a portion of new development in Holt, west of the golf course bounded by Fullston Way and Lionel Rose Street.

    Enrol your child at Strathnairn School

    Find out more about the school on the Built for CBR website

    The Strathnairn School site in May 2025

    Have your say on a refreshed Fraser oval

    The dryland oval beside Fraser Primary school is getting a refresh. This will make it more useful for students as a learning and play space.

    The community can use it too. Outside school hours, sporting groups and locals can head there for exercise, sports and recreation.

    Canberrans are now invited to share ideas on how best to refresh this popular space. Children and young people are encouraged to get involved.

    How to share your views

    Visit the YourSay Conversations website to take a survey and/or mark your ideas on an online map.

    You can do this until Wednesday, 13 August.

    The ACT Government has sought early ideas from staff and students at Fraser Primary School. Traditional Owners have also shared feedback on what is important to them in this new space.

    Your feedback will help shape a concept design for the refreshed oval. This will be shared through the YourSay platform.

    You will then have further opportunity to give feedback before the designs are finalised.

    Have your say now via the YourSay Conversations website.

    Fraser oval will be refreshed for both student and community use.

    Hawker Primary School upgrades

    Hawker Primary School students and staff are benefitting from recent upgrades.

    The school has welcomed new accessible car parking bays. There is also now a ramp leading to its entrance.

    The front office has had a makeover with:

    • a new two-door entrance
    • new furniture
    • LED lighting
    • upgrades to the sick bay and nearby toilet.

    The school now has a new printer facility room. Upgrades to the boardroom and principal’s office are also complete.

    This work has been completed as part of the ACT Government’s Asset Renewal Program.

    The Hawker Primary School front office has had a makeover.

    Upgrades ahead for Melba Copland Secondary School

    The 2025–26 ACT Budget includes support for the master planning, design and construction of priority upgrades at Melba Copland Secondary School.

    These will include an upgrade to the foyer at the College campus, and a plan for future works.

    Read more like this:

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Statement on Israel’s Blacklisting of DAWN to Stifle Accountability for War Crimes

    Source: DAWN

    (July 1, 2025 Washington, D.C.)  In response to reports of a new Israeli directive to ban employees of DAWN, along with other respected human rights and legal advocacy organizations including Al-Haq Europe, Law for Palestine, and Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights (LPHR), from entering Israel, aiming to punish and suppress accountability efforts for war crimes, apartheid, and genocide, DAWN issues the following:

    “Israel is now banning human rights organizations from even entering the country to expose and seek accountability for the atrocities and crimes it is committing,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, DAWN’s executive director. “Israel’s ban against organizations seeking accountability for IDF abuses is only the latest indication of its growing isolation in the international community” 

    “Israel’s decision to blacklist DAWN is a desperate attempt to block scrutiny of its crimes against the Palestinian people,” said Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at DAWN. “We will not be intimidated by authoritarian tactics and will continue our work to expose Israel’s violations of international law until there is full accountability and justice.”

    “It’s hard to imagine greater validation of DAWN’s work to hold accountable Israeli officials and soldiers than being banned from entering the country specifically because of that work,” said Michael Schaeffer Omer-Man, director for Israel-Palestine at DAWN. “This is nevertheless a worrying harbinger of even greater Israeli repression of human rights defenders, be they Palestinian, Israeli, or American.”

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: SCST to visit France

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    The Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism, Miss Rosanna Law, will depart for France to visit Paris and Bordeaux in the early hours tomorrow (July 3) to enhance collaboration between Hong Kong and France in the areas of culture and tourism.
     
    During her stay in France, Miss Law will engage with French government officials and trade representatives of the wine industry to explore opportunities for co-operation and exchange. She will also visit museums and prominent tourist landmarks.
     
    Miss Law will depart for Hong Kong on July 9 (Wednesday). During her absence, the Under Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism, Mr Raistlin Lau, will be the Acting Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – Strengthening scam protection: Introducing Confirmation of Payee – CBA

    Source: Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA)

    In an important step towards enhancing protections against scams and fraud, most retail Australian banks are introducing a new security feature, Confirmation of Payee. This is how it will work alongside CommBank’s existing NameCheck capability, and what that means for CommBank customers, as well as other financial institutions who implement both.

    Key points:

    • This month, CommBank is launching Confirmation of Payee (CoP), an industry name-matching solution designed to help combat scams and mistaken payments.
    • CoP was developed by industry body Australian Payments Plus (AP+) and is being progressively rolled out by most Australian banks this year.
    • CommBank was the first Australian bank to previously introduce a capability on our digital banking platforms to provide an indication to retail and business customers if the payment details they enter on a first-time payment don’t look right.
    • CoP will work alongside CommBank’s security tool NameCheck and together, the two solutions will provide more information to CommBank customers to help them protect themselves against scams and mistaken payments.

    How it works

    CoP builds on New Payments Platform (NPP) infrastructure to match the name entered by the payee with the name held by the receiving bank, when sending a domestic payment via BSB and account number.

    Meanwhile, CommBank’s existing security tool NameCheck searches the account details customers have entered when making a first-time payment in NetBank, the CommBank app or CommBiz[1]. Based on CommBank’s available payment data, NameCheck will then indicate whether the account details look right, taking into account additional factors such as preferred names, nicknames, business trading names and risk activity indicators.

    NameCheck has already saved $650 million in prevented scams and mistaken payments for CommBank customers[2].

    Both NameCheck and CoP are designed to provide additional information to customers when making payments and, together, they help provide CommBank customers with additional protections against scams and mistaken payments.

    CBA will use NameCheck to enrich or augment CoP findings in some cases, for example where CoP data does not cover a given account but NameCheck does, or where NameCheck has well established name derivations that might enhance consumer experience.

    To bring to life how the two technologies will be stronger together, CommBank General Manager Payments Alison Chang used her dad, a Singaporean immigrant whose preferred name differs from his legal name, as the example.

    “My dad is a first-generation immigrant from Singapore. He goes by John*, but his legal name is very different. When someone transfers money into my dad’s account using his nickname rather than the legal name registered with CommBank as his financial institution, NameCheck will create a match based on available payment information and past transaction data, complementing CoP’s analysis of information captured under Know Your Customer obligations.”

    The combined technology will create safer yet seamless payment experiences and will use the same principle to provide information about payments being made to businesses.

    “Businesses often trade under names that vastly differ to those filed with the Australian Business Register. When CommBank retail and small business customers are paying an invoice via NetBank or CommBank app, CoP and NameCheck can help give them confidence that they have entered the BSB and account number correctly – making sure they send money to the right person.

    For CommBank customers, CoP and NameCheck are more powerful together, as NameCheck provides additional activity-based risk warnings, even if the account name matches.

    Why this matters

    Scam activity continues to present a significant threat to Australian consumers and businesses. According to Ms Chang, introducing CoP is part of a concerted effort by the banking sector to combating this threat.

    “Introducing Confirmation of Payee reflects CommBank’s active participation in an industry-wide push to make Australia less attractive to scammers. Over two years, CommBank has seen customer losses from scams drop by 70 per cent, however there is more work to do as scammers’ methods evolve”.

    “Our experience in supporting customers with NameCheck has allowed CBA to provide valuable insights during the industry discussions for the AP+ Confirmation of Payee solution. CommBank has an ongoing commitment to improving customer safety, and CoP will help empower customers to take greater control and help spot a scam before it happens,” Ms Chang added.

    As well as NameCheck, CoP complements CommBank’s other anti-scam measures, for example participation in the Australian Financial Crime Exchange (AFCX) Intelligence Loop and behavioural security technology.

    “We encourage customers to remain vigilant and take steps to protect themselves against scams by staying on top of scam tr

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Family plea for cold case closure

    Source: New South Wales – News

    Following decades of heartache, the family of Melissa Trussell (Brown) have joined police in a renewed call for information regarding the historic disappearance of the 15-year-old, and unsolved murder of her mother, Rosemary.

    Rosemary Brown, 33, along with her daughter Melissa, were last seen leaving their Blair Athol home at about 2.30am on Saturday 13 May, 2000.

    Today marks exactly 25 years since Rosemary’s body was discovered in the mangroves at Garden Island on 2 July 2000. Melissa’s remains have never been found.

    Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke, Officer in Charge of Major Crime Investigation Branch urged anyone with information, no matter how insignificant it may seem, to come forward.

    “This is a particularly disturbing case. A mother was murdered and her body disposed of.  We believe Melissa was also murdered,” he said.

    “It’s tragic for the family of Rosemary and Melissa to experience this long passage of time with no answers about what happened to their loved ones.

    “I have no doubt that numerous people either know what happened to Rosemary and Melissa or have information that will assist the investigation into their suspected murder.

    “We appeal to them to contact police and provide that information.”

    South Australia Police (SAPOL) investigators have today released additional childhood photos of Melissa as part of a renewed public plea for information.

    Recently visiting their last believed location – Stirling Street, Northfield – Melissa’s father Barry and half-sister Kayla reminisced on childhood memories regarding Melissa, while expressing their desire for closure.

    Describing Melissa as her “best friend”, Kayla hoped to one day give her the farewell she deserves.

    “We need to know where she is and what happened to her,” she pleaded.

    “We want to see the person or people who have caused our pain brought to justice.”

    Barry echoed Kayla’s appeal for answers 25 years on.

    “My message to the people responsible, because I don’t believe it to be just one person: it’s better to come forward now with information,” he said.

    “A parent shouldn’t outlive their child… and for a long time (Melissa’s disappearance) has messed me up.

    “I’m hoping some fresh information will finally come to light to help police solve the case.”

    Anyone with information is asked to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or online at www.crimestopperssa.com.au – you can remain anonymous.

    Rewards up to $1,000,000 will be paid by the Government of South Australia, at the discretion of the Commissioner of Police, to anyone who provides information and assistance that leads to the conviction of the person or persons responsible for the suspected murder of Melissa Trussell (Brown) (and/or leading to the location and recovery of the victim’s remains).

    Rewards up to $200,000 will be paid by the Government of South Australia, at the discretion of the Commissioner of Police, to anyone who provides information and assistance that leads to the conviction of the person or persons responsible for the suspected murder of Rosemary Brown.

    Edited footage

    Raw media footage

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Distrust in AI is on the rise – but along with healthy scepticism comes the risk of harm

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Coghlan, Senior Lecturer in Digital Ethics, Deputy Director Centre for AI and Digital Ethics, School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne

    PlayStation/StaminaZero/YouTube

    Some video game players recently criticised the cover art on a new video game for being generated with artificial intelligence (AI). Yet the cover art for Little Droid, which also featured in the game’s launch trailer on YouTube, was not concocted by AI. It was, the developers claim, carefully designed by a human artist.

    Surprised by the attacks on “AI slop”, the studio Stamina Zero posted a video showing earlier versions of the artist’s handiwork. But while some accepted this evidence, others remained sceptical.

    In addition, several players felt that even if the Little Droid cover art was human made, it nonetheless resembled AI-generated work.

    However, some art is deliberately designed to have the futuristic glossy appearance associated with image generators like Midjourney, DALL-E, and Stable Diffusion.

    Stamina Zero published a video showing the steps the artist took to create the cover art.

    It’s becoming increasingly easy for images, videos or audio made with AI to be deceptively passed off as authentic or human made. The twist in cases like Little Droid is that what is human or “real” may be incorrectly perceived as machine generated – resulting in misplaced backlash.

    Such cases highlight the increasing problem of the balance of trust and distrust in the generative AI era. In this new world, both cynicism and gullibility about what we encounter online are potential problems – and can lead to harm.

    Wrongful accusations

    This issue extends well beyond gaming. There are growing criticisms of AI being used to generate and publish music on platforms like Spotify.

    Yet as a result, some indie music artists have been wrongfully accused of generating AI music, resulting in damage to their burgeoning careers as musicians.

    In 2023, an Australian photographer was wrongly disqualified from a photo contest due to the erroneous judgement her entry was produced by artificial intelligence.

    Writers, including students submitting essays, can also be falsely accused of sneakily using AI. Currently available AI detection tools are far from foolproof – and some argue they may never be entirely reliable.

    Recent discussions have drawn attention to common characteristics of AI writing, including the em dash – which, as authors, we often employ ourselves.

    Given that text from systems like ChatGPT has characteristic features, writers face a difficult decision: should they continue writing in their own style and risk being accused of using AI, or should they try to write differently?




    Read more:
    Google’s SynthID is the latest tool for catching AI-made content. What is AI ‘watermarking’ and does it work?


    The delicate balance of trust and distrust

    Graphic designers, voice actors and many others are rightly worried about AI replacing them. They are also understandably concerned about tech companies using their labour to train AI models without consent, credit or compensation.

    There are further ethical concerns that AI-generated images threaten Indigenous inclusion by erasing cultural nuances and challenging Indigenous cultural and intellectual property rights.

    At the same time, the cases above illustrate the risks of rejecting authentic human effort and creativity due to a false belief it is AI. This too can be unfair. People wrongly accused of using AI can suffer emotional, financial and reputational harm.

    On the one hand, being fooled that AI content is authentic is a problem. Consider deepfakes, bogus videos and false images of politicians or celebrities. AI content purporting to be real can be linked to scams and dangerous misinformation.

    On the other hand, mistakenly distrusting authentic content is also a problem. For example, rejecting the authenticity of a video of war crimes or hate speech by politicians – based on the mistaken or deliberate belief that the content was AI generated – can lead to great harm and injustice.

    Unfortunately, the growth of dubious content allows unscrupulous individuals to claim that video, audio or images exposing real wrongdoing are fake.

    As distrust increases, democracy and social cohesion may begin to fray. Given the potential consequences, we must be wary of excessive scepticism about the origin or provenance of online content.

    A path forward

    AI is a cultural and social technology. It mediates and shapes our relationships with one another, and has potentially transformational effects on how we learn and share information.

    The fact that AI is challenging our trust relationships with companies, content and each other is not surprising. And people are not always to blame when they are fooled by AI-manufactured material. Such outputs are increasingly realistic.

    Furthermore, the responsibility to avoid deception should not fall entirely on internet users and the public. Digital platforms, AI developers, tech companies and producers of AI material should be held accountable through regulation and transparency requirements around AI use.

    Even so, internet users will still need to adapt. The need to exercise a balanced and fair sense of scepticism toward online material is becoming more urgent.

    This means adopting the right level of trust and distrust in digital environments.

    The philosopher Aristotle spoke of practical wisdom. Through experience, education and practice, a practically wise person develops skills to judge well in life. Because they tend to avoid poor judgement, including excessive scepticism and naivete, the practically wise person is better able to flourish and do well by others.

    We need to hold tech companies and platforms to account for harm and deception caused by AI. We also need to educate ourselves, our communities, and the next generation to judge well and develop some practical wisdom in a world awash with AI content.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Distrust in AI is on the rise – but along with healthy scepticism comes the risk of harm – https://theconversation.com/distrust-in-ai-is-on-the-rise-but-along-with-healthy-scepticism-comes-the-risk-of-harm-260189

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz