Category: Pandemic

  • MIL-OSI Economics: APEC Opens Scientist Exchange Program in Korea Sejong, Republic of Korea | 02 July 2025 APEC Policy Partnership on Science, Technology and Innovation APEC has kicked off a new exchange program to boost cross-border research, with Korea hosting the first cohort of scientists in Seoul this year.

    Source: APEC – Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation

    APEC has kicked off a new exchange program to boost cross-border research, with Korea hosting the first cohort of scientists in Seoul this year. The Scientist Invitation Program to Korea 2025 marks the first program under the APEC Scientist Exchange Initiative, a new regional effort to enhance scientific mobility and long-term collaboration.

    This is the first time APEC has launched a dedicated mobility track for scientists, signaling a significant step toward institutionalizing scientific exchange as part of the region’s broader agenda for inclusive innovation and sustainable growth.

    Funded and implemented this year by the Ministry of Science and ICT of the Republic of Korea, the program supports researchers from APEC member economies through structured training and joint research opportunities. It also offers streamlined visa application processes and fast-track entry and exit at Korean ports of entry.

    The launch comes at a time when economies are navigating post-pandemic recovery, an accelerating digital transformation and rising demand for interdisciplinary scientific talent. By investing in mobility and peer exchange, the program responds to calls for deeper regional cooperation in science and technology.

    “Capacity building and exchange programmes empower scientists to share knowledge, foster innovation and create solutions that transcend borders, driving global progress through shared mission collaborations via human-to-human exchanges,” said Hazami Habib, Vice Chair of the APEC Policy Partnership on Science, Technology and Innovation (PPSTI).

    “This could lead to not only enhanced connectivity but also significant impacts across the APEC region. The Scientist Invitation Program to Korea 2025 is a commendable initiative which stimulates further interest in collaborative research within the region,” Habib added.

    “Korea has emphasized the importance of innovation driven by cultivating science and technology talent,” said Sunghoon Hwang, Director General for International Cooperation at Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT. “We hope that the Scientist Invitation Program will enable scientists from Korea and participating APEC members to build research networks and create scientific collaboration opportunities across the region, particularly with Korea.”

    The program offers two distinct pathways for participation. The first is a 10-day capacity-building track that includes mentoring, expert lectures and policy discussions to support future collaboration. The second is a 90-day research placement, where participants conduct joint research at leading Korean institutions. Eligible applicants must hold a PhD or a master’s degree with at least three years of relevant professional experience.

    The first session, focused on physics, ran from 26 May to 6 June in Seoul. It brought together 21 researchers and professors from Malaysia, Peru and Thailand, who engaged in lab visits, including the Center for Quantum Nanoscience at Ewha Womans University, and took part in cultural experiences that strengthened professional and personal ties.

    “This program will help me to have an international collaboration. I feel good, and this is a good opportunity for me,” said Dr Nuttawadee Intachai, a lecturer at Chiang Mai University in Thailand who participated in the session.

    The second session, focused on chemistry and involving scientists from Indonesia and the Philippines, concluded on 27 June. Upcoming sessions in earth sciences and life sciences, along with the first round of 90-day research placements, are set to begin in July.

    With up to 100 scientists expected to participate this year, the Scientist Invitation Program is laying the groundwork for a more connected, collaborative, and innovation-driven APEC region.

    The broader initiative also includes plans for an APEC Scientist Travel Card, modeled after the APEC Business Travel Card. Once developed, the card would streamline mobility for scientists attending conferences, seminars, or joint projects by facilitating visa-free or expedited entry. More information is available on the official program website.


    For media inquiries, please contact: [email protected]

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christopher J Waller: Welcoming remarks – IJCB Research Conference

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Thank you, Aleš, and thank you to the Czech National Bank (CNB) for hosting this year’s conference. The CNB also supported this conference in 2017. It is wonderful to have such a great relationship between the International Journal of Central Banking (IJCB) and one of our sponsoring institutions.

    I would like to take a few minutes as the outgoing managing editor of the IJCB to emphasize the importance of this journal and the research it supports.1 Central banks play an important role promoting the growth and effective functioning of their economies, and many of the decisions they make are influenced by careful and cutting-edge research. In fact, I recently gave a speech that discussed the importance of economic research in monetary policy decisions.2 The IJCB, through this conference and its volumes, provides an outlet to share and disseminate research that adds to public knowledge and understanding and informs the operational and policy decisions of central bankers.

    The value of central bank–focused research has long been known. In the summer of 2004, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the European Central Bank, and the Group of Ten central banks agreed to support the development of the IJCB to focus on the theory and practice of central banking. The journal has attracted distinguished managing editors, including my colleagues from the Federal Reserve; my immediate predecessor, Luc Laeven, from the European Central Bank; and the current managing editor, Antoine Martin, from the Swiss National Bank, who, unfortunately, could not be here today. We have the strong support now of nearly 55 sponsoring institutions, including the Czech National Bank and also the host of last year’s conference, the Central Bank of Italy. Among the ways that central banks serve the public interest is as an ongoing source of economic research, and the strong commitment to the IJCB here in Prague and other capitals advances our collective interest in strong economies and financial stability.

    Turning to this year’s conference, we chose the theme based on events that have been very much on the minds of central bankers: “Assessing the Effectiveness of Monetary Policy during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic.” The past several years have seen significant monetary policy actions across the globe in response to COVID-19–induced recessions, inflation higher than in several decades, unprecedented supply chain disruptions, and, in some countries, very tight labor markets. Early on, policymakers’ responses appeared quite in sync, but with differing speeds of recovery and varying challenges faced by different types of economies, that changed over time. Additionally, geopolitical tensions and energy price shocks have introduced new complexities. So we thought this conference could be a good place to come together and hear about the lessons we have learned from these common and different experiences.

    Today and tomorrow we will be discussing the yield curve, policy rules, and monetary policy transmission. We also will look into banking issues such as loan issuance and financial stability. And we are lucky to have the Fed’s Vice Chair for Supervision Miki Bowman here to give a keynote speech. As we go through these sessions, I hope we will all ask ourselves how this work can help policymakers do their jobs better. Through our conversation, I would ask you to share knowledge about each of these topics as they are pertinent around the world.

    But before we get to those presentations, and what I hope will be vigorous discussion, let me recognize several people who made this event possible. Here at the CNB, Simona Malovaná and Martin Hodula helped organize this conference. Year round, the IJCB co-editors devote many hours of their time to review papers to keep the journal at its high-quality and high-impact status. These individuals are Ana Babus, Diana Bonfim, Huberto Ennis, Carlos Garriga (who is here with us today), Refet Gürkaynak, Òscar Jordà, Robin Lumsdaine, Fernanda Nechio, Steven Ongena, and Enrico Sete. Finally, for the past three years, the day-to-day smooth running of the journal couldn’t have been accomplished without the editorial team at the BIS and the Board of Governors. A special thank you goes to my team: Kommaly Dias, Jane Ihrig, and Elie Singer, who worked to oversee the process.

    And with that, I will step away from the microphone and put the spotlight where it should be, on the scholars presenting their work today. Thank you, and I believe Martin has a few words to get us started.


    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christopher J Waller: Welcoming remarks – IJCB Research Conference

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Thank you, Aleš, and thank you to the Czech National Bank (CNB) for hosting this year’s conference. The CNB also supported this conference in 2017. It is wonderful to have such a great relationship between the International Journal of Central Banking (IJCB) and one of our sponsoring institutions.

    I would like to take a few minutes as the outgoing managing editor of the IJCB to emphasize the importance of this journal and the research it supports.1 Central banks play an important role promoting the growth and effective functioning of their economies, and many of the decisions they make are influenced by careful and cutting-edge research. In fact, I recently gave a speech that discussed the importance of economic research in monetary policy decisions.2 The IJCB, through this conference and its volumes, provides an outlet to share and disseminate research that adds to public knowledge and understanding and informs the operational and policy decisions of central bankers.

    The value of central bank–focused research has long been known. In the summer of 2004, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the European Central Bank, and the Group of Ten central banks agreed to support the development of the IJCB to focus on the theory and practice of central banking. The journal has attracted distinguished managing editors, including my colleagues from the Federal Reserve; my immediate predecessor, Luc Laeven, from the European Central Bank; and the current managing editor, Antoine Martin, from the Swiss National Bank, who, unfortunately, could not be here today. We have the strong support now of nearly 55 sponsoring institutions, including the Czech National Bank and also the host of last year’s conference, the Central Bank of Italy. Among the ways that central banks serve the public interest is as an ongoing source of economic research, and the strong commitment to the IJCB here in Prague and other capitals advances our collective interest in strong economies and financial stability.

    Turning to this year’s conference, we chose the theme based on events that have been very much on the minds of central bankers: “Assessing the Effectiveness of Monetary Policy during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic.” The past several years have seen significant monetary policy actions across the globe in response to COVID-19–induced recessions, inflation higher than in several decades, unprecedented supply chain disruptions, and, in some countries, very tight labor markets. Early on, policymakers’ responses appeared quite in sync, but with differing speeds of recovery and varying challenges faced by different types of economies, that changed over time. Additionally, geopolitical tensions and energy price shocks have introduced new complexities. So we thought this conference could be a good place to come together and hear about the lessons we have learned from these common and different experiences.

    Today and tomorrow we will be discussing the yield curve, policy rules, and monetary policy transmission. We also will look into banking issues such as loan issuance and financial stability. And we are lucky to have the Fed’s Vice Chair for Supervision Miki Bowman here to give a keynote speech. As we go through these sessions, I hope we will all ask ourselves how this work can help policymakers do their jobs better. Through our conversation, I would ask you to share knowledge about each of these topics as they are pertinent around the world.

    But before we get to those presentations, and what I hope will be vigorous discussion, let me recognize several people who made this event possible. Here at the CNB, Simona Malovaná and Martin Hodula helped organize this conference. Year round, the IJCB co-editors devote many hours of their time to review papers to keep the journal at its high-quality and high-impact status. These individuals are Ana Babus, Diana Bonfim, Huberto Ennis, Carlos Garriga (who is here with us today), Refet Gürkaynak, Òscar Jordà, Robin Lumsdaine, Fernanda Nechio, Steven Ongena, and Enrico Sete. Finally, for the past three years, the day-to-day smooth running of the journal couldn’t have been accomplished without the editorial team at the BIS and the Board of Governors. A special thank you goes to my team: Kommaly Dias, Jane Ihrig, and Elie Singer, who worked to oversee the process.

    And with that, I will step away from the microphone and put the spotlight where it should be, on the scholars presenting their work today. Thank you, and I believe Martin has a few words to get us started.


    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: John C Williams: The totality of the data

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Hello, everyone. I’m so pleased to be here today.

    One of the most enjoyable parts of my job is meeting with business and community leaders to learn more about our local economies-their challenges and opportunities, their long-established businesses and new industries. It’s fitting that I started my visit in Schenectady, known as “The City that Lights and Hauls the World.” And now I’m here at the Albany NanoTech Complex, a hub for innovative, cutting-edge nanotechnologies. Both cities, just 20 miles apart, have made-and continue to make-important contributions to our regional and national economies.

    I’ll talk a bit about that today, although my focus will be on the U.S. economy. I’ll discuss what the soft and hard data are telling us, and how the totality of the data is informing my outlook for the economy.

    Before I go further, I must give the standard Fed disclaimer that the views I express today are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or others in the Federal Reserve System.

    The Capital Region

    As an economist and student of history, I can’t help but start with a few words about the Capital Region. In the 1880s, when Thomas Edison created components for his electrical illumination system and the Schenectady Locomotive Works built engines, few could have imagined the ways that electricity and locomotives would transform entire societies and economies. They represent what economists call general-purpose technologies, or GPTs.

    Today, many experts think that the latest GPT is artificial intelligence, or AI. And among the many research initiatives underway here are technologies that support the advancement of AI.

    In the 140 years between these GPT bookends, this region has continued to invest in new industries and training for workers, helping to drive the health of the local economy.

    The Soft Data

    Of course, all communities in the Federal Reserve’s Second District-which includes the Capital Region-are affected by national trends. In recent months, the changing landscape around fiscal and trade policies has heightened economic uncertainty among consumers, business owners, and financial market participants.

    As an economist and policymaker, I am always studying the data. Recently, there have been some interesting dynamics in both the soft data, which are typically survey measures of perceptions and expectations, and the hard data, which are economic readings of what has actually happened.

    I’ll start with the soft data. Over the past few months, surveys carried out by the New York Fed and others have highlighted a great deal of pessimism and uncertainty about the economic outlook. With respect to the Second District, our surveys of manufacturers and service firms indicate that economic activity has declined modestly, and concerns about tariffs are widespread. Several of my business contacts reported pulling back on capital spending and putting hiring on hold until the economic uncertainty lessens.

    In the New York Fed’s national Survey of Consumer Expectations, consumers’ uncertainty remains elevated not just about inflation, but also about housing prices and their earnings growth.1 According to this survey, households have scaled back their expected spending growth on nonessential items.

    The soft data have also revealed some good news. Longer-run inflation expectations have remained stable. And with the pullback in tariffs since early April, short- and medium-term inflation expectations have receded back close to their pre-pandemic averages. These patterns are consistent with market-based measures of inflation compensation and with most other survey-based measures. This is critically important, because well-anchored inflation expectations are essential for sustained price stability.

    That said, survey respondents report that uncertainty about inflation remains elevated.

    The Hard Data

    As a policymaker, I have often said that my decisions are data dependent-but not data-point dependent. I look at the totality of the data for underlying trends. I am particularly focused on those that affect the achievement of the FOMC’s dual mandate goals of maximum employment and price stability, which is defined as 2 percent inflation over the longer run.

    And what much of the hard data shows is that the U.S. economy remains in a good place.

    With regard to real GDP growth, the data have been unusually noisy, reflecting front-running of tariffs. That said, consumer spending and investment have been resilient overall so far this year.

    On the employment side of our mandate, labor market conditions have remained solid, with the unemployment rate at a little over 4 percent for the past year.

    On the price stability side of our mandate, inflation has continued to come down from its COVID-era spikes. With the labor market in balance and wage pressures having abated, inflation, as measured by the personal consumption expenditures price index, has moved close to our 2 percent longer-run goal.

    However, measures of underlying inflation-such as core inflation, which strips away volatile categories like food and energy-are still somewhat above our 2 percent target. And there are signs that tariffs are affecting specific categories of goods.

    We are seeing evidence of these patterns in the Second District. In May, New York Fed staff fielded a special survey to gauge the extent to which New York and New Jersey businesses were passing on tariff-induced cost increases to their customers. Manufacturers indicated that over the past six months, the cost of their tariffed goods had risen by about 20 percent, on average. For service firms, the increase was about 15 percent. The survey’s key finding is that about three-quarters of respondents in both sectors passed along at least some of these higher costs to their customers by raising prices. Indeed, almost a third of manufacturers and nearly half of service firms reported fully passing along all tariff-related cost increases.2

    What does this all mean for the economy going forward?

    My answer is that we need to be vigilant in analyzing the totality of the data to see how conditions evolve.

    Monetary Policy

    Given the continued uncertainty, the solid labor market, and inflation still above our 2 percent goal, the FOMC decided at its meeting last week to leave the target range for the federal funds rate unchanged at 4-1/4 to 4-1/2 percent.3

    Maintaining this modestly restrictive stance of monetary policy is entirely appropriate to achieve our maximum employment and price stability goals. It allows for time to closely analyze incoming data, assess the evolving outlook, and evaluate the balance of risks to achieving our dual mandate goals.

    In addition, the FOMC continues to reduce its holdings of Treasury securities and agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities. Despite market volatility related to trade policy and other developments, that process continues to go very smoothly.

    The Economic Outlook

    In an uncertain environment, any number of outcomes can occur. But based on what the data tell us today, I expect uncertainty and tariffs to restrain spending and reduced immigration to slow labor force growth. As a result, I expect real GDP growth this year will slow considerably from last year’s pace, to just over 1 percent.

    With this deceleration of real GDP, I expect the unemployment rate to rise to around 4-1/2 percent by the end of this year. I anticipate the tariffs enacted this year will boost inflation to around 3 percent in 2025, and then for inflation to gradually decline to 2 percent over the next two years as the tariff effects fade.

    Conclusion

    Much of the soft data we’ve seen in recent months captures the heightened uncertainty about the path of the economy. But it’s too early to say what the future trajectory of the hard data will be.

    As always, I remain focused on all the data, and that includes what I have learned on this trip to the Capital Region. No matter what comes our way, I am committed to supporting maximum employment and returning inflation to our 2 percent longer-run goal.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • No link between COVID-19 vaccines and sudden deaths, confirms ICMR-AIIMS study

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Comprehensive studies conducted by India’s top health research bodies have found no evidence linking COVID-19 vaccination to sudden deaths among adults, particularly in the 18–45 age group. The findings, released by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, are based on extensive investigations by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC), and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi.

    These studies were initiated amid rising public concern about sudden and unexplained deaths following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the research outcomes have decisively ruled out any direct connection between the vaccines and such fatalities. Instead, they point to a combination of pre-existing health conditions, genetic factors, lifestyle choices, and in some cases, post-COVID complications as the underlying causes.

    One of the key investigations, conducted by ICMR’s National Institute of Epidemiology (NIE), was a multicentric matched case–control study titled “Factors associated with unexplained sudden deaths among adults aged 18–45 years in India.” Carried out between May and August 2023, the study covered 47 tertiary care hospitals across 19 states and Union Territories. It examined cases involving seemingly healthy individuals who died suddenly between October 2021 and March 2023. The results found no increased risk of unexplained sudden death following COVID-19 vaccination.

    In parallel, AIIMS New Delhi, in collaboration with ICMR, is conducting a prospective study titled “Establishing the cause in sudden unexplained deaths in young.” Though the study is still underway, preliminary findings indicate that myocardial infarction (heart attacks) remains the leading cause of sudden deaths in young adults. The pattern of causes has remained consistent with trends from previous years. Additionally, in several cases, genetic mutations have been identified as contributing factors.

    Collectively, the findings from both studies offer a robust scientific explanation of sudden deaths in young adults and reinforce the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines administered in India. Experts emphasized that misinformation or unverified claims linking vaccines to such deaths are not only scientifically inaccurate but also pose a risk to public trust in vaccination programs.

    Health officials and researchers have cautioned that spreading speculative and unsupported claims can fuel vaccine hesitancy—an outcome that could undermine public health efforts and reverse progress made in managing the pandemic.

  • No link between COVID-19 vaccines and sudden deaths, confirms ICMR-AIIMS study

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Comprehensive studies conducted by India’s top health research bodies have found no evidence linking COVID-19 vaccination to sudden deaths among adults, particularly in the 18–45 age group. The findings, released by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, are based on extensive investigations by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC), and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi.

    These studies were initiated amid rising public concern about sudden and unexplained deaths following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the research outcomes have decisively ruled out any direct connection between the vaccines and such fatalities. Instead, they point to a combination of pre-existing health conditions, genetic factors, lifestyle choices, and in some cases, post-COVID complications as the underlying causes.

    One of the key investigations, conducted by ICMR’s National Institute of Epidemiology (NIE), was a multicentric matched case–control study titled “Factors associated with unexplained sudden deaths among adults aged 18–45 years in India.” Carried out between May and August 2023, the study covered 47 tertiary care hospitals across 19 states and Union Territories. It examined cases involving seemingly healthy individuals who died suddenly between October 2021 and March 2023. The results found no increased risk of unexplained sudden death following COVID-19 vaccination.

    In parallel, AIIMS New Delhi, in collaboration with ICMR, is conducting a prospective study titled “Establishing the cause in sudden unexplained deaths in young.” Though the study is still underway, preliminary findings indicate that myocardial infarction (heart attacks) remains the leading cause of sudden deaths in young adults. The pattern of causes has remained consistent with trends from previous years. Additionally, in several cases, genetic mutations have been identified as contributing factors.

    Collectively, the findings from both studies offer a robust scientific explanation of sudden deaths in young adults and reinforce the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines administered in India. Experts emphasized that misinformation or unverified claims linking vaccines to such deaths are not only scientifically inaccurate but also pose a risk to public trust in vaccination programs.

    Health officials and researchers have cautioned that spreading speculative and unsupported claims can fuel vaccine hesitancy—an outcome that could undermine public health efforts and reverse progress made in managing the pandemic.

  • MIL-OSI USA: GE Aerospace Union Workers from IUE-CWA Ratify National Contract

    Source: Communications Workers of America

    GE Aerospace workers from Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts and New York voted today to approve a historic contract

    Statement from Jerry Carney, IUE-CWA Chief Negotiator and General Electric Coordinated Bargaining Committee Chair

    “After GE’s break up into three separate companies, this 4 year labor contract with GE Aerospace brings back stability to IUE-CWA families, with cost of living (COLA) language which will protect our members from a repeat of runaway inflation like we saw during the pandemic. Wage rates will increase a compounded 16.9% over the life of the contract and are now protected with added Cost of Living Adjustment language on top of that. We made sure our earnings outpace increased healthcare costs.

    Our pension is staying intact, protecting our members close to retirement, and our newer members will get more cash added to their 401ks from GE on a yearly basis, without having to contribute themselves.

    We’ve improved paid time off, with new hires being able to access personal time immediately and our members earning more vacation days at a faster rate. Juneteenth was added as a holiday. We have also improved bereavement time for our members and we have improved parental bonding time, where the Company will now pay full rate for 6 weeks of leave within 12 months following birth or adoption, up from 3 weeks currently.

    Finally we have safeguarded our collectively bargained rights with a Successorship Clause, should GE Aerospace proceed with any further restructuring.”

    Statement from Carl Kennebrew, President, IUE-CWA

    “IUE-CWA has been part of GE’s history for nearly a century, and we will be part of its future. With the ratification of its first labor contract with GE Aerospace as a standalone entity, our membership takes a strong, confident, step forward. GE Aerospace has made commitments to invest in our union plants, and we will work with them, and hold them accountable to turn their commitments into reality. For too long we have suffered a race to the bottom which has destroyed worker prosperity. Because of that, we also have made a commitment to be in solidarity with other GE Aerospace manufacturing workers in the USA and across the world, and we will provide all our union allies an update as to our bargaining results, so we can raise standards together.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Matthew Bui, Assistant Professor of Information and Digital Studies, University of Michigan

    Yelp’s Black-owned tag was designed to help business owners like Don Studvent attract more customers. His restaurant closed in 2018 after nine years in business. AP Photo/Carlos Osorio

    When the online review platform Yelp added a “Black-owned” tag in 2020, it boosted the visibility of Black-owned restaurants in Detroit. It also caused their ratings to drop, according to our recent study.

    Both local and nonlocal reviewers who showed awareness of a restaurant’s Black ownership rated restaurants 3.03 stars on average. Those who did not acknowledge Black ownership gave a rating of 3.78 stars on average. The tag seems to have caused the average rating to drop by attracting more reviewers who were aware of Black ownership.

    Why it matters

    Technology companies often introduce new features and tools to influence user behavior and make their platforms more usable.

    Although Yelp intended to support Black communities with the Black-owned tag, the design intervention was harmful to Black restaurant owners in Detroit because Yelp failed to consider platform and community-based factors that significantly shape user interactions.

    Yelp’s user base is predominantly white, educated and affluent. Making Detroit’s Black-owned restaurants more visible to Yelp users may have amplified cross-cultural interactions and frictions. For example, non-Black users sometimes mentioned “slower” and “rude” service as justifications for lower ratings. Close readings of these reviews hinted at intercultural and communicative clashes.

    Even if Black-owned restaurants businesses didn’t select the tag, they appeared in searches for “Black-owned restaurants,” in 2022 when we conducted the study and as recently as 2025. Businesses can remove the “Black-owned” tag, but Yelp doesn’t provide a way for them to opt out of search results.

    How we did our work

    To examine the local impacts of Yelp’s Black-owned tag, we collected over 250,000 Yelp reviews of Black- and non-Black-owned restaurants in Detroit and Los Angeles.

    We identified Black-owned restaurants through community-sourced lists for Detroit and Los Angeles and then generated a random sample for the non-Black-owned restaurants.

    We then identified reviews that explicitly noted “Black ownership” for closer analysis.

    Detroit’s Black-owned businesses saw a greater loss in business compared with “ownership-unreported” restaurants during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means they also potentially had more to gain from the new tag.

    We found the awareness of Black ownership on Yelp significantly increased following Yelp’s addition of the Black-owned tag in June 2020. A year after the tag was added, reviews in Detroit mentioned Black ownership 4.3% more often than a year before it was rolled out.

    Detroit Black-owned restaurants also saw a small temporary spike in their number of reviews, largely around the time Yelp added the Black-owned tag. At the same time, the restaurants’ average star ratings dropped from 3.91 to 3.88. In contrast, non-Black-owned restaurants’ ratings stayed relatively steady at 3.90.

    This metric is an aggregate of all Detroit restaurants’ Yelp reviews over their entire existence, so a .03-star rating change is small but significant.

    Even minor changes to star ratings affect the number of diners restaurants attract, their earning potential and the likelihood they will sell out of food.

    Adding obstacles in digital platforms serves to reproduce and amplify inequalities these businesses already face, rather than alleviate them. For example, Black-owned businesses have a harder time getting loans and are relatively underrepresented in Michigan as a whole.

    These findings may seem surprising given that Detroit is a majority Black city. However, Black users on Yelp are a minority. Keeping in mind the skewed user base of Yelp, we hypothesize the lower reviews for businesses featuring a Black-owned tag reflect existing racial and digital divides in the city.

    Generally, our study provides additional evidence that digital interventions are not “one-size-fits-all,” nor is digital visibility inherently positive for all businesses.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    _This article was updated to clarify how labels are added to profiles.

    This research was supported by a research grant from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

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

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

    ref. Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings – https://theconversation.com/detroit-restaurants-identified-as-black-owned-on-yelp-saw-a-slight-drop-in-business-ratings-256306

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Statewide hate crimes and bias incidents hotline now active in Clark, King, and Spokane counties

    Source: Washington State News

    SEATTLE — Today Washington launches a hate crimes and bias incidents hotline pilot in three counties across the state. According to the FBI’s hate crimes statistics, Washington has been in the top five states with the most reported hate crimes since 2018. The non-emergency hotline provides people in Clark, King, and Spokane counties an alternative way to report hate crimes or bias incidents.

    Hate crimes and incidents of bias have a devastating and long-lasting impact on individuals, families, and communities, making people feel unwelcome or unsafe where they live. Hotline staff will help callers find local, culturally competent, victim-centered, and trauma-informed support services and, with consent of the caller, can assist in reporting incidents to local law enforcement.

    The hotline is available by calling 1-855-225-1010. Anyone who wants to report a hate crime or bias incident in the three pilot counties can also visit atg.wa.gov/report-hate.

    The Legislature created the hotline in 2024 when it adopted Senate Bill 5427 with bipartisan support. The bill required a pilot program, managed by the Attorney General’s Office, for the hotline in three counties in Washington state — including one in eastern Washington. The three counties were chosen based on hate crimes data available in the 2023 Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs’ Annual Crime Report and the counties’ demographics.

    The pilot program will remain active for a year and a half, then the hotline will launch statewide by January 2027. Hate crimes and bias incidents are underreported, and data about their prevalence is limited. Beginning July 1, 2027, the Attorney General’s Office will produce an annual report describing the data collected from hotline reports for the governor, state Legislature, and public regarding hate crimes and bias incidents. 

    “Hate crimes not only directly harm individuals but also can instill harm throughout the community,” Attorney General Nick Brown said. “Success in these three counties will help us expand the hotline statewide and better understand how to combat hate crimes and bias incidents across Washington.”

    Members of the advisory group and local officials offered the following statements on the launch of the hotline pilot:

    “We took an important step in 2019 by changing our hate crime laws — but the rise in hate and bias incidents shows there’s still more to do,” said Sen. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, who sponsored the legislation creating the hotline. “That’s why this hotline matters. It’s not just about policy — it’s about people. It’s about making sure every victim is heard and supported.”

    “At a time when a hostile federal administration is fueling bigotry against vulnerable communities, many in King County are living in fear and uncertainty,” said King County Council Chair Girmay Zahilay. “I am proud to join the Attorney General’s Office in this initiative and grateful to the community leaders who’ve contributed to this launch. Together, we will continue to stand united against hate.”

    “Spokane welcomes the launch of the new Hate Crimes & Bias Incidents Hotline and is proud to be one of three original test locations,” said Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown. “Our Office of Civil Rights, Equity, and Inclusion has been engaged with the Attorney General’s team through its development, and we see this as a vital tool to improve reporting and ensure accountability throughout our community.”

    “I am proud that Spokane county is leading the way by piloting the Hate Crimes Hotline program,” said Spokane County Commissioner Amber Waldref. “I’m hopeful this tool will create a new opportunity for residents to report potential hate crimes to ensure the safety and security of everyone in our community.”

    “This hotline is an important step toward ensuring people feel safe reporting hate crimes,” said Clark County Sheriff John Horch. “We want everyone in our community to know that their voice matters, and that help is available.”

    “The Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander community has experienced hate crimes and bias incidents for hundreds of years and that was amplified during the height of the pandemic,” said Thanh Tran, co-chair of the HAPPEN Business Resource Group. “These incidents continue to occur every day, with little to no mention in the mainstream news. I’m hopeful this hotline will encourage victims to report these incidents so we can empower the community and move towards justice and healing.”

    “The hotline is critically important because it acknowledges what our communities have always known: that hate doesn’t only exist in the narrow legal definitions that require physical harm or property damage,” said Catalina Velasquez, executive director of the Washington Immigrant Solidarity Network. “When immigrant families in my network face verbal harassment that makes them afraid to send their children to school, when transgender people of color experience daily microaggressions that chip away at their humanity, when our elders are told to ‘go back where they came from’ — these are acts of violence that shape our material conditions and our ability to exist safely in the world. The hotline creates space for these experiences to be documented, believed, and responded to with culturally competent, trauma-informed care.”

    “I expect that the hotline will allow victims of hate to feel like they have support in their local communities,” said Hershel Zellman, board member of Human Rights Spokane. “I also expect the statistics gathered by the hotline will be used to create educational programming and law enforcement strategies for mitigating the occurrence of hate in the first place.”

    “We hope that this hotline will provide culturally competent support, build trust with the Muslim community, and encourage more community members to report incidents,” said Sabrene Odeh, a legal advocate with the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington state. “We hope that it will allow for better understanding of Islamophobia, improve the accuracy of future community facing programs and initiatives, and provide the support that resonates with our community members. Representation of the Muslim community in the development and implementation of this hotline reinforces the message that the safety of Muslims is prioritized and valued.”

    “Our organization is a trusted messenger of the community we serve,” said Momodou Jobe, programs director of the Washington West African Center. “Our voice comes from what our community tells us and our participation developing the hotline brought our community’s voices into the room.”

    “Too many in the Jewish community are grappling with the effects of growing antisemitism and need increased resources and services,” said Miri Cypers, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in the Pacific Northwest. “From our youngest struggling with bias incidents in K-12 schools to community institutions facing threats, the hotline will provide culturally sensitive support.”

    “The Sikh community stands firmly for justice and equality for all,” said Jasmit Singh, executive director of the Khalsa Gurmat Center. “We commend the establishment of the hotline as a crucial mechanism for those who have experienced prejudice or hate to have their voices heard and for incidents to be addressed. This hotline empowers communities and reinforces the message that hate has no home in Washington state.” 

    For more information on Washington’s hate crimes and bias incidents hotline, visit atg.wa.gov/report-hate. 

    Definitions

    Washington law defines a hate crime as assault, property damage or threats to cause injury or property damage that is committed because of the perception of a person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender expression or identity, or disability.

    Bias incidents are acts of prejudice that are not criminal in nature and do not involve violence, threats, or property damage. While bias incident cannot be criminally charged, they are important to report.

    -30-

    Washington’s Attorney General serves the people and the state of Washington. As the state’s largest law firm, the Attorney General’s Office provides legal representation to every state agency, board, and commission in Washington. Additionally, the Office serves the people directly by enforcing consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental protection laws. The Office also prosecutes elder abuse, Medicaid fraud, and handles sexually violent predator cases in 38 of Washington’s 39 counties. Visit www.atg.wa.gov to learn more.

    Media Contact:

    Email: press@atg.wa.gov

    Phone: (360) 753-2727

    General contacts: Click here

    Media Resource Guide & Attorney General’s Office FAQ

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Ingersoll Rand Accelerates Value Creation Through Continued M&A, Announces New Acquisition

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    • Continues the company’s disciplined capital allocation strategy of targeted bolt-on acquisitions and proven ability to build trusted, proprietary partnerships with family-owned businesses
    • Acquisition expands Ingersoll Rand competencies and capabilities in high-growth end markets
    • Purchase made at an attractive low-double-digit multiple with expected post-synergy multiple in the mid-to-high single digits

    DAVIDSON, N.C., July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Ingersoll Rand Inc., (NYSE: IR) a global provider of mission-critical flow creation and life science and industrial solutions, has acquired Termomeccanica Industrial Compressors S.p.A. (“TMIC”) and its subsidiary Adicomp S.p.A. (“Adicomp”) (collectively “TMIC/Adicomp”) with a purchase price of approximately €160 million.

    TMIC is an international leader in the design and production of air and gas compressors with over 100 years of experience and innovation. Its subsidiary Adicomp provides engineered-to-order (ETO) solutions in the renewable natural gas (RNG) industry. TMIC/Adicomp are based in Italy, with an existing presence in North America and recent expansion into Brazil and India, and improve the company’s RNG gas-ends and packaging presence. The businesses will join the Industrial Technologies and Services (IT&S) segment.

    “TMIC/Adicomp are leading businesses in their respective industries, and today we welcome them to Ingersoll Rand,” said Vicente Reynal, chairman and chief executive officer of Ingersoll Rand. “These companies strengthen our core capabilities and broaden our service offerings, enabling us to deliver greater value to our customers while advancing our long-term growth strategy for shareholders. Additionally, these companies reflect the strength of our M&A flywheel and reaffirm our ability to partner with family-owned businesses on a proprietary basis.”

    About Ingersoll Rand Inc.

    Ingersoll Rand Inc. (NYSE: IR), driven by an entrepreneurial spirit and ownership mindset, is dedicated to Making Life Better for our employees, customers, shareholders, and planet. Customers lean on us for exceptional performance and durability in mission-critical flow creation and life science and industrial solutions. Supported by over 80+ respected brands, our products and services excel in the most complex and harsh conditions. Our employees develop customers for life through their daily commitment to expertise, productivity, and efficiency. For more information, visit www.IRCO.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements related to Ingersoll Rand Inc.’s (the “Company” or “Ingersoll Rand”) expectations regarding the performance of its business, its financial results, its liquidity and capital resources and other non-historical statements. These forward-looking statements generally are identified by the words “believe,” “project,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “outlook,” “target,” “endeavor,” “seek,” “predict,” “intend,” “strategy,” “plan,” “may,” “could,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “will be,” “on track to,” “will continue,” “will likely result,” “guidance” or the negative thereof or variations thereon or similar terminology generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. All statements other than historical facts are forward-looking statements.

    These forward-looking statements are based on Ingersoll Rand’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual results to differ materially from these current expectations. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those indicated or anticipated by such forward-looking statements. The inclusion of such statements should not be regarded as a representation that such plans, estimates, or expectations will be achieved. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such plans, estimates or expectations include, among others, (1) adverse impact on our operations and financial performance due to natural disaster, catastrophe, global pandemics (including COVID-19), geopolitical tensions, cyber events, or other events outside of our control; (2) unexpected costs, charges, or expenses resulting from completed and proposed business combinations; (3) uncertainty of the expected financial performance of the Company; (4) failure to realize the anticipated benefits of completed and proposed business combinations; (5) the ability of the Company to implement its business strategy; (6) difficulties and delays in achieving revenue and cost synergies; (7) inability of the Company to retain and hire key personnel; (8) evolving legal, regulatory, and tax regimes; (9) changes in general economic and/or industry specific conditions; (10) actions by third parties, including government agencies; and (11) other risk factors detailed in Ingersoll Rand’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), as such factors may be updated from time to time in its periodic filings with the SEC, which are available on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The foregoing list of important factors is not exclusive.

    Any forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this release. Ingersoll Rand undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information or development, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any of these forward-looking statements.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Releases Bombshell Records Showing FBI Headquarters Interfered with Alleged Chinese Election Interference Probe to Shield Christopher Wray from Political Blowback

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today released internal Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) emails revealing the FBI suppressed intelligence of alleged Chinese interference in the 2020 election to insulate then-FBI Director Christopher Wray from criticism, after Wray provided inaccurate and contradictory testimony to Congress.
    The FBI declassified and provided the requested records to Grassley, along with an accompanying cover letter, after Grassley initially received some information from whistleblower disclosures. The FBI emails offer an inside look at the Bureau’s decision to recall and suppress an Intelligence Information Report (IIR) from the FBI’s Albany Field Office on September 25, 2020. The IIR contained information from an FBI Confidential Human Source (CHS) alleging the Chinese government was producing “tens of thousands” of fraudulent drivers’ licenses to manufacture mail-in votes for then-presidential candidate Joe Biden in the 2020 election. 
    According to the FBI, these allegations, despite showing initial signs of credibility, were allegedly never fully investigated due to the FBI’s sudden and “abnormal” decision to halt the investigation and bury the IIR’s existence, preventing any additional FBI field offices, as well as other Intelligence Community elements, from accessing or studying the document. The FBI’s stated reason for doing so was because “the reporting will contradict Director Wray’s testimony.” 
    “These records smack of political decision-making and prove the Wray-led FBI to be a deeply broken institution. Ahead of a high-stakes election happening amid an unprecedented global pandemic, the FBI turned its back on its national security mission,” Grassley said. “One way or the other, intelligence must be fully investigated to determine whether it’s true, or if it’s just smoke and mirrors. Chris Wray’s FBI wasn’t looking out for the American people – it was looking to save its own image. Now’s the time to rebuild the FBI’s trust. Director Patel’s willingness to work with me to establish renewed transparency and accountability is a critical part of that process, and I applaud him for his efforts.” 
    Political ReasoningFollowing the IIR’s recall, an FBI Albany intelligence analyst summarized the concerning series of events that led to the suppression:
    “Most concerning to me, is stating the reporting would contradict with Director Wray’s testimony. I found this troubling because it implied to me that one of the reasons we aren’t putting this out is for a political reason, which goes directly against our organization’s mission to remain apolitical and simply state what we know. Likewise, at the field operational level, I do not feel it is our job to assess whether or not our intelligence aligns with the Director…. My concern is that I think it gets dangerous if we cite potential political implications as reasons for not putting out our information.” 
    Source CredibilityAn FBI Albany official noted “the IIR was coordinated and disseminated in textbook fashion.” Further, a re-interview of the FBI CHS yielded additional context that supported the initial IIR’s findings. An FBI Albany official described the CHS as “competent” and “authentic in his/her reporting.” The CHS described the confidence in his/her sub-sourcing as a “9-10 range. [V]ery, very confident.”
    Decision for RecallAccording to an Assistant Section Chief in the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, the IIR immediately generated “a lot of attention from all [Headquarter] divisions.” 
    Upon receiving the IIR, an FBI Albany official stated, “We have no reason to recall at this point.” Minutes later, the Albany Field Office was commanded to recall the IIR at the direct request of officials at FBI Headquarters, including Nikki Floris, then-Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. Months before dismissing the IIR, Floris provided an unnecessary briefing to Grassley and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) regarding their investigation into the Biden family. The briefing – though classified – was later leaked to the press in an effort to falsely smear the senators’ investigation as Russian disinformation.
    Following the IIR’s recall, FBI Headquarters informed field offices that “all raw reporting concerning the election will now require [Headquarters] coordination,” which had not been previously required. 
    Contradictory TestimonyDuring sworn testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee (HSGAC) on September 24, 2020, Wray stated: 
    “I think what I would say is this: We take all election-related threats seriously, whether it is voter fraud, voter suppression, whether it is in person, whether it is by mail. And our role is to investigate the threat actors. Now, we have not seen historically any kind of coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it is by mail or otherwise… [B]ut people should make no mistake we are vigilant as to the threat and watching it carefully, because we are in uncharted new territory.” 
    Wray doubled down on his assertion in response to further questioning from HSGAC Ranking Member Gary Peters (D-Mich.).
    Peters: “Right, but your answer is clear. You have not seen any widespread fraud by mail. It is something the FBI watches continuously to make sure that that is not happening.” 
    Wray: “That is something that we would investigate seriously.” 
    Peters: “Absolutely.” 
    Wray: “And aggressively.” 
    FITF-China Prevents Further Follow-upOn October 8, 2020, an official with the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF)-China division confirmed FITF-China had still not approved a reissue of the IIR. Despite FITF-China offering to “discuss next steps” for the IIR, the FBI on June 27, 2025 confirmed to Grassley that they had “found no information to indicate that FITF-China aggressively investigated the reported information, despite corroborating intergovernmental reporting and logical investigative leads.” 
    Wray established FITF with the stated goal to “identify and counteract malign foreign influence operations targeting the United States.” Grassley called the Trump administration’s recent decision to close FITF “a positive step, given what the task force had been twisted into,” noting specifically its conduct against his and Senator Johnson’s Biden family investigation.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Matthew Bui, Assistant Professor of Information and Digital Studies, University of Michigan

    Yelp’s Black-owned tag was designed to help business owners like Don Studvent attract more customers. His restaurant closed in 2018 after nine years in business. AP Photo/Carlos Osorio

    When the online review platform Yelp added a “Black-owned” tag in 2020, it boosted the visibility of Black-owned restaurants in Detroit. It also caused their ratings to drop, according to our recent study.

    Both local and nonlocal reviewers who showed awareness of a restaurant’s Black ownership rated restaurants 3.03 stars on average. Those who did not acknowledge Black ownership gave a rating of 3.78 stars on average. The tag seems to have caused the average rating to drop by attracting more reviewers who were aware of Black ownership.

    Why it matters

    Technology companies often introduce new features and tools to influence user behavior and make their platforms more usable.

    Although Yelp intended to support Black communities with the Black-owned tag, the design intervention was harmful to Black restaurant owners in Detroit because Yelp failed to consider platform and community-based factors that significantly shape user interactions.

    Yelp’s user base is predominantly white, educated and affluent. Making Detroit’s Black-owned restaurants more visible to Yelp users may have amplified cross-cultural interactions and frictions. For example, non-Black users sometimes mentioned “slower” and “rude” service as justifications for lower ratings. Close readings of these reviews hinted at intercultural and communicative clashes.

    Even if Black-owned restaurants businesses didn’t select the tag, they appeared in searches for “Black-owned restaurants,” in 2022 when we conducted the study and as recently as 2025. Businesses can remove the “Black-owned” tag, but Yelp doesn’t provide a way for them to opt out of search results.

    How we did our work

    To examine the local impacts of Yelp’s Black-owned tag, we collected over 250,000 Yelp reviews of Black- and non-Black-owned restaurants in Detroit and Los Angeles.

    We identified Black-owned restaurants through community-sourced lists for Detroit and Los Angeles and then generated a random sample for the non-Black-owned restaurants.

    We then identified reviews that explicitly noted “Black ownership” for closer analysis.

    Detroit’s Black-owned businesses saw a greater loss in business compared with “ownership-unreported” restaurants during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means they also potentially had more to gain from the new tag.

    We found the awareness of Black ownership on Yelp significantly increased following Yelp’s addition of the Black-owned tag in June 2020. A year after the tag was added, reviews in Detroit mentioned Black ownership 4.3% more often than a year before it was rolled out.

    Detroit Black-owned restaurants also saw a small temporary spike in their number of reviews, largely around the time Yelp added the Black-owned tag. At the same time, the restaurants’ average star ratings dropped from 3.91 to 3.88. In contrast, non-Black-owned restaurants’ ratings stayed relatively steady at 3.90.

    This metric is an aggregate of all Detroit restaurants’ Yelp reviews over their entire existence, so a .03-star rating change is small but significant.

    Even minor changes to star ratings affect the number of diners restaurants attract, their earning potential and the likelihood they will sell out of food.

    Adding obstacles in digital platforms serves to reproduce and amplify inequalities these businesses already face, rather than alleviate them. For example, Black-owned businesses have a harder time getting loans and are relatively underrepresented in Michigan as a whole.

    These findings may seem surprising given that Detroit is a majority Black city. However, Black users on Yelp are a minority. Keeping in mind the skewed user base of Yelp, we hypothesize the lower reviews for businesses featuring a Black-owned tag reflect existing racial and digital divides in the city.

    Generally, our study provides additional evidence that digital interventions are not “one-size-fits-all,” nor is digital visibility inherently positive for all businesses.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    _This article was updated to clarify how labels are added to profiles.

    This research was supported by a research grant from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

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

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

    ref. Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings – https://theconversation.com/detroit-restaurants-identified-as-black-owned-on-yelp-saw-a-slight-drop-in-business-ratings-256306

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Security: Michigan Man Sentenced to Two Years in Prison for Drug Distribution and Loan Fraud

    Source: US FBI

    BOSTON – A Michigan man was sentenced today in federal court in Boston for a conspiracy to import and sell illegal pharmaceuticals, including opioids, and to fund the operation of the scheme by fraudulently obtaining a COVID-19 pandemic relief loan.

    Donald Nchamukong, 37, was sentenced by U.S. Senior District Court Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton to two years in prison, to be followed by two years of supervised release. Nchamukong was also ordered to pay $200,000 in restitution. In March 2025, Nchamukong pleaded guilty to conspiracy to smuggle goods into the United States, committing loan fraud and distributing controlled substances.

    Starting in 2019 and continuing to 2022, Nchamukong and co-conspirator, Doyal Kalita, conspired to distribute drugs to persons in the United States over the internet and using call centers in India. Nchamukong used shell companies, including a purported dietary supplements company and an auto parts supplier, and associated bank and merchant accounts to process sales of illegal foreign drugs, including the Schedule IV opioid, tramadol. Nchamukong and Kalita also received shipments of tramadol from India and reshipped the drug to customers across the United States, including in Massachusetts. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Nchamukong and Kalita fraudulently obtained a $200,000 Economic Injury Disaster Loan to fund their illegal drug scheme.  

    In June 2024, Kalita was sentenced to 10 years in prison for orchestrating the online drug distribution scheme, a technical support fraud scheme and related money laundering.

    United States Attorney Leah B. Foley; Ted E. Docks, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Boston Division; Thomas Demeo, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, Boston Field Office; and Fernando P. McMillan, Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Criminal Investigations made the announcement today. Valuable assistance was provided by Homeland Security Investigations in New York, the Small Business Administration and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. Assistant U.S. Attorney Kriss Basil, Deputy Chief of the Securities, Financial & Cyber Fraud Unit  prosecuted the case.

    On May 17, 2021, the Attorney General established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The Task Force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international criminal actors and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts. For more information on the department’s response to the pandemic, please visit https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus and https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus/combatingfraud.

    Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud  Hotline via the NCDF Web Complaint Form.

    MIL Security OSI

  • Starmer wins vote on UK welfare reform but suffers damaging rebellion

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    British Prime Minister Keir Starmer won a vote on his welfare plans on Tuesday at significant political cost as he suffered the biggest parliamentary rebellion of his premiership and was forced to back down on key parts of the package.

    After his lawmakers pushed him into a series of embarrassing U-turns to sharply scale back plans to cut benefits, lawmakers in the House of Commons gave their initial approval to a package of measures Starmer says are vital to securing the future of the welfare system.

    But the scale of the rebellion – with 49 Labour lawmakers voting against the reforms – underlined the prime minister’s waning authority.

    A year after winning one of the largest parliamentary majorities in British history, Starmer has seen his personal approval ratings collapse and been forced into several policy reversals by his increasingly rebellious lawmakers.

    It’s been a bumpy time tonight,” work and pensions minister Liz Kendall told reporters after a session of parliament when lawmakers took turns to mostly criticise the planned changes. “There are definitely lessons to learn from this process.”

    Starmer came into office last year promising his big parliamentary majority would bring an end to the political chaos that defined much of the Conservative Party’s 14 years in power. But the revolt over the welfare bill underlines the difficulty he has pushing through unpopular changes.

    In the run-up to the vote, ministers and party enforcers known as “whips” had been locked in frantic last-ditch lobbying of undecided members of parliament to try to win their backing.

    In a further concession to rebels about two hours before the vote, the government said it would not finalise changes in eligibility for a key benefit payment until a review into the welfare system had been completed.

    Paula Barker, a Labour member of parliament, called the attempt to pass the plans “the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen”.

    In the end, the government suffered by far the biggest rebellion of Starmer’s premiership, eclipsing the 16 members of parliament who opposed an infrastructure bill earlier this month.

    Mel Stride, the opposition Conservative Party finance policy chief, described Starmer’s team as “a government that’s lost control”, only able to pass the legislation by having “ripped the heart of it out”.

    Labour lawmaker Henry Tufnell said by agreeing to the concessions Starmer had shown “he’s willing to take on board these criticisms that people have raised.”

    Almost 90 disability and human rights groups before the vote urged lawmakers to vote down the legislation.

     

    RISING COSTS

    The proposed reforms are designed to reduce the cost of Britain’s growing welfare bill, which the government has described as economically indefensible and morally wrong.

    Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds the country’s defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds ($137 billion) by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now.

    More than half of the rise in working-age disability claims since the COVID-19 pandemic relates to mental health conditions, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank.

    The government had initially hoped to save 5 billion pounds ($6.9 billion) a year by 2030 by tightening rules for people to receive disability and sickness benefits.

    But after the government conceded to pressure from its lawmakers, it said the new rules would now apply only to future applicants, not to the millions of existing claimants as had been proposed. Analysts estimated the savings would likely be closer to 2 billion pounds.

    It was not clear how the additional last-minute change would impact the hoped-for savings in the welfare reform package.

    Opposition politicians said the government would now have to raise taxes or cut government spending elsewhere to balance the public finances in the annual budget later this year.

    The government has said there would be no permanent increase in borrowing, but has declined to comment on possible tax rises.

    While Starmer is under no immediate threat, and the next election is not expected until 2029, his party now trails behind Nigel Farage’s populist Reform UK in opinion polls.

    John Curtice, Britain’s most respected pollster, said this week that Starmer was the most unpopular elected prime minister in modern British history, and that voters still did not know what he stood for a year after he was elected.

    -Reuters

  • MIL-OSI: Navicore Solutions Offers Crucial Financial Support as Credit Card Interest Rates Increase

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MANALAPAN, N.J., July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — As credit card interest rates continue to climb, averaging 25.37% for existing balances in June, Navicore Solutions is stepping up to provide essential financial counseling services to consumers nationwide. Despite the December 2024 Federal Reserve rate cuts, credit card Annual Percentage Rates (APRs) remain high, exacerbating financial strain for many Americans.

    The average APR has been steadily increasing, particularly since the beginning of 2022, due to a combination of factors including the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes and increases in credit card issuers’ margins.

    The Federal Reserve’s recent interest rate cuts in December 2024 have had minimal impact on credit card APRs, which remain near record highs. For instance, the average APR on new credit cards ranges between 20% and 29% which is significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels. This persistent rise in credit card interest rates is contributing to increased financial distress, with many consumers struggling to manage their debt.

    Navicore Solutions, a nonprofit credit counseling organization offers confidential, and personalized financial counseling to individuals and families across the United States. Navicore’s certified counselors work with clients to develop customized debt management plans, often reducing interest rates and consolidating multiple payments into a single monthly payment. This approach can help clients pay off unsecured debt in three to five years, providing a clear path to financial stability.

    “In these challenging economic times, it’s more important than ever for consumers to seek professional guidance,” said Diane Gray, Chief Operating Officer with Navicore. “Our team is dedicated to helping individuals regain control of their finances, reduce debt, and avoid the pitfalls of high-interest credit card debt.”

    For those struggling with credit card debt, reaching out to a nonprofit credit counseling agency like Navicore Solutions can be a crucial step toward financial recovery with services designed to empower consumers with the knowledge and tools needed to make informed financial decisions and achieve long-term financial health.

    About Navicore Solutions

    Founded in 1991, Navicore Solutions is a national leader in the field of nonprofit financial counseling with a mission to strengthen the well-being of individuals and families through education, guidance, advocacy, and support.

    Navicore counselors provide a wide range of services including credit counseling to consumers in need; education programs through workshops, courses and written material; debt management plan to provide relief for applicable consumers; student loan counseling for those struggling with student loan debt; and housing counseling services in the areas of rental, pre-purchase, default and reverse mortgage. The agency is an advocate of financial education helping communities achieve and maintain financial stability.

    Contact:
    Lori Stratford
    Digital Marketing Manager
    Navicore Solutions
    lstratford@navicoresolutions.org
    navicoresolutions.org

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the future of the EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector: leveraging research, boosting innovation and enhancing competitiveness – A10-0123/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the future of the EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector: leveraging research, boosting innovation and enhancing competitiveness

    (2025/2008(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 9, 151, 152, 153(1) and (2) thereof, as well as Articles 173 and 179 thereof, which concern EU industrial policy and research and refer to, among other things, the competitiveness of the Union’s industry and the strengthening of the Union’s scientific and technological bases,

     having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article 5(3) thereof and Protocol No 2 thereto on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 20 March 2024 entitled ‘Building the future with nature: Boosting Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing in the EU’ (COM(2024)0137),

     having regard to the report by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 29 January 2025 entitled ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’ (COM(2025)0030),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640),

     having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 10 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 19 February 2025 entitled ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food – Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations’ (COM(2025)0075),

     having regard to Rule 55 and Rule 148(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0123/2025),

    A. whereas the EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector has been recognised as one of 10 strategic technology sectors for Europe’s competitiveness, economic security and sustainability; whereas the sector is characterised by very high productivity, growth and employment, and delivers globally competitive, cutting-edge solutions in healthcare, life sciences, industrial production and transformation, sustainable biomanufacturing, energy and food security; whereas biotechnology and biomanufacturing are important enablers of the bioeconomy at large; whereas biotechnology and biomanufacturing can help enhance the EU’s strategic autonomy, resilience and circularity by reducing industry’s dependency on fossil-based input and other external dependencies in various sectors; whereas the biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector still faces regulatory and financial obstacles and an incomplete internal market; whereas the Commission is expected to present an EU biotech act, an updated EU bioeconomy strategy, an EU life sciences strategy, an EU innovation act and an EU circular economy act;

    B. whereas according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), biotechnology is defined as the application of science and technology to living organisms, as well as parts, products and models thereof, to alter living or non-living materials for the production of knowledge, goods and services; whereas biomanufacturing is not clearly defined and the Commission should therefore propose such a definition; whereas a definition of biomanufacturing should be future-proof, open to scientific and technological developments, and technology neutral, so as to broadly encompass the use of biotechnology or other technologies for the production of bio-based material products and solutions including, but not limited to, chemical, mechanical or thermal processes;

    C. whereas the biotech and biomanufacturing industries have led the development and deployment of breakthrough innovations in healthcare, such as mRNA-based vaccines; whereas biotechnology processes can be used to manufacture active pharmaceutical ingredients and key manufacturing inputs for medicines;

    D. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of having robust raw material value chains and manufacturing capabilities within Europe, to ensure security of supply of critical products and to mitigate shortages, for example of essential medicines;

    E. whereas artificial intelligence (AI) can help drive biotechnology innovation – e.g. in personalised medicine and drug discovery – resulting in health and environmental benefits; whereas the use of AI in biotechnology can also present ethical challenges and risks, related to the protection of private data, which need to be addressed in order to maintain public trust and acceptance;

    F. whereas biotechnology is applied in various aspects of animal and plant-based agriculture and also indirectly, through its use in activities such as waste management;

    G. whereas biotechnology can strengthen the resilience of forests and, in the case of biomanufacturing, the forest sector can offer sustainably produced, renewable and recyclable raw materials that can be used in high-value innovative products, materials and applications;

    H. whereas the EU is a global leader in research and biomanufacturing capacity, yet its potential remains unexploited due to the lack of a sufficiently coordinated policy framework that enables the efficient scaling up of innovation, the attraction of investment and the commercialisation of new technologies; whereas the ‘one in, one out’ approach ensures that all burdens introduced by Commission initiatives are considered, and administrative burdens are offset by removing burdens of equivalent value in the same policy area at EU or Member State level; whereas Parliament has called for the EU’s research budget to be doubled; whereas EU private investment in research, development and innovation is lagging behind other major economies; whereas promoting investment in pioneering demo and commercial production plants can accelerate the commercialisation of EU innovation in the bio-based industries;

    I. whereas urgent, coherent and consistent action needs to be taken during the next few years to make the EU a world leader in biotechnology, biomanufacturing and life sciences effecting a bold level of change, in accordance with due process and supported by competitiveness checks and adequate funding;

    J. whereas lengthy and complex authorisation procedures, particularly concerning approval times, represent a competitive disadvantage for EU operators and drive project developers out of the EU, and hinder industrial deployment and growth;

    K. whereas current EU regulatory frameworks do not cater precisely to the specificities of bio-based products; whereas the existing regulatory authorisation processes for biotech products needs to be urgently addressed to ensure that the EU remains globally competitive; whereas an effective regulatory framework for conducting clinical research is essential for the competitiveness of the most innovation-intensive aspects of the EU’s pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors; whereas the Commission should take account of the regulatory frameworks of non-EU countries leading in the biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector, in the context of existing and future EU legislation covering the industry, to ensure compatibility without lowering existing EU safety and environmental standards;

    L. whereas the EU’s biotechnology and biomanufacturing investment and venture capital ecosystem remains fragmented; whereas high energy prices, regulatory burdens, barriers, and a lack of available key feedstock, raw materials and components are limiting the ability of start-ups and other small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to scale up, and limit large-scale deployment; whereas EU biomanufacturing capacity and supply chain resilience, including the availability of feedstock, are essential to reduce dependence on non-EU actors; whereas effective global supply chains – including strategic partnerships with reliable global actors – are also important to secure stable access to critical resources, avoid supply disruptions and foster continuous innovation in essential technologies;

    M. whereas bio-based feedstocks, such as sustainably sourced biomass, recycled waste and CO2 captured from biogenic sources, could be used as alternative feedstocks for the manufacturing of, for example, polymers, plastics, solvents, paints, detergents, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals, thereby contributing to EU emission reduction, resource efficiency and strategic autonomy; whereas the EU could further incentivise market demand and market uptake for sustainable bio-based products and materials;

    N. whereas it is vital to increase the use of sustainable bio-based raw materials as part of the means of reaching the EU’s 2050 climate targets; whereas biotechnology has the potential to transform the refinery and chemical industry towards biomanufacturing, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions, in line with the EU’s climate objectives;

    O. whereas biotechnology and biomanufacturing are regulated across many different regulatory frameworks; whereas current EU regulatory frameworks for biotechnology and biomanufacturing are inconsistent across sectors, creating legal uncertainty and slowing market access for innovative solutions; whereas the lengthy authorisation processes, particularly concerning approval times, need to be urgently addressed and improved, while maintaining a risk- and science-based approach, to compete with corresponding time frames outside the EU; whereas the use of regulatory sandboxes should be expanded to ensure that emerging technologies have a clear development pathway; whereas new EU-wide regulation in the form of an EU biotech act should be duly justified based on examples of concrete gaps and shortcomings in current legislation and implementation, focusing on the specificities of the industry;

    P. whereas a coherent, robust and future-proof intellectual property (IP) framework is essential, ideally resulting in economic, environmental and societal benefits;

    Q. whereas public awareness in the EU of biotechnology and biomanufactured products should be further strengthened, in order to boost public acceptance; whereas the ethical aspects of biotechnology should be considered; whereas stakeholder consultation plays a crucial role in shaping responsible and ethical biotechnology policies; whereas civil society can play an essential role in ensuring public trust;

    R. whereas the engineering of DNA and organisms is increasingly carried out in automated biofoundries, which produce a wealth of data and improved designs and knowledge of biological functions;

    S. whereas the EU’s regulatory framework needs to adequately address evolving risks, opportunities and responsibilities associated with the handling, trade and synthesis of biological material, particularly in the context of synthetic biology; whereas existing biosecurity gaps need to be addressed by the EU and through international cooperation;

    Criteria for a comprehensive EU biotech act

    1. Emphasises the growth potential of the European biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector and the need for the EU to remain world-leading in this field; underlines the commitment to the principles of better regulation and lawmaking, simplification and administrative burden reduction; underlines that the simplification of EU legislation must not endanger any of the fundamental rights of citizens, workers and businesses or risk regulatory uncertainty; believes that any simplification proposal should not be rushed and proposed without proper consideration, consultation and impact assessments; therefore asks the Commission, if it proposes a new EU-wide regulation in the form of an EU biotech act, to address concrete gaps and shortcomings in current legislation and implementation, and to present legislation that can be revised, simplified, streamlined, repealed and which reduces bureaucratic burdens, focusing on the specificities of the industry and maintaining relevant safety and security standards; asks that an EU biotech act adopt a comprehensive cross-sectoral scope and that it be accompanied by an impact and cost assessment, competitiveness checks as well as a comprehensive assessment by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, taking due consideration of the impact on SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups, as well as the interaction with other relevant legislative and non-legislative initiatives, including proposals currently undergoing the co-legislative procedure;

    2. Recalls that according to the OECD, biotechnology is defined as the application of science and technology to living organisms, as well as parts, products and models thereof, to alter living or non-living materials for the production of knowledge, goods and services; notes, however, that biomanufacturing is not clearly defined and calls on the Commission to propose such a definition;

    3. Recommends streamlining and harmonising existing and upcoming initiatives relating to biotechnology and biomanufacturing, with the objective of strengthening the biotechnology and biomanufacturing industry through clear industrial and research and development (R & D) competences;

    4. Urges the Commission to ensure coherence and consistency across all initiatives and legislative measures that may affect biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovations and companies, especially start-ups and scale-ups;

    5. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any future relevant legislative initiatives have a broad enough scope to capture the width of the biotechnology and biomanufacturing industry and its full range of applications; recommends facilitating a fast and efficient uptake of biotechnology and biomanufacturing through clear regulatory frameworks;

    6. Calls on the Commission to implement measures within its structures in order to ensure coordination, coherence and complementarity across its relevant directorates-general, and to enable more efficient scale-up and commercialisation of research, development and innovation results; highlights the importance of efforts to improve policy coherence and coordination at national level;

    7. Calls on the Commission to take account of regulatory frameworks of non-EU countries leading in the biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector, in the context of existing and future EU legislation covering the industry, to ensure compatibility, where possible and without compromising consumer safety, and a level playing field for EU biotech companies competing internationally, and to learn from best practices from outside the EU without lowering existing EU standards;

    8. Calls on the Commission to present a report on the implementation of current legislation in the field of biotechnology and biomanufacturing, including identifying potential gaps and regulatory barriers hampering the growth of the industries applying these technologies and manufacturing processes, including barriers to improving the EU’s self-sufficiency in key feedstocks, raw materials and components; recalls the precautionary principle laid down in Article 191 TFEU; urges the Commission to share with Parliament the preliminary findings of its study on regulatory burden, in this regard, and the potential need to review legislation related to biotechnology and biomanufacturing; calls for a simplification of current requirements for the sector across regulatory frameworks to enable faster approval procedures and market access, while maintaining a risk- and science-based approach and avoiding regulatory uncertainty;

    9. Welcomes the recently launched Biotech and Biomanufacturing Hub; requests that the Commission provide further guidance to EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing companies and the Member States with regard to the Net-Zero Industry Act[1] and the new Clean Industrial Deal in terms of permitting and financing, and to consider the creation of supporting hubs, in order to improve guidance and advice to companies navigating through the regulatory framework;

    10. Calls on the Commission to urgently streamline, simplify and shorten the time required for authorisation procedures, particularly approval time frames, for biotechnology materials and products throughout their manufacturing- and life-cycles, and to facilitate the market uptake of bio-based solutions, including the provision of pre-authorisation guidance, while maintaining a risk- and science-based approach, particularly in the context of its regular review of EU agencies such as the European Food Safety Authority, the European Medicines Agency and the European Chemicals Agency; calls on the Commission to ensure that the relevant EU agencies are adequately resourced, to enhance their capacity for conducting authorisation procedures in a timely manner;

    11. Calls on the Commission to consider the possibility of a simplified approvals procedure for biotechnology products that have already been approved by trusted regulatory bodies in like-minded countries with EU-equivalent standards;

    12. Calls on the Commission to consider simplifying labelling practices, such as the use of QR codes, and ensure fair market conditions between biotechnology and other products, such as marketing and advertising, without compromising consumer safety or access to relevant consumer information;

    13. Recalls that harmonised, predictable, future-proof and internationally competitive IP and data protection rules for biotechnology and biomanufacturing patents are essential for the development of the industry, resilient supply chains and sustainable economic growth; underlines the importance of improving IP protection rules by longer terms for patented technologies to strengthen the EU’s competitiveness, foster innovation and the EU’s strategic autonomy, protect cutting-edge technologies, reward long-term investments, and support high-risk research; considers that a coherent, robust and future-proof IP framework is essential; welcomes, in this regard, the EU’s recently established unitary patent system;

    14. Calls for a common clinical trials framework with streamlined approval procedures across the Member States to minimise administrative burdens and delays, and which allows for the use of real-world evidence for biotechnology therapies; asks the Commission to present the current situation in this regard, as well as potential improvements; calls for the swift implementation of the Clinical Trials Regulation[2] and the use of the EU’s Clinical Trials Information System;

    15. Underlines the strategic importance for the EU of a strong biotechnology ecosystem to support R & D, manufacturing, and patient access to innovative medicines; points out that biotechnology processes can be used to manufacture active pharmaceutical ingredients and key manufacturing inputs for both off-patent and innovative medicines;

    16. Recommends using the next generation of regulatory sandboxes to assess the specific impacts and possibilities of emerging biotechnology and biomanufacturing applications, ensuring that new technologies can be trialled in a controlled but flexible and future-proof regulatory environment; stresses the importance of ensuring that EU policy takes account of technological and scientific developments to safeguard the EU’s global competitiveness;

    17. Recommends developing a strategy to support biotechnology and biomanufacturing companies transitioning from the regulatory sandbox regime to full market access; requests that the strategy include, but not be limited to, support mechanisms, regulatory assistance and guidance on compliance with EU legislation;

    The need to promote the advantages and specificities of the biotechnology and biomanufacturing industry

    18. Underlines that effectively scaling up biotechnology and biomanufacturing in the EU hinges on a robust, competitive and circular bioeconomy; calls on the Commission to present an updated bioeconomy strategy, which takes account of current challenges and reinforces the bioeconomy’s industrial dimension and its links to biotechnology and biomanufacturing, incentivising the development and production of sustainable, innovative, high-value added bio-based materials, products and solutions, to contribute to EU competitiveness and strategic autonomy;

    19. Acknowledges the important role biomass plays in biomanufacturing; recalls, in this regard, the importance of adopting an approach open to different sustainable biomass technologies grounded in robust analysis, and with the aim of enhancing feedstock access and use, as well as harnessing international supply chains, while aiming to avoid unintended environmental externalities;

    20. Underlines the need to account for the specificities of biogenic carbon, bio-based products and processes, and to differentiate them from petrochemical and fossil-based products, in the context of EU and national chemical, materials and environmental legislation;

    21. Points out that essential components, such as enzymes, lactic acid bacteria and other microorganisms, run the risk of being prohibited or unduly disincentivised by EU regulations primarily designed for petrochemical and synthetic substances, such as the REACH Regulation[3];

    22. Is concerned that the European Investment Bank (EIB)’s interpretation of sustainability criteria under the EIB Group Paris alignment framework may result in access to funding for bio-based materials and projects being denied; asks the Commission to examine relevant definitions accordingly and encourage biotechnology- and biomanufacturing-friendly interpretations; calls on the EIB to propose de-risking instruments for biotechnology and biomanufacturing, in order to raise capital; calls, moreover, on the EIB to improve outreach, advisory support and information on financing instruments and opportunities for eligible biotechnology and biomanufacturing projects, in particular SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups;

    23. Underlines the benefit and contribution of bio-based products and processes to the EU’s CO2 reduction objectives, which, given the potential of these products to increase sustainability and lower the EU’s environmental footprint, need to be reflected in respective life cycle assessments, information for consumers and public procurement;

    24. Considers that, in order to accelerate the substitution of fossil-based feedstocks, the market demand and market uptake of sustainable bio-based products could be further incentivised in the EU; considers that bio-based feedstocks, such as sustainably sourced biomass, recycled waste and CO2 captured from biogenic sources, could be used as alternative feedstocks for the manufacturing of various products, contributing to the EU’s emissions reduction, resource efficiency and strategic autonomy; in this context, recalls the commitment in the EU’s Competitiveness Compass to develop policies to reward early movers; considers that coherent and adequate sustainability criteria should be ensured for biomass;

    25. Underlines the importance of upholding the EU’s high standards of food and consumer safety and the potential of biotechnology applications when assessing biotechnology applications in food and feed to protect consumer health, assess impact on circularity and sustainability, and to consider social, ethical, economic, environmental and cultural aspects of food innovation; calls on the Commission to identify smooth routes to market for safe applications of biotechnology in food products, while reiterating that such biotechnology applications need to be properly examined, prior to any future authorisation and subsequent placing on the EU market, including gathering toxicological information and clinical and pre-clinical studies where relevant, and ensuring traceability;

    26. Underlines that biosecurity risks, including bioethical considerations, must be addressed in conjunction with biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation, ensuring responsible access to and use of synthetic biology tools, genetic editing technologies and biological materials; calls for the establishment of an EU biosecurity registry for synthetic DNA, benchtop synthesis equipment and genetic engineering tools, improving transparency and risk-assessment mechanisms, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, such as industry and civil society, and while ensuring sensitive data is adequately protected; stresses the importance of EU strategic autonomy in biotechnology supply chains, ensuring that critical biomanufacturing inputs and expertise remain within Europe; calls for stronger international cooperation on biosecurity standards, including mandatory international screening standards, ensuring that EU-based biotechnology and biomanufacturing companies benefit from global best practice while maintaining competitiveness;

    27. Urges the Commission to conduct a study on biological materials and to present an updated communication and an action plan on chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks, in particular regarding bioterrorism and bio-risks;

    Horizontal issues

    28. Underlines the importance for supply chain security of ensuring a sufficient, stable and competitive supply of feedstock, raw materials and essential components, such as sustainable biomass and enzymes for biotechnology and biomanufacturing companies; calls for potential risks, gaps and dependencies to be closely monitored while safeguarding company-sensitive data and the functioning of the internal market;

    29. Stresses the importance of developing EU raw material value chains and manufacturing, and enhancing self-sufficiency where possible, while also fostering strategic partnerships and cooperation with like-minded non-EU countries to secure resilient and diversified access to critical inputs of biotechnology and biomanufacturing industries in the EU;

    30. Stresses that, in an increasingly tense geopolitical context, biotechnology and biomanufacturing should be fully leveraged to strengthen the EU’s strategic autonomy, enhance food security and reduce dependence on non-EU countries; highlights the need to stimulate market demand and uptake of bio-based products to boost the growth, competitiveness and sustainability of the EU biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector;

    31. Notes that the scale-up and commercialisation of research results remains a major challenge in the EU, and stresses the need to improve knowledge and technology transfer between academia and industry to ensure that EU-funded biotechnology and biomanufacturing research leads to commercial applications and industrial deployment; highlights the importance of strengthening public-private collaboration and supporting universities and research institutions with high levels of technology transfer, spin-offs, and start-up creation, for example by applying the CERN model of building start-up studios within research institutions; calls for strategic investments in shared EU infrastructure – such as pilot facilities, biobanks or innovation accelerators – to support the scale-up of prototypes and the market uptake of innovative biotechnology and biomanufacturing solutions; underlines that innovation cannot solely take place for short-term economic benefit, and that biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation should be driven through a bottom-up approach under a standalone and long-term framework programme; calls on the Commission to facilitate the creation of world-leading research hubs for biotechnology and biomanufacturing to drive innovation and collaboration between academia, industry and venture capital; emphasises the need for robust physical testing facilities in the biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector to drive innovation and facilitate the production and market access for SMEs and start-ups;

    32. Stresses the need to ensure access to affordable energy for biotechnology and biomanufacturing operators, given the high energy intensity of large-scale biological production processes; underlines the importance of facilitating the authorisation and validation of large industrial plants, such as bioreactors, which are essential for scale-up but also face significant construction and operating risks; welcomes the latest revision of the Renewable Energy Directive[4] and its provisions to simplify permitting procedures, and calls on the Member States to swiftly implement relevant measures to support the deployment of biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure;

    33. Underlines the need for a skilled and diverse European workforce in the biotechnology and biomanufacturing sector and for the promotion of entrepreneurial skills, in close collaboration with industry and research institutions; calls for increased investment in biotechnology and biomanufacturing education and targeted professional training, including in but not limited to areas such as regulatory compliance, quality assurance and process engineering; supports the development of competence centres and public-private training initiatives across all Member States to enable upskilling, reskilling and lifelong learning to safeguard the attractiveness of the biotechnology and biomanufacturing industry; highlights the importance of adapting educational curricula to the evolving needs of the sector, and of promoting science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects, with a particular focus on attracting more girls and women into biotechnology and biomanufacturing careers; encourages more public awareness about career opportunities in the field to attract talent from non-EU countries and suggests exploring the potential for transatlantic cooperation; welcomes the recently launched Choose Europe for Science pilot scheme to attract top non-EU researchers, scientists and academics to Europe;

    34. Calls for the urgent completion of the capital markets union to attract institutional investors to the biotechnology and biomanufacturing industry, including venture capital, pension funds and private equity; underlines that the sector is characterised by high levels of risk and that reducing the cost of investment failure in the EU is necessary for attracting large-scale capital investment; calls for dedicated support to ensure that biotechnology and biomanufacturing SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups can access sufficient funding and compete globally; stresses that cross-border investment barriers must be reduced to facilitate investment in biotechnology and biomanufacturing scale-ups;

    35. Notes that public-private partnerships and mission-driven EU investment strategies, such as the Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking, are essential for de-risking biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation and for increasing the likelihood that IP and industrial capacity remain in Europe; urges EU investment instruments, such as the InvestEU programme, to be strengthened to support biotechnology and biomanufacturing projects considered as high-risk from an investment perspective; underlines that the sector is characterised by a high concentration of SMEs, which face disproportionate barriers in accessing capital despite being critical drivers of innovation; supports the exploration of a biotechnology Important Project of Common European Interest to facilitate industrial deployment and first-mover investments in bio-based chemicals, materials, and products and solutions;

    36. Notes that public awareness of biotechnology and biomanufactured products in the EU should be further strengthened to boost public acceptance; recommends engaging with citizens and civil society organisations to communicate the characteristics, benefits and implications of the growing presence of biotechnology-based products and services in the European market;

    Future-proof research and innovation

    37. Regrets that European private investment in research, development and innovation is lagging behind other major economies and that the scale-up and commercialisation of research results remain a major challenge in Europe; highlights the fact that European and national public systems for R & D funding remain complex and insufficiently coordinated, resulting in duplications and inefficiencies; calls for an EU-wide approach to coordinating public investment in R & D for biotechnology and biomanufacturing, with the dual objective of closing excellence and innovation gaps and accelerating commercialisation; underlines the importance of strengthening European collaboration, pooling knowledge and resources, and leveraging public funding with private investment; recalls the key role of framework programmes such as Horizon Europe in fostering scientific excellence, innovation and technical development and calls for targeted investment in strategic biotechnology and biomanufacturing subfields, such as industrial, environmental, marine, health and agri-food biotechnology;

    38. Reiterates the call to double the EU’s research budget and to reach the target of 3 % of EU gross domestic product being devoted to R & D by 2030;

    39. Notes the growing role of synthetic biology, bioinformatics, data and game-changing AI-driven biotechnology and biomanufacturing research; calls on the Commission to integrate biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation into the EU digital and AI strategies, ensuring interoperability between biotechnology and biomanufacturing data infrastructure and AI-driven discovery platforms; notes that AI capabilities are dependent on the efficient use of data; considers that the creation of industrial data spaces for biotechnology and biomanufacturing is important for efficient data sharing;

    40. Acknowledges that, while AI systems and quantum computing can significantly speed up research and lead to new innovations, enabling better computational designs of biological systems, they can also increase the risk of biological threats; underlines, therefore, the need to apply a risk-based approach to the use of AI in scientific research and manufacturing;

    41. Considers that the ethical use of AI, bioinformatics and synthetic biology is crucial for building trust and for society at large to benefit from these technologies; underlines the need to safeguard data privacy, data security, transparency and human oversight of the use of AI systems in the health biotechnology sector;

    42. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: In Dialogue with North Macedonia, Experts of the Human Rights Committee Commend Anti-Discrimination Measures, Raise Concerns about Reports of Excessive Use of Force by Border Officials and Attacks on Journalists

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Human Rights Committee today concluded its consideration of the fourth periodic report of North Macedonia on how it implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, with Committee Experts commending the State’s efforts to address discrimination, and raising issues concerning reports of border officials’ excessive use of force against asylum seekers and attacks on journalists.

    A Committee Expert acknowledged the positive efforts made by the State towards strengthening the rule of law and addressing discrimination, pursued in the context of North Macedonia’s candidacy for membership of the European Union.

    One Committee Expert cited reports of excessive use of force carried out by border officials against asylum seekers.  How did the State party ensure that such reports were investigated in a timely and effective manner?

    Another Committee Expert said there had been an increase in attacks on journalists in recent years; how was the State working to prevent such attacks?  What training was provided to public officials on the right to freedom of expression?

    Nikola Prokopenko, State Counsellor for Criminal Legislation at the Ministry of Justice of North Macedonia and head of the delegation, said North Macedonia had been committed to implementing the Committee’s recommendations, which had been integral to strategic priorities in reforming the legal system, strengthening the rule of law, and advancing democracy in alignment with European standards.

    On measures to prevent discrimination, the delegation said the State was harmonising the law on the prevention of discrimination with relevant European Union directives.  The national commission monitoring discrimination had been strengthened; it had helped to develop national policies on preventing discrimination and to raise civil servants’ awareness of the issue.

    There were internal mechanisms within the police service that investigated complaints of excessive use of force and torture by police officers, the delegation said.  When evidence was found, criminal proceedings were instituted against the accused officer, who was also sanctioned.  There had been no reports of excessive use of force against migrants and asylum seekers between 2022 and 2024.

    The delegation also said recent amendments to the Criminal Code allowed for the ex-officio prosecution of attacks on journalists.  The State had worked to raise the visibility of crimes against journalists and increase punishments for such crimes.  There were four crimes committed against journalists in 2024; all these cases had been prosecuted.

    In concluding remarks, Mr. Prokopenko expressed appreciation for the constructive dialogue, saying that the Committee’s recommendations would serve as valuable guidance for strengthening laws and policies. The State would leave the dialogue motivated to build a more just and equitable human rights-based society.

    Changrok Soh, Committee Chairperson, in concluding remarks, commended North Macedonia on its ratification of international treaties, legal norms on gender-based violence, and policies on gender equality.  However, he said concerns remained related to issues such as hate speech, prison conditions, and the limited protection framework for asylum seekers.  Mr. Soh closed by expressing sincere gratitude to all those who had contributed to the dialogue.

    The delegation of North Macedonia was made up of representatives of the Ministry for Inter-Community Relations; the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services; the Ministry of Social Policy, Demography and Youth; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Health; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade; the Ministry of Interior; the Ministry of Education and Science; and the Permanent Mission of North Macedonia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

    The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and forty-fourth session is being held from 23 June to 17 July 2025.  All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage.  Meeting summary releases can be found here.  The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.

    The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m., Tuesday 1 July to begin its consideration of the fourth periodic report of Latvia (CCPR/C/LVA/4).

    Report

    The Committee has before it the fourth periodic report of North Macedonia (CCPR/C/MKD/4).

    Presentation of the Report

    NIKOLA PROKOPENKO, State Counsellor for Criminal Legislation at the Ministry of Justice of North Macedonia and head of the delegation, said North Macedonia had been committed to implementing the Committee’s recommendations over the reporting period.  These recommendations had been integral to strategic priorities in reforming the legal system, strengthening the rule of law, and advancing democracy in alignment with European standards.

    In 2022, the State signed the Second Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime; in 2023, it ratified the European Convention on Human Rights; in November 2024, it ratified the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents; in December 2024, it ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products; and the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure was in its final parliamentary reading.  In October 2024, North Macedonia was elected a member of the Human Rights Council for the 2025-2027 term.

    During the reporting period, North Macedonia completed implementation of the justice sector reform strategy 2017–2022, which laid the foundation for a more transparent, efficient, and accountable justice system; and adopted a development strategy for the justice sector 2024–2028, aimed at further advancing the rule of law and access to justice.

    According to the strategy for Roma inclusion 2022–2030, dedicated funds had been allocated from the national budget to support the implementation of targeted projects in areas of employment, housing, social inclusion, healthcare, and persons lacking personal documentation.  In parallel, the implementation of the strategy for combatting human trafficking and illegal migration (2021–2025) was in the evaluation process.  The State was developing the national action plan for the rights of the child (2025–2029), and the strategy and national action plan for the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combatting Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (2026–2033).

    Over the past period, notable progress had been made in the legislative sphere, including through the harmonisation of the Criminal Code with the provisions of the Istanbul Convention; and the adoption of the law on audio and audiovisual media services, the new law on the media, and the law on the execution of sanctions, aimed at enhancing legal clarity and institutional effectiveness.  The State was also actively engaged in drafting amendments to the law on the Judicial Council, the law on the courts, the law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and the law on the Council of Public Prosecutors.  These reforms were an integral part of the development sectoral strategy for the judiciary, aiming to further strengthen judicial independence, transparency, and accountability.

    The Government had partnered with the United Nations Children’s Fund to identify the most vulnerable groups of children and conduct a comprehensive assessment of existing services and programmes aimed at addressing child poverty and social exclusion.  It had enacted the law on justice for children and adopted a declaration on the prevention of and fight against violent extremism, which was jointly signed by religious communities and civil society organizations in the country.

    The consistent and effective implementation of reforms in the field of education remained a national priority.  Several reform-oriented laws on education had been adopted, aimed at enhancing accessibility, inclusiveness, and quality of education across all levels.

    The State party was actively implementing the second national action plan to support the women, peace and security agenda.  It had also focused efforts on strengthening institutional capacities for support to and protection of victims of gender-based violence, while intensifying activities aimed at the prevention of discrimination and violence against women and domestic violence.

    North Macedonia remained fully committed to the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.  In December 2024, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a final resolution confirming the closure of two cases against the country, thus acknowledging its efforts in implementing the Court’s decisions.

    The fight against corruption and organised crime remained a high national priority.  The State was steadfastly implementing the national strategy for the prevention of corruption and conflict of interests, which set a comprehensive framework for transparency, accountability, and institutional integrity.  The Interdepartmental Body for Coordination of Anti-Corruption Activities played a vital role in fostering inter-institutional cooperation and ensuring the effective implementation of anti-corruption measures across all sectors. 

    The State party was currently drafting a new law on internal affairs, which introduced mandatory professional integrity checks for all personnel at the Ministry of the Interior.  In addition, it had adopted the plan for the prevention of corruption in the penitentiary system (2022–2026), as well as a sector-specific integrity policy.

    Towards the continuous development of staff in the penitentiary sector, the State had established a functional training and education centre, currently staffed with 31 certified trainers, which played a pivotal role in building institutional capacity, improving service delivery, and aligning penitentiary practices with European and international standards.

    In support of freedom of expression, the State had taken concrete steps to strengthen criminal law protection for journalists, thereby reinforcing a safe and enabling environment for independent journalism.

    The State party was prioritising both the enhancement of the legal framework and the strengthening of institutional capacities to prevent and protect against acts of torture and other forms of ill-treatment.  It had established the Commission for Monetary Compensation to Victims of Violent Crime, in accordance with the law on payment of monetary compensation to victims of violent crimes, which was adopted in 2022.  This mechanism envisaged a crucial form of redress and recognised the State’s responsibility to support victims on their path to recovery.

    In the period ahead, North Macedonia would intensify reform efforts and take more decisive, accelerated steps to ensure timely and effective implementation of the planned reform agenda.  Fully-fledged membership of the European Union would serve as a powerful catalyst for the effective realisation, advancement, and sustained protection of human rights in the country.  The State’s reform agenda for 2024 to 2027 promoted reforms that were integral to completing the European Union integration journey.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert said the dialogue was taking place in the context of North Macedonia’s candidacy for membership of the European Union and membership of the Human Rights Council.  The Committee acknowledged the positive efforts made by the State towards strengthening the rule of law and addressing discrimination.

    North Macedonia had not provided information on the application of the Covenant in its report.  Was the Covenant used by national courts?  How did the State party ensure dissemination of the Committee’s general comments?  During the COVID-19 pandemic, the State party had adopted measures that derogated from the Covenant without reporting them.  Why was this?  The Committee had registered less than five individual communications from North Macedonia. What was being done to ensure that individuals were aware of the Committee’s communications procedure?

    The national human rights institution had “B” status under the Paris Principles and lacked resources.  The role of the national human rights institution as the national preventive mechanism had not been formalised.  Would the State party adopt a law to ensure that the Ombudsperson had sufficient resources and independence, and that its reports were followed up on by the authorities?

    The reform of the Criminal Code in 2023 reportedly made it more difficult to prosecute cases of corruption.  What results had been obtained in prosecuting cases of corruption and money laundering?  Had proceedings involving the former Prime Minister concluded? What was the mandate of the State’s Anti-corruption Commission and how was it funded?

    Another Committee Expert said North Macedonia had made many attempts to address discrimination, including the 2020 law on the prevention of discrimination and the establishment of the Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination.  However, this Commission reportedly operated with only a fifth of the resources it needed.  What challenges did the State party face in ensuring the effective implementation of the legal framework on discrimination?  How effective were remedies available to victims of discrimination?  How was the State party addressing barriers that prevented the reporting of discrimination?

    The national action plan on the Roma for 2014 to 2022 reportedly had achieved limited progress, indicating structural issues. What measures were in place to combat de facto segregation of the Roma in housing and education?  How was the State party empowering Roma women?  What steps had been taken to facilitate access to birth registration for all Roma persons?

    One Committee Expert asked about the results of the strategy for equality and non-discrimination for 2022 to 2026.  The State party needed to recognise discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity as grounds for hate speech and hate crimes within the Criminal Code.  Would this be done?  Some 32 cases of hate crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex peoples had been brought to courts, but only two had reached convictions.  Was the State party considering measures to increase the conviction rate?

    Why did the State party impose long pre-trial detention periods of up to 180 days?  Would it revise its practices and ensure that pre-trial detention was used only as a last resort?  Could judicial sentences imposing pre-trial detention be appealed?  Did detained persons have access to a lawyer from the moment of their arrest, and did the State party implement alternatives to pre-trial detention?

    A Committee Expert said North Macedonia adopted a national gender equality strategy in 2017, but no progress had been made on the draft law on gender equality.  Why was this?  It was welcome that the State party had appointed its first woman President in 2024. North Macedonia had a comparatively high percentage of women members of parliament for the region, but had a low representation of ethnic minority women.  How was the State party addressing this?  Only three out of 18 ministers were women; only two out of 82 mayors were women; and women represented 36 per cent of managerial positions in the public sector.  What were the obstacles to improving women’s representation in decision-making?

    New gender-based violence and domestic violence legislation was commendable, but it did not recognise psychological violence and cyber violence.  Would the State party amend the Criminal Code to address these forms of violence? Violence against female journalists and human rights defenders had increased recently.  What measures had the State party taken to implement existing laws and protect these women from violence?  Women involved in court procedures related to gender-based violence were often unaware of their right to free legal aid.  Underaged mothers who were victims of violence were unable to access support shelters.  Cases of gender-based violence had increased in recent years, but there was a low number of criminal convictions of perpetrators.  How was the State party addressing these issues?  Had sufficient funds been allocated to implementing the national action plan on preventing gender-based violence, including to collect data on the issue?

    During the reporting period, North Macedonia had adopted a law permitting abortion from 12 to 17 weeks of pregnancy and regulations on abortion procedures.  However, abortion medications had not been registered and procedures were not available in rural areas.  Would the State party address these issues?

    A Committee Expert noted the establishment of accountability measures within the Ombudsperson’s Office to investigate complaints against police officers on acts of torture and ill-treatment.  Most investigations of complaints had not led to prosecutions; however, there were continued reports of police using violence to obtain forced confessions, and of excessive use of force carried out by border officials against asylum seekers.  How did the State party ensure that complaints of excessive use of force by the police were investigated in a timely and effective manner? 

    The Roma community reportedly continued to face violence and threats from police officers, and not enough was being done to investigate such cases in an impartial manner.  How would the State party ensure the effective investigation of such cases and the punishment of perpetrators?  How would the State party promote the effectiveness of investigative mechanisms, including the national preventive mechanism?

    There were reports of a lack of implementation of prison reform.  The prison system was reportedly severely overcrowded and understaffed.  Some prisons struggled to provide sufficient access to clean water and food, including for juvenile detainees.  What measures would the State party take to address prison overcrowding, provide adequate health and sanitation services in all prisons, and ensure that prison staff were trained on international standards on the treatment of prisoners?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said that according to the Constitution of North Macedonia, ratified international treaties were part of the domestic legal order.  The State party had undertaken activities to raise awareness of the Committee’s individual communications procedure, and would work to raise the awareness of members of the judiciary about the Committee’s jurisprudence.

    In 2016, the State party adopted legislative amendments to strengthen the Ombudsperson, and a committee was now developing further measures to expand its mandate to monitor the rights of persons with disabilities and trafficking in persons.  National authorities had implemented 74 per cent of the Ombudsperson’s recommendations.  The State was considering measures to strengthen the degree of implementation of the recommendations.

    The State had increased the budget of the National Commission against Corruption by 47 per cent in recent years, and had developed an electronic platform for reporting cases of money laundering and organised crime, which included indicators for monitoring the anti-corruption policy.  It was also drafting amendments to the law on the prevention of corruption and conflicts of interest, which would make sanctions for misdemeanours stricter.  A law on the protection of whistleblowers was adopted in 2022, which had led to three related cases being brought to the courts.  The National Commission against Corruption produced annual reports, proposing initiatives for holding officials responsible and for institutions to respond to cases of corruption.  In 2025, 65 corruption cases were opened, most relating to violations of the Electoral Code involving non-reporting of conflicts of interest by political candidates.

    The State party had incriminated psychological violence in article 144 of the Criminal Code, recognising such violence as an aggravating circumstance.

    The civil oversight mechanism for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment granted individuals the right to protection against ill-treatment.  Twenty-five complaints of ill-treatment by police were filed in 2024. There had been three complaints related to torture over the reporting period.  The Ombudsperson had established that there were no violations of rights in most of the cases.  Eight cases related to excessive use of force by the police were still under examination.

    Legal remedies were available to victims of discrimination, including civil lawsuits.  The State party sought to build the capacities of relevant entities within the judiciary to respond to cases of discrimination.  Discrimination was a subject in curricula at the judicial academy.

    North Macedonia had undertaken many activities to fight corruption within the prison system as part of the plan for the fight against corruption 2022-2025.  Amendments to the law on the execution of sanctions had been drafted, under which all prison staff would be obliged to make asset declarations.  In the second half of 2024, the State party increased the number of prison inspections.  Around 100 disciplinary actions had been imposed against prison staff in 2024, and proceedings had been initiated against two former prison wardens who were accused of abusing their authority.

    The State party had advanced the legislative framework to address prison overcrowding, while also developing prison infrastructure.  New laws concerning the Probation Service were being developed, which would increase the Service’s staff.  There had been more than 700 probation cases in 2024 and thus far had been more than 500 in 2025.  The State was promoting the use of probation instruments by the courts and had procured electronic bracelets for house arrests.  There were plans to increase funding for the reconstruction of the prison system.

    The Ombudsperson registered complaints of torture and violence in prisons, and there were plans to establish a registry of injuries among inmates.  The State party had increased the number of disciplinary proceedings against prison staff and had organised visits to prisons by non-governmental organizations. 

    In 2022, the State drafted the second cycle of the strategy for the Roma.  A coordinating unit for the strategy had been set up, and the budget for its implementation had been increased.  The strategy’s main focuses were healthcare, education, housing, employment and civil registration.  Most projects adopted under the former strategy had been completed.  The number of Roma who applied for social housing had increased, as had the number of Roma employees in the public administration. All Roma children born in the State had the right to birth registration, including children born to undocumented parents.

    The State party had developed measures to implement the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, including measures to prevent the segregation of Roma students in primary schools.  The State party had increased the number of Roma education mediators, who were working on keeping Roma individuals in the education system and preventing discrimination.  Some 97 per cent of Roma students now progressed from primary to secondary school.

    North Macedonia had appointed gynaecologists in the municipality with the largest number of Roma.  There were health care mediators who supported Roma persons’ access to health care procedures.  Ante- and neo-natal screenings for the Roma were funded by the State.  Door-to-door vaccination campaigns were conducted in Roma settlements.

    The State party had adopted clinical guidelines for medically induced abortions and procured medications for abortions, but these had yet to be approved for use.  The State had, in collaboration with a non-governmental organization, trained doctors in one hospital to perform the procedure.

    Analysis was being conducted on the level of harmonisation of the law on the prevention of discrimination with relevant European Union directives, with a view to revising this law. The national commission monitoring discrimination had been strengthened; it had helped to develop national policies on preventing discrimination and to raise civil servants’ awareness of the issue. A research centre for the design of gender responsive budgets and policies was being set up and a report on the implementation of the national strategy for gender equality was being prepared.  Shelters for victims of gender-based violence and domestic violence had been set up across the country.

    There were internal mechanisms within the police service that investigated complaints of excessive use of force and torture and ill-treatment by police officers.  When evidence was found, criminal proceedings were instituted against the accused officer, who was also sanctioned.  A specialised department of the Public Prosecutor was mandated to prosecute police officers who had used excessive force.  There had been no reports of excessive use of force against migrants and asylum seekers between 2022 and 2024.

    The Criminal Code included provisions on cyber bullying, stalking, abuse of personal data, and sexual harassment. The State party had adopted amendments to the Criminal Code that included journalists within the group of professions performing in the public interest and increased penalties for crimes against journalists.  Defamation was decriminalised in 2017 and changed to an administrative offence.

    Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts

    Committee Experts asked follow-up questions on the strategy to bring the Ombudsperson to “A” status under the Paris Principles; progress in investigations into corruption cases involving high-ranking officials; the results of measures implemented by the commission to combat corruption and the national strategy to combat corruption; whether the national strategy against gender-based violence included measures for the collection of data on domestic violence; measures to address the anti-gender movement in the State; the share of the Roma in the national population and in public bodies; and investigations into cases of ill-treatment against the Roma community.

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the State party was planning measures to strengthen the implementation of the Ombudsperson’s recommendations, including a deadline for reporting on implementation.  It would take into consideration the Ombudsperson’s financial independence and the status of its employees in upcoming legal reforms.

    From 2017 to 2024, 412 cases of corruption were opened, including 62 cases involving high-profile officials, including the former Prime Minister, and former mayors and prosecutors.  Some 110 indictments had been instituted related to abuse of official power, bribery and corruption.  Offenders had been sentenced to up to 15-year prison sentences, and assets had been confiscated, including more than 800,000 euros in one case.

    The State party had achieved great progress in prosecuting hate crimes.  The Criminal Code had been amended to expand the types of hate crimes and grounds for discrimination addressed, including discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.  Training had been provided for the judiciary on the amended legislation.

    Hate speech was currently defined in eight different criminal laws.  The State party was preparing a revision to its Criminal Code that would establish a stand-alone offence of hate speech.

    In 2025, one case of an attack against a woman human rights defender had been brought before the courts.  There were a few cases of such attacks brought before the courts each year in the past three years.

    Pre-trial detention could be renewed for longer periods depending on the severity of the crime.  For most crimes, it could be renewed up to 90 days, but it could be renewed for up to two years for crimes punishable with life imprisonment.

    The State party was working to harmonise all national laws with the law on the prevention of discrimination and to raise public awareness of discrimination.  The Commission for the Protection of Discrimination lacked human resources, but had achieved great results, organising public awareness campaigns on international instruments related to discrimination.  Many citizens filed complaints with the Commission.  The draft law on gender equality was being analysed in cooperation with non-governmental organizations.

    The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy collected data from social work centres on domestic violence.  There had been 319 newly registered victims of domestic violence in the first quarter of 2025.  In 2024, there was a 14 per cent increase in reported cases of domestic violence. Awareness raising campaigns on the prevention of domestic violence had been carried out, which included information on the mechanism for reporting such violence.

    Gender-based attacks against women were widespread. Policies in North Macedonia were implemented with an obligatory gender analysis.  The State party was championing institutional support for women and their promotion to management positions.  Anti-gender equality movements had appeared in North Macedonia in 2023.  The State party had raised public awareness about gender equality in response.  Some 39 per cent of members of Parliament were women.  Under the new strategy for the prevention of gender-based violence and domestic violence, there were provisions on countering digital violence.

    The police did not keep data on the ethnic affiliations of persons filing reports on excessive use of force by law enforcement. Laws were equally applied when processing all reports.

    Refugees and asylum seekers were housed in open accommodation centres, but were free to leave those centres.  Refugees often transited through the country.  No asylum seekers’ applications had been rejected without reasonable grounds.  The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees controlled the process of assessing asylum applications.  Asylum seekers who wished to report excessive use of force by the police or challenge decisions on asylum could lodge complaints with the appeals court or the European Court of Human Rights.

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, presidential decrees were issued to enforce a state of emergency.  These decrees did not suspend constitutional rights, beyond enforcing a strict regime regarding movement.  A Constitutional Court ruling that invoked the Covenant had reversed a decision, which had banned certain persons’ from exiting the country.

    Alternative measures to detention, such as house arrest and bail, were applied by the State, and judges were provided with training on these measures.  Remand imprisonment was often stopped on appeal; in 2023, 3.6 per cent of cases were ceased after a court appeal.

    The State party was working to improve legal provisions governing excessive use of force, torture and abuse of office.  New amendments removed the statute of limitations on cases of torture and excessive use of force by the police.  The public prosecutor’s office had investigated 424 cases of excessive use of force by law enforcement officers.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    A Committee Expert said North Macedonia had made huge efforts in combatting trafficking in persons, with a national action plan for 2021 to 2025 and a specific plan addressing child trafficking. Severe penalties had been introduced for the exploitation of children, and measures ensuring the non-punishment of victims and the provision of compensation and shelter had been introduced. There was a rise in the number of victims of trafficking identified in 2021 and reports of ongoing complicity by the police regarding trafficking.  How was this complicity being addressed?  How did the State party ensure victims had access to support and compensation in line with international standards?  How was it addressing the root causes of trafficking, including poverty, lack of education and social marginalisation?  How would the State party enhance identification of adult victims of trafficking?

    The legal framework on political representation had been updated, which had led to increased representation of minority groups in Parliament.  However, there were no representatives of the Roma community.  The Ombudsperson had also reported an increased representation of minorities in the public sector from 2007 to 2020.  There was a lack of funds and staff for the agencies working for the rights of minorities.  How would this be addressed?  How was the State party collecting data on the needs of minorities, and promoting their cultural identities and participation in cultural life?  What measures were in place to promote the Macedonian cultural identity?

    One Committee Expert welcomed that the Constitutional Court passed a decision in 2012 repealing articles of the law on travel documents, granting every citizen the right to freedom of movement. However, several complaints had been filed at the European Court of Human Rights regarding legal limitations on the rights of freedom of movement of the Roma.  In 2023, the Court found that Romani citizens’ freedom of movement had been violated, ordering the State to provide remedies.  What measures were in place to ensure that the right of freedom of movement of the Roma was protected, and that all persons who restricted that right in border areas were held to account?  How had the decision of the European Court of Human Rights been implemented?

    Asylum seekers faced prolonged waits for biometric identification, which restricted their access to basic services.  Reports of detention of asylum seekers were also concerning.  Two temporary transit centres in North Macedonia reportedly operated without State regulation.  How would the State party expedite the issuance of biometric identification to asylum seekers and refugees to facilitate their freedom of movement and access to services?  How would it ensure that detention of asylum seekers was implemented only as a last resort and prevent the detention of women and children asylum seekers?  There were reports of pushbacks of asylum seekers, in violation of the principle of non-refoulement.  Had these incidents been investigated?

    The Committee welcomed several positive measures by the State party to address statelessness, including ratification of the 1963 Statelessness Convention and efforts to provide stateless persons with documentation.  However, there was no official statelessness determination procedure, and some regions had insufficient birth registration systems.  How would the State party strengthen measures to register undocumented persons and ensure that all Roma persons were registered?  Would it establish an effective and fair statelessness determination procedure?

    One Committee Expert asked about the status of the bill amending witness protection measures.  There were significant delays in court cases on corruption and allegations of a lack of transparency in the appointment of judges on the Judicial Council. Could the delegation comment on these issues?  Had implementation of the strategy to strengthen the justice system improved access to justice for marginalised persons?  There was a significant backlog of administrative dispute cases; how was this being addressed?

    A bill on religious groups had been developed which sought to harmonise religious laws with provisions of the Criminal Code and punish antisemitism and the glorification of fascism.  What was the status of this bill?  Had measures been adopted to identify cases of hate speech against religious groups online and punish perpetrators?

    How many journalists had been punished under the law on slander?  There had been an increase in attacks on journalists in recent years; how was the State working to prevent such attacks?  What training was provided to public officials on the right to freedom of expression?  What activities were undertaken by the prosecutor’s office to monitor threats against journalists?

    A Committee Expert asked about legal guarantees offered to persons who were subject to illegal surveillance.  How did judges intervene in such cases?  Was there an exclusion regime in courts for evidence which had been obtained illegally?  What progress had been made in reforming police guidelines related to the collection and treatment of detainees’ data?  What measures were implemented through the State’s digital transformation strategy?

    Another Committee Expert said that in 2024, North Macedonia adopted a law on justice for children that incorporated the best interests of the child.  This was a positive step.  However, only 22 per cent of families with children in North Macedonia were receiving family cash benefits, and more than 7,000 children with disabilities did not receive disability benefits.  What plans were in place to improve social support for children with disabilities and their families?

    What measures were in place to abolish child and forced marriages?  Violence against children remained a problem in the State.  Almost three-quarters of all children were exposed to violent discipline at home, with higher rates for children with disabilities.  Roma children made up 75 per cent of children in correctional facilities, where they were subjected to solitary confinement. What could be done to protect all children in the country?

    It was welcome that measures were taken to improve the accessibility of the voting process for persons with disabilities. How did the State party support the candidacy of persons with disabilities in elections?  What had been done to support undocumented persons and detained persons to exercise their voting rights?  The Constitutional Court had struck down amendments to the electoral code in 2025.  How would the State party ensure that future legal amendments to electoral laws did not infringe on voting rights?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the national action plan on trafficking in persons included measures to increase the police’s capacity to address trafficking cases.  The State party applied the principle of non-refoulement for victims of trafficking; it did not forcibly return them to their places of origin.  It was setting up a working group to develop the next iteration of the national action plan on trafficking for 2026 to 2030.  A law on compensation for victims of trafficking was adopted in 2022.  North Macedonia was part of a working group on combatting trafficking in the Western Balkans.  The State conducted awareness raising campaigns on identifying trafficking victims. A roadmap for treating victims of trafficking had also been developed, as had guidelines for their legal representation and reintegration.

    The national strategy on cohesion and multiculturalism included policies promoting culture, education and media representation.  The Ministry for Inter-Community Relations had allocated funds for marking national days for different communities’ celebrations.  The State provided funds to 33 non-governmental organizations to implement activities promoting multiculturalism, ethnic coexistence and minority languages.

    Instruction in primary schools was provided in Macedonian and communities’ local languages, including Albanian, Bosnian and Serbian.  Some 64,000 pupils received instruction in their mother tongues.  All students could learn the minority language of their community, which was taught as an optional subject.  Teaching programmes for Macedonian as a second language had been implemented. The State provided grants to primary and secondary schools to facilitate programmes promoting ethnic harmony. Criteria for developing textbooks written in minority languages had been lowered to facilitate their development.

    Amendments had been made to the Criminal Code to prevent impunity for trafficking crimes.  The criminal procedural law included provisions on the protection of witnesses, which applied to all vulnerable witnesses.  The State party was working to amend this law in line with relevant European Union directives.  The law on witness protection, which was adopted in 2005, was in line with international standards.

    The State party had implemented reforms to the law on surveillance of communications and had established the operative technical agency. These efforts aimed to ensure that regulation of surveillance was in line with international standards.  In 2023, five officers were charged for the destruction of surveillance equipment and were issued prison sentences.

    Amendments to the Criminal Code in 2022 had resulted in the statute of limitations expiring for certain cases related to organised crime and corruption, leading to reduced sentences.  The State party was working to address this shortcoming in its ongoing revision of the Criminal Code.  The average time for the conclusion of administrative cases was 188 days.

    North Macedonia had developed a law prohibiting antisemitism and the glorification of genocide and fascist crimes.  It had also amended the law on the Judicial Council that required the Council to provide explanations for the election of all judges; it would be adopted soon.  The law envisaged the inclusion of non-governmental organizations in the process of electing judges.

    As part of judicial reform efforts, the State had taken steps to address shortcomings in the judiciary that led to cases being passed back and forth between courts, and had set up an electronic case register.  It was also reforming its legal aid system and had provided increased training to legal aid practitioners.

    Recent amendments to the Criminal Code allowed for the ex-officio prosecution of attacks on journalists.  The State had worked to raise the visibility of crimes against journalists and increase punishments for such crimes.  There were four crimes committed against journalists in 2024; all these cases had been prosecuted.  In 2024, there were 15 lawsuits filed against journalists for defamation.  Measures had been implemented to reduce the amount of compensation ordered in these cases, and alternatives to compensation, such as public apologies, were promoted.

    The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy would soon adopt a national action plan on children’s rights, which would address issues such as child poverty and protection from violence.  There was also a strategy for deinstitutionalisation which ensured that no children were placed in institutions; more than 600 children had been placed in foster families.  The State sought to increase healthcare coverage for preschool children.  To combat poverty, the State provided guaranteed minimal child benefits and benefits for children with disabilities and the families that cared for such children.  Measures were in place to support access to the labour market for disadvantaged persons.  Inspections were carried out to identify cases of child abuse and neglect. Amendments to the law on the family were planned to prohibit child marriage.

    The State party was implementing measures to support the participation of persons with disabilities in elections.  North Macedonia had adopted a national strategy on the rights of persons with disabilities and a related action plan. Some 75 experts had been trained to recognise difficulties in child development.  The State party was expanding the network of social protection services for persons with disabilities, including family-based care services.

    In 2018, the State incriminated violence against children, including cyberviolence, which was punished with up to three years imprisonment.  Trafficking of children was considered an aggravating circumstance.  The State party would work to raise public awareness to prevent child marriages.

    Under the national strategy on the Roma, data was collected on areas such as housing and employment.  Around 1.9 per cent of the Roma community was part of the public administration.  All births could be registered, regardless of whether the parents were documented or not. North Macedonia sought to eradicate statelessness.  There were 100 unresolved cases of unregistered persons, but their cases would be resolved through the law on foreigners.  Asylum seekers waited only 15 days to receive identification documents; there were no cases of forced expulsion.  Amended regulations prescribed time limits for keeping biometric materials.

    Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts

    Committee Experts asked follow-up questions on how biometric data was stored by the police; measures to prevent non-refoulement and to investigate alleged cases of pushbacks, including those involving Greece; efforts to legally recognise religious groups that were not recognised in the Constitution; efforts to implement European Court of Human Rights decisions related to the freedom of movement of Roma individuals; statistics on compensation paid to victims of abuse by law enforcement officials; quotas for representation of women and minority ethnic groups in elections in North Macedonia in 2025 and 2026; the voter turnout rate for the most recent election and mechanisms promoting voter participation; whether the State party had any pending ratifications of international human rights treaties; and whether it investigated reports by non-governmental organizations of pushbacks at the border.

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said there were no recent reports of pushbacks of asylum seekers at the border.  Greek authorities reacted to problems at the border with Greece.  A period had been set for the storage of biometric materials and guidelines had been developed on storage methods.

    The law on witness protection established a witness protection unit within the Ministry of Interior and the Council for Witness Protection.  Witness protection measures included identity changes, which were implemented in cooperation with other countries.

    The judgement of the European Court of Human Rights related to the freedom of movement of Roma persons had been executed. No legislative amendments had been adopted, as legislation allowed for freedom of movement of the Roma.  A law on prevention from discrimination had been adopted, which placed the burden of proof on the alleged perpetrator.  Around 113 civil lawsuits had been filed against the Ministry of Interior related to the freedom of movement; assessment of those cases had been completed.

    The State party had not registered cases of discrimination of the Roma at border crossings.  Persons with expired or damaged travel documents were not allowed to exit the country; this measure applied to all citizens.  Parents were not allowed to take children out of the country if they did not have the permission of the other parent.  Police officers who violated the rights of citizens were prosecuted.  The State party investigated every report of pushbacks that it received, including reports from non-governmental organizations.

    Asylum reception centres accommodated asylum seekers whose applications were being considered and unaccompanied minors, who were provided with special care and immediately appointed social workers as ex-officio guardians.  The State worked to shorten the period of accommodation in such centres.  Asylum seekers’ rights were ensured by the State. They were provided with food, healthcare, sanitation facilities, interpretation services, and free legal aid.

    State law guaranteed religious freedom for all religious groups.  The law envisaged civil oversight of the registration of religious groups. Reasons for not granting registration needed to be provided.  The State party had mechanisms for processing hate speech against religious communities.

    The State party was in the process of ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure.  It had harmonised legislation with international standards in 2019 to prohibit solitary confinement of children.

    There had been no explicit application of the Covenant or the Committee’s jurisprudence over the reporting period. The State party would work to strengthen the capacity of the judiciary in this regard.  The Constitutional Court regularly applied the European Convention on Human Rights.

    Closing Statements

    NIKOLA PROKOPENKO, State Counsellor for Criminal Legislation at the Ministry of Justice and head of the delegation, expressed appreciation for the constructive dialogue.  The State party valued the Committee’s efforts in reviewing the application of the Covenant in North Macedonia.  The State faced challenges related to corruption, independence of the judiciary and the protection of marginalised groups.  These challenges tested the State party’s resolve to uphold the human rights of all.  The Committee’s recommendations would be given due consideration and would serve as valuable guidance for strengthening laws and policies.  The review was a step in the State’s ongoing journey toward strengthening human rights protections.  North Macedonia was dedicated to cooperating with the human rights treaty bodies and to promoting justice and rights globally.  The State would leave the dialogue motivated and encouraged to build a more just and equitable human rights-based society.

    CHANGROK SOH, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for its thoughtful and thorough responses to the Committee’s questions.  The dialogue addressed key aspects of implementation of the Covenant. The Committee commended the State’s ratification of international treaties, legal norms on gender-based violence, and policies on gender equality, among other measures.  However, concerns remained related to issues such as hate speech, prison conditions, implementation gaps in protective legislation, and the limited protection framework for asylum seekers.  Mr. Soh closed by expressing sincere gratitude to all those who had contributed to the dialogue.

    __________

    Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media; 
    not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

    __________

     

    CCPR25.012E

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Different interpretations of state support rules impact 500 jobs – E-001676/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. In general, State aid should not encourage or facilitate the relocation of services or production from one Member State to another. EU State aid rules contain safeguards in this sense. The Hungarian aid to Apollo Tyres was granted in the context of state aid schemes approved by Commission decisions in cases SA.56926 and SA.57375[1]. The schemes were adopted to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and to partially compensate companies for losses suffered because of the lockdown measures introduced by the Hungarian Government, in line with the state aid rules applicable to this type of situations.

    2. Regarding the alleged closure and relocation of the Enschede factory, the Commission cannot interfere in specific company decisions regarding restructuring plans.

    3. The Commission decisions in cases SA.56926 and SA.57375 do not depart from the standard interpretation of the applicable state aid rules. Furthermore, the Commission does not have any indication that the Hungarian schemes at issue were not implemented in line with those decisions.

    • [1] Commission decision of 8 April 2020 in case SA.56926 (2020/N) — Hungary COVID-19: Aid measures for increasing competitiveness of undertakings in relation with the COVID-19 outbreak, OJ C 144 of 30.4.2020; Commission decision of 23 June 2020 in case SA.57375 (2020/N) — Hungary COVID-19: Compensation scheme related to the recovery of the Hungarian economy, OJ C 302 of 11.9.2020.
    Last updated: 1 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Virginia Man Sentenced to Federal Prison for COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Insurance Benefits Scheme

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Greenbelt, Maryland – Today, U.S. District Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby sentenced Alonzo Brown, 27, of Richmond, Virginia, to 45 months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, in connection with a conspiracy and scheme to defraud the Maryland Department of Labor (MD-DOL) and California Employment Development Department (CA-EDD).  Judge Griggsby also ordered Brown to pay $310,428.08 of restitution to the victims and forfeit all money, property, and/or assets derived from the scheme, including a money judgment of $310,428.08.

    Kelly O. Hayes, U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland, announced the guilty plea with Special Agent in Charge Troy W. Springer, National Capital Region, U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General (DOL-OIG), and Special Agent in Charge Kareem A. Carter, Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) – Washington Field Office.

    According to the guilty plea, from at least June 2020 through March 2021, Brown conspired with Michael Cooley, 26, of Prince George’s County, Maryland, and Isiah Lewis, 35, of Prince George’s County, to devise and execute a scheme to defraud individuals and multiple state workforce agencies, including in Maryland and California, of more than $800,000 in unemployment insurance (UI) benefits, successfully obtaining more than $300,000.  The scheme was sophisticated and used personal identifiable information — such as name, date of birth, and social security number — from more than 60 individuals to file online UI applications in Maryland and California, using anonymous email addresses to obscure their identities and avoid detection.

    Griggsby sentenced Cooley to 87 months in federal prison for his role in the scheme back in April.

    This case is part of the District of Maryland COVID-19 Strike Force, a Strike Force that is one of five strike forces established throughout the United States by the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute COVID-19 fraud, including fraud relating to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.  The CARES Act was designed to provide emergency financial assistance to Americans suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.  The strike forces focus on large-scale, multi-state pandemic relief fraud perpetrated by criminal organizations and transnational actors.  The strike forces are interagency law enforcement efforts, using prosecutor-led and data analyst-driven teams designed to identify and bring to justice those who stole pandemic relief funds.

    For more information about the Department’s response to the pandemic, please visit justice.gov/coronavirus.  Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.

    U.S. Attorney Hayes commended the DOL-OIG and IRS-CI for their work in the investigation.  Ms. Hayes also thanked Assistant U.S. Attorneys Bijon A. Mostoufi and Jared M. Beim, who are prosecuting this federal case, and Joanna B.N. Huber, who is supporting the case.

    For more information about the Maryland U.S. Attorney’s Office, its priorities, and resources available to report fraud, please visit justice.gov/usao-md and justice.gov/usao-md/report-fraud.

    # # #

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Issues Revisited: Titles, Amendments to Rule 15c2-12 Undertakings and Voluntary Disclosure

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    Good afternoon. Thank you to the Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA”) for inviting me to speak with you today. In my role as the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“Commission” or “SEC”) Director of the Office of Municipal Securities (“Office of Municipal Securities” or “OMS”), I get a front row seat to see how government finance professionals strive to advance the continued integrity of the municipal securities market. However, I also get a front row seat to some concerning behaviors that may impact the investor confidence and transparency of the municipal securities market. 

    As is customary, I must remind you that this speech is provided in my official capacity as the Commission’s Director of the Office of Municipal Securities but does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other members of the staff.

    I. What’s in a Title?

    Before I delve into disclosure practices, I would like to start by offering my views on another area of concern to which OMS is paying careful attention. It’s been fifteen years since Congress created a new class of regulated person required to register with the Commission: municipal advisors.[1] But when I speak with market participants or pick up an official statement or visit an issuer’s website, I am regularly confronted with a title that imprecisely[2] reflects the nature of the relationship between municipal entities and/or obligated persons and their advisors: financial advisor.[3]

    While some of you may view using the terms “financial advisor” and “municipal advisor” to be interchangeable when discussing hiring a professional to negotiate terms of a transaction or verify pricing as just a matter of a title, Congress expressly defined those persons who engage in municipal advisory activities[4] as “municipal advisors”.[5]

    I’m going to start with why I think it’s helpful to use regulatory terms. Although not required, using regulatory terms such as “municipal advisor” in solicitations and offering documents is helpful because it clearly indicates to investors that those professionals are subject to the rules and regulations designed to protect investors and municipal entities[6] and obligated persons.[7] Additionally, using defined regulatory terms in these documents may be helpful to municipal entities and obligated persons in avoiding including confusing or ambiguous statements in disclosures to investors.

    Now, for the what. Let’s start with hiring professionals. Municipal entities and obligated persons often retain various professionals through a competitive request for proposal/qualification (“RFP/Q”) process. Before anyone objects, you’re correct: responses to RFP/Qs do not on their own constitute municipal advisory activity.[8] I have, however, observed instances (most notably in public-private partnerships[9] and charter schools[10]) where the work or services requested in the RFP/Qs would require the selected professional to be registered as a municipal advisor because they would be providing advice with respect to the issuance of municipal securities or the use of municipal financial products. In our review of these RFP/Qs, we have either seen municipal entities be silent on requiring that respondents to an RFP/Q be registered as a municipal advisor with the Commission and Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”) or, worse, affirmatively say that registration as a municipal advisor is not a requirement.[11]

    Given that unregistered entities may be engaging in what appears to be municipal advisory activity, you may want to confirm not only that any professional providing municipal advisory services to you is properly registered[12] but also that you have in your RFP/Qs for services or work constituting municipal advisory activity a requirement that respondents be registered with the Commission and the MSRB as municipal advisors in order to submit a response. At a minimum, I do not believe these RFP/Qs should be soliciting the services of a “financial advisor” or “consultant” which may create the impression that they do not need to be registered with the Commission or the MSRB. If you are seeking the services of a municipal advisor, it would be helpful to use the term municipal advisor in your RFP/Qs.

    Another area where I see a concerning use of “financial advisor,” where “municipal advisor” should be used, is in your offering documents. As previously mentioned, municipal advisor is more than just a title: it is a regulatory term. Using “municipal advisor” tells investors that the firm, its associated persons, and its activities are subject to rules and regulations; that the Commission monitors municipal advisors for compliance; and takes necessary action to enforce Congress’s mandate. If you use municipal advisors in your transactions, I think it would be beneficial to use the defined term “municipal advisor” in your offering documents to accurately describe the professionals fulfilling that role. Using a term that is explicitly defined by law may also help avoid including confusing or ambiguous statements in disclosures to investors.

    There are also strong benefits to being involved with or retaining persons or firms registered and regulated as municipal advisers, as it demonstrates that these persons or firms recognize that they are engaging in municipal advisory activity. Registering as a municipal advisor may also demonstrate that the advisor understands that it has certain legal obligations, including a requirement to register unless an exclusion or exemption applies. These obligations include, among other things, a requirement to disclose to clients any material conflicts of interest. If you remember nothing else from today, remember this: your municipal advisor is required to always act in your best interest.

    II. Observations on Amendments to Continuing Disclosure Undertakings

    Now turning to disclosure practices. When the Commission proposed amendments[13] to Rule 15c2-12 (“Rule 15c2-12” or “Rule”)[14] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) in 1994[15] prohibiting underwriters, subject to certain exemptions, from purchasing or selling municipal securities covered by the Rule in a primary offering, unless the underwriter had reasonably determined that the issuer (or obligated person) had undertaken in a written agreement or contract[16] (“continuing disclosure undertaking”) to provide specified annual information and event notices,[17] practitioners expressed concern[18] that the amendments were not sufficiently flexible to address changing conditions to financial and pertinent operating information. The Commission addressed practitioners’ concerns when it adopted the amendments.[19]

    a. NABL 1 Letter

    The Commission explained in the 1994 Amendments Adopting Release that Rule 15c2-12, as amended, requires that continuing disclosure undertakings specify only the general type of information to be provided[20] and that undertakings should be drafted with sufficient flexibility to accommodate for subsequent developments that may require adjustments in the financial information and operating data contractually agreed upon in the undertaking.[21] Shortly after adoption of the amendments, the National Association of Bond Lawyers (“NABL”) requested[22] staff guidance interpreting an issue that I see continues to be debated thirty-one years later: amending continuing disclosure undertakings.

    Let’s take a moment and revisit the statements made by staff on amending continuing disclosure undertakings in response to the NABL 1 Letter.[23] Staff first noted that in meeting the requirement that annual financial information be specified in reasonable detail, staff anticipated that continuing disclosure undertakings would set forth a general description of the type of financial information and operating data that would be provided. Staff further observed that these descriptions would not need to state more than a general category of financial information and operating data. Moreover, staff noted that where a continuing disclosure undertaking calls for information that no longer can be generated because the operations to which it related had been materially changed or discontinued, a statement to that effect would satisfy the continuing disclosure undertaking. In such instances, staff explained that it may be good practice to provide similar operating data with respect to any substitute or replacement operation. Further, staff noted that issuers and obligated persons may provide additional information that is not required by the terms of the undertaking. Accordingly, the staff did not anticipate that it often would be necessary to amend informational undertakings.

    In addition to providing guidance on the circumstances under which an undertaking could be amended, the staff also provided several examples[24] of annual financial information descriptions. For example, categories of operating data provided for a college or university facility bond offering might include, among others, information regarding attendance, applications, and tuition and room and board rates charged to students. In a water or sewer financing, categories of information provided might include, among others, customers, rates, use, capacity, and demand.

    b. Current State of Continuing Disclosure Undertakings

    Now I would like to take the opportunity to reflect on the current state of continuing disclosure undertakings. Since the 1994 amendments promoted flexibility in drafting continuing disclosure undertakings, staff has heard that practitioners have discovered ambiguities and inconsistencies in their continuing disclosure undertakings that have resulted in overlapping, inconsistent, and outdated information in required disclosures. Consequently, practitioners continue to struggle with questions about amending continuing disclosure undertakings and have asked the staff for guidance on this issue.

    To start, I want to remind practitioners that Rule 15c2-12, as amended, offers flexibility in the content and scope of disclosed financial information.[25] The Rule specifies only general types of information relating to the financial information and operating data to accommodate for any subsequent developments that would require adjustments to the data.[26] Further, adhering to your continuing disclosure undertakings does not preclude you from providing additional information, particularly where disclosure may be necessary to avoid liability under the antifraud provisions.[27]

    The staff recognizes that, despite the staff interpretive guidance in the NABL 1 Letter, which elaborated on statements in the 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, some obligated persons have continued to provide specific and relatively unflexible descriptions of annual financial information or operating data in the continuing disclosure undertakings by, for instance, pointing to specific tables of information in an official statement because they believe it makes it easier for issuers and dissemination agents to comply with the undertaking. Although Rule 15c2-12 does not prohibit such specificity or incorporation by reference,[28] I believe that where obligated persons choose to include references to specific tables or similar specificity, they might consider including language allowing for flexibility, such as describing tables “of the type” or tables “of the kind” provided in the official statement.

    The inclusion in continuing disclosure undertakings of clear descriptions of the disclosures to be made by municipal issuers and obligated persons promotes a more transparent and efficient market. However, drafters of continuing disclosure undertakings may want to be mindful when specifying the particular types of information that will be provided for many years into the future, as continuing disclosure undertakings are contractual obligations that cannot be amended based on a unilateral decision by an issuer or any other party. With very limited exceptions, issuers and obligated persons may not later decide unilaterally what types of information an investor would consider necessary or meaningful, especially where such information has previously been agreed upon.[29]

    Continuing disclosure undertakings would be meaningless if issuers and obligated persons could unilaterally determine that certain types of information were no longer necessary or meaningful to investors.[30] Despite previous requests from the market for guidance on amending continuing disclosure agreements, I remind you that those agreements are contracts governed by state law[31] from which the Commission does not have the authority to provide exemptions. Failure to comply with continuing disclosure undertakings would be breaches of contract enforceable by private parties.[32] This is why staff statements have focused on using language in continuing disclosure agreements that allow for changing conditions.

    III. The Importance of Voluntary Disclosure in the Municipal Securities Market

    Sound, timely, and accurate disclosures of the financial condition and operating status of issuers and obligated persons promotes the continued integrity of the municipal securities market.[33] As we all know, Rule 15c2-12 requires that continuing disclosure undertakings set forth certain enumerated requirements. Rule 15c2-12 does not generally impose an obligation to provide ongoing information beyond the contractual continuing disclosure obligations. I am of the view, however, that voluntary disclosures[34] — providing information beyond contractual continuing disclosure obligations — by issuers and obligated persons can provide market participants with updated financial and other disclosures regarding the effects of evolving economic conditions.[35]

    a. Improving Transparency and Market Efficiencies

    Issuer organizations and other market participants have noted that providing voluntary interim disclosure can serve the interests of municipal issuers and have developed voluntary disclosure best practices designed to improve the quality and quantity of voluntary disclosure in the secondary market.[36] GFOA issued a Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure in 2021.[37]

    I am of the view that if issuers and obligated persons provide voluntary disclosures of their financial condition and operating status on a more frequent basis, the additional information could potentially reduce information asymmetries and help investors and other market participants identify early warning signs of an issuer’s or obligated person’s deteriorating financial condition sooner (such as budget deficits and imbalances, high unfunded pensions liability, and decreases in property value), which could lead to increased market efficiencies.

    Some examples of helpful voluntary disclosures that municipal issuers and obligated persons could consider disseminating are[38]

    • More Timely Financial Information. Municipal issuers routinely prepare periodic reports containing financial information and/or operating data, such as investment positions, interim financial information, or capital improvement plans, for various non-disclosure purposes,[39] which are generally produced in accordance with governance documents, best practices, and generally accepted guidelines. Municipal issuers could consider submitting such reports via the repository designated by the Commission (currently the MSRB’s Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system) and/or through their own designated website.
    • Reports Prepared for Other Governmental Purposes. Municipal issuers and obligated persons may have prepared reports addressing relevant climate, cybersecurity, litigation, or other risks for other purposes.
    • Reports and Information Shared with Third Parties. Reports prepared to be shared with rating agencies, bank loan providers or other market participants may also include information material to investors.[40]
    • Information Regarding Availability of Federal, State and Local Aid. If it materially affects, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, your ability to repay debt service, you could make available a description of available aid that you have sought or are planning on seeking and any other material terms of the aid to investors.
    • Information Regarding Non-Routine Events that May Impact an Issuer’s Ability to Repay Securities. For instance, a large business relocating to your jurisdiction may have a positive impact, while a natural disaster may have a negative impact. Sharing information with the market on any non-routine events that may impact your ability to repay debt service could be helpful.

    In my view, making any voluntary disclosures available in the place or places where they regularly make information available to investors, such as on the EMMA system and/or on their own websites, would be helpful to both issuers and investors.

    b. Observations on Liability

    I sometimes hear from issuers that they would disclose more information to the market, but that their counsel advises them, as a matter of course, not to provide any information that is not required. I recognize that the issue of liability is often raised in connection with voluntary disclosures.

    I believe that accompanying voluntary disclosures that contain projections or forward-looking statements with meaningful cautionary language — including, for example, (1) a description of relevant facts or assumptions affecting the reasonableness of reliance on and the materiality of the information provided, (2) a description of how certain important information may be incomplete or unknown, and (3) the process or methodology (audited versus unaudited) used by the municipal issuer or obligated person to produce the information — could not only improve the quality of the disclosure but also help mitigate associated legal risks.

    As I observe the municipal securities market and consider appropriate paths to address behaviors that impact investor confidence and transparency, I believe that it would be beneficial for municipal issuers to disclose, to exercise reasonable care, and to follow best practices in the creation and release of any voluntary disclosure.

    It’s always a pleasure to speak with members of the GFOA. Thank you again for the invitation to discuss these important issues with you today.


    [1]           See Section 975(a)(1)(B) (15 U.S.C. 78o-4(a)(1)(B)) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act” or “Dodd-Frank”).

    [3]           While state statutes or other governing documents may reference the selection or designation of a “financial advisor” in connection with the issuance of bonds, I am of the view that the term “municipal advisor” should also be used in any RFP/Qs and offering documents issued in these jurisdictions when the requested service may include municipal advisory activity. In the event a state statute or other governing document references “financial advisor” or other term, it may be appropriate to use both terms with appropriate definitions and cross-references.  

    [4]           Pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 15Ba1-1(e) (15 CFR 240.15Ba1-1(e)), “municipal advisory activities” includes, but is not limited to, “[p]roviding advice to or on behalf of a municipal entity or obligated person with respect to municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities, including advice with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such financial products or issue.”

    [5]           See Exchange Act Section 15B(e)(4)(A) (15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(A)). The definition of municipal advisor includes financial advisors, guaranteed investment contract brokers, third-party marketers, placement agents, solicitors, finders, and swap advisors that provide municipal advisory services, unless they are statutorily excluded. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(B). The statutory definition of municipal advisor excludes a broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer serving as an underwriter (as defined in section 77b(a)(11) of this title), any investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 et seq.), or persons associated with such investment advisers who are providing investment advice, any commodity trading advisor registered under the Commodity Exchange Act or persons associated with a commodity trading advisor who are providing advice related to swaps, attorneys offering legal advice or providing services that are of a traditional legal nature, or engineers providing engineering advice. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(C). The Commission exempts the following persons from the definition of municipal advisor to the extent they are engaging in the specified activities: accountants; public officials and employees; banks; responses to requests for proposals or qualifications; swap dealers; participation by an independent registered municipal advisor; persons that provide advice on certain investment strategies; certain solicitations. See Exchange Act Rule 15Ba1-1(d)(3)(i) through (viii) (17 CFR 240.15Ba1-1(d)(3)(i) through (viii)).

    [6]           See Registration of Municipal Advisors, Exchange Act Release No. 70462 (Sept. 20, 2013), 78 FR 67468, 67509 (Nov. 12, 2013) (“Municipal Advisor Adopting Release”).

    [7]           The timeline for being required to register as a municipal advisor when advising clients about conduit financing or other financing options is dependent on certain facts and circumstances. See id. at 67485.

    [8]           Id. at 67475.

    [11]         While the Dodd-Frank Act is a federal law, the municipal advisor registration requirements apply to advice with respect to the issuance of municipal securities regardless of the proposed source of funds used to repay those securities, which may include local tax revenue, state or federal revenue or grants or funds paid by a private lessee or purchaser. The staff is aware of publicly available documents where a state or local government has stated that municipal advisor registration is only required for municipal securities being repaid with federal funds.

    [12]         See Speech, Responsibilities of Regulated Entities to Municipal Issuers, supra note 2.

    [13]         See Exchange Act Release No. 33742 (Mar. 9, 1994), 59 FR 12759 (Mar. 17, 1994) (“1994 Amendments Proposing Release”).

    [14]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12. The Commission adopted Rule 15c2-12 in 1989 to enhance disclosure in the   municipal securities market by codifying standards for underwriters to obtain, review, and disseminate disclosure documents. See Exchange Act Release No. 26100 (Sept. 22, 1988), 53 FR 37778 (“1988 Proposing Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 26985 (June 28, 1989), 54 FR 28799 (July 10, 1989) (“1989 Adopting Release”). Rule 15c2-12 requires an underwriter acting in primary offerings of municipal securities with an aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 or more to obtain and review an official statement “deemed final” by an issuer of the municipal securities, except for the omission of specified information, prior to making a bid, purchase, offer, or sale of municipal securities. See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(a) and (b)(1).

    [15]         The Commission has amended Rule 15c2-12 over the years to respond to evolving market practices. See Exchange Act Release No. 34961 (Nov. 10, 1994), 59 FR 59590 (Nov. 17, 1994) (“1994 Amendments Adopting Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 59062 (Dec. 5, 2008), 73 FR 76104 (Dec. 15, 2008) (“2008 Amendments Adopting Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 62184A (May 27, 2010), 75 FR 33100 (June 10, 2010) (“2010 Amendments Adopting Release”); and Exchange Act Release No. 83885 (Aug. 20, 2018), 83 FR 44700 (Aug. 31, 2018) (“2018 Amendments Adopting Release”).

    [16]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(b)(5).

    [17]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(b)(5)(C).

    [18]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599.

    [19]         Id.

    [20]         Id.

    [21]         Id.

    [22]         NABL raised several questions in its letters. See Letter from Robert L.D. Colby, Deputy Director, Division of Market Regulation, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, to John S. Overdorff, Chair, and Gerald J. Laporte, Vice-Chair, Securities Law and Disclosure Committee, National Association of Bond Lawyers, dated June 23, 1995 (‘‘NABL 1 Letter”), available at https://www.sec.gov/info/municipal/nabl-1-interpretive-letter-1995-06-23.pdf; and Letter from Catherine McGuire, Chief Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, to John S. Overdorff, Chair, Securities Law and Disclosure Committee, National Association of Bond Lawyers, dated Sept. 19, 1995 (“NABL 2 Letter”), available at https://www.sec.gov/info/municipal/nabl-2-interpretive-letter-1995-09-19.pdf. See also Letter from Michael Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, Bond Dealers of America, Emily Swenson Brock, Director, Federal Liaison Center, Government Finance Officers Association, Kenneth R. Artin, President, National Association of Bond Lawyers, Cornelia Chebinou, Washington Director, National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasures, Michael Decker, Managing Director, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, to Jessica Kane, Director, Office of Municipal Securities, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated Aug. 9, 2016 available at https://www.nabl.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/20160809-Joint-Letter-on-Amending-CDAs.pdf.

    [23]         See NABL 1 Letter, Question 2, supra note 22.  

    [24]         Id.

    [25]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599; Securities and Exchange Commission, Report on the Municipal Securities Market (July 31, 2012) (“Report on the Municipal Securities Market”), at 70, available at https://www.sec.gov/news/studies/2012/munireport073112.pdf.

    [26]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599 (Commission noting that “the amendments require that the undertaking specify only the general type of information to be supplied . . .”).

    [27]         Id.

    [28]         Id.

    [29]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599. But see NABL 1 Letter, Question 2, supra note 22, outlining scenarios where an undertaking that includes an amendment provisions nevertheless may satisfy the requirements of Rule 15c2-12.

    [30]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599.

    [31]         Id. at 59601.

    [32]         Id. (“remedies for breach of any undertaking under applicable state law are a subject for negotiation between the parties to the Offering.”).

    [33]         See Exchange Act Release No. 33741 (Mar. 9, 1994), 59 FR 12748, 12752-754 (Mar. 17, 1994) (“1994 Interpretive Release”).

    [34]         As seen during the Covid-19 Pandemic, variations in voluntary disclosures persisted and the differing approaches to disclosure served as a reminder that required disclosures are not confined to enumerated events. For instance, some issuers included tailored, stand-alone COVID-19-risk sections in their disclosures or uploaded financial informational statements to EMMA identifying impacts on economies and revenues, and expectations regarding associated risk mitigation. See, e.g., MSRB, Municipal Securities Market COVID-19-Related Disclosure Summary (updated Mar. 28, 2021), available at https://www.msrb.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/Municipal-Securities-Market-COVID-19-Related-Disclosure-Summary.pdf; DPC Data COVID Disclosure Trends Charted in New Infographic, A Year of COVID-Tagged Disclosures, Mar. 2020 to Mar. 2021, available at https://www.dpcdata.com/resources/year-covid-tagged-disclosures/. 

    [35]         See, e.g., Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at III.A.1 and III.B (summarizing market participant and investor interest in voluntary disclosure guidelines and best practices to improve the level and quality of disclosure in the primary and secondary markets); Chairman Jay Clayton and Rebecca Olsen, Director, Office of Municipal Securities, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, The Importance of Disclosure for our Municipal Markets (May 4, 2020) (the “Municipal Market COVID-19 Statement”), available at https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-olsen-2020-05-04.

    [36]         See, e.g., Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA”) Best Practices Voluntary Disclosure (Oct. 1, 2021) (“Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure”), available at https://www.gfoa.org/materials/voluntary-disclosure (“Enhanced market communication achieved through voluntary disclosure the issuer to improve its investor relations. This enhanced communication and improved relations with investors can become an important factor for access to the capital for markets….”); National Federation of Municipal Analysts (“NFMA”) Position Paper on Voluntary Interim Disclosures by State and Local Governments (Oct. 26, 2004) (“NFMA Voluntary Interim Disclosures Paper”), at 2-4, available at https://www.nfma.org/assets/documents/nfma_position_interim_disclosure.pdf (NFMA “strongly believe(s) that it is in the best interest of state and local government units and political instrumentalities thereof to provide investors on a voluntary basis with timely disclosure reports derived from information maintained in the normal course of operations” and that “[t]o the extent that governmental issuers have relevant financial information on hand, the benefits of providing voluntary interim disclosure vastly outweigh any administrative burden entailed in disseminating this information to the market.”)

    [37]         See Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure, supra note 36.

    [38]         See, e.g., id.; Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at 58 (noting that the “practices of market participants in voluntarily providing [large amounts of information about issuers of municipal securities] to investors are not, however, consistent,” further explaining that “[l]arge repeat issuers generally have more comprehensive disclosure than small, infrequent or conduit issuers, who may voluntarily provide little ongoing information to investors.”).

    [39]         In many cases, municipal issuers already prepare and disseminate reports or other documents containing financial information and/or operating data to various governmental or institutional bodies, or to the public. See, e.g., Application of Antifraud Provisions to Public Statements of Issuers and Obligated Persons of Municipal Securities in the Secondary Market: Staff Legal Bulletin No. 21 (OMS) (Feb. 7, 2020) (“Staff Legal Bulletin No. 21”), available at https://www.sec.gov/municipal/application-antifraud-provisions-staff-legal-bulletin-21; Report of Investigation in the Matter of the City of Harrisburg, Pa. Concerning the Potential Liability of Public Officials with Regard to Disclosure Obligations in the Secondary Market, Exchange Act Release No. 69516 (May 6, 2013), (“Harrisburg Report”), available at https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-69516.htm.

    [40]         See Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at 106 n.640.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum – A10-0125/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum

    (2025/2014(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 13 and 208(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

     having regard to Decision (EU) 2022/591 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 April 2022 on a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2030[1],

     having regard to the joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission of 30 June 2017 on the New European Consensus on Development – ‘Our world, our dignity, our future’[2],

     having regard to its resolution of 8 September 2015 on the follow-up to the European Citizens’ Initiative Right2Water[3] and its resolution of 5 October 2022 on access to water as a human right – the external dimension[4],

     having regard to its resolution of 28 November 2019 on the climate and environment emergency,[5]

     having regard to its resolution of 9 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives[6],

     having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2022 on the EU action plan for the social economy[7],

     having regard to the UN General Assembly resolution of 27 March 2023 entitled ‘Promoting the Social and Solidarity Economy for Sustainable Development’,

     having regard to the resolution of the International Labour Organization concerning decent work and the care economy, adopted at the 112th International Labour Conference on 14 June 2024,

     having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2022 on addressing food security in developing countries[8],

     having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2022 on the future European Financial Architecture for Development[9],

     having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2023 on Policy Coherence for Development[10],

     having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2023 on the implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)[11],

     having regard to its recommendation of 19 December 2024 to the Council concerning the EU priorities for the 69th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women[12],

     having regard to its resolution of 11 April 2024 on including the right to abortion in the EU Fundamental Rights Charter[13],

     having regard to its resolution of 24 June 2021 on the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health[14],

     having regard to the Commission staff working document of 18 November 2020 entitled ‘Delivering on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals – A comprehensive approach’ (SWD(2020)0400),

     having regard to the Commission staff working document of 3 November 2021 entitled ‘Better Regulation Guidelines’ (SWD(2021)0305) and to the Better Regulation Toolbox of July 2023,

     having regard to the integration of the SDGs into the better regulation framework, including the Commission communication of 29 April 2021 entitled ‘Better regulation: Joining forces to make better laws’ (COM(2021)0219),

     having regard to the Council conclusions of 26 May 2015 on poverty eradication and sustainable development after 2015,

     having regard to the Council conclusions of 24 October 2019 on the Economy of Wellbeing[15] and the Council conclusions of 24 June 2024 on EU priorities at the United Nations during the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, September 2024 – September 2025,

     having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 June 2021 entitled ‘A comprehensive approach to accelerate the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for sustainable development – Building back better from the COVID-19 crisis’,

     having regard to the Council recommendation of 16 June 2022 on Learning for the Green transition and sustainable development,

     having regard to the Council conclusions of 21 June 2022 entitled ‘The transformative role of education for sustainable development and global citizenship as an instrumental tool for the achievement of the sustainable development goals (SDGs)’,

     having regard to the Council conclusion of 24 June 2024 on EU development aid targets,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 11 March 2020 entitled ‘A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive Europe’ (COM(2020)0098),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 12 May 2021 entitled ‘Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All – EU Action Plan: Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil’ (COM(2021)0400) and its annexes,

     having regard to the report of the European Environment Agency and the Commission’s Joint Research Centre of 3 March 2025 entitled ‘Zero pollution monitoring and outlook 2025’,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 23 February 2022 on decent work worldwide for a global just transition and sustainable recovery (COM(2022)0066),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 12 March 2024 entitled ‘Managing climate risks – protecting people and prosperity’ (COM(2024)0091),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 7 March 2025 entitled ‘A Roadmap for Women’s Rights’ (COM(2025)0097),

     having regard to the mission letters from Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to the 26 European Commissioners,

     having regard to the European Environment Agency report of 4 December 2019 entitled ‘The European environment – state and outlook 2020: Knowledge for transition to a sustainable Europe’,

     having regard to the EU Global Health Strategy,

     having regard to the EU Gender Action Plan III (GAP III),

     having regard to the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030,

     having regard to the European care strategy,

     having regard to the EU’s first voluntary review of SDG implementation, presented to the United Nations on 19 July 2023,

     having regard to Eurostat’s 2024 monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context, published on 18 June 2024,

     having regard to the opinions of the European Economic and Social Committee of 19 September 2018 entitled ‘Indicators better suited to evaluate the SDGs – the civil society contribution’, of 30 October 2019 entitled ‘Leaving no one behind when implementing the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda’, and of 8 December 2021 entitled ‘Renewed sustainable finance strategy’,

     having regard to UN Resolution 70/1 entitled ‘Transforming our World – the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ (2030 Agenda), adopted at the UN Sustainable Development Summit on 25 September 2015 in New York and establishing the SDGs,

     having regard to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) for Youth,

     having regard to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreed at the 15th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UNCBD,

     having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the EU Strategy on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030,

     having regard to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, adopted by UN member states at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction on 18 March 2015,

     having regard to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21) in Paris on 12 December 2015,

     having regard to the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030),

     having regard to the Buenos Aires Commitment, which charts a path forward on a care society, adopted at the 15th Regional Conference on Women in Latin America and the Caribbean, which was organised by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, the Regional Office for the Americas and the Caribbean of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women) and the Government of Argentina and held in Buenos Aires from 7 to 11 November 2022,

     having regard to the 2024 joint report entitled ‘Are we getting there? A synthesis of the UN system evaluations of SDG 5’, published by UN Women, the UN Development Programme, the UN Population Fund, the UN Children’s Fund and the World Food Programme,

     having regard to the agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) of 4 March 2023 (UN High Seas Treaty),

     having regard to the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women,

     having regard to the Gender Equality Index 2024 of the European Institute for Gender Equality,

     having regard to the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcomes of its review conferences,

     having regard to UN Human Rights Council resolution 48/13, adopted on 8 October 2021, and UN General Assembly resolution 76/300, adopted on 28 July 2022, on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and to Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution 2545 (2024), adopted on 18 April 2024, on mainstreaming the human right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment with the Reykjavik process,

     having regard to the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolution ‘5/10. The environmental dimension of a sustainable, resilient and inclusive post-COVID-19 recovery’, adopted on 2 March 2022,

     having regard to the UN Global Sustainable Development Report 2019, entitled ‘The Future is Now: Science for Achieving Sustainable Development’,

     having regard to the UN Secretary-General’s report entitled ‘Our Common Agenda’, presented to the UN General Assembly, and to the mandate that UN General Assembly Resolution 76/6 of 15 November 2021 gave the UN Secretary-General to follow up on his report,

     having regard to the UN Sustainable Development Report 2021, entitled ‘The Decade of Action for the Sustainable Development Goals’, and the UN Sustainable Development Report 2022, entitled ‘From Crisis to Sustainable Development: the SDGs as Roadmap to 2030 and Beyond’,

     having regard to the UN Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024,

     having regard to the 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on global warming of 1.5 ºC, its special report on climate change and land, its special report on the ocean and cryosphere in a changing climate and its sixth assessment report (AR6),

     having regard to the global assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) of 25 November 2019 on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and its latest nexus and transformative change assessment reports,

     having regard to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report of 18 February 2021 entitled ‘Making Peace with Nature: a scientific blueprint to tackle the climate, biodiversity and pollution emergencies’,

     having regard to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ publication of January 2022 entitled ‘SDG Good Practices: A compilation of success stories and lessons learned in SDG implementation – Second Edition’,

     having regard to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report of 10 November 2022 entitled ‘Global Outlook on Financing for Sustainable Development 2023: No Sustainability Without Equity’,

     having regard to the Human Development Report 2023/24 entitled ‘Breaking the Gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world’,

     having regard to the report of the UN Inter-agency Task Force on Financing for Development of April 2024, entitled ‘Financing for Sustainable Development Report 2024: Financing for Development at a Crossroads’,

     having regard to the initiative by the UN Secretary-General ‘SDG Stimulus to Deliver Agenda 2030’ of February 2023,

     having regard to the Bridgetown Initiative launched on 23 September 2022,

     having regard to the One Health Initiative of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the One Health Joint Action Plan (2022-2026) of the WHO, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Organisation for Animal Health, and the UNEP,

     having regard to the WHO’s 2024 progress report on the Global Action Plan for Healthy Lives and Well-being for All,

     having regard to the Spotlight Initiative to eliminate violence against women and girls,

     having regard to the FAO’s Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication,

     having regard to the Summit for a New Global Financial Pact which took place in Paris in June 2023,

     having regard to the 2023 SDG Summit which took place in September 2023, during the United Nations General Assembly high-level week,

     having regard to the Summit of the Future which took place on 22 and 23 September 2024 in New York, its outcome, the Pact for the Future, which pledges 56 actions to accelerate and finance sustainable development, and its two annexes, the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations,

     having regard to the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development that will take place in Seville, Spain, from 30 June to 3 July 2025,

     having regard to the Sustainable Development Solutions Network report of January 2025 entitled ‘Europe Sustainable Development Report 2025: SDG Priorities for the New EU Leadership’,

     having regard to the ‘SDG Acceleration Actions’ online database,

     having regard to the existing national and regional initiatives that encourage the fulfilment of the Sustainable Development Goals,

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Development and the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety under Rule 59 of the Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (A10-0125/2025),

    A. whereas the 2030 Agenda and the 17 integrated SDGs, including their 169 targets and 247 indicators, represent the only globally shared and politically agreed framework for evidence-based policies to address common challenges and achieve sustainable development in its three dimensions – economic, social and environmental – in a balanced and integrated manner;

    B. whereas UN member states have committed to achieving the SDGs by 2030; whereas only 17 % of SDG targets are on track, nearly half are showing minimal or moderate progress, and progress on over a third has stalled or even regressed below 2015 baseline levels; whereas the important steps already made in crucial fields highlight the need for urgent action to reverse this alarming trend and should act as an incentive to implement the SDGs in full;

    C. whereas the implementation of the 2030 Agenda implies that economic development goes hand in hand with social justice, good governance and respect for human rights; whereas the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, the new geopolitical landscape, escalating conflicts, geopolitical tensions, the transgression of planetary boundaries, increasing dependencies on raw materials and critical minerals, the negative effects of climate change and biodiversity loss, and multiple crises in various areas are severely affecting progress towards the achievement of the SDGs;

    D. whereas the number of additional people in extreme poverty in the world’s poorest countries is estimated to reach 175 million by 2030, including 89 million women and girls[16]; whereas people with disabilities are more vulnerable to poverty due to reduced employment and education opportunities, lower wages and higher living costs; whereas further collective action is urgently needed to respond to poverty;

    E. whereas the SDGs, being universal and indivisible, are applicable to all actors, including civil society and social partners, and to both the public and private sectors; whereas these actors should be systematically involved in devising and implementing policies related to the SDGs; whereas the commitment of the private sector to the SDGs offers the possibility of increasing the scale of development actions and their sustainability by creating jobs, stimulating economic growth and eliminating poverty;

    F. whereas the EU has underlined its unequivocal commitment to the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs; whereas progress towards achieving SDG targets is uneven across European countries and many dimensions of sustainable development have not shown significant progress in the past decade, with increasing levels of poverty and an increasing level of inequality between and within countries being a threat to sustainable development; whereas the latest progress monitoring report of the 8th Environment Action Programme shows that for a majority of the indicators the EU is not on track to meet the targets[17]; whereas the Commission has acknowledged that more progress is needed on many SDGs at EU level, and that accelerating the SDGs’ implementation is more urgent than ever, with a particular focus on vulnerable people;

    G. whereas the Commission has not yet devised an overarching strategy for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda at EU level or a financing plan for the SDGs; whereas Commission has committed to taking a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to SDG implementation and its work programme should foster the realisation of the 2030 Agenda; whereas the EU should set a good example for ensuring the prosperity for present and future generations globally;

    H. whereas the 2025 High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) will be convened from 14 to 23 July 2025 under the auspices of the Economic and Social Council; whereas the 2025 HLPF will focus on advancing sustainable, inclusive, science- and evidence-based solutions for the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs, aiming to leave no one behind; whereas it will conduct in-depth reviews of SDG 3 (Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages), SDG 5 (Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls), SDG 8 (Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all), SDG 14 (Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources); and SDG 17 (Revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development);

    I. whereas health is an indispensable foundation for peoples’ well-being; whereas health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity[18]; whereas the COVID-19 pandemic alone has eliminated a decade of progress in global levels of life expectancy[19]; whereas non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, dementia and chronic respiratory disease, are the world’s leading causes of death; whereas road safety is also a cause for concern;

    J. whereas air pollution constitutes a major factor for non-communicable diseases and is responsible for almost 7 million deaths globally, with more than nine out of ten deaths occurring in lower- and middle-income countries; whereas at EU level, air pollution remains the largest environmental health risk, despite the progress made, causing hundreds of thousands of premature deaths every year;

    K. whereas gender equality is crucial for fair, inclusive and sustainable development; whereas, despite some steps forward, significant inequalities continue to persist; whereas reinforcing women’s rights, empowering women and girls, challenging biased social norms, eliminating harmful practices and tackling discrimination are necessary to promote SDG 5;

    L. whereas protection of labour rights is declining and income inequality is rising; whereas the global jobs gap reached 402 million in 2024, while extreme forms of working poverty affect 240 million workers globally[20]; whereas women and young people experience higher unemployment rates; whereas more than one in five young people are not in education, employment or training[21];

    M. whereas the ocean covers more than 70 % of the surface of our planet and constitutes its largest ecosystem; whereas the ocean plays a critical role as a climate regulator, enables economic activity and provides livelihoods for more than 3 billion people; whereas the ocean constitutes the world’s greatest ally against climate change as it generates 50 % of the world’s oxygen, absorbs 25 % of all carbon dioxide emissions and captures 90 % of the excess heat generated by these emissions but its absorption capacity is decreasing; whereas 40 % of the ocean is heavily affected by pollution, depletion of fisheries, loss of coastal habitats and other human activities; whereas the UN Secretary-General declared an ‘ocean emergency’ during the 2022 UN Ocean Conference; whereas an inclusive ocean governance should, among others, be human-rights-based and socially equitable, and enhance gender equality;

    N. whereas there is currently a USD 4 trillion annual investment gap to achieve the SDGs; whereas foreign direct investment flows to developing countries have decreased while gains in remittances and official development assistance (ODA) have been modest[22];

    O. whereas the lack of financing is a major barrier in achieving gender equality outcomes; whereas gender equality is fundamental to delivering on the promises of sustainability, prosperity, social justice, peace and human progress; whereas meaningful and sustained financial commitments and strengthen budgeting processes are fundamental to support the implementation of legislation, policies and gender responsive services to advance gender equality across all SDG 5 targets[23];

    P. whereas, after a decade of rapid debt accumulation, the debt levels of low-, middle- and high-income countries remain at unprecedentedly high levels, limiting their capacity to invest in achieving the SDGs and in efficiently tackling climate challenges; whereas about 60 % of low-income countries are at high risk of or are already experiencing debt distress[24]; whereas the existing fiscal space in heavily indebted developing countries is further reduced by external shocks, such as natural disasters, different aspects of debt management, higher borrowing costs and the absence of a conducive international environment for domestic resource mobilisation;

    Q. whereas illicit financial flows, tax base erosion, profit shifting and corruption have led to a global decline in revenues and represent another important obstacle to sustainable development; whereas further international tax cooperation and rules are needed to address these challenges;

    R. whereas the EU and its Member States constitute the largest donor for developing countries, providing approximately 42 % of the total ODA; whereas the EU has set the target of collectively providing ODA equivalent to 0.7 % of its gross national income (GNI); whereas the collective ODA of the EU stood at 0.57 % of GNI in 2023 with only four Member States meeting the agreed target and several others making historic cuts to their ODA; whereas in order to reach the agreed target, the EU budget for ODA should amount to an estimated minimum of EUR 200 billion over the next multiannual financial framework; whereas the Global Gateway is a strategic instrument and has the potential to advance a range of interconnected SDGs, notably through international partnerships and investments in transport, energy, digital infrastructure, health and education;

    S. whereas the EU’s political commitment to policy coherence for development was reaffirmed in the 2017 New European Consensus on Development, which identified policy coherence for development as a ‘crucial element of the EU strategy to achieve the SDGs and an important contribution to the broader objective of policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD)’; whereas PCSD is an approach that integrates the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development at all stages of domestic and international policymaking;

    T. whereas the new US administration has taken a number of deeply worrisome and damaging decisions in the field of international development and humanitarian aid, most significantly the suspension of 83 % of funding for programmes of the US Agency for International Development (USAID); whereas it is estimated that USD 54 billion in foreign aid contracts are affected; whereas the suspension of USAID funding and global aid cuts by several Member States will have long-term implications for the world’s development agenda and the achievement of the SDGs;

    State of play

    1. Reaffirms its strong and unwavering commitment to ensuring the full and prompt implementation and delivery of all the SDGs, their targets and the 2030 Agenda as a whole, especially in the light of the deteriorating geopolitical, social, economic and environmental landscape; reaffirms its strong commitment to the Pact for the Future, which is a crucial step towards revitalising the UN and achieving the SDGs;

    2. Regrets that the global community is severely off track with regard to realising the 2030 Agenda and achieving SDG targets; recognises the interconnectedness and interdependence of the 17 SDGs and acknowledges that the achievement of the 2030 Agenda and beyond will require broad and accelerated action across all SDGs; underlines that the scarring effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, escalating conflicts, geopolitical tensions, social, health and humanitarian emergencies and the accelerating negative effects of climate change constitute significant obstacles for the achievement of the SDG targets and that more efforts by all actors are needed to match real needs;

    3. Recognises that the delay in achieving the SDGs is aggravated by the significant progress gap among different groups of countries, particularly in the poorest and most vulnerable countries and regions; highlights that the current unequal progress is being exacerbated by the suspension of USAID funding and by cuts to global aid budgets by EU Member States and other OECD countries; stresses the need to maintain a strong focus on development cooperation in order to place the world on course to achieve the SDGs;

    4. Underlines that relevant policies for achieving the SDGs in low- and middle-income countries are to a large extent reduced by high debt levels and high debt service burdens; points also to the limitations of the global financial architecture and insufficient international support; stresses that these countries urgently require more financial resources and fiscal space to facilitate far greater investment in the SDGs; emphasises the need for global cooperation to reform the global financial architecture, especially in view of the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development held in Seville from 30 June to 3 July 2025;

    5. Stresses the urgent need for international cooperation and decisive transformative action to place our societies and economies firmly on course to achieve the SDGs and address the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution; highlights that the SDGs should be achieved in a just way and with respect for planetary boundaries; emphasises that social sustainability, including reducing global inequalities, ensuring access to essential services and promoting social inclusion, should be mainstreamed across all SDG implementation efforts;

    6. Welcomes, as a first step, the latest version of the Bridgetown Initiative in terms of climate action, which calls for the mobilisation of an additional USD 500 billion per year for climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing countries; recalls, however, that it still falls short of what is required; urges the EU and its Member States, accordingly, to work towards providing an additional USD 1.3 trillion per year for climate change mitigation and adaptation as well as loss and damage, through public concessional and non-debt creating instruments, in line with the Baku to Belem Roadmap agreed at COP 29;

    7. Reiterates that international cooperation is a fundamental condition for the world to make progress on the SDGs by 2030 and beyond and that such cooperation should prioritise strengthening the resilience, stability and autonomy of partner countries, especially in Africa, by promoting opportunities for economic and human development and refocusing on key priorities such as nutrition, healthcare and education; highlights that, despite the difficulties posed by the current geopolitical situation, special attention should be given to regions and communities that are furthest off-track, to ensure that no one is left behind; warns that the consequences of inaction or further delay would primarily be borne by the most vulnerable but would also detrimentally affect the world as a whole;

    8. Underlines the importance of uninterrupted access to high-quality climate and environmental data and the fulfilment of international reporting obligations for science- and evidence-based policymaking; notes with concern that recent geopolitical developments highlight vulnerabilities in the global climate infrastructure; highlights, moreover, the need for stronger collaboration between EU and global institutions, the IPCC and the UN to ensure that both EU and global policies remain grounded in the latest climate science;

    9. Recognises the importance of country-led sustainable development strategies for the implementation of the SDGs; acknowledges that sustainable development approaches should be tailored to specific local contexts; highlights, in this regard, the significant role of local and regional authorities in defining, implementing and monitoring local actions and strategies that contribute to the global achievement of the SDGs; stresses, moreover, that the effective implementation of the SDGs requires the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders, stronger social and institutional partnerships, public and private investment, cooperation and shared responsibility between public actors, greater involvement of the people, adequate education and broader interaction between the public and private sectors, science and civil society;

    10. Highlights that EU leadership in the global implementation of the SDGs remains crucial, especially in the light of multiple geopolitical challenges and ongoing crises; emphasises that the EU and its Member States should assume a stronger leadership role in coordinating global efforts to reverse stagnation or regression, and to facilitate and accelerate the achievement of the SDGs, while remaining a reliable partner for effective and sustainable aid; stresses the important role of the European Green Deal in implementing and achieving the SDGs;

    11. Highlights the need to mobilise adequate financial resources towards SDG-relevant transformations and to promote policy coherence and inclusiveness at all levels of governance, prioritising the inclusion of the SDGs in policymaking and Commission impact assessments;

    12. Calls on the EU institutions to live up to their long-standing commitments to apply gender mainstreaming and an intersectional perspective to all EU policies and funding; regrets that countries still lack 44 % of data needed to track SGD 5 and that over 80 % of countries are missing data on at least one SDG 5 target[25]; therefore, stresses the need to strengthen national statistical offices, and improve their global coordination and cooperation to ensure informed policymaking and close the remaining gender data gaps;

    13. Highlights the significant role of the UN and the annual HLPF for the monitoring and review of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs; believes that the 2025 HLPF should be used as an opportunity to provide high-level political guidance and new impetus to intensified efforts and accelerated action to achieve the SDGs by 2030;

    SDGs under in-depth review at the 2025 HLPF

    SDG 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

    14. Regrets the marginal or moderate progress in most SDG 3 targets and the slowing pace since 2015 in multiple key areas; notes with concern that less than 10 % of SDG 3 targets are on track and less than one third are likely to be met by 2030; is highly concerned that the EU has also experienced setbacks in about half of the indicators analysed by Eurostat for its June 2024 report

    15. Is alarmed that progress towards universal health coverage has slowed, leaving almost half of the world’s population without access to essential health services; is highly concerned that the lack of health coverage exposes 2 billion people to financial hardship from healthcare costs[26];

    16. Underlines that healthcare systems are experiencing increased strains due to the ageing global population, low-quality healthcare infrastructure and the global shortage of healthcare workers and recalls that progressing towards universal health coverage requires addressing these challenges; underlines the significant disparities around the globe regarding the adequate number of healthcare workers, with low-income countries experiencing the lowest density and distribution; notes that an additional 1.8 million healthcare workers are needed in 54 countries, mostly high-income ones, just to maintain their current age-standardised density[27]; highlights the vulnerability of healthcare workers confronted with increased workloads, burnout and mental health issues; recommends targeted support, training, and protective measures to safeguard frontline professionals and strengthen emergency health response capacity;

    17. Stresses that multiple and interlocking crises, the negative impact of climate change and biodiversity loss on health, economic instability, poverty, persistent inequalities, especially among vulnerable populations and regions, and increasingly constrained resources, despite the increasing demands on health services, threaten to worsen the health crisis, undermine global health security and further derail progress towards SDG 3 targets;

    18. Regrets the devastating effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on global health and on progress towards SDG 3 targets; stresses that the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed extensive long-lasting weaknesses in healthcare systems and has highlighted the importance of increasing crisis preparedness, crisis response capacity and healthcare systems resilience; stresses that health threats know no borders and that a local health emergency can quickly escalate into a global pandemic, necessitating a coordinated global response and strengthened international cooperation through robust multilateral health institutions, in particular the WHO;

    19. Deeply regrets the US decision to withdraw from the WHO and the dismantling of health programmes under USAID; underlines that this decision will have a severe effect on people’s lives and access to health services globally, exposing and exacerbating weaknesses in global health systems, increasing healthcare disparities and straining resources with long-term consequences for global health security and resilience; stresses that this withdrawal will significantly hinder progress towards achieving SDG 3 by reducing capacities for monitoring health threats, as well as international coordination, resources and leadership in addressing health crises and promoting equitable access to health for all; calls on the US to reconsider its decision to withdraw from the WHO;

    20. Recognises that efforts to combat communicable diseases such as HIV-AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected tropical diseases have led to significant progress in the past decades; is concerned, however, about the increased numbers of cases of malaria and tuberculosis and about the fact that, despite the achievements, inequalities continue to persist and threats continue to emerge, leaving many populations vulnerable and weakening global efforts; deeply regrets that the disruption of HIV-AIDS programmes could undo 20 years of progress, which could lead to over 10 million additional HIV-AIDS cases and 3 million deaths[28]; calls for more effective implementation of policies and programmes to further reduce transmission rates and improve access to treatment and prevention, particularly in less developed countries;

    21. Notes that neglected tropical diseases continue to affect billions of people, with many countries lacking adequate access to treatment, which highlights the urgent need to strengthen the prevention, preparation and response capacities of the EU and its partners, particularly in the Global South, to ensure that the benefits of global efforts reach everyone; calls for incentives to promote research and development on medicines targeting tropical diseases; calls for the EU to take proactive measures to encourage innovation and accelerate drug availability;

    22. Notes with concern that, despite the improvement in skilled birth attendance and the decrease in global neonatal mortality and under-five mortality rates, the global maternal mortality rate remains almost unchanged since 2015; points to the significant divergences between low-income and high-income countries and the grim situation in high and very high alert fragile countries; calls for decisive action across Member States and as part of the EU’s external policies to make substantial progress towards the 2030 goal to reduce maternal mortality, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including access to quality maternal healthcare services, skilled birth attendance, emergency obstetric care, comprehensive antenatal and postnatal services, family planning and legal abortions;

    23. Highlights that improvements in reducing adolescent birth rates and in access to modern contraceptive methods do not benefit all women and girls equally; points to the persisting social, economic and regional inequalities hindering the broadening of positive trends; calls for the EU to ensure, as a priority, access to safe and effective contraception methods and to legal abortion services across Member States and to contribute to the same through its external policies; reiterates its call for the right to safe and legal abortion to be included in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;

    24. Recalls that the full realisation of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and upholding women’s and girls’ bodily autonomy is critical to achieving gender equality; highlights that SRHR are an integral part of the universal health coverage and are critical to achieving SDG 3, particularly target 3.7; calls on the Commission to ensure that SRHR are included in EU initiatives and programmes on universal health coverage;

    25. Regrets that progress towards the nine global voluntary targets agreed to in the NCD Global Monitoring Framework is slow and uneven; stresses that without increased uptake of these effective interventions, half of all countries will miss the 2030 SDG target to reduce NCD-related premature mortality by one third; calls, therefore, for strengthened, coordinated, and multi-sectoral actions to prevent and control NCDs to reduce suffering and prevent premature mortality; calls, moreover, for the implementation of the WHO’s ‘best buys’ policies to be prioritised, to address the primary risk factors of NCDs, including tobacco use, unhealthy diets, harmful use of alcohol, drug use and physical inactivity; calls, in addition, for the full implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in all signatory countries;

    26. Calls on the Commission to fully align EU air quality standards with the WHO guidelines in line with the Ambient Air Quality Directive[29]; recalls that sustainable cities and communities, and in particular tackling air pollution levels in urban areas, are key to promoting health and well-being, since over half of the world’s population currently resides in cities;

    27. Calls for enhanced, coordinated and holistic action, multiannual and tailor-made planning and substantial investment to achieve universal health coverage; stresses the need to strengthen health systems and the healthcare workforce, ensure equitable access to quality healthcare services and safe, effective and affordable medicines and vaccines, promote disease prevention and treatment, develop innovative solutions, and build inclusive and resilient health systems; calls also for action to tackle aggravating environmental factors, reduce the number of illnesses and deaths from hazardous chemicals and pollution, reduce the risks from emerging and re-emerging zoonotic epidemics and pandemics, and combat antimicrobial resistance; underlines the need to support social and solidarity healthcare organisations and address social determinants of health and disparities in access to quality care and services, including sexual and reproductive health services, especially for vulnerable populations such as women and girls with disabilities, with particular attention to directly affected regions and rural and remote communities;

    28. Stresses the need for horizontal programming in health policy and for investment in preparedness against health threats and in resilient public health systems; calls for increased investment in research and development on vaccines and medicines for the communicable and non- communicable diseases that primarily affect developing countries with a view to providing access to affordable essential medicines and vaccines; regrets that in 2022, 20.5 million children missed out on life-saving vaccines[30]; notes that access to vaccines must be equitable for an effective global response; calls for the use of initiatives such as the Global Gateway to facilitate investment for the local production of medicines and medical technologies and to prevent future health emergencies by strengthening capacities around the world;

    29. Reaffirms its commitment to the One Health approach; considers that applying the One Health approach is key to achieving progress on SDG 3; underlines, moreover, the need for the Commission and the Member States to fully implement the EU global health strategy, monitoring its implementation and regularly reporting to Parliament on the achievement of its objectives;

    30. Recalls that access to affordable and quality medicines depends also on technology and knowledge transfer; underlines, therefore, the flexibilities in the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), confirmed by the Doha Declaration, as legitimate policy measures that governments can use to protect and promote public health by putting limits and safeguards on the enforcement of intellectual property rights; urges the EU to ensure that trade agreements with developing countries are fully supportive of this objective;

    31. Underlines that environmental risks account for a quarter of the disease burden worldwide[31]; recalls that, in line with the One Health approach, human and animal health depend on planetary health and that a healthy environment is a universal human right and a fundamental pillar of sustainable development and human well-being; welcomes the wide support at the UN General Assembly for the recognition of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a universal human right[32] and calls for its effective protection at EU level; stresses the need to ban the most hazardous chemicals, including banning endocrine disruptors, and to phase out the PFAS forever chemicals, allowing their use only where essential for critical sectors, such as medical devices, pharmaceuticals and products necessary for the twin transition to a climate neutral and digital economy; stresses the need to also ban exports of chemical pesticides that are banned in the EU to third countries;

    32. Highlights the rising health risks due to the climate crisis, including increased incidences of heat-related illnesses, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the spread of vector- and water-borne diseases; calls for dedicated efforts to protect vulnerable populations, including older persons, children, people with pre-existing conditions, persons with disabilities, and low-income communities, which face disproportionate climate-related health risks; urges for the implementation of localised heat action plans and the provision of accessible shelters and targeted outreach during extreme weather events;

    33. Stresses, moreover, that extreme weather events are disrupting healthcare infrastructure, energy supply, and supply chains, thereby compromising access to critical medical care and treatment; underscores the need to invest in climate-resilient healthcare systems, including disaster-proof infrastructure, renewable energy sources in medical facilities, and robust water and sanitation systems; calls for the integration of early warning systems, mobile health units, and decentralised community-based healthcare models to ensure continuity of care in climate emergencies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to integrate climate resilience into all public health policies and national health strategies; encourages the use of SDG-aligned indicators to monitor the health impacts of climate change and to guide EU and national-level adaptation strategies;

    SDG 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

    34. Expresses grave concern about the slow progress towards gender equality, with a majority of the indicators being off track, risking further backsliding on gender equality and women’s rights, including actions that shrink the civic space for women rights defenders; considers that development aid cuts are already having a negative impact on women’s empowerment and gender equality; reaffirms gender equality as both a distinct goal and a catalyst for the advancement of the other SDG goals; calls for strong EU leadership internationally in the promotion of gender equality and women’s rights through policy and financial assistance;

    35. Calls for accelerated, targeted action to end all forms of violence and harassment against women and girls, including sexual and gender-based violence and technology-facilitated gender-based violence, and to end harmful practices such as child, early and forced marriage, so-called ‘honour’ based violence, sterilisation and female genital mutilation; recalls that over 230 million girls and women have undergone female genital mutilation[33] and deplores the fact that new estimates show an increase of 30 million cases compared to 2016[34]; remains gravely concerned about the high worldwide rates of maternal mortality, in particular in low and middle-income countries; stresses that rape remains one of the most widespread human rights violations and calls for the establishment of a common definition of rape on the basis of lack of consent; stresses that the objectives of SDG 5 must also play an important role in the EU’s relations with other countries;

    36. Stresses that women are disproportionately affected by climate change, particularly in least developed countries and rural areas; underlines that this disproportionate impact poses unique threats to their livelihoods, health and safety, including increased food and water insecurity, heightened exposure to gender-based violence in the context of climate-related displacement and migration, and greater economic instability owing to a reliance on climate-sensitive sectors; stresses that four out of five of those displaced due to the climate crisis are women and girls[35]; calls for climate action plans to include support for women and for women’s participation in climate decision-making at all levels; calls for strengthened healthcare systems to address climate-related diseases affecting women and for the promotion of education on climate adaptation; calls on the Commission and the Member States to integrate climate resilience into all public health policies and national health strategies; encourages the use of SDG-aligned indicators to monitor the health impacts of climate change and to guide EU and national-level adaptation strategies and looks forward to the new gender action plan under the UNFCCC; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide leadership for the adoption of a new ambitious and effective gender action plan at COP30;

    37. Regrets that women’s sexual and reproductive rights remain limited globally, and stresses the importance of addressing the barriers that hinder women’s ability to make decisions about contraception, healthcare access and sexual consent, recognising that socio-economic factors, education and geographical location significantly influence women’s ability to exercise these rights; recalls the EU’s commitment to the promotion, protection and fulfilment of the right of every individual to have full control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality and sexual and reproductive rights, free from discrimination, coercion and violence; warns that targets set by SDG 5 will not be achieved if universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights is not guaranteed in the EU and globally and calls on the EU to prioritise this question in policy and funding, and enshrine the right to legal and safe abortion in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; reiterates that all women must have access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including for family planning, information and education, and calls for the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes; calls for increased investment in these areas to ensure access to comprehensive and non-discriminatory services;

    38. Calls for the continuation of funding for programmes focusing on promoting women’s rights, empowerment and autonomy and fighting against all forms of gender-based violence; calls on the Commission to ensure that 85 % of all new external actions incorporate gender as a significant or principal objective and that 20 % of ODA in each country is allocated to programmes with gender equality as one of their principal objectives; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to ensure the systematic implementation of rigorous gender analyses, gender disaggregated data collection, gender-responsive budgeting and gender impact assessments;

    39. Regrets that assistance from OECD Development Assistance Committee donors for gender equality dropped in 2022, marking the first decline after a decade of growth[36]; notes that only 4 % of allocable ODA focused on gender equality as its principal objective[37]; stresses the need to mobilise new resources to resume progress towards gender equality; regrets that since the launch of the GAP III only 3.8 % of all gender-responsive/targeted actions have gender equality as a principal objective, falling behind the 5 % target outlined in the NDICI Regulation[38]; calls on the Member States and the Commission to substantially increase the number of the EU’s actions having the promotion of gender equality as a principal objective; calls for the EU to increase its funding of multilateral funds for gender equality, such as UN Women, and for sexual and reproductive health, such as the UN Population Fund and the Global Fund to fight AIDS Tuberculosis and Malaria;

    40. Recalls that women in general perform most unpaid domestic and care work, which imposes a disproportionate burden on lower-income households, contributing to poverty, inequality and precarious living conditions and reducing the labour market participation of women; calls for stronger promotion of the right of every woman to balance her professional and private life based on joint responsibility and working conditions that facilitate the reconciliation of private, family and working lives; calls for accelerated efforts to close the gender pay and pension gaps, including in the care economy, as well as to tackle horizontal and vertical labour market segregation; calls, moreover, for efforts to ensure women’s full, equal and meaningful participation and leadership in decision-making roles and opportunities in the public and private sectors, including in all aspects of peace and security; calls for further promotion of women’s participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics;

    41. Recognises the urgent need to respond to negative trends hampering progress in gender equality in the EU, including gender-based violence, and to prevalent sexist political discourse; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s Roadmap for Women’s Rights as a compass for future EU action in the area both inside and outside the Union and in shaping the new gender equality strategy from 2026; stresses that this roadmap should foster the implementation of legislative and non-legislative measures for greater progress and accountability on SDG 5 and calls for stronger Member States involvement; urges a comprehensive approach addressing sexual and reproductive services, intersectional discrimination and the protection of vulnerable women;

    42. Deplores the increasing unjustified attacks against civil society organisations, particularly women’s rights organisations, both in the EU and worldwide; stresses the need for the establishment of a protection mechanism for human rights defenders in the EU, with particular attention paid to women, LGBTIQ+ people and SRHR human rights defenders; calls for the full implementation of gender equality policies (gender action plan, gender equality strategy), including in their SRHR components, and insists that this implementation must be backed up with adequate funding, including for women’s rights and SRHR organisations, and information about family planning, affordable contraception, free, safe and legal abortion, and maternal healthcare; stresses that women’s rights organisations continue to be systematically underfunded, receiving less than 1 % of global ODA;

    43. Recognises that, despite progress, 122 million girls worldwide remain out of school[39]; emphasises that equal access to education is fundamental for sustainable development, poverty reduction, and economic prosperity, as it empowers women and girls to participate fully in society; calls for the integration of gender-responsive strategies in education policies to address these inequalities; calls on Member States to ensure the provision of education in primary and secondary schools,  focused on fighting gender-based violence and gender stereotyping; underlines that investing in girls’ education yields great returns for generations to come, directly contributing to the realisation of their fundamental rights and protecting them against all forms of violence, and also contributing to better well-being for whole societies;

    44. Recognises the disproportionate vulnerability of women and girls in conflict and humanitarian crises, including the increased risk they face of sexual and gender-based violence, displacement, and disruption of essential services; reaffirms the vital role of women and girls in peacebuilding, conflict resolution and post-conflict reconstruction, emphasising their essential participation in peace negotiations and decision-making processes, as outlined in the women, peace and security agenda;

    45. Calls for stronger policies and actions that promote access to land, credit, entrepreneurship and education, as well as employment and health, especially for women and girls in circumstances of vulnerability, women with disabilities, pregnant women and women in rural areas;

    46. Takes note of the lessons learned listed in the 2024 join report entitled ‘Are we getting there? A synthesis of the UN system evaluations of SDG 5’, including the importance of effectively engaging men and boys in programmes and initiatives on issues that educate and assist them in the behavioural change that is needed if the targets are to be met, and the more sustained and comprehensive prioritisation of the targets in humanitarian settings;

    47. Regrets the regression of LGBTIQ+ rights and the transphobia that threatens gender equality; denounces the fact that, between 2021 and 2022, just three anti-LGBTIQ+ organisations reported USD 1 billion in income, while 8 000 global LGBTIQ+ grantees received USD 905 million between them[40]; warns of the worrying increase in anti-gender financing that aims to counteract the progressive achievements of women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights of the past decades;

    48. Calls for the EU to ban conversion centres in the Member States and to do anything possible to prevent this practice everywhere;

    SDG 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

    49. Is alarmed that SDG 8 targets face the highest rates of stagnation or regression among the SDGs under in-depth review at the 2025 HLPF;

    50. Expresses concern about the decrease over the past decade in labour rights, freedom of association and collective bargaining rights, highlighting its adverse impact on social justice and efforts to promote productive employment and decent work for everyone; regrets that one fifth of the world’s population lives in countries with high levels of inequality[41]; affirms the need to strengthen social measures to address inequalities in line with the leave no one behind principle, taking into account the social consequences of inflation, rising budget pressures, geopolitical tensions and risks posed by climate change and extreme weather events to the health and safety of workers; stresses the importance of a just transition for the decarbonisation of the economy, to ensure that the transition is as fair and inclusive as possible for all concerned;

    51. Calls for stronger policies and bold actions to promote inclusive and sustainable economic development; urges the EU and global partners to use instruments such as the Global Gateway to leverage multiple sources of funding, including private sector investments, respect social and environmental standards and promote the creation of decent jobs that will reduce income inequality and ensure that no one is left behind; recognises the role of private finance in bridging the financing gap to achieve the SDGs; highlights, however, the need for public investments in critical services such as healthcare, education and social protection;

    52. Underlines the need to address territorial and housing inequalities by supporting access to affordable, adequate and energy-efficient housing, especially in disadvantaged urban and rural areas; calls for increased investment in integrated community development, social infrastructure and basic services to promote social cohesion and economic inclusion; encourages support for local and regional authorities in implementing sustainable, inclusive and resilient development strategies that link climate, health, housing, mobility and social inclusion;

    53. Expresses concern that economic growth in many developing countries remains slow and uneven, often hindered by structural weaknesses, economic inequalities, political instability, external shocks and the growing impact of climate change; emphasises that local initiatives addressing unique community needs play a vital role in fostering equitable economic growth; underscores that regional cooperation on economic corridors enhances trade, investment, sustainable industrialisation, and economic diversification;

    54. Recommends increased public and private investment in research, sustainable business practices, the green and digital transition, quality education and skills development, including reskilling and upskilling, as well as aligning them with market demands, and supporting small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups to support access to finance and foster investment and innovation; reiterates the need for a special focus on the promotion of women’s economic empowerment and on ensuring equitable access to business opportunities; calls for inclusive policies for persons with disabilities in the workplace;

    55. Reiterates the importance of policies that support youth employment, education and vocational training; stresses the significance of the expanding young population in the Global South for sustainable development; insists on the importance of creating stronger links between education, skills development and employment, to allow access to decent work in the rapidly changing labour market;

    56. Emphasises that initiatives aimed at stimulating economic growth should go hand in hand with social justice, gender equality, labour rights and environmental protection; calls for the EU to constructively engage with and work towards the adoption of the UN Treaty on Business and Human Rights;

    57. Regrets that more than half of the global workforce finds itself in informal employment[42], thus posing a significant barrier to social justice and inclusive growth; expresses deep concern that in the least developed countries, in sub-Saharan Africa and in Central and Southern Asia, almost nine out of ten workers are still employed informally[43];

    58. Notes that while gross domestic product remains an important indicator of economic performance, additional metrics reflecting social and environmental dimensions should be taken into account in order to achieve a more balanced and informed approach to economic policymaking;

    59. Calls for further measures to eradicate forced labour and human trafficking, and to put an end to any form of child labour, including the recruitment and use of child soldiers;

    SDG 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

    60. Stresses the alarming trends of marine pollution, coastal eutrophication, ocean acidification, rising temperatures, overfishing, declining marine biodiversity, habitat destruction, unsustainable industrial practices, underwater noise and inland water contamination, which individually and cumulatively threaten marine ecosystems and coastal communities, especially in developing countries and vulnerable regions, and hinder the achievement of SDG 14 targets;

    61. Regrets the lack of actual progress towards meeting SDG 14 targets and, in some cases, their worsening outlook, notably owing to the lack of effective measures alongside increasing economic pressures; is alarmed that none of the SDG 14 targets for 2020 were met; considers that the marginal or moderate progress and the high levels of stagnation and regression mean that global action is far from the speed and scale required to meet SDG14 targets on time; recalls that equity in both benefits and cost-sharing is essential for the implementation of SDG 14;

    62. Notes that SDG 14 remains among the least financed SDGs and that the current funding gap is estimated at about USD 150 billion per year; underlines that the 2025 UN Ocean Conference should provide new impetus in eliminating the existing funding gap and creating a stable and enabling environment for the mobilisation of increased funding for the achievement of the SDG 14 targets; calls on the EU and its Member States to step up their financial contribution to protecting and restoring marine ecosystems; calls on the Commission to allocate dedicated funds to the European Ocean Pact for the protection of the ocean and the just transition to a sustainable blue economy benefitting coastal communities, economic growth and society as a whole;

    63. Highlights the need to protect the ocean as a unified entity and use it sustainably; calls for a holistic approach that integrates environmental protection and restoration, prosperity, social equity, sustainability and competitiveness, and for a comprehensive framework serving as a single reference point for all ocean-related policies; expects the upcoming European Ocean Pact to set an international example by providing such a holistic approach to all ocean-related policies and coherence across all policy areas linked to the ocean;

    64. Believes that binding global measures and an ecosystem-based approach are urgently needed to address shortcomings, accelerate action and ensure the long-term health of the ocean, also and especially under changing climate conditions; stresses that such measures should ensure the protection of human rights and our marine ecosystems; considers it particularly necessary to support the just transition to sustainable fisheries, combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, address the increasing numbers of invasive alien species, strengthen transparency in the seafood sector, protect small-scale fishers’ rights, enhance marine conservation and restoration efforts and adopt a global treaty on plastic pollution; recalls that the EU Nature Restoration Law is one of the tools for the EU to meet its international commitments in restoring marine and coastal ecosystems;

    65. Calls for enhanced global action to tackle ocean acidification and ocean heat levels in order to safeguard the role of the ocean as the most important carbon sink on the planet and to protect marine life and food web;

    66. Welcomes the adoption of UN High Seas Treaty (Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement, or BBNJ); regrets, however, that, to date, only one of the 27 EU Member States has ratified that treaty; urges all Member States to swiftly complete their individual ratification processes; calls on the parties to continue work on the UN Ocean and Climate Change Dialogue and ensure swift implementation of the agreement, including by mobilising funds from the EU Global Ocean Programme; welcomes the Commission proposal to integrate the UN High Seas Treaty into EU law;

    67. Recalls the commitment under target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework  for the effective conservation of at least 30% of terrestrial and inland water areas and of marine and coastal areas by 2030 through the establishment of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures; considers that increased efforts are required for the further expansion of marine and coastal protected areas to achieve the 30 % target and facilitate the conservation and sustainable management of marine species, habitats, ecosystems and resources; regrets that the EU is off track to meet its objectives to protect 30 % of its marine areas by 2030;68.  Is alarmed by the increasing levels of marine pollution that are set to double or triple by 2040; highlights that a large part of the pollution pressure placed on the ocean results from land-based activities; calls for stronger measures and accelerated implementation as a matter of urgency to put an end to marine pollution both at EU and international level; underlines that plastics make up the largest, most harmful and most persistent share of marine litter; regrets the lack of a conclusion on the first ever global legally-binding instrument on plastic pollution; urges for the adoption of an ambitious binding global treaty on plastic pollution at the resumption of the intergovernmental negotiations in 2025; supports the EU position that the final agreement should contain a target of reducing the production of primary plastic polymers;

    69. Stresses the importance of advancing the EU’s zero pollution action plan that includes significant targets for the improvement of water quality, the reduction of waste generation, and the reduction of nutrient losses; notes that only 37 % of Europe’s surface waters are in a healthy ecological state and that nutrient pollution is costing more than EUR 75 billion per year[44]; notes, moreover, that, according to the 2025 zero pollution monitoring and outlook report, only two of the zero pollution targets are on track; stresses that the implementation and enforcement of environmental legislation is crucial to achieve the 2030 zero pollution targets and that additional action is needed; reiterates its call on the Commission to propose ambitious EU targets for 2030 to significantly reduce the EU material and consumption footprints and bring them within planetary boundaries by 2050 as required under the 8th Environment Action Programme; highlights, moreover, the need to leverage modern technologies, including artificial intelligence, to monitor pollution;

    70. Stresses the importance of applying the precautionary principle in deep-sea mining; reiterates, in this regard, its support for an international moratorium on commercial deep-sea mining exploitation until such time as the effects of deep-sea mining on the marine environment, biodiversity and human activities at sea have been studied and researched sufficiently[45];

    71. Highlights that the ongoing decline in sustainable fish populations underscores the importance of a regulatory framework following an ecosystem-based approach along with efficient and transparent monitoring systems to promote sustainable fishing practices and combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; welcomes the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies as a major step forward towards ending harmful subsidies that contribute to overfishing; calls on WTO members that have not yet done so to deposit their instruments of acceptance to allow for the agreement to become operational; urges, moreover, WTO members to phase out environmentally harmful subsidies in maritime economic activities, including harmful fisheries subsidies;

    72. Recognises that sustainable fishing practices involving community participation are instrumental in reducing overfishing and ensuring the long-term sustainability of marine resources;​ recalls that many small-scale fishing communities continue to face marginalisation and unfair competition; notes that it is essential to promote the resilience of coastal and island communities and the potential of the blue economy in line with the EU environmental legislation and objectives, ensuring access to drinking water, sustainable transport, rules-based fisheries, sustainable tourism, entrepreneurship and fair access to services; calls on the Commission to promote international sustainable fishing standards to ensure, among other things, a global level-playing field;

    73. Calls for the EU to reaffirm and step up its support for ocean science; encourages the promotion of scientific research and the dissemination of accurate data, alongside the development and sharing of best practice; emphasises the need to integrate ocean management policy with indigenous and traditional knowledge, science and community engagement; calls for the development and implementation of area-based management tools in conjunction with other appropriate conservation measures;

    SDG 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development

    74. Calls for the EU to continue advocating and working for multilateralism and provide global leadership in advancing the implementation of the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda, and reinforcing international treaties and agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and regional conservation initiatives;

    75. Emphasises that, in the current difficult and uncertain geopolitical landscape, a vocal re-commitment to the SDGs will send a clear signal to partners around the world and support the EU’s global action; is concerned about the USD 4 trillion investment gap on achieving the SDGs[46]; stresses that the EU’s commitment to the SDGs should be supported by ambitious financial commitments in the next multiannual financial framework 2028-2034; calls for the EU to pursue a reinforced approach to development cooperation and to mobilise and continue to engage constructively with other international players in stepping up their sustainable development efforts and supporting peace, gender equality and human development;

    76. Reaffirms that ODA remains a crucial source of public financing and an essential tool for reducing poverty, addressing inequalities, and supporting the most vulnerable communities, particularly in fragile, conflict-affected and least developed countries (LDCs);

    77. Regrets the reduction in ODA by several EU Member States; calls on all Member States and global partners to uphold their commitment to ODA as a key pillar of their development policy and ensure that sufficient financing is dedicated to fulfilling the commitment to spend 0.7 % of gross national income on ODA and 0.2 % as ODA to LDCs; stresses, moreover, that only 12 % of ODA currently targets children despite their significant representation within the population of ODA-receiving countries; calls for the removal of obstacles, including administrative burden, to enable aid to reach the most vulnerable communities;

    78. Calls for the EU to enhance its role in advocating stronger financial commitments for development and humanitarian aid at international level, including the SDGs and the Paris Agreement, and particularly supporting climate adaptation and resilience in the most vulnerable regions, including Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and LDCs; calls, moreover, on the EU to ensure that climate finance targets are met and prioritised in multilateral negotiations and global partnerships; emphasises that advancing EU economic interests should also encompass creating stable partnerships guided by mutual interests and that all EU external policies should be embedded in the larger framework of the 2030 Agenda, while EU development policy and the use of EU ODA should remain focused on poverty alleviation as defined by the OECD Development Assistance Committee;

    79. Stresses the urgent need to address the underrepresentation of countries from the Global South in global governance and to foster a more inclusive international financial architecture; considers South-South and triangular cooperation crucial for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda;

    80. Insists on the paramount importance of the UN at the core of the multilateral system for creating a peaceful, fair, equal, inclusive, and rules-based global system that works for all, leaving no one behind; expresses, in this context, its support for swift and effective reforms of the UN Security Council; highlights the pressing need to review and reform the global governance of international development cooperation, particularly following cuts to global aid by several countries; stresses that reforms to the international financial system should be driven by a renewed commitment to multilateralism;

    81. Emphasises the crucial role of multi-stakeholder partnerships and the meaningful involvement of local governments, civil society and youth and women’s representatives for attaining the SDG targets as well as of the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in global partnerships, in line with the UN Declaration on the rights of indigenous people; emphasises the need for youth-led initiatives, particularly in the Global South and in climate-affected regions;

    82. Recognises the vital and multifaceted roles that civil society organisations play in advancing the SDGs through locally-led, context-specific strategies that empower local actors and ensure broad-based, inclusive participation at all levels of society; calls, in this context, for deeper involvement of vulnerable communities in designing and monitoring SDG-related policies and for strengthened cooperation, resource mobilisation, and multi-stakeholder participation to advance the SDGs; calls for civil society participation and civic space in order to ensure that public funds are prevented from financing repressive regimes; stresses that access to structural funding is necessary for the effective participation of civil society in policy-making;

    83. Calls for better monitoring of SDG implementation at regional and local levels, including through support for voluntary local reviews; stresses the importance of improving the availability of reliable data and collecting and using data disaggregated by income, age, gender, disability and geography; emphasises the need to modernise statistics and strengthen data capacity-building in the countries of the Global South;

    84. Calls for the EU and its Member States to support global debt relief and debt restructuring for developing countries, particularly those in the Global South, taking into account the UN Trade and Development principles on promoting responsible sovereign lending and borrowing; calls, moreover, for comprehensive reforms of global financial institutions, including multilateral development banks, to enhance their effectiveness, equity and responsibility in supporting the implementation of the SDGs; emphasises that existing instruments and development banks, such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, should be more in focus;

    85. Stresses the need to align the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, including Global Gateway programmes, with the SDGs, the Paris Agreement and human development indicators; calls for greater involvement of Parliament and for it to take a more active role in the scrutiny of Global Gateway programmes, guaranteeing their effectiveness and proper implementation;

    86. Insists that the Global Gateway initiative requires a more strategic and coordinated approach, incorporating strict criteria with the SDGs and the Paris Agreement goals and fundamental EU values, including human rights, good governance, democracy, transparency and environmental sustainability; recognises the potential of the Global Gateway to be able to contribute to sustainable development; stresses that it must be transparent in its planning process and have clear mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating its impact;

    87. Highlights the need for clearer communication, coordination and alignment of Global Gateway projects with existing EU development policies; stresses, in this context, that the EIB should intensify its collaboration with other international financial institutions and national development banks to maximise the impact of its interventions, while ensuring its activities fully align with the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the SDGs;

    88. Reiterates its strong call on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen cooperation with partners on fighting organised crime, corruption, illicit financial flows, harmful tax competition, tax avoidance and tax evasion; calls for the scaling-up of cooperation with developing countries on tax matters, including in terms of capacities, digitalisation, and the strengthening of their tax systems; welcomes the setting up of an intergovernmental process to adopt a UN convention on tax as a new global framework for international tax cooperation; highlights the pivotal role of progressive taxation in securing revenue to finance sustainable development; supports the decision of the G20 finance ministers to ensure that ultra-high net worth individuals are effectively taxed;

    Outlook

    89. Reiterates that the SDGs are the only globally agreed and comprehensive set of goals on the major challenges faced by both developed and developing countries and are the best tool for tackling the root causes of these challenges; stresses that the achievement of the 2030 Agenda is contingent on global collaboration and enhanced and accelerated action by all actors; calls on the EU to double down action and take the lead on advancing progress in these five years before the 2030 deadline in order to accelerate action to reverse the negative trends and foster a more just, peaceful and sustainable future for all;

    90. Emphasises that policy coherence for development is a binding obligation under Article 208 of the TFEU aiming at integrating the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development at all stages of the policymaking cycle, in order to foster synergies across policy areas, identifying and reconciling potential trade-offs, as well as addressing the international spillover effects of EU policies;

    91. Highlights the opportunity provided by the SDGs to foster a sustainable, well-being and people-centred economy; emphasises the need for a comprehensive approach that ensures long-term sustainability and prosperity beyond 2030 in line with the diverse needs and circumstances of different countries;

    92. Welcomes the Pact for the Future which pledges 56 actions to accelerate and finance sustainable development, ensure that technology benefits people and the planet, invest in young people, support human rights and gender equality, and transform global governance; calls for the commitments made during the Summit of the Future and reflected in the Pact for the Future to be translated into concrete actions and measurable targets; urges the UN to begin preparing a comprehensive post-2030 Agenda strategy based on global commitment to sustainable development;

    93. Calls for implementation plans with concrete timelines for achieving the SDGs by 2030 and setting ambitious targets beyond; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to lead by example and develop a comprehensive strategy accompanied by a structured SDG implementation plan with clear and concrete targets; calls, moreover, for the next EU multiannual financial framework to be fully consistent with the SDGs;94.  Welcomes the EU’s first voluntary review of SDG implementation in 2023; considers that its conclusions can serve as a solid basis for a comprehensive EU SDG strategy, which should include an updated monitoring system that takes into account the EU’s internal and external impact on the SDG process; insists that such reviews become regular exercises and that their conclusions be taken into account in Commission proposals;

    95. Believes that successes in SDG progress should be made visible and lay the groundwork for formulating best practice for the achievement of the SDGs; stresses, in this context, the importance of inclusive digitalisation, including with regard to AI, building on the Global Digital Compact; welcomes the 2025 Human Development Report that focuses on this matter;

    °

    ° °

    96. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, the Secretary General of the United Nations and the President of the United Nations General Assembly.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Senator Coons explores how Democrats can better appeal to voters of faith on The Holy Post Podcast

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
    WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) joined The Holy Post Podcast for an interview with Skye Jethani to talk about U.S. foreign policy matters in the Middle East, what led him to attend divinity school, and how Democratic leaders can work to speak more openly about their faith and bring more religious voters into the party. 
    You can listen here. 
    Key excerpts:
    Early Faith and Path to Divinity School
    Jethani: What’s the journey from divinity school to the U.S. Senate? Why does divinity school end up in public political service?
    Senator Coons: I was very active in youth group and Sunday school and that just sort of formed the foundation of faith in action. My mother volunteered with a group of women at our church to welcome refugees, a refugee family from South Vietnam – who were literally rescued, you know, from the ocean – having fled persecution after the fall of Vietnam, and worked at a homeless ministry, Emmanuel Dining Room, that still serves every day in downtown Wilmington. And my father for a time volunteered in prison ministry.
    ….
    The great thing – and this is a long-winded answer, so interrupt me if it’s getting past your level of interest – but the great thing about a divinity school as opposed to a seminary was, I had classmates from a very wide range of traditions. A great friend who had gone to Oral Roberts as an undergraduate, another friend who was Catholic, another friend who is Muslim, but coming to the United States to train to be a professor of religious studies, friends who were going into pulpit ministry as Congregationalists and Episcopalians and Presbyterians, and friends who really weren’t sure why they were there but their parents were ministers or you know, they came from a long line of ministers and so they were [pastors’ kids] who were there, sort of trying to work out their future. It was a wonderful experience. I left with less certainty than I went in. So, if I were to summarize my lessons: humility. Humility in the face of the awesomeness and depth of Scripture. Humility about the certainty of my interpretation and understanding, and thus a demand or a call to constantly re-evaluate and learn, so an increased certainty about the call and the grace and the mercy and the salvation offered to us by Jesus Christ and a less absolute certainty about, “this scripture means this and we can ignore these and we have to follow these,” which as you get into politics becomes a more pressing question.
    Democratic Messaging
    Jethani: How do you think the Democratic Party can do better at drawing religious voters back into its fold or what missteps do you look at and think, we need to do better in this area?
    Senator Coons: First, I think we have to show biblical literacy. I think we have to make connections between why are you fighting for health care for the poor and the disabled and the elderly? Why are you working for food programs for children? Like where does this come from? If you can’t articulate some connection between a Torah definition of righteousness that focuses on how you welcome the hungry, the foreigner, the stranger, the orphan, the widow, the imprisoned – if you can’t draw a line between, sort of, here’s my priorities and what I’m doing and, it’s rooted in the Luke 4 passage where Jesus stands up in his home synagogue and says this is my ministry and my mission – if you can’t draw some of those connections, don’t be surprised when religious or theologically serious people sort of doubt the sincerity of your engagement.
    Second, and I’m just going to be really blunt about this, the kind of liberal consensus in the Democratic Party of the last couple of years … mistakenly viewed Black and Brown Americans, folks who are from the Hispanic community, from the African-American community, as inalterably and fundamentally progressive because they had experienced racism and racially based oppression for centuries – missing that enduring that oppression largely was possible because of a focus on faith. And so, every Black church I’ve been to in my home state of Delaware, you’ve got a really powerful, focused, engaged, on-fire community that is getting through things that are hard to get through by leaning on the arms. And so, not bringing a message rooted in values and in particular, in faith, in connecting with communities that have experienced oppression and have transited it by faith is a huge mistake. Nothing offends and annoys Hispanic and Black communities more than treating them as victims, rather than as heroes who have transcended oppression through the depth of their faith.
    Faith in Leadership and the Future of the Democrats
    Jethani: Can you point to evidence that you think the party is getting that message that it’s trying to adjust, that it will be different in 2026 and 2028?
    Senator Coons: There are certainly several of us trying very hard in this direction. Look, Joe Biden was our last Democratic president, and if there is one defining characteristic millions of Americans knew about Joe Biden that helped them trust him in 2020 in the middle of a pandemic, at a time of chaos and uncertainty, it’s that Joe Biden endured huge deep grief twice in his life: the loss of his wife and daughter just before Christmas in a tragic car accident, the loss of his beloved son Beau to glioblastoma, a terrible brain cancer. And they knew that in moments of loss and of celebration, he was on his knees praying at mass. Joe Biden does not talk about his faith much publicly…it is personal, it is something that has allowed him to endure. And I think lots of people looked at that and said, “You know what, he gets me, because that’s how I get through the hard things in life.” They may not agree with his exact positions on important moral issues, but they knew that he was a kind and compassionate man, they knew he’d been raised by a family that got through some struggles as a blue-collar, middle-class family in Claymont relying on their faith.
    Senator Coons: … If you think about three out of four of the last Democrats who became president: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, in addition to Joe Biden who I just talked about. All of them were not really of Washington, all of them were not well known before they were catapulted to electoral success, and all of them talked comfortably about their faith. Jimmy Carter continued to teach Sunday school at his hometown Baptist church throughout almost a hundred years and was – I think the election of Jimmy Carter was made possible by Richard Nixon. And I think Donald Trump, a demonstrably cruel, aggressive, and vulgar president will make possible the election of someone who champions compassion, decency, and a welcoming and gracious heart as long as that Democratic leader also makes clear that he sees and cares about opportunity and security for the people of our country. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Marrero Woman Guilty of Cares Act Fraud

    Source: US FBI

    NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA – Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced that on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, LINDA TRIGGS (“TRIGGS”), age 73, a resident of Marrero, pleaded guilty to making a false statement related to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2).

    On March 27, 2020, the President of the United States signed into law the CARES Act, which provided emergency assistance, administered by the United States Small Business Administration (SBA), to small business owners affected by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.  One of the  primary sources of funding for small businesses was the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).

    According to the charging documents, on or about April 18, 2021, TRIGGS, on behalf of a non-profit corporation that she owned, made false statements to an approved lender to obtain approximately $59,065 for PPP loans.

    TRIGGS faces a maximum term of imprisonment of five (5) years, a fine of up to $250,000, a period of supervised release of up to three years, and a mandatory special assessment fee of $100.00.  United States District Judge Brandon S. Long will sentence TRIGGS on September 30, 2025.

    For more information on the Department of Justice’s response to the pandemic, please visit https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus.  Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Simpson praised the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in investigating this matter.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Brittany Reed of the Violent Crimes Unit is in charge of the prosecution.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sen. Johnson Releases Statement on Passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Ron Johnson
    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) released the following statement on his vote to pass Cal. #107, H.R.1, One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
    “With President Biden in the White House and majorities in both chambers of Congress, Democrats had every opportunity to repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and increase taxes on ‘the rich.’ They did not do so. Instead of returning to a reasonable pre-pandemic level of spending and deficits, once the economy recovered, they incurred deficits averaging $1.9 trillion over four years. If that wasn’t bad enough, President Biden also left office with open borders and raging wars.  
    “By passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, we have avoided a $4 trillion automatic tax increase and a default on our debt. Due to the enormous messes Biden and congressional Democrats left us, we are also providing additional funding for border security and defense.   
    “While the bill is a step forward, we have only just begun the difficult task of reducing spending, and there is still a long way to go. A rigorous effort will soon be announced to review every program and every line of the federal budget, looking for ways to reduce spending to a reasonable pre-pandemic level. I look forward to being fully involved in that effort to put America on a path to fiscal sustainability.” 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Gain-of-function research as a security risk for the EU – E-002369/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002369/2025/rev.1
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Gerald Hauser (PfE)

    Neither the Chinese nor the US Government officially disputes that the COVID-19 virus was artificially created in a laboratory as part of ‘gain-of-function’ research and that the global COVID-19 pandemic was triggered either by a laboratory accident or deliberate release. The US Government has therefore recently slashed funding for gain-of-function research or stopped it altogether in certain countries. In the last few months, a pair of Chinese researchers working at the University of Michigan was charged in the US with attempting to smuggle a dangerous pathogen – a potential bioweapon – into the United States. The US prosecutor in charge of the case described it as a matter of utmost importance for national security[1].

    • 1.Which gain-of-function research programmes and which laboratories involved have been and are being supported financially, organisationally or with personnel by the Commission, its bodies, agencies or entities since 2015?
    • 2.What measures has the Commission taken to prevent the import, manufacture or release of potential biological weapons in the EU?
    • 3.Does the Commission intend to ban gain-of-function research – i.e. the artificial creation of potentially dangerous pathogens of any kind – in the future?

    Submitted: 12.6.2025

    • [1] https://www.foxnews.com/us/patel-chinese-nationals-charged-smuggling-known-agroterrorism-agent-into-us-direct-threat
    Last updated: 1 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Issues Revisited: Titles, Amendments to Rule 15c2-12 Undertakings and Voluntary

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    Good afternoon. Thank you to the Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA”) for inviting me to speak with you today. In my role as the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“Commission” or “SEC”) Director of the Office of Municipal Securities (“Office of Municipal Securities” or “OMS”), I get a front row seat to see how government finance professionals strive to advance the continued integrity of the municipal securities market. However, I also get a front row seat to some concerning behaviors that may impact the investor confidence and transparency of the municipal securities market. 

    As is customary, I must remind you that this speech is provided in my official capacity as the Commission’s Director of the Office of Municipal Securities but does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other members of the staff.

    I. What’s in a Title?

    Before I delve into disclosure practices, I would like to start by offering my views on another area of concern to which OMS is paying careful attention. It’s been fifteen years since Congress created a new class of regulated person required to register with the Commission: municipal advisors.[1] But when I speak with market participants or pick up an official statement or visit an issuer’s website, I am regularly confronted with a title that imprecisely[2] reflects the nature of the relationship between municipal entities and/or obligated persons and their advisors: financial advisor.[3]

    While some of you may view using the terms “financial advisor” and “municipal advisor” to be interchangeable when discussing hiring a professional to negotiate terms of a transaction or verify pricing as just a matter of a title, Congress expressly defined those persons who engage in municipal advisory activities[4] as “municipal advisors”.[5]

    I’m going to start with why I think it’s helpful to use regulatory terms. Although not required, using regulatory terms such as “municipal advisor” in solicitations and offering documents is helpful because it clearly indicates to investors that those professionals are subject to the rules and regulations designed to protect investors and municipal entities[6] and obligated persons.[7] Additionally, using defined regulatory terms in these documents may be helpful to municipal entities and obligated persons in avoiding including confusing or ambiguous statements in disclosures to investors.

    Now, for the what. Let’s start with hiring professionals. Municipal entities and obligated persons often retain various professionals through a competitive request for proposal/qualification (“RFP/Q”) process. Before anyone objects, you’re correct: responses to RFP/Qs do not on their own constitute municipal advisory activity.[8] I have, however, observed instances (most notably in public-private partnerships[9] and charter schools[10]) where the work or services requested in the RFP/Qs would require the selected professional to be registered as a municipal advisor because they would be providing advice with respect to the issuance of municipal securities or the use of municipal financial products. In our review of these RFP/Qs, we have either seen municipal entities be silent on requiring that respondents to an RFP/Q be registered as a municipal advisor with the Commission and Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”) or, worse, affirmatively say that registration as a municipal advisor is not a requirement.[11]

    Given that unregistered entities may be engaging in what appears to be municipal advisory activity, you may want to confirm not only that any professional providing municipal advisory services to you is properly registered[12] but also that you have in your RFP/Qs for services or work constituting municipal advisory activity a requirement that respondents be registered with the Commission and the MSRB as municipal advisors in order to submit a response. At a minimum, I do not believe these RFP/Qs should be soliciting the services of a “financial advisor” or “consultant” which may create the impression that they do not need to be registered with the Commission or the MSRB. If you are seeking the services of a municipal advisor, it would be helpful to use the term municipal advisor in your RFP/Qs.

    Another area where I see a concerning use of “financial advisor,” where “municipal advisor” should be used, is in your offering documents. As previously mentioned, municipal advisor is more than just a title: it is a regulatory term. Using “municipal advisor” tells investors that the firm, its associated persons, and its activities are subject to rules and regulations; that the Commission monitors municipal advisors for compliance; and takes necessary action to enforce Congress’s mandate. If you use municipal advisors in your transactions, I think it would be beneficial to use the defined term “municipal advisor” in your offering documents to accurately describe the professionals fulfilling that role. Using a term that is explicitly defined by law may also help avoid including confusing or ambiguous statements in disclosures to investors.

    There are also strong benefits to being involved with or retaining persons or firms registered and regulated as municipal advisers, as it demonstrates that these persons or firms recognize that they are engaging in municipal advisory activity. Registering as a municipal advisor may also demonstrate that the advisor understands that it has certain legal obligations, including a requirement to register unless an exclusion or exemption applies. These obligations include, among other things, a requirement to disclose to clients any material conflicts of interest. If you remember nothing else from today, remember this: your municipal advisor is required to always act in your best interest.

    II. Observations on Amendments to Continuing Disclosure Undertakings

    Now turning to disclosure practices. When the Commission proposed amendments[13] to Rule 15c2-12 (“Rule 15c2-12” or “Rule”)[14] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) in 1994[15] prohibiting underwriters, subject to certain exemptions, from purchasing or selling municipal securities covered by the Rule in a primary offering, unless the underwriter had reasonably determined that the issuer (or obligated person) had undertaken in a written agreement or contract[16] (“continuing disclosure undertaking”) to provide specified annual information and event notices,[17] practitioners expressed concern[18] that the amendments were not sufficiently flexible to address changing conditions to financial and pertinent operating information. The Commission addressed practitioners’ concerns when it adopted the amendments.[19]

    a. NABL 1 Letter

    The Commission explained in the 1994 Amendments Adopting Release that Rule 15c2-12, as amended, requires that continuing disclosure undertakings specify only the general type of information to be provided[20] and that undertakings should be drafted with sufficient flexibility to accommodate for subsequent developments that may require adjustments in the financial information and operating data contractually agreed upon in the undertaking.[21] Shortly after adoption of the amendments, the National Association of Bond Lawyers (“NABL”) requested[22] staff guidance interpreting an issue that I see continues to be debated thirty-one years later: amending continuing disclosure undertakings.

    Let’s take a moment and revisit the statements made by staff on amending continuing disclosure undertakings in response to the NABL 1 Letter.[23] Staff first noted that in meeting the requirement that annual financial information be specified in reasonable detail, staff anticipated that continuing disclosure undertakings would set forth a general description of the type of financial information and operating data that would be provided. Staff further observed that these descriptions would not need to state more than a general category of financial information and operating data. Moreover, staff noted that where a continuing disclosure undertaking calls for information that no longer can be generated because the operations to which it related had been materially changed or discontinued, a statement to that effect would satisfy the continuing disclosure undertaking. In such instances, staff explained that it may be good practice to provide similar operating data with respect to any substitute or replacement operation. Further, staff noted that issuers and obligated persons may provide additional information that is not required by the terms of the undertaking. Accordingly, the staff did not anticipate that it often would be necessary to amend informational undertakings.

    In addition to providing guidance on the circumstances under which an undertaking could be amended, the staff also provided several examples[24] of annual financial information descriptions. For example, categories of operating data provided for a college or university facility bond offering might include, among others, information regarding attendance, applications, and tuition and room and board rates charged to students. In a water or sewer financing, categories of information provided might include, among others, customers, rates, use, capacity, and demand.

    b. Current State of Continuing Disclosure Undertakings

    Now I would like to take the opportunity to reflect on the current state of continuing disclosure undertakings. Since the 1994 amendments promoted flexibility in drafting continuing disclosure undertakings, staff has heard that practitioners have discovered ambiguities and inconsistencies in their continuing disclosure undertakings that have resulted in overlapping, inconsistent, and outdated information in required disclosures. Consequently, practitioners continue to struggle with questions about amending continuing disclosure undertakings and have asked the staff for guidance on this issue.

    To start, I want to remind practitioners that Rule 15c2-12, as amended, offers flexibility in the content and scope of disclosed financial information.[25] The Rule specifies only general types of information relating to the financial information and operating data to accommodate for any subsequent developments that would require adjustments to the data.[26] Further, adhering to your continuing disclosure undertakings does not preclude you from providing additional information, particularly where disclosure may be necessary to avoid liability under the antifraud provisions.[27]

    The staff recognizes that, despite the staff interpretive guidance in the NABL 1 Letter, which elaborated on statements in the 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, some obligated persons have continued to provide specific and relatively unflexible descriptions of annual financial information or operating data in the continuing disclosure undertakings by, for instance, pointing to specific tables of information in an official statement because they believe it makes it easier for issuers and dissemination agents to comply with the undertaking. Although Rule 15c2-12 does not prohibit such specificity or incorporation by reference,[28] I believe that where obligated persons choose to include references to specific tables or similar specificity, they might consider including language allowing for flexibility, such as describing tables “of the type” or tables “of the kind” provided in the official statement.

    The inclusion in continuing disclosure undertakings of clear descriptions of the disclosures to be made by municipal issuers and obligated persons promotes a more transparent and efficient market. However, drafters of continuing disclosure undertakings may want to be mindful when specifying the particular types of information that will be provided for many years into the future, as continuing disclosure undertakings are contractual obligations that cannot be amended based on a unilateral decision by an issuer or any other party. With very limited exceptions, issuers and obligated persons may not later decide unilaterally what types of information an investor would consider necessary or meaningful, especially where such information has previously been agreed upon.[29]

    Continuing disclosure undertakings would be meaningless if issuers and obligated persons could unilaterally determine that certain types of information were no longer necessary or meaningful to investors.[30] Despite previous requests from the market for guidance on amending continuing disclosure agreements, I remind you that those agreements are contracts governed by state law[31] from which the Commission does not have the authority to provide exemptions. Failure to comply with continuing disclosure undertakings would be breaches of contract enforceable by private parties.[32] This is why staff statements have focused on using language in continuing disclosure agreements that allow for changing conditions.

    III. The Importance of Voluntary Disclosure in the Municipal Securities Market

    Sound, timely, and accurate disclosures of the financial condition and operating status of issuers and obligated persons promotes the continued integrity of the municipal securities market.[33] As we all know, Rule 15c2-12 requires that continuing disclosure undertakings set forth certain enumerated requirements. Rule 15c2-12 does not generally impose an obligation to provide ongoing information beyond the contractual continuing disclosure obligations. I am of the view, however, that voluntary disclosures[34] — providing information beyond contractual continuing disclosure obligations — by issuers and obligated persons can provide market participants with updated financial and other disclosures regarding the effects of evolving economic conditions.[35]

    a. Improving Transparency and Market Efficiencies

    Issuer organizations and other market participants have noted that providing voluntary interim disclosure can serve the interests of municipal issuers and have developed voluntary disclosure best practices designed to improve the quality and quantity of voluntary disclosure in the secondary market.[36] GFOA issued a Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure in 2021.[37]

    I am of the view that if issuers and obligated persons provide voluntary disclosures of their financial condition and operating status on a more frequent basis, the additional information could potentially reduce information asymmetries and help investors and other market participants identify early warning signs of an issuer’s or obligated person’s deteriorating financial condition sooner (such as budget deficits and imbalances, high unfunded pensions liability, and decreases in property value), which could lead to increased market efficiencies.

    Some examples of helpful voluntary disclosures that municipal issuers and obligated persons could consider disseminating are[38]

    • More Timely Financial Information. Municipal issuers routinely prepare periodic reports containing financial information and/or operating data, such as investment positions, interim financial information, or capital improvement plans, for various non-disclosure purposes,[39] which are generally produced in accordance with governance documents, best practices, and generally accepted guidelines. Municipal issuers could consider submitting such reports via the repository designated by the Commission (currently the MSRB’s Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system) and/or through their own designated website.
    • Reports Prepared for Other Governmental Purposes. Municipal issuers and obligated persons may have prepared reports addressing relevant climate, cybersecurity, litigation, or other risks for other purposes.
    • Reports and Information Shared with Third Parties. Reports prepared to be shared with rating agencies, bank loan providers or other market participants may also include information material to investors.[40]
    • Information Regarding Availability of Federal, State and Local Aid. If it materially affects, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, your ability to repay debt service, you could make available a description of available aid that you have sought or are planning on seeking and any other material terms of the aid to investors.
    • Information Regarding Non-Routine Events that May Impact an Issuer’s Ability to Repay Securities. For instance, a large business relocating to your jurisdiction may have a positive impact, while a natural disaster may have a negative impact. Sharing information with the market on any non-routine events that may impact your ability to repay debt service could be helpful.

    In my view, making any voluntary disclosures available in the place or places where they regularly make information available to investors, such as on the EMMA system and/or on their own websites, would be helpful to both issuers and investors.

    b. Observations on Liability

    I sometimes hear from issuers that they would disclose more information to the market, but that their counsel advises them, as a matter of course, not to provide any information that is not required. I recognize that the issue of liability is often raised in connection with voluntary disclosures.

    I believe that accompanying voluntary disclosures that contain projections or forward-looking statements with meaningful cautionary language — including, for example, (1) a description of relevant facts or assumptions affecting the reasonableness of reliance on and the materiality of the information provided, (2) a description of how certain important information may be incomplete or unknown, and (3) the process or methodology (audited versus unaudited) used by the municipal issuer or obligated person to produce the information — could not only improve the quality of the disclosure but also help mitigate associated legal risks.

    As I observe the municipal securities market and consider appropriate paths to address behaviors that impact investor confidence and transparency, I believe that it would be beneficial for municipal issuers to disclose, to exercise reasonable care, and to follow best practices in the creation and release of any voluntary disclosure.

    It’s always a pleasure to speak with members of the GFOA. Thank you again for the invitation to discuss these important issues with you today.


    [1]           See Section 975(a)(1)(B) (15 U.S.C. 78o-4(a)(1)(B)) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act” or “Dodd-Frank”).

    [3]           While state statutes or other governing documents may reference the selection or designation of a “financial advisor” in connection with the issuance of bonds, I am of the view that the term “municipal advisor” should also be used in any RFP/Qs and offering documents issued in these jurisdictions when the requested service may include municipal advisory activity. In the event a state statute or other governing document references “financial advisor” or other term, it may be appropriate to use both terms with appropriate definitions and cross-references.  

    [4]           Pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 15Ba1-1(e) (15 CFR 240.15Ba1-1(e)), “municipal advisory activities” includes, but is not limited to, “[p]roviding advice to or on behalf of a municipal entity or obligated person with respect to municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities, including advice with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such financial products or issue.”

    [5]           See Exchange Act Section 15B(e)(4)(A) (15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(A)). The definition of municipal advisor includes financial advisors, guaranteed investment contract brokers, third-party marketers, placement agents, solicitors, finders, and swap advisors that provide municipal advisory services, unless they are statutorily excluded. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(B). The statutory definition of municipal advisor excludes a broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer serving as an underwriter (as defined in section 77b(a)(11) of this title), any investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 et seq.), or persons associated with such investment advisers who are providing investment advice, any commodity trading advisor registered under the Commodity Exchange Act or persons associated with a commodity trading advisor who are providing advice related to swaps, attorneys offering legal advice or providing services that are of a traditional legal nature, or engineers providing engineering advice. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(e)(4)(C). The Commission exempts the following persons from the definition of municipal advisor to the extent they are engaging in the specified activities: accountants; public officials and employees; banks; responses to requests for proposals or qualifications; swap dealers; participation by an independent registered municipal advisor; persons that provide advice on certain investment strategies; certain solicitations. See Exchange Act Rule 15Ba1-1(d)(3)(i) through (viii) (17 CFR 240.15Ba1-1(d)(3)(i) through (viii)).

    [6]           See Registration of Municipal Advisors, Exchange Act Release No. 70462 (Sept. 20, 2013), 78 FR 67468, 67509 (Nov. 12, 2013) (“Municipal Advisor Adopting Release”).

    [7]           The timeline for being required to register as a municipal advisor when advising clients about conduit financing or other financing options is dependent on certain facts and circumstances. See id. at 67485.

    [8]           Id. at 67475.

    [11]         While the Dodd-Frank Act is a federal law, the municipal advisor registration requirements apply to advice with respect to the issuance of municipal securities regardless of the proposed source of funds used to repay those securities, which may include local tax revenue, state or federal revenue or grants or funds paid by a private lessee or purchaser. The staff is aware of publicly available documents where a state or local government has stated that municipal advisor registration is only required for municipal securities being repaid with federal funds.

    [12]         See Speech, Responsibilities of Regulated Entities to Municipal Issuers, supra note 2.

    [13]         See Exchange Act Release No. 33742 (Mar. 9, 1994), 59 FR 12759 (Mar. 17, 1994) (“1994 Amendments Proposing Release”).

    [14]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12. The Commission adopted Rule 15c2-12 in 1989 to enhance disclosure in the   municipal securities market by codifying standards for underwriters to obtain, review, and disseminate disclosure documents. See Exchange Act Release No. 26100 (Sept. 22, 1988), 53 FR 37778 (“1988 Proposing Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 26985 (June 28, 1989), 54 FR 28799 (July 10, 1989) (“1989 Adopting Release”). Rule 15c2-12 requires an underwriter acting in primary offerings of municipal securities with an aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 or more to obtain and review an official statement “deemed final” by an issuer of the municipal securities, except for the omission of specified information, prior to making a bid, purchase, offer, or sale of municipal securities. See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(a) and (b)(1).

    [15]         The Commission has amended Rule 15c2-12 over the years to respond to evolving market practices. See Exchange Act Release No. 34961 (Nov. 10, 1994), 59 FR 59590 (Nov. 17, 1994) (“1994 Amendments Adopting Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 59062 (Dec. 5, 2008), 73 FR 76104 (Dec. 15, 2008) (“2008 Amendments Adopting Release”); Exchange Act Release No. 62184A (May 27, 2010), 75 FR 33100 (June 10, 2010) (“2010 Amendments Adopting Release”); and Exchange Act Release No. 83885 (Aug. 20, 2018), 83 FR 44700 (Aug. 31, 2018) (“2018 Amendments Adopting Release”).

    [16]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(b)(5).

    [17]         See 17 CFR 240.15c2-12(b)(5)(C).

    [18]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599.

    [19]         Id.

    [20]         Id.

    [21]         Id.

    [22]         NABL raised several questions in its letters. See Letter from Robert L.D. Colby, Deputy Director, Division of Market Regulation, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, to John S. Overdorff, Chair, and Gerald J. Laporte, Vice-Chair, Securities Law and Disclosure Committee, National Association of Bond Lawyers, dated June 23, 1995 (‘‘NABL 1 Letter”), available at https://www.sec.gov/info/municipal/nabl-1-interpretive-letter-1995-06-23.pdf; and Letter from Catherine McGuire, Chief Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, to John S. Overdorff, Chair, Securities Law and Disclosure Committee, National Association of Bond Lawyers, dated Sept. 19, 1995 (“NABL 2 Letter”), available at https://www.sec.gov/info/municipal/nabl-2-interpretive-letter-1995-09-19.pdf. See also Letter from Michael Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, Bond Dealers of America, Emily Swenson Brock, Director, Federal Liaison Center, Government Finance Officers Association, Kenneth R. Artin, President, National Association of Bond Lawyers, Cornelia Chebinou, Washington Director, National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasures, Michael Decker, Managing Director, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, to Jessica Kane, Director, Office of Municipal Securities, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated Aug. 9, 2016 available at https://www.nabl.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/20160809-Joint-Letter-on-Amending-CDAs.pdf.

    [23]         See NABL 1 Letter, Question 2, supra note 22.  

    [24]         Id.

    [25]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599; Securities and Exchange Commission, Report on the Municipal Securities Market (July 31, 2012) (“Report on the Municipal Securities Market”), at 70, available at https://www.sec.gov/news/studies/2012/munireport073112.pdf.

    [26]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599 (Commission noting that “the amendments require that the undertaking specify only the general type of information to be supplied . . .”).

    [27]         Id.

    [28]         Id.

    [29]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599. But see NABL 1 Letter, Question 2, supra note 22, outlining scenarios where an undertaking that includes an amendment provisions nevertheless may satisfy the requirements of Rule 15c2-12.

    [30]         See 1994 Amendments Adopting Release, supra note 15, 59 FR at 59599.

    [31]         Id. at 59601.

    [32]         Id. (“remedies for breach of any undertaking under applicable state law are a subject for negotiation between the parties to the Offering.”).

    [33]         See Exchange Act Release No. 33741 (Mar. 9, 1994), 59 FR 12748, 12752-754 (Mar. 17, 1994) (“1994 Interpretive Release”).

    [34]         As seen during the Covid-19 Pandemic, variations in voluntary disclosures persisted and the differing approaches to disclosure served as a reminder that required disclosures are not confined to enumerated events. For instance, some issuers included tailored, stand-alone COVID-19-risk sections in their disclosures or uploaded financial informational statements to EMMA identifying impacts on economies and revenues, and expectations regarding associated risk mitigation. See, e.g., MSRB, Municipal Securities Market COVID-19-Related Disclosure Summary (updated Mar. 28, 2021), available at https://www.msrb.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/Municipal-Securities-Market-COVID-19-Related-Disclosure-Summary.pdf; DPC Data COVID Disclosure Trends Charted in New Infographic, A Year of COVID-Tagged Disclosures, Mar. 2020 to Mar. 2021, available at https://www.dpcdata.com/resources/year-covid-tagged-disclosures/. 

    [35]         See, e.g., Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at III.A.1 and III.B (summarizing market participant and investor interest in voluntary disclosure guidelines and best practices to improve the level and quality of disclosure in the primary and secondary markets); Chairman Jay Clayton and Rebecca Olsen, Director, Office of Municipal Securities, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, The Importance of Disclosure for our Municipal Markets (May 4, 2020) (the “Municipal Market COVID-19 Statement”), available at https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-olsen-2020-05-04.

    [36]         See, e.g., Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA”) Best Practices Voluntary Disclosure (Oct. 1, 2021) (“Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure”), available at https://www.gfoa.org/materials/voluntary-disclosure (“Enhanced market communication achieved through voluntary disclosure the issuer to improve its investor relations. This enhanced communication and improved relations with investors can become an important factor for access to the capital for markets….”); National Federation of Municipal Analysts (“NFMA”) Position Paper on Voluntary Interim Disclosures by State and Local Governments (Oct. 26, 2004) (“NFMA Voluntary Interim Disclosures Paper”), at 2-4, available at https://www.nfma.org/assets/documents/nfma_position_interim_disclosure.pdf (NFMA “strongly believe(s) that it is in the best interest of state and local government units and political instrumentalities thereof to provide investors on a voluntary basis with timely disclosure reports derived from information maintained in the normal course of operations” and that “[t]o the extent that governmental issuers have relevant financial information on hand, the benefits of providing voluntary interim disclosure vastly outweigh any administrative burden entailed in disseminating this information to the market.”)

    [37]         See Best Practices on Voluntary Disclosure, supra note 36.

    [38]         See, e.g., id.; Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at 58 (noting that the “practices of market participants in voluntarily providing [large amounts of information about issuers of municipal securities] to investors are not, however, consistent,” further explaining that “[l]arge repeat issuers generally have more comprehensive disclosure than small, infrequent or conduit issuers, who may voluntarily provide little ongoing information to investors.”).

    [39]         In many cases, municipal issuers already prepare and disseminate reports or other documents containing financial information and/or operating data to various governmental or institutional bodies, or to the public. See, e.g., Application of Antifraud Provisions to Public Statements of Issuers and Obligated Persons of Municipal Securities in the Secondary Market: Staff Legal Bulletin No. 21 (OMS) (Feb. 7, 2020) (“Staff Legal Bulletin No. 21”), available at https://www.sec.gov/municipal/application-antifraud-provisions-staff-legal-bulletin-21; Report of Investigation in the Matter of the City of Harrisburg, Pa. Concerning the Potential Liability of Public Officials with Regard to Disclosure Obligations in the Secondary Market, Exchange Act Release No. 69516 (May 6, 2013), (“Harrisburg Report”), available at https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-69516.htm.

    [40]         See Report on the Municipal Securities Market, supra note 25, at 106 n.640.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China’s international image has improved significantly in recent years and is recognized in different parts of the world – Russian expert

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    Moscow, July 1 /Xinhua/ — Economic power, international activity and contribution to global development – these factors have a positive effect on China’s image on the world stage, which is recognized in various countries, Nikita Stepanov, a senior researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences and a member of the central board of the Russian-Chinese Friendship Society, told Xinhua in an interview.

    “China’s international image has indeed improved significantly in recent years and is worthy of recognition in various parts of the world. This is due to a combination of factors, primarily its active economic influence and the successful implementation of large-scale international projects, such as the Belt and Road Initiative. China has become an important trading partner for many countries, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, which has strengthened trust and respect for it on the world stage,” the expert noted.

    As N. Stepanov pointed out, today China plays a key role in the formation of inclusive economic globalization, demonstrating a development model that takes into account national characteristics and needs. The Chinese experience of sustainable growth and successful adaptation of economic reforms has become, in his opinion, an important reference point for many countries, especially for the states of the Global South and developing regions. “China has proven that it is possible to combine an open economy with active state participation, which has caused a wide response and interest in the modern world,” he believes.

    According to the Russian economist, China’s Belt and Road initiative strengthens the integration of developing countries into the global economy, stimulating infrastructure and industrial development. By promoting trade, investment and technological exchange, China acts as a stabilizing factor in maintaining the global economic order. “China not only offers alternative models, but also plays a driving role in stimulating growth and reducing the gap between developed and developing countries, maintaining balance and diversity in the global economic order,” he emphasized.

    N. Stepanov drew attention to the fact that China demonstrates a desire not only to develop the economy and infrastructure, but also to promote sustainable development and innovation at the global level. China is actively involved in reforming international institutions, stimulating their adaptation to modern challenges and the needs of different countries, especially developing ones. “Thus, China’s role in the global governance system is becoming increasingly significant, contributing to the formation of a more just and inclusive international order,” the expert noted.

    The Xinhua interlocutor emphasized that the hegemonic and intimidating behavior of the United States, which manifests itself in the abuse of tariff measures and military interventions without the sanction of the UN Security Council, raises serious concerns, undermines the international order, leads to the escalation of trade conflicts and instability in the global economy. At the same time, according to N. Stepanov, China plays an important role in maintaining the international order and developing the global governance system. “Over the past decades, it has consistently advocated respect for international law and the sovereignty of states, which contributes to strengthening multilateralism in international relations,” the economist recalled, adding that the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind reflects China’s commitment to cooperation, mutual respect and joint development, which is important in the era of global challenges.

    According to the Russian expert, the concept of building a community of common destiny for humanity has had a significant impact on the development of world diplomacy and international relations. “This concept emphasizes the need for global cooperation and mutual respect to address common challenges — climate change, pandemics, economic instability and conflicts. It encourages the search for compromises and joint actions, emphasizing the interdependence of all countries regardless of their level of development,” he explained.

    N. Stepanov is confident that the concept of a common destiny for humanity has strengthened multipolarity in world politics, supporting the principles of justice and equality. “China is actively promoting this idea through the Belt and Road initiative, promoting economic development and infrastructure cooperation in developing countries. Thus, the concept unites the efforts of different states on the path to sustainable and inclusive development of humanity,” he said.

    In addition, cultural diplomacy, as well as the dissemination of the Chinese language and traditional culture through Confucius Institutes, play an important role in improving China’s international image, according to the expert. “This expands the positive perception of the country,” concluded N. Stepanov. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Africa: Coalition commits to Action Plan to increase private investment mobilization for developing countries by end of 2027


    Download logo

    A coalition of governments, international development partners and private sector groups including the UN Capital Development Fund, UN Economic Commission for Africa, African Union Commission, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Global Investors for Sustainable Development (GISD) Alliance, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Norad, Switzerland SECO and Convergence Blended Finance, are announcing the development of an Action Plan to increase mobilize private sector capital at scale in developing countries.

    The Action Plan, announced at the Fourth Financing for Development Conference (FFD4) in Seville, Spain, seeks to tackle poverty, economic growth and climate risks by deploying public sector resources through blended finance to mobilize private investment in underserved markets, which, over the last decade, has remained weak even as global wealth has ballooned. The Action Plan will include a dedicated Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Africa-focused track to advance context-specific blended finance approaches and support scalable investment opportunities in key sectors.

    FFD4 is a once-in-a-decade gathering of development partners seeking to build a renewed global financing framework to urgently unlock greater volumes of capital to close the financing gap of developing countries. Government-sourced Official Development Assistance (ODA) declined last year by over 7% compared with 2023, according to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), one of the co-proposers of the Action Plan.

    “The world has the resources – the money we need – to eradicate poverty and ensure every person can live a life free from poverty. Much of those resources lie with the private sector in the world’s most developed nations and they will likely remain there until the real and perceived risks that act as a barrier to investment in underserved markets are tackled head-on,” said Pradeep Kurukulasuriya, Executive Secretary of the UN Capital Development Fund, which provides catalytic and blended finance solutions for underserved markets.

    “Blended finance models that are tailored to country needs have the potential to de-risk markets, plug the international development finance gap and transform the lives of hundreds of millions of people living in the world’s underserved markets and Least Developed Countries,” Mr Kurukulasuriya added.

    “Bridging Africa’s investment gap demands bold, coordinated action. This Action Plan marks a turning point, a practical blueprint to shift global capital toward sustainable development in countries that need it most. The UN Economic Commission for Africa is committed to ensuring that Africa is not only part of the conversation, but central to the solution” added Claver Gatete, Executive Secretary, UN Economic Commission for Africa.

    “As traditional streams of overseas development assistance dry up, more people than ever are talking about the promise of blended finance,” shared Joan Larrea, Chief Executive Office of Convergence. “At FFD4, with this joint proposal, we have made a significant step towards making that promise a reality.”

    “Norway is proud to collaborate with this global coalition on developing the Action Plan to mobilize private investment for sustainable development. Addressing the financing gaps in Least Developed Countries and underserved markets is critical to tackling poverty, hunger, and climate challenges. By leveraging blended finance and fostering innovative partnerships, we aim to contribute to transformative change and create a foundation for equitable and inclusive growth,” said Åsmund Aukrust, Norway’s Minister of Development.

    “Mobilization of private capital for financing sustainable development is an integral part of Finland’s foreign and development policy”, says Ville Tavio, Finland’s Minister for Foreign Trade and Development. “Financing for Development Conference will increase the clarity and formality of private capital mobilization as part of the financing sustainable development for the next decade. We believe that developing a common action plan and standardizing the proven blended finance models will help us scale up private capital mobilization to deliver on the commitments agreed here in Seville.”

    While global assets have doubled to $482 trillion over the last decade, private sector investment to and within low- and middle-income countries has remained stubbornly weak. Only 5% of those global assets are invested in developing countries, excluding China, according to the Financial Stability Board, an international body that monitors the global financial system. Of that 5%, only a tiny proportion reaches the most underserved markets and the world’s 44 Least Developed Countries, which are collectively home to some 880 million people.

    The world stands at a crossroads for financing sustainable development with an estimated annual financing gap of $4 trillion – up from $2.5 trillion pre-pandemic. The OECD reports that all “official development finance” activity mobilized an average of $57 billion in private investment annually over the last five years – just 1% of the $6-7 trillion needed each year if the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are to be met.

    At the same time, domestic financial resources in developing countries are insufficient and cross-border private investment flows from developed to developing countries has been low over the past decade.

    Blended finance has the potential to transform private investment flows and positively contribute to the FfD4 Outcome Document mobilization objectives and to the SDGs.

    Signatories of the Joint Initiative have committed to develop an “effective, efficient, fair and practical action plan” through the remainder of 2025 and into 2026 to identify how to use a blend of public sector and philanthropic resources to mobilize and crowd-in larger amounts of private sector finance for development results at scale.

    The Action Plan will describe practical measures to mobilize private investment using standardized and replicable blended finance models tailored to country contexts, with an emphasis on alignment with national priorities and global development goals with the following measurable results:

    • At least 16 OECD DAC countries will agree to or endorse the Action Plan by March 31, 2026.

    • At least 27 African countries and 27 non-African developing countries will also endorse the Action Plan by the same date.

    • At least 16 developed and 54 developing countries will commit to implementing the plan starting June 30, 2026.

    The Action Plan is one of a series being submitted to conference organisers that seek to turn the objectives outlined in the FFD4 outcome document into a pathway for action.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).

    MIL OSI Africa

  • India–Ghana relations to get fresh push with PM Modi’s landmark two-day visit

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s two-day visit to Ghana from July 2, marks a landmark moment in India–Ghana relations. This will be the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Ghana in more than three decades and PM Modi’s first bilateral engagement with the West African nation. The visit is expected to deepen cooperation in trade, development partnership, capacity building and cultural exchange, strengthening a warm relationship that has endured since Ghana’s independence.

    Historical Context

    India and Ghana share historical ties rooted in anti-colonial solidarity and a shared vision for the Global South. India established its representative office in Accra in 1953, four years before Ghana gained independence in 1957. Diplomatic relations were formally established the same year, laying the foundation for a close and friendly partnership.

    Political Engagement and High-Level Visits

    High-level exchanges have played a crucial role in nurturing this bond. From the Ghanaian side, President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo visited India in March 2018 for the International Solar Alliance Founding Conference and later addressed the Voice of Global South Summit hosted by Prime Minister Modi in January 2023. Before him, President John Dramani Mahama travelled to India in October 2015 to attend the third India-Africa Forum Summit. Other notable visits include President Kufuor’s trips in 2002 and 2008, President Rawlings’ visit in 1993, President Limann’s in 1981 and President Kwame Nkrumah’s historic visit in 1961.

    From the Indian side, President Pranab Mukherjee visited Ghana in June 2016. Before that, Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao’s visit in November 1995 was the last by an Indian Prime Minister, making PM Modi’s upcoming trip especially significant. Recent engagements have kept the momentum alive, with External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar meeting President Akufo-Addo in September 2022 and Minister of State V. Muraleedharan attending the Ghanaian Presidential inauguration in January 2021.

    Institutional Mechanisms

    India and Ghana have built robust institutional mechanisms to sustain regular dialogue. The Joint Commission was established in 1995 and reinforced in 2016, while a protocol for Foreign Office Consultations was signed in 2002. Three rounds of consultations have been held since then, with the latest in New Delhi in 2022. The Joint Trade Committee, operational since 1981, held its fourth meeting in Accra in May 2024. Ghana’s Parliamentary Friendship Association also contributes to exchanges at the legislative level.

    Commercial Partnership

    India is among Ghana’s top trading partners and the largest destination for Ghanaian exports. Bilateral trade crossed two billion US dollars in 2022–23, with Ghana enjoying a positive trade balance due to substantial gold exports. Indian investments in Ghana are valued at over 1.2 billion dollars, spanning sectors such as pharmaceuticals, agro-processing, construction, manufacturing and ICT. Platforms like the CII-Exim Bank Conclave on India–Africa Project Partnership continue to play an important role in strengthening commercial ties. Ghana has been an active participant, with the 19th edition of the conclave in August 2024 witnessing the participation of four Ghanaian ministers and senior regulatory officials.

    Development Partnership

    India has been a committed development partner for Ghana, extending around 450 million US dollars in concessional credit and grants for infrastructure and capacity-building projects. Landmark initiatives include the India-Ghana Kofi Annan ICT Centre of Excellence established in 2003, the Rural Electrification Project, the Jubilee House Presidential Complex which was rehabilitated in 2017, and industrial ventures like the Komenda Sugar Plant and Elmina Fish Processing Plant inaugurated in 2016. Under Buyer’s Credit, India supported the construction of the Tema-Mpakadan Standard Gauge Railway Line, which was inaugurated in November 2024 and is expected to boost regional connectivity by linking Ghana’s main port city to its hinterland and neighbouring Burkina Faso. Other key projects include the Tamale-Walewale Road and an assembly plant for agricultural machinery.

    Capacity Building & Human Resource Development

    Ghana is also one of the largest beneficiaries of India’s flagship capacity-building programmes. Over 1,600 scholarships have been offered under the e-Vidya Bharati and e-Arogya Bharati digital network project. Hundreds of Ghanaians have benefited from ITEC and ICCR scholarships. In 2024 alone, 128 civilians and 109 defence personnel from Ghana trained in India under ITEC, while 35 ICCR scholarships and three AYUSH scholarships were awarded. Education fairs held in Kumasi and Accra in 2024 and 2025 have strengthened linkages between Indian institutions and Ghanaian students.

    Sectoral Cooperation

    Sectoral cooperation has grown steadily over the years. Agreements have been signed to promote cooperation in areas like LPG distribution, peaceful uses of nuclear energy and standardisation through collaborations between India’s Bureau of Indian Standards and Ghana Standards Authority. Air connectivity is facilitated through the Air Services Agreement signed in 1978 and updated through subsequent MoUs. Cultural exchange remains a vibrant aspect of the partnership, anchored by a Cultural Agreement signed in 1981 and periodic Cultural Exchange Programmes. India also extended humanitarian support to Ghana during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing 50,000 vaccine doses as a grant and over 1.6 million doses through the COVAX facility.

    Prime Minister Modi’s visit is expected to inject fresh momentum into the bilateral partnership by expanding trade, boosting investments in energy and digital infrastructure, advancing cooperation in defence and capacity building, and deepening collaboration in health, education and climate action. 

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Seychelles’ Path to Macroeconomic Stability and Resilience

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    Comprehensive reforms have fueled Seychelles’ journey out of crisis and its continued resilience in the face of shocks

    Seychelles—a nation of 115 islands in the Indian Ocean—today enjoys a comparatively high degree of economic stability. Inflation is below 2 percent, real GDP has largely recovered from the pandemic, public debt is on course to reach the government’s target of less than 50 percent of GDP before 2030, and per capita income is the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa. But this stands in stark contrast to the country’s fortunes twenty years ago when it faced an economic crisis. What’s behind this turnaround?

    From times of crisis

    In the mid-2000s, Seychelles faced significant macroeconomic challenges stemming from expansionary fiscal policies and a rigid state-led economy. Large fiscal deficits were driven by high public spending on capital projects, subsidies, transfers to state enterprises and high debt service payments, while government revenues were constrained by significant tax concessions to foreign investors in the growing tourism sector. An expansionary monetary policy within a fixed exchange rate framework and extensive exchange controls led to external imbalances and depletion of foreign reserves. By 2008, gross public debt exceeded 192 percent of GDP and reserves had dwindled to just 2 weeks of import cover. The global financial crisis exacerbated these vulnerabilities, and the crisis came to a head in mid-2008 when the Seychelles authorities missed payments on the nation’s private foreign debt and Standard & Poor’s downgraded Seychelles to selective default.

    Changing course

    In response to this crisis, the government launched a comprehensive reform program with support from the IMF and other development partners. Key actions included abolishing all exchange restrictions and floating the rupee, consolidating public finances, reforming state enterprises, and abolishing indirect product subsidies in favor of a targeted social safety net. Paris Club creditors agreed to a debt stock reduction. These measures quickly yielded positive outcomes: inflation fell, foreign reserves were restored to over 3 months of import cover, and public debt declined to below 70 percent of GDP within five years. This turnaround rebuilt investor confidence, and the restoration of macroeconomic stability allowed policymakers room to shift from crisis management to macro-structural reforms in support of sustainable growth. 

    Resilience and commitment tested

    The COVID-19 pandemic, which caused a sudden collapse in global tourism, was another tremendous shock. But its years of macroeconomic stability enabled Seychelles to face this new challenge from a position of strength. Confronted with an economic contraction of nearly 12 percent in 2020, the government implemented timely fiscal and monetary measures to support households and businesses, utilized emergency financing from the IMF, and moved quickly to resume tourism. As tourism rebounded in 2021 and 2022, economic growth surged to nearly 13 percent in 2022, helping to regain lost ground. Foreign exchange reserves were maintained above 3 months of import cover, and the exchange rate was allowed to move to facilitate adjustment. Key to managing the effects of the pandemic and the international commodity shock that followed were the fiscal and foreign exchange buffers built up in prior years and a commitment to macro fiscal discipline demonstrated by the government. 

    Staying on course

    Given highly volatile global economic and financial conditions, Seychelles’ hard-won macroeconomic stability will likely be put to the test again. Environmental pressures limit scope to expand tourism, while vulnerability to external shocks argues for continued strong fiscal discipline and external buffers. To ensure continued economic growth and resilience, vital investments in infrastructure will be necessary, together with deeper development of human capital, more efficient public services, and financial sector deepening and inclusion. Concerted efforts are also needed to strengthen the social safety net and address critical social ills that hamper productivity and economic development. Some of these areas fall within the reform agenda under the current IMF-supported Extended Fund Facility and Resilience and Sustainability Facility, but others will require new policy commitments.

    Seychelles’ economic record highlights the importance of sound macroeconomic management and institutional strengthening in achieving and sustaining economic prosperity. Its journey offers valuable lessons for other small economies aiming at building resilience in an increasingly uncertain global landscape.

    Todd Schneider is IMF mission chief to Seychelles and an advisor in the IMF’s African Department, where Hany Abdel-Latif is an economist, Pedro Maciel is a senior economist, and Henry Quach is a research analyst.

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/07/01/cf-seychelles-path-to-macroeconomic-stability-and-resilience

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News