Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Warns Federal Employees about Questionable Buyout Offer

    Source: US State of California

    Monday, February 3, 2025

    Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov

    Latest attempt to sow chaos amid federal workforce and for Americans that rely on a functioning government

    OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a coalition of 12 attorneys general warning federal employees about the Trump Administration’s questionable “deferred resignation” program, which purports to offer federal employees pay through September 30, 2025, if they resign by February 6, 2025. Following the Trump Administration’s proposal, unions representing federal employees warned their members against accepting the offer, adding that employees who accepted the offer were not guaranteed its benefits. California is home to nearly 150,000 federal workers who provide vital services to Americans nationwide. 

    “Federal employees provide vital services that Americans rely on every day, and are an essential part of the California economy and communities across the state,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration’s so-called buyout offer is a pointed attack aimed at dismantling our federal workforce and sowing chaos for Americans that rely on a functioning government. I urge federal employees to heed warnings from their unions to be very cautious of any buyout offers.” 

    On January 28, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent an email to millions of federal employees detailing a new deferred resignation program. Employees were told that if they accept the offer and resign, they would continue receiving all pay and benefits, and be exempt from in-person work requirements until September 30. OPM sent another email to federal employees on January 30 reiterating the offer and urging them to find “higher productivity” jobs outside of government. The OPM emails instructed employees that they have until February 6 to decide to remain in their position or resign under the deferred resignation program and warned that those who did not resign were not guaranteed to keep their jobs. 

    Immediately following OPM’s email, unions representing federal employees warned their members against accepting the offer. The American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal employees union, released information for its members warning them that employees who accepted the offer were not guaranteed its benefits. The National Federation of Federal Employees similarly warned its members against accepting the offer. 

    Joining Attorney General Bonta in issuing the warning to federal employees are the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, and Washington.

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: How universities can help make our cities more accessible for people with disabilities

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Carmela Cucuzzella, Dean, Faculty of Environmental Design, Université de Montréal, Full Professor School of Design, Université de Montréal

    Those designing university courses should ensure issues of universal accessibility are embedded throughout a student’s academic journey. (Shutterstock)

    People living with disabilities, ranging in severity, regularly face barriers. Oftentimes, built environments are designed in ways that fail to consider the needs of those in situations of disability. That can include improperly sized ramps for wheelchair users or public spaces that are not sensory friendly.

    One 2024 study found that most buildings in Canada are not accessible for people with disabilities.

    This lack of accommodation can have a serious impact on a person’s quality of life. For example, people with disabilities report challenges in their workplaces, such as a lack of automatic door openers and poor signage and way-finding.

    If our public spaces are not accessible to all, then they cannot be truly public. The first step in changing our built environment is to bring awareness to the different forms of disabilities that people in Canada experience.

    The number of people in Canada living with disabilities increased by about five per cent from 2017 to 2022. In 2022, the Canadian Survey on Disability showed that 27 per cent of Canadians aged 15 years and older had one or more disabilities that impacted their daily activities.

    As a professor in a school of design and the dean of the Faculty of Environmental Design at the Université of Montréal, I believe it’s urgently important to explore how faculties of architecture, design, landscape architecture and urbanism can inform design practices through the way we teach and conduct research.

    Our objective must be to teach students how to make our built environment more inclusive and universally accessible through creative means rather than basic technological add-ons.

    In 2022, the Canadian Survey on Disability showed that 27 per cent of Canadians aged 15 years and older had one or more disabilities that impacted their daily activities.
    (Shutterstock)

    Solutions remain cumbersome and stigmatizing

    In 2022, 72 per cent of people with disabilities reported that they experienced one or more barriers to accessibility due to their condition. The Canadian government has recognized these challenges by setting ambitious nationwide accessibility targets for 2040.

    Standards exist for accessibility and inclusivity in Canada, but they are not systematically applied. Furthermore, when designing for universal accessibility, the emphasis is on conformity rather than experience, on separation rather than integration, and on functionality rather than fulfillment.

    Take, for example, a multi-storey office building that provides separate entrances and facilities for people with disabilities. The building complies with the minimum accessibility requirements set by local building codes, but does so in a way that isolates people with disabilities rather than integrating their needs into the overall design. This building does not provide the same experience to all people and therefore separates rather than includes diverse populations.

    The universal accessibility of public spaces and buildings is a complex design problem. It is especially difficult for retrofits, since solutions can quickly become costly, particularly in heritage buildings.

    But if changes are managed carefully, costs can become manageable. Universal accessible design is also challenging for new buildings and spaces, but if universal design is prioritized right from the outset of a project, architects and developers can create inclusive environments that accommodate diverse needs without incurring substantial additional expenses.

    Universities that offer teaching and research programs in universal accessible design can make a real difference.
    (Shutterstock)

    How universities can help

    Universal accessible design is not just a question of following a set of codes, but rather a question of designing for an equitable, qualitative accessible experience. This means ensuring that all people, regardless of their physical or mental situations, are offered equivalent spatial experiences.

    Universities that offer teaching and research programs in a universal accessible design can make a real difference. But it’s integral that teaching is developed alongside the research, as understanding of needs and best practices are in continual renewal.

    Faculties with such programs and courses could achieve this by enabling students through creative engagement of this difficult subject. Furthermore, being in these design environments allows students to understand these societal issues as leverage for innovative solutions, rather than just satisfying building codes.

    Those designing university courses should ensure issues of universal accessibility are embedded throughout a student’s academic journey, and included in a way that helps empower the graduating students.

    Students graduating from these programs will become the young professionals in the fields of design, architecture, urbanism or landscape architecture.

    Unfortunately, the exact likelihood of students specializing in universal accessibility — and applying their knowledge in their careers — is challenging due to limited specific data. But there is an increasing recognition of the importance of accessibility in various sectors, leading to more roles that require expertise in universal design and inclusive practices.

    For instance, in Québec, efforts are being made to integrate and retain people with disabilities in the workforce, highlighting the need for professionals trained in inclusive access and universal accessibility.

    Accessiblity in the classroom

    Incorporating more discussion on universal accessibility in the classroom and in university research environments can help students apply their expertise in the design of our built environment throughout their careers.

    Yet, higher education institutions are still not giving enough attention to courses related to universal accessibility and design. Institutions in Canada often struggle with how to provide students living with disabilities with barrier-free environments.

    A national research project led by the Université of Montréal called Quality in Canada’s Built Environment is bringing together research groups from universities across the country to develop solutions based on the lived experiences of people living with diverse conditions. This is a key research approach to help sensitize students across the many programs touching the built environment that is also having an impact on student learning experiences.

    In 2020 alone, more than 77,000 students graduated in the fields of architecture and related studies in Canada. If every graduate is sensitized to the barriers faced by people living with disabilities, we could begin to see a shift in how our built environments are imagined and constructed by those who design them.

    By fostering dialogue between research, education and practice, universities can ensure a future where accessibility is seamlessly integrated into the every day.

    Carmela Cucuzzella receives funding from FRQSC and SSHRC.

    ref. How universities can help make our cities more accessible for people with disabilities – https://theconversation.com/how-universities-can-help-make-our-cities-more-accessible-for-people-with-disabilities-245639

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Europe: AFRICA/NIGERIA – Poverty, food insecurity, inadequate health care and high cost of living

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Monday, 3 February 2025

    Abuja (Agenzia Fides) – In addition to the serious waves of violence that are affecting the Nigerian population, including kidnappings, clashes, terrorist attacks and brutal murders, there is poverty, food insecurity, inadequate health care and a disproportionate increase in the cost of living.”We are suffering greatly. We have almost nothing to eat and for more than four years we have not been able to dedicate ourselves to agricolture because the bandits have driven us out of our communities. We urgently need the government’s support,” says a statement from residents of a refugee camp in Zamfara state, in northwest Nigeria.In this region of the country, armed groups are driving farmers off their land, closing markets and extorting money from communities. More than 2.2 million people have been forced to flee, many of them now living in overcrowded camps without any resources. According to local press reports, the ongoing conflicts are also affecting agriculture and food production in the northeast. Families returning to their land are reluctant to farm away from militarized cities, risking starvation. Food shortages are so severe that some families are forced to eat cassava husks to survive.In 2020, the Nigerian government launched the so-called “National Multisectoral Action Plan for Food and Nutrition”, an initiative for the period 2021-2025 to combat food security and malnutrition, with a focus on increasing food production through agricultural investments. Unfortunately, so far, the funds have not been sufficient.Agriculture generates 24% of Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employs more than 30% of the total workforce, but the funding for the sector remains well below the 10% target set by the African Union in the 2003 Maputo Declaration, which calls for at least 10% of national budgets to be allocated to agriculture and rural development within five years (see Fides, 21/9/2006).Africa’s most populous country, with around 225 million inhabitants, has one of the highest rates of childhood stunting in the world: 32% of children under five are affected.According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), two million children in Nigeria, mainly in the north of the country, are affected by malnutrition, which kills around 2,400 children under five every day. (AP) (Agenzia Fides, 3/2/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: AFRICA/DR CONGO – “In Bukavu, young people are joining self-defense militias”

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Kinshasa (Agenzia Fides) – “The situation in Bukavu is calm at the moment, but young people are flocking en masse to the recruitment centers of the self-defense groups of the so-called ‘Wazalendo’ militias,” report Fides sources from the capital of the Congolese province of South Kivu, which is now also threatened by the advance of the rebel movement M23, after it has already taken Goma (capital of the province of North Kivu).”The M23 seems to have stopped its advance on Bukavu,” say the observers. “So we are living from day to day without really knowing what to expect. The army has also launched a campaign to recruit civilians to join self-defense groups. Many young people have answered the call of the authorities and are now strengthening the ranks of the so-called ‘Wazalendo’ militias.” The observers report that “life is slowly recovering in Goma too. Electricity has returned to some neighborhoods and, since yesterday evening, internet connections have also been restored. Schools have reopened today, at least those that were not intended to accommodate displaced people.” “As for the displaced people, the various refugee camps around the city have meanwhile been dismantled; those who were able to do so have returned to their places of origin; the others have been forced to take shelter in schools and other public buildings,” the observers continue.According to the Congolese Ministry of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO), the health situation in the city is very serious. “Several health facilities are working beyond their capacity: there is a lack of beds, medicines, medical equipment, emergency kits, blood donations, fuel, surgical supplies and other equipment,” says a report dated January 30, sent to Fides. “The morgues are overflowing (more than 770 lifeless bodies have already been collected, others are still scattered in the streets of the unsafe districts and are in an advanced stage of decomposition)”. According to the report, 2,800 injured people are in the city’s hospitals. Many of the injured remain at home without adequate medical care, while the risk of epidemics remains high.At the political level, the Heads of State of the member states of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) reaffirmed their “unwavering commitment to continue to support the Democratic Republic of Congo in its efforts to preserve its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity” at the end of their extraordinary summit on 31 January in Harare (Zimbabwe). There is therefore a fear that the conflict will expand into a confrontation that goes beyond the Great Lakes region, as the President of Burundi explained in a video published on his YouTube channel: “If there is no peace in eastern Congo, there will be no peace in the region. The conflict does not only affect Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya, but the entire region”. (L.M.) (Agenzia Fides, 3/2/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Latest news – Meeting of Wednesday 12 February 2025, Strasbourg – Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries

    Source: European Parliament

    The Delegation will hold an exchange of views on the current situation in Jordan and the EU-Jordan relations with :

    • Ambassador Pierre-Christophe CHATZISAVAS, Head of the EU Delegation in Jordan
    • Ms Željana ZOVKO, Chief Observer of the EU Election Observation Mission to the parliamentary election in Jordan and Mr Andreas SCHIEDER, Chair of the EP Election Observation Delegation

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – State intervention by the Spanish Government in investee companies – E-000233/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000233/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dolors Montserrat (PPE)

    The Spanish Government has again moved to take control of an investee company. Manuel de la Rocha, head of the Government Office for Economic Affairs, informed José María Álvarez-Pallete at La Moncloa on Saturday, 18 January 2025, that the latter would no longer serve as Chairman of Telefónica.

    This is a move which, it is claimed, is driven by the ‘new shareholders’ – first and foremost the State Industrial Holding Company (SEPI), which reports to the Ministry of Finance, which in May 2024 purchased 10 % of the shares for EUR 2 285 million from the General State Budget, originally earmarked for the autonomous communities and municipalities.

    The Government makes no secret of its intention to dominate Telefónica’s management, just as in the case of Indra, Hispasat, Correos, RTVE, the National Statistical Institute, and the CIS.

    • 1.Is the Commission concerned about government moves to exercise disproportionate control over companies through instruments such as SEPI, which undermine the principles of the European single market, fair competition and competitive neutrality?
    • 2.Does the Commission believe that State interference with investee companies can discourage new competitors from entering the market, stifling the diversity of businesses promoted by the single market?

    Submitted: 21.1.2025

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Weidel and Musk’s talk on X – E-000254/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000254/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Markus Buchheit (ESN)

    Alice Weidel and Elon Musk’s talk on X on 9 January 2025 has raised a number of questions. There is, after all, a risk that German civil servants who sit on the fence when it comes to politics could end up voting for the AfD.

    • 1.How many Commission staff were made to listen in to this talk?
    • 2.Were the hours they worked (after 19:00) counted as overtime?
    • 3.What criteria was used to select the staff?

    Submitted: 21.1.2025

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Questions surrounding the Commission’s hand in the annulment of Member State elections – P-000261/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-000261/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Piotr Müller (ECR)

    In recent remarks, former Commissioner Thierry Breton said that the EU had played a role in the annulment of the presidential elections in Romania. He claimed the decision was motivated by the EU’s concerns about the election result and hinted at the possibility of similar action in other Member States.

    In view of this, I would ask the Commission for clear answers to the following questions:

    • 1.Legal basis: on what legal basis did it take action to annul the presidential elections in Romania?
    • 2.Position on comments: what is the Commission’s official position on the words of former Commissioner Thierry Breton? Does it support his claims?
    • 3.Plans with respect to other countries: is the Commission contemplating action to annul or challenge the election results in Poland if the left or liberals deem the election campaign on social media too intensive or controversial?

    We expect clear answers, free from sweeping statements and bureaucratic jargon, so that the general public can understand the legal bases, intentions and scope of any action the Commission may take.

    Submitted: 22.1.2025

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Forthcoming visit of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy – P-000285/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-000285/2025
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Nikolas Farantouris (The Left)

    According to the Commission’s official programme[1], Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, will visit Türkiye on Friday 24 January and will hold meetings with Hakan Fidan, the Turkish Foreign Minister, and Numan Kurtulmuş, Speaker of the Turkish National Assembly. In view of Türkiye’s continuous challenges to and violations of the sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus, the signing of the illegal agreement between Türkiye and Libya that violates the International Law of the Sea and the statements by the Turkish Government[2] (despite the subsequent denials[3]) concerning advanced negotiations on the signing of another memorandum of understanding with the Syrian transitional regime for the designation of an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEΖ) between the two countries:

    • 1.Does the VP/HR intend to put as a matter of urgency to the Turkish Government the necessary precondition of full respect for the International Law of the Sea and the sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus?
    • 2.Does she intend to stress, once more, the invalidity of the agreement between Türkiye and Libya that violates the International Law of the Sea and the sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus?
    • 3.Does the VP/HR plan to ask for explanations for Türkiye’s threats against Greece regarding Greece’s compliance with its obligation to complete its maritime spatial planning under Directive 2014/89/ΕU[4]?

    Submitted: 22.1.2025

    • [1] https://commission.europa.eu/about/organisation/college-commissioners/calendar-items-president-and-commissioners_en?f%5B0%5D=commissioner_dynamic_commissioner_dynamic%3Ahttp%3A//publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/political-leader/COM_00006A32DF03&f%5B1%5D=ewcms_calendar_status%3Apast&f%5B2%5D=ewcms_calendar_status%3Aupcoming
    • [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-24/turkey-plans-to-start-maritime-agreement-negotiations-with-syria
    • [3] https://www.tanea.gr/2025/01/15/politics/i-tourkia-crden-exei-prothesi-crna-oriothetisei-aoz-me-ti-syria-online/
    • [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EL/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0089
    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Urgent action needed to counter the EU’s growing dependence on Russian fertilisers, including through the introduction of sanctions and tariffs – P-002726/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    In response to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the EU has adopted unprecedented economic sanctions on Russia, imposing severe consequences and costs and seriously curbing its war economy.

    The EU has sought to balance effective sanctions against Russia with the specific economic needs of its Member States and partners and ensure, in the interests of global food security, that EU sanctions do not target in any way the trade in agricultural and food products, including wheat and fertilisers, between third countries and Russia.

    The Commission is closely monitoring the situation regarding the import of fertilisers into the EU from Russia and Belarus. The Commission is concerned by the EU’s continued reliance on certain types of Russian fertilisers and is considering ways to reduce it. While reflecting on new measures, upholding food security remains our primary consideration.

    The EU has designated a number of persons having interests in the fertiliser sector. Those listings are based either on their leading role in the Russian economy, or their involvement in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Russian government.

    The EU remains committed to ensuring that sanctions are robustly enforced and that they target those supporting or benefiting from activities that undermine the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova – A10-0006/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova

    (COM(2024)0469 – C10‑0127/2024 – 2024/0258(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2024)0469),

     having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10‑0127/2024),

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

     having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the opinions of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Budgetary Control,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Budgets (A10-0006/2025),

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

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

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

     

    Amendment  1

    AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT[*]

    to the Commission proposal

    ———————————————————

    2024/0258 (COD)

    Proposal for a

    REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

    on establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova
     

    THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

    Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 212 thereof,

    Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

    Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

    Whereas:

    (1) The Union is founded on the values referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), which include democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Those values form part of the accession criteria established at the Copenhagen European Council in June 1993 (‘Copenhagen criteria’), which constitute the conditions of eligibility for the Union membership,

    (2) The enlargement process is built on established criteria, fair and rigorous conditionality and the principle of own merits. A firm commitment to ‘fundamentals first’ approach, which requires a strong focus on the rule of law, fundamental rights, the functioning of democratic institutions and public administration reform, as well as on economic criteria, remains essential. Progress depends on  implementation by the Republic of Moldova (hereinafer referred to as ‘Moldova’) of the necessary reforms to align with the Union acquis,

    (3) Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine further showed that enlargement is a geo-strategic investment in peace, security and stability. The Union is fully and unequivocally committed to the Union membership perspective of Moldova. Moldova’s orientation and commitment towards the Union is a strong expression of its strategic choice and place in a community of values. Moldova’s EU path needs to be firmly anchored in tangible and concrete progress on reforms,

    (4) It is in the common interest of the Union and Moldova to advance with the reforms its political, legal and economic systems with a view to its future Union membership and to support its accession process. The prospect of Union membership has a powerful transformative effect, embedding positive democratic, political, economic and societal change,

    (5) It is necessary to bring forward some of the advantages of Union membership before accession. Economic convergence is at the heart of those benefits. Currently, the convergence of Moldova in terms of GDP per capita expressed in purchasing power standards remains low at 29% of the Union average and is not progressing fast enough,

    (6) As accession negotiations with Moldova opened in June 2024, it is important that support to Moldova’s accession track is brought to levels that are comparable with other candidate countries engaged in accession negotiations and to ensure commensurate resources.

    (7) The implementation of the Growth Plan for Moldova requires the appropriate funding under a dedicated new financing instrument, the Facility to assist the country in implementing reforms for sustainable economic growth and advance on the fundamentals.

    (8) To achieve the goals of the Growth Plan for Moldova, emphasis with respect to investment areas should be placed on sectors that are likely to function as key multipliers for social and economic development: connectivity, infrastructure, including sustainable transport, decarbonisation, energy, green and digital transitions, agriculture and rural communities as well as education, labour market participation and skills development, with a particular focus on children and youth and on raising the standard of living throughout the country. Moldova’s diaspora should also be considered as an important contributor to Moldova’s social and economic development.

    (9) The Facility should build on the Association Agenda with Moldova as well as the work of the Economic and Investment Plan for the Eastern Partnership in Moldova which spearheaded investments in critical sectors such as connectivity, energy efficiency and energy security, while avoiding stranded assets, business development, and competitiveness, recognising that the liberalisation of tariff-rate quotas for key Moldovan exports, facilitation of trade through infrastructure and regulatory alignment, and strengthening Moldova’s integration into Union-led economic initiatives and programs will contribute to Moldova’s  integration into the Union single market and will deliver immediate and tangible socio-economic benefits.

    (9a) Given Russia’s unjust war of aggression against Ukraine, which has profoundly impacted Moldova’s security, economy, and citizens’ livelihoods, as well as the ongoing and unprecedented hybrid attacks targeting the country and democratic institutions, it is appropriate for the Facility to provide support to Moldova in a timely manner and to enable Moldova to strengthen its resilience to foreign malign interference in its sovereignty, democratic processes and institutions. The Facility should also seek to support Moldova’s needs for energy independence from Russia.

    (10) Sustainable and cohesive transport infrastructure is essential to improve connectivity between Moldova and the Union. It should contribute to the integration of Moldova in the Union’s transport network In the revised trans-European transport network (TEN-T), the Commission extended the Baltic Sea – Black Sea – Aegean Sea European Transport Corridor to Moldova. The TEN-T network is the reference for funding sustainable transport infrastructure, including for environmentally friendly means of transport, such as railways as well as digitalisation of transport. Cross-border energy infrastructure projects and interconnections are essential for regional energy security and integration within the Union.

    (11) The Facility should support investments and reforms that promote Moldova’s path to the digital transformation of the economy and society in line with the Union vision for 2030 presented in the Commission communication, entitled ‘2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade’, fostering an inclusive digital economy that benefits all citizens. The Facility should strive to facilitate Moldova’ achievement of the general objectives and digital targets with regard to the Union. As outlined by the Commission in its communication of 15 June 2023, entitled ‘Implementation of the 5G cybersecurity Toolbox’, the 5G cybersecurity Toolbox should be the reference for Union funding to ensure security, resilience and the protection of integrity of digital infrastructure projects in the region.

    (12) The support under the Facility should be provided to meet general and specific objectives, based on established criteria and with clear payment conditions. Those general and specific objectives should be pursued in a mutually reinforcing manner. The Facility should support the enlargement process by accelerating the alignment with Union values, laws, rules, standards, policies and practices (‘acquis’) with a view to Union membership, accelerate progressive integration of Moldova in the Union single market, and accelerate its socio-economic convergence with the Union. The Facility should also foster good neighbourly relations.

    (13) In addition to boosting socio-economic convergence, the Facility should also help accelerate reforms related to the fundamentals of the enlargement process including rule of law, fundamental rights, inter alia, the rights of refugees, of persons belonging to minorities, including national minorities and Roma, as well as the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons. It should also improve the functioning of democratic institutions and public administrations; public procurement, state aid control and public finance management; the fight against all forms of corruption and organised crime; quality education and training as well as employment policies; the country’s green transition, climate and environmental objectives.

    (14) This Facility should help Moldova in its preparation for Union Membership and in line with the existing enlargement methodology[1].

    (15) The Facility should complement the existing Economic and Financial Dialogue without compromising its scope, thereby enhancing economic integration and preparation for the Union’s multilateral surveillance of economic policies.

    (16) The Facility should promote the development of effectiveness principles, respecting additionality to and complementarity with the support provided under other Union programmes and instruments and striving to avoid duplication and ensure synergies between assistance under this Regulation and other assistance, including integrated financial packages composed of both export and development financing provided by the Union, the Member States, third countries, multilateral and regional organisations and entities. Moldova’s participation in other EU funding programmes should be promoted and encouraged.

    (17) In line with the principle of inclusive partnerships, the Commission should strive to ensure that relevant stakeholders in Moldova, including Moldova’s parliament, local and regional authorities, social partners and civil society organisations are duly consulted and have timely access to relevant information to allow them to play a meaningful role during the design and implementation of programmes and the related monitoring processes.

    (18) Technical assistance, as well as cross-border cooperation assistance, should be provided in support of the objectives of this Facility and in order to strengthen the relevant capacities of Moldova to implement the Reform Agenda.

    (19) The Facility should ensure consistency with, and support for the general objectives of Union external action as laid down in Article 21 of the TEU, including the respect for fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It should in particular ensure the protection and promotion of human rights, and the rule of law.

    (20) The Facility should boost innovation, research, and cooperation between academic institutions and industry in support of the green and digital transitions, promoting local industries with a particular emphasis on locally based micro, small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups;

    (21) Moldova should demonstrate a credible commitment to European values, including through its alignment with the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, including Union restrictive measures.

    (22) In the implementation of the Facility, account should be taken of the Union’s strategic autonomy as well as of the Union and its Member States’ strategic interests and the values on which the Union is founded.

    (23) Activities under the Facility should support progress towards Union social, climate and environmental standards, and support progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and should not contribute to environmental degradation or cause harm to the environment or climate. Measures funded under the Facility should be in line with Moldova’ Energy and Climate Plans, their Nationally Determined Contribution and ambition to reach climate neutrality by 2050. The Facility should contribute to the mitigation of climate change and to the ability to adapt to its adverse effects, and foster climate resilience. In particular, funding under the Facility should promote the transition towards a decarbonised, climate-neutral, climate-resilient and circular economy.

    (24) The implementation of this Regulation should be guided by the principles of equality and non-discrimination, as elaborated in the Union of Equality strategies. It should promote and advance gender equality and mainstreaming, ensure meaningful participation of women in decision-making processes, and the empowerment of women and girls, and seek to protect and promote women’s and girls’ rights, as well as prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence, taking into consideration relevant EU Gender Action Plans and relevant Council conclusions and international conventions. Furthermore, this Regulation should be implemented in full respect of the European Pillar of Social Rights, including on child protection and labour rights. The implementation of the Facility should be in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its protocol and ensure accessibility in its investments and technical assistance, in line with Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

    (25) Reflecting the European Green Deal as Europe’s sustainable growth strategy and the importance of tackling climate and biodiversity objectives in line with the commitments of the Interinstitutional Agreement, the Facility should contribute to the achievement of an overall target of 30 % of Union budget expenditure supporting climate objectives and 7,5 % in 2024 and 10 % in 2026 and 2027 to biodiversity objectives. At least 37 % of the non-repayable financial support, including provisioning, provided to investment projects approved under the Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP), one of the regional investment platforms referred to in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947[2], should account to climate objectives. That amount should be calculated using the Rio markers following the obligation to report the EU’s international climate finance to the OECD, as well as other international agreements or frameworks. As early as June 2025, the EU climate coefficients, applicable across all programmes under the 2021-2027 Multi-annual Financing Framework (MFF) and set out in the Commission Staff Working Document entitled ‘Climate Mainstreaming Architecture in the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework’ (SWD(2022) 225), will also be applied to climate expenditure under the MFF’s Heading 6 (‘Neighbourhood and the world’). The Facility will align with the approach of other Heading 6 instruments, in order to ensure consistent climate reporting in the region. The Facility should support activities that fully respect the climate and environmental standards and priorities of the Union and the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6).

    (26) Projects are approved under the NIP after assessment by the Commission and subject to a positive opinion by the Member States in the NIP Board.

    (27) The Commission, in cooperation with the Member States and Moldova, should ensure the compliance, coherence, consistency and complementarity, increased transparency and accountability in the delivery of assistance, including by implementing appropriate internal control systems and anti-fraud policies. The support under the Facility should be made available under the preconditions that Moldova upholds and respects effective democratic mechanisms, including a multi-party parliamentary system, free and fair elections, independent and pluralistic media, an independent judiciary and the rule of law, and to guarantee respect for all human rights obligations, including the effective rights of persons belonging to minorities.

    (28) The Facility should be supported with resources from the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe amounting to EUR 420 million and a maximum amount of EUR 1 500 million in loans for the period from 2025-2027. The amount should cover the 9% provisioning required for the loans corresponding to EUR 135 million, support provided by the Union for projects approved under the NIP, as referred to in Article 18(2), and complementary support, including support to civil society organisations and technical assistance.  The non-repayable support should be financed from the envelope allocated to the Neighbourhood geographic programme under Article 6(2), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2021/947. In order to maximise EU financial support, the 9 % provisioning required for the loans corresponding to EUR 135 million should be covered from the NDICI- Global Europe Emerging challenges and priorities cushion, in line with Articles 6(3) and 17 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947. All provisions under Regulation (EU) 2021/947 should apply unless otherwise mentioned in this Regulation. In particular, Moldova should remain eligible for NDICI regional, thematic and rapid response programmes as well as humanitarian aid. The proposed Facility is closely modelled on the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans.

    (29) Decisions on the release referred to in Article 19(3) for the support in the form of loans should be adopted in the period from 1 January 2025 to 30 June 2029. This final date includes the time necessary for the Commission to evaluate the successful fulfilment of the payment conditions concerned and to adopt the subsequent release decision.

    (30) In order to maximise the leverage of Union financial support to attract additional investment, and to ensure Union control over the expenditure, the investments supporting the Reform Agenda should be implemented through the NIP. At least 25% of the loan amount released to Moldova should be made available by Moldova to investment projects approved under the NIP. This is in addition to the non-repayable support provided by the Union for these projects.

    (31) The financial liability from loans under the Facility should not constitute part of the amount of the External Action Guarantee within the meaning of Article 31(4) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

    (32) Horizontal financial rules adopted by the European Parliament and the Council on the basis of Article 322 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should apply to this Regulation. Those rules are laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and determine in particular the procedure for establishing and implementing the budget in direct and indirect management through grants, procurement, financial assistance, blending operations and the reimbursement of external experts, and provide for checks on the responsibility of financial actors.

    (33) Restrictions on eligibility in award procedures under the Facility should be provided for, where appropriate, given the specific nature of the activity or when the activity affects security or public order.

    (34) In order to ensure the efficient implementation of the Facility, including the facilitation of Moldova’ integration in European value chains, all supplies and materials financed and procured under this Facility should originate from Member States, Moldova, candidate countries and contracting parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area and countries which provide a level of support to Moldova comparable to the one provided by the Union, taking into account the size of their economy, and for which reciprocal access to external assistance in Moldova is established by the Commission, unless the supplies and materials cannot be sourced under reasonable conditions in any of those countries.

    (35) A Facility Agreement should be concluded with Moldova to set up the principles of the financial cooperation between the Union and Moldova, and to specify the necessary mechanisms related to the control, supervision, monitoring, evaluation, reporting and audit of Union funding under the Facility, rules on taxes, duties and charges and measures to prevent, detect, investigate and correct irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest. Consequently, a loan agreement should also be concluded with Moldova setting out specific provisions for the management and implementation of funding provided in the forms of loans. Both the Facility Agreement and the loan agreement should be transmitted without delay, simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council ▌.

    (36) The Facility Agreement should provide the obligation for Moldova to ensure the collection of, and access to data in compliance with Union data protection principles and with applicable data protection rules, adequate data on persons and entities receiving funding, including beneficial ownership information, for the implementation of Reform Agenda.

    (37) The implementation of the Facility should be underpinned by a coherent and prioritised set of targeted reforms and investment-related priorities in Moldova (the ‘Reform Agenda’), providing a framework for boosting inclusive sustainable socio-economic growth, clearly articulated and aligned with Union accession requirements and the fundamentals of the enlargement process. The Reform Agenda will serve as an overarching framework to achieve the objectives of the Facility. The Reform Agenda should be prepared in close consultation with relevant stakeholders, including Moldova’s parliament, local and regional authorities, social partners and civil society organisations and their input should be reflected, in accordance with the national legal framework. Disbursement of Union support should be conditional on compliance with the payment conditions and on measurable progress in the implementation of reforms set out in the Reform Agenda assessed and formally approved by the Commission. The release of funds should be structured accordingly, reflecting the objectives of the Facility.

    (38) The Reform Agenda should include targeted reform measures and priority investment areas, along with payment conditions in the form of measurable qualitative and quantitative steps that indicate satisfactory progress or completion of those measures, and a timetable for the implementation of those measures. The Reform Agenda should also include a preliminary list of planned investment projects intended for implementation under NIP. Those steps should be planned to be implemented for no later than 31 December 2027, although it should be possible for the overall completion of the measures, to which such steps refer, to extend beyond 2027 but not later than 31 December 2028. The Reform Agenda should include an explanation of Moldova’s system to effectively prevent, detect and correct irregularities, corruption, including high-level corruption, fraud and conflicts of interest, when using the funds provided under the Facility, and the arrangements to avoid double funding from the Facility and other Union programmes as well as other donors.

    (39) The Reform Agenda should include an explanation on how the measures are expected to contribute to the climate and environmental objectives and the principle of ‘do no significant harm’, and the digital transformation.

    (40) Measures under the Reform Agenda should contribute to improving an efficient public financial management and control system, money laundering, tax avoidance, tax evasion, fraud and organised crime and to an effective system of State aid control, with the aim of ensuring fair conditions for all undertakings.

    (41) The Reform Agenda should contain a description of such systems as well as specific steps related to Chapter 32 in order to support Moldova in bringing its audit and controls requirements in line with Union standards. In the event that a request for the release of funds includes a step related to Chapter 32, referred to in Article 19(2), the Commission may not adopt a decision authorizing the release of funds unless it assesses such step positively.

    (42) The Facility Agreement should also include indicators for assessing progress towards the achievement of general and specific objectives of the Facility set out in this Regulation. Those indicators should be based on internationally agreed indicators. Indicators should also, to the extent possible, be coherent with the key performance indicators included in Commission Implementing Decision approving the Reform Agendas for the Western Balkans under Regulation (EU) 2024/1449 and in the EFSD+ Results Measurement Framework. The indicators should be relevant, accepted, credible, easy, and robust.

    (43) The Commission should assess the Reform Agenda based on the list of criteria set out in this Regulation. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to approve the Reform Agenda. The Commission will duly take into account Council decision 2010/427/EU (11) and the role of the European External Action Service (EEAS), where appropriate.

    (44) The work programme within the meaning of Article 110(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 adopted in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2021/947 should cover the amounts funded from the envelope allocated to the Neighbourhood geographic programme under Article 6(2), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

    (45) Given the need for flexibility in the implementation of the Facility, it should be possible for Moldova to make a reasoned request to the Commission to amend the implementing decision, where the Reform Agenda, including relevant payment conditions, is no longer achievable, either partially or totally, because of objective circumstances. Moldova should be able to make a reasoned request to amend the Reform Agenda, including by proposing addenda, where relevant. The Commission should be able to amend the implementing decision.

    (46) The Facility Agreement should provide the obligation for Moldova to ensure the collection of, and access to data in compliance with Union data protection principles and with applicable data protection rules, adequate data on persons and entities receiving funding, including beneficial ownership information, for the implementation of the Reform Agenda. Financial support for the Reform Agenda should be possible in the form of a loan. In the context of Moldova’s financing needs, it is appropriate to organise the financial assistance under the diversified funding strategy provided for in Article 224of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and established as a single funding method therein, which is expected to enhance the liquidity of Union bonds and the attractiveness and cost-effectiveness of Union issuance.

    (47) It is appropriate to provide loans to Moldova on highly concessional terms with a maximum duration of 40 years and to not start the repayment of the principal before 2034.

    (48) Considering that the financial risks associated with the support to Moldova in the form of loans under the Facility is comparable to the financial risks associated with lending operations under Regulation (EU) 2021/947, provisioning for the financial liability from loans under this Regulation should be constituted at the rate of 9 %, in line with Article 214 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and the funding of the provisioning should be sourced from the emerging challenges and priorities cushion under Article  6(3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

    (49) In order to ensure that Moldova disposes of start-up funding for the implementation of the first reforms, it should have access to up to 20 % of the total amount provided for in this Facility, after deduction of complementary support, including support to civil society organisations and technical assistance, and provisioning for loans, in the form of a pre-financing, subject to availability of funding and to the respect of the preconditions for support under the Facility.

    (50) It is important to guarantee both flexibility and programmability in providing Union support to Moldova. Moldova should submit on a six-monthly basis a duly justified request for the release of funds at the latest two months after the timeline for the planned fulfilment of steps, set in the Commission Implementing Decision approving the Reform Agenda. For that purpose, funds under the Facility should be released according to a fixed semi-annual schedule, subject to availability of funding, on the basis of a request for the release of funds submitted by Moldova and following verification by the Commission of the satisfactory fulfilment of both the general conditions related to macro-financial stability, sound public financial management, transparency and oversight of the budget and the relevant payment conditions. Where a payment condition is not fulfilled as per the indicative timeline set in the decision approving the Reform Agenda, the Commission could withhold in whole or in part the release of funds corresponding to that condition, following a methodology on partial payments. The release of the corresponding withheld funds could take place during the next window for the release of funds and up to twelve months after the original deadline set out in the indicative timeline, provided that the payment conditions have been fulfilled. In the first year of implementation, that deadline should be extended to 24 months from the initial negative assessment.

    (51) By way of derogation from Article 116(2) and (5) of the Financial Regulation, it is appropriate to set the payment deadline for contributions to state budgets starting from the date of the communication of the decision authorising the disbursement to Moldova and to exclude the payment of default interest by the Commission to Moldova.

    (52) The Commission should provide▌ the European Parliament in the framework of the discharge procedure with detailed information about the implementation of the Union budget under the Facility, in particular as regards audits carried out, including weaknesses identified and corrective measures taken, and as regards projects approved under NIP, including where applicable the amount of Moldova’s co-financing as well as other sources of contributions including from other Union financing instruments.

    (53) In the framework of the Union’s restrictive measures, adopted on the basis of Article 29 TEU and Article 215 TFEU, no funds or economic resources may be made available, directly or indirectly, to or for the benefit of designated legal persons, entities or bodies. Such designated entities, and entities owned or controlled by them, therefore should not be supported by the Facility.

    (54) In the interest of transparency and accountability, Moldova should publish data on final recipients receiving amounts of funding exceeding the equivalent of EUR 50 000 cumulatively during the implementation of reforms and investments under this Facility.

    (55) In accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, Regulation (EU, Euratom) 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13) and Council Regulations (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (14), (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 (15) and (EU) 2017/1939 (16), the financial interests of the Union are to be protected by means of proportionate measures, including measures relating to the prevention, detection, correction and investigation of irregularities, fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest, double funding, to the recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used.

    (56) In particular, in accordance with regulations (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 and (EU, Euratom) 883/2013, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) should be in a position to carry out administrative investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union.

    (57) In accordance with Article 129 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, the necessary rights and access should be granted to the Commission, OLAF, the Court of Auditors and, where applicable the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), including by third parties involved in the implementation of Union funds.

    (58) The Commission should ensure that the financial interests of the Union are effectively protected under the Facility. Considering the long track record of financial assistance provided to Moldova also under indirect management and taking into account its gradual alignment with the Unions internal control standards and practices, the Commission should rely to a great extent on the operation of Moldova’s internal control and fraud prevention systems. In particular, the Commission and OLAF and, where applicable, the EPPO should be informed of all suspected cases of irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest affecting the implementation of funds under the Facility without delay.

    (59) Furthermore, Moldova should report the irregularities including fraud which have been the subject of a primary administrative or judicial finding, without delay, to the Commission and keep it informed of the progress of administrative and legal proceedings. With the objective of alignment to good practices in Member States, this reporting should be done by electronic means, using the Irregularity Management System, established by the Commission.

    (60) Moldova should establish a monitoring system feeding into a semi-annual report on the fulfilment of its Reform Agenda’s payment conditions accompanying the semi-annual request for the release of funds. Moldova should collect and provide access to data and information allowing the prevention, detection and correction of irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest, in relation to the measures supported by the Facility.

    (61) The Commission should ensure that clear monitoring and independent evaluation mechanisms are in place in order to provide effective accountability and transparency in implementing the Union budget, and to ensure effective assessment of progress towards the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation.

    (62) The Commission should provide an annual report to the European Parliament and the Council on progress towards the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation.

    (63) The Commission should carry out an evaluation of the Facility upon its completion.

    (64) Moldova should support free pluralistic media that enhance and promote the understanding of Union values and the benefits and obligations of potential Union membership, while undertaking decisive actions in terms of tackling Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference. They should also ensure pro-active, clear and consistent public communication, including on the Union support. The recipients of Union funding should actively acknowledge the origin and ensure visibility of the Union funding, in line with the Communication and Visibility Manual for EU External Actions.

    (65) Implementation of the Facility should also be accompanied by enhanced strategic communication and public diplomacy to promote the values of the Union and highlight the added value of the Union’s support.

    (66) Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.

    (67) In order to provide funding for Moldova in due time without further delay, this Regulation should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

    HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

     

    CHAPTER I

    General Provisions

     

    Article 1

    Subject matter

    1. This Regulation establishes the Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova for the period 2025-2027 (the ‘Facility’).

    2. The Regulation shall provide assistance to Moldova for the delivery of EU-related reforms, in particular inclusive and sustainable socio-economic reforms and reforms concerning fundamentals of the enlargement process, aligned with Union values, as well as investments to implement Moldova’s Reform Agenda.

    3. The rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2021/947 shall apply to the implementation of the Facility, unless specified otherwise in this Regulation.

    Article 2

    Definitions

    For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:

    (1) ‘Moldova’ means the Republic of Moldova.

    (2) ‘Facility Agreement’ means an arrangement concluded between the Commission and Moldova laying down the principles for the financial cooperation between Moldova and the Commission under this Regulation; this arrangement constitutes a financing agreement within the meaning of Article 114(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 ;

    (3) ‘enlargement policy framework’ means the overall policy framework for the implementation of this Regulation as defined by the European Council and the Council, and includes the revised enlargement methodology, agreements that establish a legally binding relationship with Moldova, the negotiating frameworks governing accession negotiations with candidates, where applicable, as well as resolutions of the European Parliament, relevant communications from the Commission, including, where applicable, on the rule of law, and joint communications from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy 

    (4) ‘loan agreement’ means an agreement concluded between the Union and Moldova laying down the terms of the loan support under the Facility;

    (5) ‘Reform Agenda’ means a comprehensive, coherent and prioritised set of targeted reforms and priority investment areas in Moldova, including payment conditions that indicate satisfactory progress or completion of related measures, and an indicative timetable for their implementation;

    (6) ‘measures’ means reforms and investments as set out in the Reform Agenda under Chapter III;

    (7) ‘payment conditions’ means conditions for the release of funds that take the form of observable and measurable qualitative or quantitative steps to be implemented by Moldova, as set out in the Reform Agenda under Chapter III;

    (8) ‘blending operation’ means an operation supported by the Union budget that combines non-repayable forms of support from the Union budget with repayable forms of support from development or other public financial institutions, including export credit agencies, or from commercial finance institutions and investors;

    (9) ‘final recipient’ means a person or entity receiving funding under the Facility; for the part of the funding that is made available as financial assistance, final recipient will be the treasury of Moldova; for the part of the funding that is made available through the Neighbourhood Investment Platform, final recipient will be the contractor or sub-contractor implementing the investment project; 

    (10) ‘do no significant harm’ means not supporting or carrying out economic activities that do significant harm to any environmental objective, where relevant, within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852;

    (11) ‘the Neighbourhood Investment Platform’ is one of the regional investment platforms referred to under Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

     

    Article 3

    Objectives of the Facility

    1. The general objectives of the Facility shall be to:

    (a) support the enlargement process by accelerating the alignment with Union values, laws, rules, standards, policies and practices (‘acquis’) through the adoption and implementation of reforms with a view to future Union membership;

    (b) support progressive integration of Moldova into the Union single market;

    (c) accelerate the socio-economic convergence of Moldova’s economy with the Union;

    (d) foster good neighbourly relations, as well as people-to-people contact.

     

    2. The specific objectives of the Facility shall be to:

    (a) further strengthen the fundamentals of the enlargement process, including the rule of law and fundamental rights, the functioning of democratic institutions, including de-polarisation, public administration and fulfil the economic criteria; build a functioning market economy capable of coping with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union, ▌ promoting an independent judiciary, reinforcing security and stability, strengthening the fight against fraud and all forms of corruption, including high-level corruption, oligarchic influence and nepotism, organised crime, cross-border crime and money laundering as well as terrorism financing, tax evasion and tax fraud, tax avoidance; increasing compliance with international law; strengthening freedom and independence of media and academic freedom; combating hate speech; reinforce territorial integrity; enabling an environment for civil society, fostering social dialogue; promoting gender equality, gender mainstreaming and the empowerment of women and girls, children’s rights and child and youth participation, non-discrimination and tolerance, to ensure and strengthen respect for the rights of refugees and persons belonging to minorities, including national minorities and Roma, as well as rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons;

    (b) move towards full alignment of Moldova with the Union Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including Union restrictive measures;

    (c) fight disinformation, hybrid threats, cyberattacks and Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference, in particular by Russia, against Moldova’s sovereignty, democratic processes and institutions, as well as against the Union and its values;

    (d) move towards harmonisation of visa policies with the Union;

    (e) reinforce the effectiveness of public administration, build capacities and invest in administrative staff in Moldova; ensure access to information, public scrutiny and the involvement of civil society in decision-making processes; support transparency, accountability, structural reforms and good governance at all levels, including as regards their powers of oversight and inquiry over the distribution of and access to public funds as well as in the areas of public financial management and public procurement and State aid control; support initiatives and bodies involved in supporting and enforcing international justice in Moldova;

    (f) accelerate the transition of Moldova to sustainable, climate-neutral and inclusive economy, that is capable of withstanding competitive market pressures of the Union single market, and to a stable investment environment and reduce its strategic dependency by diversifying energy sources and by constructing new electricity interconnections with neighbouring countries in order to achieve energy security;

    (g) foster economic integration of Moldova with the Union single market, in particular through increased trade and investment flows, and resilient value chains;

    (h) support enhanced integration with the Union single market through improved and sustainable connectivity in line with trans-European networks to reinforce good neighbourly relations, as well as people-to-people contact;

    (i) accelerate the inclusive and sustainable green transition to climate neutrality by 2050, in accordance with the Paris Agreement and the Green Deal and covering all economic sectors, particularly energy, including the transition towards a de-carbonised, climate-neutral, climate-resilient and circular economy, while ensuring that investments respect the ‘do no significant harm’ principle;

    (j) promote the digital transformation and digital skills as an enabler of sustainable development and inclusive growth;

    (k) boost innovation, research, and cooperation between academic institutions and industry in support of the green and digital transitions, promoting local industries with a particular emphasis on locally based micro, small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups;

    (l) boost quality education, training, reskilling and upskilling at all levels, with a particular focus on youth, including tackling youth unemployment, preventing brain drain and supporting vulnerable communities, including refugees, and support employment policies, including labour rights, in line with the European Pillar of Social Rights, and fighting poverty.

    (la) support communication activities to improve Moldovan citizens’ awareness of the positive impact of Union accession and understanding of the required reforms.

     

    Article 4

    General principles

    1. Support from the Facility shall be managed by the Commission in a manner consistent with the key principles and objectives of economic reforms set out in the EU-Moldova Association Agreement and the EU enlargement policy.

    2. Cooperation under the Facility shall be needs-based and shall promote the development effectiveness principles, namely ownership of development priorities by Moldova with a focus on clear conditionality and tangible results, inclusive partnerships with local and regional authorities, social partners and civil society organisations, as well as transparency and mutual accountability. That cooperation shall be based on an effective and efficient allocation and use of resources.

    3. The provision of macro-financial assistance shall not fall within the scope of this Facility.

    4. Support from the Facility shall be additional and complementary to the support provided under other Union programmes and instruments. Activities eligible for funding under this Regulation may receive support from other Union programmes and instruments provided that such support does not cover the same cost and that appropriate oversight and budget control is ensured. The Commission shall ensure complementarities and synergies between the Facility and other Union programmes, with a view to avoiding the duplication of assistance and double funding.

    5. In order to promote the complementarity, coherence and efficiency of their actions, the Commission and the Member States shall cooperate and shall strive to avoid duplication and ensure synergies between assistance under this Regulation and other forms of assistance, including integrated financial packages composed of both export and development financing provided by the Union, Member States, third countries, multilateral and regional organisations and entities, such as international organisations and the relevant international financial institutions, agencies and non-Union donors, in line with the established principles for strengthening operational coordination in the field of external assistance, including through enhanced coordination with Member States at local level. Such coordination at local level shall involve regular and timely consultations and frequent exchanges of information throughout the implementation of the Facility.

    5a. In order to maximise international support, it shall be possible for Member States, third countries, international organisations, international financial institutions or other sources to contribute to the implementation of the Facility. Such contributions shall be implemented in accordance with the same rules and conditions and shall constitute external assigned revenue within the meaning of Article 21(2), points (a), (d) and (e), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

    6. Activities under the Facility shall mainstream and promote democracy, human rights and gender equality, progressively align with the social, climate and environmental standards of the Union, mainstream climate change mitigation and adaptation, where relevant, disaster risk reduction, environmental protection and biodiversity conservation, including through, where appropriate, environmental impact assessments, and shall support progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals, promoting integrated actions that can create co-benefits and meet multiple objectives in a coherent way. Those activities shall avoid stranded assets, and shall be guided by the principles of ‘do no significant harm’ and of ‘leaving no one behind’, as well as by the sustainability mainstreaming approach underpinning the European Green Deal. At least 37 % of the non-repayable financial support, including provisioning, provided to investment projects approved under the Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP) should account to climate objectives.

    7. Moldova and the Commission shall ensure that gender equality, gender mainstreaming and the integration of a gender perspective are taken into account and promoted throughout the preparation of the Reform Agenda and the implementation of the Facility. Moldova and the Commission shall take appropriate steps to prevent any discrimination based upon gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. The Commission shall report on these measures in the context of its regular reporting under the Gender Action Plans.

    8. The Facility shall not support activities or measures which are incompatible with Moldova’s Energy and Climate Plans, their Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement, and ambition to reach climate-neutrality by 2050 at the latest or that promote investments in fossil fuels, or that cause significant adverse effects on the environment, the climate or biodiversity, while taking into account possible transitional arrangements, in line with existing Union legislation, to mitigate energy crises.

    9. In line with the principle of inclusive partnership, the Commission shall ▌ensure, as appropriate, democratic scrutiny in the form of consultation by Moldova’s government of the parliament of Moldova as well as of relevant stakeholders, including local and regional authorities, social partners and civil society, including vulnerable groups, refugees, and all minorities and communities, as relevant, so as to allow them to participate in shaping the design and the implementation of activities eligible for funding under the Facility and in the related monitoring, scrutiny and evaluation processes, as relevant. That consultation shall seek to represent the pluralism of Moldova’s society. In addition, the Commission shall ensure that civil society in Moldova, including non-governmental organisations, is able to directly report any irregularities concerning funding or final beneficiaries to the Commission via appropriate standing channels, as well as to send to the Commission opinions on the implementation of the Reform Agenda and the evaluation of its measures by the Moldovan government.

    10. The Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States and Moldova, shall ensure the implementation of Union commitments to increased transparency and accountability in the delivery of support, including by promoting the implementation and reinforcement of internal control systems and anti-fraud policies. The Commission shall make information on the volume and allocation of support publicly available through the Scoreboard referred to in Article 24. Moldova shall publish up-to-date data on final recipients receiving Union funds for the implementation of reforms and investments under this Facility, as described in Article 20.

    Article 5

    Preconditions for Union support

    1. Preconditions for the support under the Facility shall be that Moldova upholds and respects effective democratic mechanisms, including a multi-party parliamentary system, free and fair elections, pluralistic media, meaningful engagement of the civil society, an independent judiciary and the rule of law, and guarantee respect for all human rights obligations, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

    2. The Commission shall monitor the fulfilment of the preconditions set out in paragraph 1 before funds, including pre-financing, are released to Moldova under the Facility and throughout the period of the support provided under the Facility taking duly into account the enlargement policy framework. The Commission shall also take into account the relevant recommendations of international bodies, such as the Council of Europe and its Venice Commission, or the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in the monitoring process.

    3. The Commission may adopt a decision concluding that some of the preconditions set out in paragraph 1 of this Article are not met, and in particular, withhold the release of funds referred to in Article 19, irrespective of whether the payment conditions referred to in Article 10 are fulfilled.

     

    CHAPTER II

    Financing and implementation

    Article 6

    Implementation

    1. The Facility shall be supported with resources from the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe amounting to EUR 420 million and a maximum amount of EUR 1 500 million in loans. The amount for loans shall not constitute part of the amount of the External Action Guarantee within the meaning of Article 31(4) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

    2. The non-repayable financial support shall be financed for the period from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2027 from the envelope allocated to the Neighbourhood geographic programme under Article 6(2), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947. It shall cover▌ support provided by the Union for projects approved under the NIP, as referred to in Article 18(2)and complementary support, including support to civil society organisations and technical assistance. That funding shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/947. The provisioning for loans amounting to EUR 135 million shall be covered from the NDICI-Global Europe Emerging challenges and priorities cushion in accordance with Articles 6(3) and 17 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

    Decisions on the release referred to in Article 19(3) for the support in the form of loans shall be adopted in the period from 1 January 2025 to 30 June 2029.

    3. The release of the Union’s assistance shall be managed by the Commission in a manner consistent with the key principles and objectives of reforms set out in the Reform Agenda. All funds, with the exception of complementary support referred to in paragraph 2, and resources referred to in paragraph 5 and the exceptional bridge financing shall be provided in twice-yearly instalments based on the completion of the necessary reforms in the specified timelines as agreed in the reform agenda and agreed in the Commission Implementing Decision.

    4. At least 25% part of the loan component released to Moldova shall be made available by Moldova to investment projects approved under the NIP, one of the regional investment platforms referred to in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947. The Facility Agreement, referred to in Article 8, shall detail this obligation, as well as the detailed rules and principles for implementation. Failure to comply with this obligation shall trigger suspension of further operations under this Facility and recovery of said amounts from Moldova, as referred to in Article 19.

    4a  Complementary support shall correspond to at least 20 % of total non-repayable financial support as referred to in Article 6(2) and shall include measures to strengthen the administrative capacities of Moldovan authorities and other stakeholders, including local and regional authorities, social partners and civil society organisations.

    5. An amount of up to 1% of the non-repayable support referred to in paragraph 2 may be used for technical and administrative assistance for the implementation of the Facility, such as preparatory actions, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, which are required for the management of the Facility and the achievement of its objectives, in particular studies, meetings of experts, training consultations with Moldova’s authorities, conferences, consultation of stakeholders, including local and regional authorities and civil society organisations, information and communication activities, including inclusive outreach actions▌insofar as they are related to the objectives of this Regulation, expenses linked to IT networks focusing on information processing and exchange, corporate information technology tools, as well as all other expenditure at headquarters and Union delegation for the administrative and coordination support required for the Facility. Expenses may also cover the costs of activities supporting transparency and of other activities such as quality control and monitoring of projects or programmes on the ground and the costs of peer counselling and experts for the assessment and implementation of reforms and investments.

    5a  Member States, third countries, international organisations, international financial institutions or other sources may provide additional financial contributions to the Facility. Such contributions shall constitute external assigned revenue within the meaning of Article 21(2), points (a), (d) and (e), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. Additional amounts received as external assigned revenue within the meaning of Article 21(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 under the relevant Union legal acts shall be added to the resources referred to in Article 6(1) and be implemented in accordance with the same rules and conditions.

    Article 7

    Rules on the eligibility of persons and entities, on the origin of supply and materials and on restrictions under the Facility

    1. By way of derogation from Article 28 of Regulation (EU) 2021/947, participation in procurement and in grant award procedures for activities financed under the Facility shall be open to international and regional organisations and to all natural persons who are nationals of, or legal persons effectively established in:

    (a) Member States, Moldova, candidate countries and contracting parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area;

    (b) countries which provide a level of support to Moldova comparable to that provided by the Union, taking into account the size of their economy, and for which reciprocal access to external assistance in Moldova is established by the Commission.

    2. The reciprocal access referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), may be granted for a limited period of at least one year where a country grants eligibility on equal terms to entities from the Union and from countries eligible under the Facility.

    The Commission shall decide on the reciprocal access after consulting Moldova.

    3. All supplies and materials financed and procured under this Facility shall originate from any country referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) and (b), unless those supplies and materials cannot be sourced under reasonable conditions in any of those countries. In addition, the rules on restrictions laid down in paragraph 6 shall apply.

    4. The eligibility rules under this Article shall not apply to, and shall not create nationality restrictions for, natural persons employed or otherwise legally contracted by an eligible contractor or, where applicable, subcontractor except where the nationality restrictions are based on the rules provided for in paragraph 6.

    5. For activities jointly co-financed by an entity or implemented under direct management or indirect management with entities referred to in Article 62(1), first subparagraph, point (c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, the rules applicable to those entities shall also apply in addition to the rules established under this Article, including, where applicable, the restrictions provided for under paragraph 6 of this Article and duly reflected in the financing agreements and contractual documents signed with those entities.

    6. The eligibility rules and rules on the origin of supplies and materials set out in paragraphs 1 and 3 and rules on the nationality of the natural persons as set out in paragraph 4 may be restricted with regard to the nationality, geographical location or nature of the legal entities participating in award procedures, as well as with regard to the geographical origin of supplies and materials where:

    (a) such restrictions are required on account of the specific nature or objectives of the activity or specific award procedure or where those restrictions are necessary for the effective implementation of the activity;

    (b) the activity or specific award procedures affect security or public order, in particular concerning strategic assets and interests of the Union, of Member States, or of Moldova, including the security, resilience and protection of integrity of digital infrastructure, including 5G network infrastructure, communication and information systems, and related supply chains.

    7. Tender applicants and candidates from non-eligible countries may be accepted as eligible in cases of urgency or where services are unavailable in the markets of the countries or territories concerned, or in other duly substantiated cases where the application of the eligibility rules would make the realisation of an activity impossible or exceedingly difficult.

    8. In the framework of the Union’s restrictive measures, adopted on the basis of Article 29 TEU and Article 215 TFEU, no funds or economic resources may be made available, directly or indirectly, to or for the benefit of legal persons, entities or bodies subject to Union restrictive measures. Such persons and entities, and entities owned or controlled by them, shall not be supported by the Facility either directly or indirectly, including as indirect owners, sub-contractors in the supply chain or ultimate beneficiaries.

    Article 8

     Facility Agreement

    1. The Commission shall conclude a Facility Agreement with Moldova for the implementation of this Regulation setting out the obligations and payment conditions for the disbursement of funding.

    2. The Facility Agreement shall be complemented by a loan agreement in accordance with Article 15, setting out specific provisions for the management and implementation of funding provided in the form of a loan. The Facility Agreement, including any related documentation, shall be made available▌, to the European Parliament and the Council simultaneously and without delay.

    3. With the exception of bridge financing referred to in Article 17a, funding shall be granted to Moldova only after the Facility Agreement and the loan agreement have entered into force.

    4. The Facility Agreement and the loan agreement concluded with Moldova shall ensure that the obligations set out in Article 129 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 are fulfilled.

    5. The Facility Agreement shall lay down the necessary detailed provisions concerning:

    (a) the commitment of Moldova to make decisive progress towards a robust legal framework to fight fraud, and establish more efficient and effective control systems, including appropriate mechanisms for the protection of whistleblowers as well as appropriate mechanisms and measures to effectively prevent, detect and correct irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest as well as to strengthen the fight against money laundering, organised crime, misuse of public funds, terrorism financing, tax avoidance, tax fraud or tax evasion, and other illegal activities affecting the funds provided under the Facility;

    (b) the rules on the release, withholding and reduction of funds in accordance with Article 19;

    (c) the detailed rules on and the obligation of Moldova to provide part of total loan amount for projects approved under the NIP, pursuant to Art. 6(4).

    (d) the activities related to management, control, supervision, monitoring, evaluation, reporting and audit, as well as system reviews, investigations, anti-fraud measures and cooperation;

    (e) the rules on reporting to the Commission on whether and how the payment conditions referred to in Article 10 are fulfilled;

    (f) the rules on taxes, duties and charges in accordance with Article 27(9) and (10) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947;

    (g) the measures to effectively prevent, detect and correct irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest, and the obligation for persons or entities implementing Union funds under the Regulation to notify the Commission, OLAF and, where applicable, EPPO, without delay, of suspected or actual cases of irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest and other illegal activities affecting the funds provided under the Facility and their follow-up;

    (h) the obligations referred to in Articles 21 and 22, including the precise rules and a timeframe on collection of data by Moldova and access to it for the Commission, OLAF, the Court of Auditors and, where applicable, EPPO;

    (i) a procedure to ensure that disbursement requests for loan support fall within the available loan amount, in accordance with Article 6(1);

    (j) the right of the Commission to reduce proportionately the support provided under the Regulation and to recover any amount referred to in Article 6(1) spent to achieve the objectives of the Regulation, or to ask for early repayment of the loan, in cases of irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest affecting the financial interests of the Union that have not been corrected by Moldova, of a reversal of qualitative or quantitative steps, or of a serious breach of an obligation provided for in the Facility Agreement;

    (k) rules and modalities for Moldova to report for the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Facility and assessing the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3.

    (l) the obligation for Moldova to transmit electronically to the Commission the data referred to in Article 20.

     

    CHAPTER III

    Reform Agenda

     

    Article 9

    Submission of Reform Agenda

    1. In order to receive any support under this Regulation, Moldova shall submit to the Commission a Reform Agenda for 2025-2027 based on the key principles and objectives of socio-economic and fundamental reforms set out in the EU-Moldova Association Agreement, agreed under the European Neighbourhood Policy, and the enlargement policy framework.

    2. The Reform Agenda shall provide an overarching framework to achieve the general and specific objectives set out in Article 3, setting out the reforms to be undertaken by Moldova, as well as investment areas. The Reform Agenda shall comprise measures for the implementation of reforms through a comprehensive and coherent package. In the areas of the fundamentals of the enlargement process, including the rule of law, the fight against corruption, including high-level corruption, fundamental rights and the freedom of expression, the Reform Agendas shall reflect the assessments in the enlargement policy framework.

    3. The Reform Agendas shall be consistent with the latest macroeconomic and fiscal policy framework submitted to the Commission in the context of the Economic and Financial Dialogue with the Union.

    4. The Reform Agenda shall be consistent with and support the reform priorities identified in the context of Moldova’s accession path, and in other relevant documents, the Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement and the ambition to reach climate neutrality by 2050 at the latest.

    5. The Reform Agenda shall respect the general principles set out in Article 4.

    6. The Reform Agenda shall be prepared in an inclusive and transparent manner, in consultation with social partners and civil society organisations.

    7. The Commission shall invite Moldova to submit its Reform Agenda within three months of the entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall transmit Moldova’s Reform Agenda to the European Parliament and the Council as soon as it is received.

     

    Article 10

    Principles for financing under the Reform Agenda

    1. The Regulation shall provide incentives for the implementation of the Reform Agenda by setting payment conditions on the release of funds. Those payment conditions shall apply to funds under Article 6(1), with the exception of complementary support including support to civil society organisations and technical assistance. Those payment conditions shall take the form of measurable qualitative or quantitative steps. Such steps shall reflect progress on specific socio-economic reforms and on the fundamentals of the enlargement process linked to the achievement of the objectives of the Facility set out in Article 3, consistent with the enlargement policy framework.

    2. The fulfilment of those payment conditions shall trigger full or partial release of funds, depending on the degree of their completion.

    3. Macro financial stability, sound public financial management, transparency and oversight of the budget are general conditions for payments that shall be fulfilled for any release of funds.

    Funds under the Facility shall not support activities or measures which undermine the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Moldova.

    Article 11

    Content of the Reform Agenda

    1. The Reform Agenda shall in particular set out the following elements, which shall be reasoned and substantiated:

    (a) measures constituting a coherent, comprehensive and adequately balanced response to the objectives set out in Article 3, including structural reforms, investments, and measures to ensure compliance with preconditions referred to in Article 5, where appropriate;

    (b) an explanation of how the measures are consistent with the general principles referred to in Article 4, as well as the requirements, strategies, plans and programmes referred to in Articles 4 and 10;

    (c) an explanation of how the measures are expected to further strengthen the fundamentals of the enlargement process as referred to in Article 3(2), point (n), including the rule of law, fundamental rights and the fight against corruption;

    (d) an indicative list of investment projects and programmes intended for discussion and approval under the NIP,, including respective overall investment volumes and envisaged timelines for implementation;

    (e) an explanation of the extent to which the measures are expected to contribute to climate and environmental objectives and their compatibility with the principle ‘do no significant harm’;

    (f) an explanation of the extent to which the measures are expected to contribute to digital transformation;

    (g) an explanation of the extent to which the measures are expected to contribute to education, training and employment and social objectives;

    (h) an explanation of the extent to which the measures are expected to contribute to gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, and the promotion of women and girls’ rights;

    (i) for the reforms and investments, an indicative timetable, and the envisaged payment conditions for the release of funds in the form of measurable qualitative and quantitative steps planned to be implemented by 31 December 2027 at the latest;

    (j) an explanation of how the measures are expected to contribute to a progressive and continuous alignment with the CFSP, including Union restrictive measures;

    (k) the arrangements for the effective monitoring, reporting and evaluation of the Reform Agenda by Moldova, including the proposed measurable qualitative and quantitative steps and relevant indicators set out in paragraph 2;

    (l) an explanation of Moldova’s system to effectively prevent, detect and correct irregularities, fraud, corruption, including high-level corruption, and conflicts of interest and to enforce State aid control rules, and the proposed measures to address existing deficiencies in the first years of the implementation of the Reform Agenda;

    (m) for the preparation and, where available, for the implementation of the Reform Agenda, a summary of the consultation process, conducted in accordance with Moldova’s legal framework, of relevant stakeholders, including Moldova’s parliament, local and regional representative bodies and authorities, social partners and civil society organisations, and how the input of those stakeholders is reflected in the Reform Agenda;

    (n) a communication and visibility plan on the Reform Agenda for the local audiences of Moldova;

    (o) any other relevant information.

    2. The Reform Agenda shall be results-based and include indicators for assessing progress towards the achievement of the general and specific objectives set out in Article 3. Those indicators shall be based, where appropriate and relevant, on internationally agreed indicators and those already available related to the Moldova’s policies. Indicators shall also be coherent, to the extent possible, with the key performance indicators included in Commission Implementing Decision approving the Reform Agendas for the Western Balkans under Regulation (EU) 2024/1449 and in the EFSD+ Results Measurement Framework.

    Article 12

    Commission assessment of the Reform Agenda

    1. The Commission shall assess the relevance, comprehensiveness and appropriateness of Moldova’s Reform Agenda or, where applicable, any amendment to that Agenda, without undue delay. When carrying out its assessment, the Commission shall act in close cooperation with Moldova, and may make observations, seek additional information or require Moldova to review or modify its Reform Agenda.

    2. As regards the objective set out in Article 11(1)(j) of this Regulation, the Commission, in accordance with Decision 2010/427/EU, shall duly take into account the role and the contribution of the EEAS.

    3. When assessing the Reform Agenda, the Commission shall take into account relevant available analytical information about Moldova, including its macroeconomic situation and debt sustainability, the justification and the elements provided by Moldova as referred to in Article 13, as well as any other relevant information such as the information listed in Article 11.

    4. In its assessment, the Commission shall consider in particular the following criteria:

    (a) whether the Reform Agenda represents a relevant, comprehensive, coherent and adequately balanced response to the objectives set out in Article 3 and elements set out in Article 11;

    (b) whether the Reform Agenda and its measures are consistent with the principles, strategies, plans and programmes referred to in Articles 4 and 11;

    (c) whether the Reform Agenda can be expected to accelerate progress towards bridging the socio-economic gap between Moldova and the Union, and thereby enhances their economic, social and environmental development and supports the convergence towards the Union’s standards, reduces inequalities and reinforces social cohesion;

    (d) whether the Reform Agenda can be expected to further strengthen the fundamentals of the enlargement process as referred to in Article 3(2), point (a);

    (e) whether the Reform Agenda can be expected to accelerate the transition of Moldova towards sustainable, climate-neutral and climate resilient and inclusive economy by improving connectivity, making progress on the twin transition of green and digital, including biodiversity, reducing strategic dependencies and boosting research and innovation, education, training, employment and skills and the wider labour market, with particular attention on youth;

    (f) whether the measures included in the Reform Agenda are compatible with the principles of ‘do no significant harm’ and of ‘leaving no one behind’;

    (g) whether the Reform Agenda appropriately addresses potential risks in compliance with preconditions and payment conditions;

    (h) whether the payment conditions proposed by Moldova are appropriate and ambitious, consistent with the enlargement policy framework, as well as sufficiently meaningful and clear to allow for the corresponding release of funds in case of their fulfilment and whether the proposed reporting indicators are appropriate and sufficient to monitor and report on the progress made towards the overall objectives;

    (i) whether the arrangements proposed by Moldova are expected to effectively prevent, detect and correct irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest, organised crime and money laundering as well as to effectively investigate and prosecute criminal offences affecting the funds under the Facility,;

    (j) whether the Reform Agenda effectively reflects the input of relevant stakeholders, including Moldova’s parliament, local and regional representative bodies and authorities, social partners and civil society organisations.

    5. For the purpose of the assessment of the Reform Agenda submitted by Moldova, the Commission may be assisted by independent experts.

    Article 13

    Commission Implementing Decision

    1. In case of positive assessment, after informing the European Parliament and the Council, the Commission shall approve by means of an implementing decision the Reform Agenda submitted by Moldova, in accordance with Article 12 or, where applicable, of the amended Agenda submitted in accordance with Article 14. The provisions of Article 25(2) shall apply to the adoption of that implementing decision.

    2. The Commission implementing decision, referred to in paragraph 1, shall set out the reforms to be implemented by Moldova concerned, the investment areas to be supported and the payment conditions stemming from the Reform Agenda, including the timetable.

    3. The Commission implementing decision, referred to in paragraph 1, shall also lay down:

    (a) the indicative amount of overall funds available to Moldova against fulfilment of payment conditions, as referred in Article 10(1), and the scheduled instalments to be released, including pre-financing, structured in accordance with Article 11, once Moldova has achieved satisfactory fulfilment of the relevant payment conditions in the form of qualitative and quantitative steps identified in relation to the implementation of the Reform Agenda;

    (b) the breakdown by instalment of financing between loan support and non-repayable support;

    (c) the time limit by which the final payment conditions for the reforms must be completed;

    (d) the arrangements and timetable for the monitoring, reporting and implementation of the Reform Agenda, including, where appropriate, through democratic scrutiny as referred to in Article 4 as well as, where relevant, measures necessary for complying with Article 23.

    (e) the indicators referred to in Article 11(2) for assessing progress towards the achievement of the general and specific objectives set out in Article 3.

    Article 14

     Amendments to the Reform Agenda

    1. Where the Reform Agenda, including relevant payment conditions, is no longer achievable by Moldova, either partially or totally, because of objective circumstances, Moldova may propose an amended Reform Agenda. In that case, Moldova may make a reasoned request to the Commission to amend its implementing decision referred to in Article 13(1).

    2. The Commission, after informing the European Parliament and the Council, may amend the implementing decision, in particular to take into account a change of the amounts available in line with the principles under Article 19.

    3. Where the Commission considers that the reasons put forward by Moldova justify an amendment to its Reform Agenda, the Commission shall assess the amended Agenda in accordance with Article 12 and may amend the implementing decision referred to in Article 13(1) without undue delay.

    4. In an amendment, the Commission may accept timelines for payment conditions extending until 31 December 2028.

    Article 15

    Loan agreement, borrowing and lending operations

    1. In order to finance the support under the Facility in the form of loans, the Commission shall be empowered on behalf of the Union to borrow the necessary funds on the capital markets or from financial institutions in accordance with Article 224 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

    2. The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Moldova. The loan agreement shall lay down the maximum loan amount, the availability period and the detailed terms and conditions of the support under the Facility in the form of loans. The loans shall have maximum duration of 40 years from the date of the signature of the loan agreement. The loan agreement shall contain the amount of pre-financing and rules on clearing of pre-financing.

    In addition to and by way of derogation from Article 220(5) of the Financial Regulation, the loan agreement shall contain the amount of pre-financing and rules on clearing of pre-financing.

    2a  The Commission shall provide the European Parliament and the Council, simultaneously, with the following information:

    (a) the amount of the loan in EUR;

    (b) the average maturity of the loan;

    (c) the pricing formula, and the availability period of the loan;

    (d) the maximum number of instalments and a clear and precise repayment schedule.

    3. The loan agreement shall be made available, simultaneously and without delay, to the European Parliament and the Council.

    Article 16

    Provisioning

    1. Provisioning for the loans shall be constituted at the rate of 9 % from the envelope allocated to the emerging challenges and priorities cushion under Article 6(3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/947 and shall be used as part of provisions supporting similar risks.

    2. By way of derogation from Article 211 (2), last sentence, of the Financial Regulation, the provisioning shall be paid progressively and fully constituted at the latest when the loans are fully disbursed.

    3.  The provisioning rate shall be reviewed at least every three years from the date of application of this Regulation. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article xx [on exercise of the delegation] of this Regulation to amend the provisioning rates, following the principles laid down in Article 214(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/2509.

     

    Article 17

    Pre-financing

    1. Following the submission of the Reform Agenda to the Commission, Moldova may request the release of a pre-financing of up to 20 % of the total amount foreseen under this Facility in accordance with Article 6(1), after deduction of complementary support, including support to civil society organisations and technical assistance, and provisioning for loans. Financing under this Article may be granted in addition to and during the same period of exceptional bridge financing granted under Article 17a.

    2. The Commission may release the requested pre-financing after the adoption of its implementing decision referred to in Article 13 and the entry into force of the Facility Agreement and of the loan agreement referred to in Articles 8 and 15 respectively. The funds shall be released in accordance with Article 19(3), first sentence, and subject to the respect of the preconditions set out in Article 5.

    3. The Commission shall decide on the timeframe for the disbursement of the pre-financing, which may be disbursed in one or more tranches.

    Article 17a

    Exceptional bridge financing

     

    1. Without prejudice to Article 17, if the Facility Agreement is not signed or the Reform

    Agenda is not adopted by 1 May 2025, the Commission may decide to provide limited, exceptional support to Moldova in the form of loans for a period of up to 4 months starting from [the date of entry into force of the Regulation], subject to satisfactory progress on the preparation of the Reform Agenda, subject to conditions to be agreed in a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Commission and Moldova, to the respect of the precondition set out in Article 5(1), to compliance with Article 6 and to available funding.

     

    2.   The MoU shall in particular establish policy conditions, indicative financial planning and the reporting requirements, proportionate to the duration of the financing. The policy conditions shall include a commitment to the principles of sound financial management with a focus on anti-corruption and anti-money laundering.

     

      The MoU shall be adopted and amended by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 27.

     

    3.  The amount of support referred to in paragraph 1 shall not exceed EUR 50 000 000. The Commission shall enter into a loan agreement with Moldova, which shall comply as appropriate with Article 15.

    Article 18

    Implementation of investment projects under the Neighbourhood Investment Platform

    1. In order to benefit from the leverage of Union financial support to attract additional investment, investments supporting the Reform Agenda shall be implemented in cooperation with international financial institutions in the form of investment projects approved under the Neighbourhood Investment Platform.

    2. Following satisfactory fulfilment of payment conditions, the Commission will adopt a decision authorising a release of funds, as referred to in Article 19(3). This decision shall, in accordance with Article 6(1), set the amount of funds to be made available in the form of non-repayable support provided by the Union for projects approved under the NIP, and the amount of financial assistance in the form of loan support to be released to Moldova. This decision shall also set out, in accordance with the ratio set in the Facility Agreement as referred to in Article 8(5)(c), the share of this loan support to be made available by Moldova as co-financing for projects approved under the NIP.

    Article 19

    Assessment of the fulfilment of payment conditions, withholding and reduction of funds, rules on payments

    1. Twice per year, Moldova shall submit a duly justified request for the release of funds at the latest two months after the timeline set in the Commission Implementing Decision in respect of fulfilled payment conditions related to the quantitative and qualitative steps as set out in the Reform Agenda.

    2. The Commission shall assess without undue delay whether Moldova has met the preconditions set out in Article 5 and the principles for financing set out in Article 10(3) and achieved satisfactory fulfilment of the payment conditions set out in the Commission implementing decision referred to in Article 13. In case the Commission finds that payment conditions for which it had previously paid have been reversed by Moldova, the Commission will reduce future disbursements by an equivalent amount. The Commission may be assisted by experts, including experts from Member States. In the event that a request for the release of funds or a request for payment includes a step related to Chapter 32, referred to in Article 19(2), the Commission may not adopt a decision authorizing the release of funds unless it assesses such step positively.

    3. Where the Commission makes a positive assessment of the satisfactory fulfilment of all applicable conditions, it shall adopt without undue delay a decision authorising the release of funds corresponding to those conditions. In respect of those amounts, the decision shall constitute the condition referred to in Article 10.

    4. Where the Commission makes a negative assessment of the fulfilment of any conditions as per the timetable, the release of funds corresponding to such conditions shall be withheld. The withheld amounts shall be released only when Moldova has duly justified, as part of the subsequent request for release of funds, that it has taken the necessary measures to ensure satisfactory fulfilment of the corresponding conditions.

    5. Where the Commission concludes that Moldova has not taken the necessary measures within a period of 12 months from the initial negative assessment referred to in paragraph 4, the Commission shall reduce the amount of the non-repayable financial support and of the loan proportionately to the part corresponding to the relevant payment conditions. During the first year of implementation, a deadline of 24 months shall apply, calculated from the initial negative assessment referred to in paragraph 4. Moldova may present its observations within two months from the communication to them of the Commission’s conclusions.

    6. Any amount corresponding to payment conditions that have not been fulfilled by 31 December 2028 shall not be due to Moldova and shall be decommitted, or cancelled from the available amount of loan support, as appropriate.

    7. The Commission may reduce the amount of the non-repayable financial support and recover from Moldova, including by offsetting, any amount spent to achieve the objectives of the Facility, or to reduce the amount of the loan to be disbursed to Moldova or request early repayment of the loan in accordance with the loan agreement, in the event of funds unduly paid, identified cases of, or serious concerns in relation to, irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest affecting the financial interests of the Union that have not been corrected by Moldova, or of a reversal of qualitative or quantitative steps or in cases it is found, after the payment has taken place, that steps were not satisfactorily fulfilled, or of a serious breach of an obligation resulting from the Facility Agreements or from the loan agreements-, including on the basis of information provided by OLAF or of the Court of Auditors’ reports. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council prior to taking any decision of such reductions.

    8. By way of derogation from Article 116(2) of the Financial Regulation, the payment deadline as referred to in Article 116(1), point (a), of the Financial Regulation shall start running from the date of the communication of the decision authorising the disbursement to Moldova pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.

    9. Article 116(5) of the Financial Regulation shall not apply to payments made as financial assistance, channelled directly to Moldova’s treasury pursuant to this Article and to Article 23 of this Regulation.

    10. Payments of the non-repayable financial support and of the loans under this Article shall be made in accordance with the budget appropriations, as set in the annual budgetary procedure, and subject to the available funding, respectively. Funds shall be paid in instalments. An instalment may be paid in one or more tranches.

    11. The amounts shall be paid following the decision referred to in paragraph 3 in accordance with the loan agreement.

    12. Payment of any amount of the support in the form of loans shall be subject to the submission by Moldova of a request for payment in the form set out in the loan agreement, , and in accordance with the provisions set out in the Facility Agreement. This shall not apply to payment of pre-financing.

     

    Article 20

    Transparency with regard to persons and entities receiving funding for the implementation of the Reform Agenda

    1. Moldova shall publish up-to-date data on final recipients receiving amounts of funding exceeding the equivalent of EUR 50 000 cumulatively over the period of three years for the implementation of reforms and investments under this Facility.

    2. For final recipients referred to in paragraph 1, the following information shall be published in a machine- readable format on a webpage, in order of total funds received, having due regard to the requirements of confidentiality and security, in particular the protection of personal data:

    (a) in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full legal name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, where available, or another unique identifier established by the legislation applicable to the legal person;

    (b) in the case of a natural person, the first and last name or names of the recipient;

    (c) the amount received by the recipient and the reforms and investments under the Moldova Facility that this amount contributes to implementing.

    3. The information referred to in paragraph 2 shall not be published where disclosure risks threatening the rights and freedoms of the final recipients concerned or seriously harming their commercial interests. Such information shall be made available to the Commission.

    4. Moldova shall transmit electronically to the Commission at least once a year the data on the final recipients referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, in a machine-readable format to be defined in the Facility Agreement, as referred to in Article 8(5)(l).

     

    CHAPTER IV

    Protection of financial interests of the Union

     

    Article 21

     Protection of the financial interests of the Union

    1. In implementing the Facility, the Commission and Moldova shall take all the appropriate measures to protect the financial interests of the Union, taking into account the principle of proportionality and the specific conditions under which the Facility will operate, the preconditions set out in Article 5(1) and conditions set out in the specific Facility Agreements, in particular regarding the prevention, detection and correction of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities as well as the investigation and prosecution of offences affecting the funds provided under the Facility. Moldova shall commit to progressing towards effective and efficient management and control systems and ensure that amounts wrongly paid or incorrectly used can be recovered.

    2. The Facility Agreement shall provide for the following obligations of Moldova:

    (a) to regularly check that the financing provided has been used in accordance with the applicable rules, in particular regarding the prevention, detection and correction of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities;

    (b) to protect whistleblowers;

    (c) to take appropriate measures to prevent, detect and correct fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities as well as to investigate and prosecute criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union, to detect and avoid double funding and to take legal actions to recover funds that have been misappropriated, including in relation to any measure for the implementation of reforms and investment projects or programmes under the Reform Agenda and to take appropriate measures to treat mutual legal assistance requests by EPPO and Member States’ competent authorities concerning criminal offences affecting the funds under the Facility, where applicable and without delay;

    (d) for the purpose of paragraph 1, in particular for checks on the use of funds in relation to the implementation of reforms in the Reform Agenda, to ensure the collection of, and access to, in compliance with Union data protection principles and with applicable data protection rules, adequate data on persons and entities receiving funding, including beneficial ownership information, for the implementation of measures of the Reform Agenda under Chapter III;

    (e) to expressly authorise the Commission, OLAF, the Court of Auditors and, where applicable, EPPO to exert their rights as provided for in Article 129 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

    (ea) to include all information related to project implementation, in particular concerning performance and financial implementation, and final recipients in an interoperable information system provided by the Commission as laid down under Article 36(2)(d) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

    3. The Facility Agreement shall also provide for the right of the Commission to reduce proportionately the amount of the non-repayable financial support provided under the Facility and to recover from Moldova, including by offsetting, any amount spent to achieve the objectives of the Facility and to reduce the amount of the loan to be disbursed to the Beneficiary or request early repayment of the loan in accordance with the loan agreement, in the event of funds unduly paid, identified cases of, or serious concerns in relation to, irregularities, fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest affecting the financial interests of the Union that have not been corrected by Moldova, or in cases it is found, after the payment has taken place, that steps were not satisfactorily fulfilled, or of a serious breach of an obligation resulting from the Facility Agreement or from the loan agreement When deciding on the amount of the recovery and reduction, or the amount to be repaid early, the Commission shall respect the principle of proportionality and shall take into account the seriousness of the irregularity, fraud, corruption or conflict of interest affecting the financial interests of the Union, or of a breach of an obligation. Moldova shall be given the opportunity to present its observations before the reduction is made or early repayment is requested.

    4. Persons and entities implementing funds under the Facility shall report any suspected cases of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities affecting financial interests of the Union without delay, to the Commission and to OLAF.

     

    Article 22

    Role of Moldova’s internal systems and audit authority

    1. For the part of the Facility funding made available as financial assistance, the Commission can rely on the audit authorities established by Moldova for the purpose of controlling public expenditure. As appropriate, the Commission shall also rely on further democratic scrutiny as referred to in Article 4(9).

    2. The Reform Agenda shall prioritise in the first years of their implementation reforms related to negotiation Chapter 32, particularly on public financial management and internal control, as well as on the fight against fraud, together with Chapters 23 and 24, particularly when it comes to justice, corruption and organised crime and Chapter 8, particularly on State aid control.

    3. Moldova shall report any irregularities, including fraud, which have been the subject of a primary administrative or judicial finding, without delay, to the Commission and shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of any administrative and legal proceedings in relation to such irregularities. Such reporting shall be done by electronic means, using the Irregularity Management System, established by the Commission.

    4. The entities referred to in paragraph 1 shall maintain regular dialogue with the Court of Auditors, OLAF and, where appropriate, EPPO.

    5. The Commission may carry out detailed systems reviews of Moldova’s budget implementation based on a risk-assessment and dialogue with audit authorities, and issue recommendations for improvements in the systems.

    6. The Commission may adopt recommendations to Moldova on all cases where in its views competent authorities have not taken the necessary steps to prevent, detect and correct fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities that have affected or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the expenditure financed under the Facility and in all cases where it identifies weaknesses affecting the design and functioning of the control system put in place by the those authorities. Moldova concerned shall implement such recommendations or provide a justification on why it has not done so.

     

     

    CHAPTER V

    MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION

     

    Article 23

    Monitoring and reporting

    1. The Commission shall monitor the implementation of the Facility and assess the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3. The monitoring of implementation shall be targeted and proportionate to the activities carried out under the Facility Agreement, and shall be without prejudice to the reporting requirements set out under Regulation (EU) 2021/947. The indicators referred to in Article 11(2) shall be expected to contribute to the Commission’s monitoring of the Facility.

    2. The Facility Agreement referred to in Article 8 shall set out rules and modalities for Moldova to report to the Commission for the purpose of paragraph 1 of this Article.

    3. The Commission shall provide an annual report to the European Parliament and the Council on progress towards the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation. The annual report shall be complemented by presentations on the state of play of the implementation of the Facility twice per year.

    4. The Commission shall provide the annual report referred to in paragraph 3 to the Committee referred to in Article 27(1).

    5. The Commission shall report on the progress of the implementation of the Reform Agenda of Moldova in the context of the scoreboard established under Regulation (EU) 2024/1449.

     

    Article 24

    Facility scoreboard

    6. The Commission shall establish display the progress of the implementation of the Reform Agenda in the Facility scoreboard, established under Regulation (EU) 2024/1449.

    Article 25

     

    Evaluation of the Facility

    1. After 31 December 2027 and by 31 December 2031 at the latest, the Commission shall carry out an independent ex-post evaluation of the Regulation. That ex-post evaluation shall assess the Union contribution to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation.

    2. The ex-post evaluation shall make use of the good practice principles of the OECD Development Assistance Committee, seeking to ascertain whether the objectives have been met and to formulate recommendations with a view to improving future actions.

    3. The Commission shall communicate the findings and conclusions of the ex-post evaluation accompanied by its observations and follow-up, to the European Parliament, the Council and the Member States. That ex-post evaluation may be discussed at the request of the European Parliament, the Council or the Member States. The results shall feed into the preparation of future programmes and actions and resource allocation. That ex-post evaluation and follow-up shall be made publicly available.

    4. The Commission shall, to an appropriate extent, associate all relevant stakeholders, including Moldova, social partners, civil society organisations, in the evaluation process of the Union’s funding provided under this Regulation, and may, where appropriate, seek to undertake joint evaluations with the Member States and other partners with close involvement of Moldova.

     

    Article 26

    Reporting by Moldova in the context of the Economic and Financial Dialogue

    1. The beneficiary shall report once a year in the context of the Economic and Financial Dialogue on the progress made in the achievement of the reform-related part of its Reform Agenda.

     

    Article 26a

     

    Parliamentary oversight and scrutiny over the Facility

     

    1. The Commission shall report to the competent committees of the European Parliament on the state of progress in the implementation of the Facility and the Reform Agenda. The Commission shall provide the European Parliament with written information on:

     

    (a) the state of progress in the implementation of the Facility, in particular the Reform Agenda and related investments and reforms, as well as the Facility Agreement;

    (b) the assessment of the Reform Agenda, and any amendments thereof;

    (c) the main findings of the report referred to in Article 23(3);

    (d) payment, withholding and reduction procedures, where applicable, including any observation presented to ensure a satisfactory fulfilment of the conditions;

    (e) the withholding and suspension of payments as well as the reduction of funds, including any observation presented and remedial measures taken by the beneficiary to ensure a satisfactory fulfilment of the payment conditions;

    (f) any other relevant elements in relation to the implementation of the Facility.

    2.  The regular dialogue between the European Parliament and the Commission shall take place at least once a year, in addition to ad-hoc meetings responding to sudden developments in the country. Ahead of each dialogue, the Commission shall provide the Parliament with information referred to in paragraph 1. The Facility scoreboard referred to in Article 24 may serve as a basis for the dialogue.

    3.  The European Parliament may express its views in resolutions as regards the matters referred to in paragraph 1 and the Commission shall take those views into account.

     

     

    CHAPTER VI

    FINAL PROVISIONS

     

    Article 27

    Committee procedure

    1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee, established by the Regulation (EU) 2021/947.

    2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

    3. For implementing acts referred to in Articles 13(1) and 14(2), where the committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and Article 5(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

     

    Article 28

    Information, communication and publicity

    1. Without prejudice to the requirements set out under Regulation (EU) 2021/947, the Commission shall engage in communication activities to ensure the visibility of the Union funding for the financial support envisaged in the Reform Agenda, including through joint communication activities with Moldova. The Commission shall ensure that support under the Facility is communicated and acknowledged through a funding statement. Actions financed under the Facility shall be carried out in accordance with communication and visibility requirements in Union-financed external actions and in other relevant guidelines.

    2. The recipient of Union funding shall actively acknowledge the origin and ensure the visibility of the Union funding, including, where applicable, by displaying the emblem of the Union and an appropriate funding statement that reads ‘funded by the European Union’, in particular when promoting the actions and their results, by providing coherent, effective and proportionate targeted information to multiple audiences, including the media and the public.

    3. Information, communication and publicity shall be provided in accessible format.

    Article 29

    Entry into force

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

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

    Done at Brussels,

    For the European Parliament For the Council

    The President The President

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council decision on the renewal of the Agreement on cooperation in science and technology between the European Community and Ukraine – A10-0007/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the draft Council decision on the renewal of the Agreement on cooperation in science and technology between the European Community and Ukraine

    (COM(2024)0438 – C10‑0196/2024 – 2024/0240(NLE))

    (Consent)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the draft Council decision (14848/2024),

     having regard to the Council Decision 2003/96/EC of 6 February 2003 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Community and Ukraine[1],

     having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 186 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10‑0196/2024),

     having regard to Rule 107(1) and (4), and Rule 117(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0007/2025),

    1. Gives its consent to the renewal of the agreement;

    2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Ukraine.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    Ukraine has a long tradition of science and technology excellence and despite the difficulties of the last years and Russia’s unlawful and unprovoked war of aggression, Ukraine still has first class science and scientists, and remains an important science, technology and innovation (STI) actor in the neighbourhood of the Union. Cooperation between the Union and Ukraine has traditionally been very active notably in the fields of advanced/new materials, IT-technology, physics and astronomy, engineering, agricultural technology, nanotechnology, biotechnology and their applications across various sectors such as aviation, energy, and biomedicine, in particular immunotherapies for cancer.

     

    The ‘Agreement on cooperation in science and technology between the European Community and Ukraine’ was signed in Copenhagen on 4 July 2002 and was concluded originally until 31 December 2002. Article 12 point (b) of the Agreement provides for a possibility of renewal by common agreement between the Parties for additional periods of five years. The Agreement has been renewed four times: in 2003, 2011, 2015 and 2020.

     

    The renewal of the Agreement for an additional period of five years is in the mutual interest of both Parties to the Agreement in order to continue facilitating cooperation between the EU and Ukraine in common science and technology (S&T) priority areas leading to mutual benefits as laid out in Article 4 of the Agreement.

     

    The substance of the proposed decision is to extend the existing Agreement. It will in all other regards be identical to that of the content of the current Agreement.

     

    The content of the Agreement will remain unchanged and will not create new or additional rights and obligations for either of the Parties, but instead it will extend in time the legal regime already existing between the Parties in the field of S&T cooperation.

     

    For the reasons stated above, the Rapporteur believes that it is in the Union’s interest to renew the ‘Agreement on cooperation in science and technology between the European Community and Ukraine’ for a new period of five years.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Renewal of the Agreement on cooperation in science and technology between the European Community and Ukraine

    References

    14848/2024 – C10-0196/2024 – 2024/0240(NLE)

    Date of consultation or request for consent

    20.11.2024

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    ITRE

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Borys Budka

    3.12.2024

     

     

     

    Simplified procedure – date of decision

    3.12.2024

    Date adopted

    29.1.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    77

    1

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Wouter Beke, Hildegard Bentele, Michael Bloss, Paolo Borchia, Borys Budka, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Raúl de la Hoz Quintano, Elena Donazzan, Matthias Ecke, Christian Ehler, Sofie Eriksson, Jan Farský, Lina Gálvez, Jens Geier, Nicolás González Casares, Giorgio Gori, Bart Groothuis, Elisabetta Gualmini, András Gyürk, Niels Flemming Hansen, Eero Heinäluoma, Ivars Ijabs, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Fernand Kartheiser, Seán Kelly, Rudi Kennes, Sarah Knafo, Ondřej Knotek, Michał Kobosko, Ondřej Krutílek, Eszter Lakos, Isabella Lövin, Yannis Maniatis, Sara Matthieu, Eva Maydell, Marina Mesure, Jana Nagyová, Dan Nica, Angelika Niebler, Ville Niinistö, Mirosława Nykiel, Daniel Obajtek, Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, Tsvetelina Penkova, Virgil-Daniel Popescu, Jüri Ratas, Julie Rechagneux, Aura Salla, Jussi Saramo, Paulius Saudargas, Benedetta Scuderi, Anna Stürgkh, Marcin Sypniewski, Beata Szydło, Dario Tamburrano, Matej Tonin, Isabella Tovaglieri, Filip Turek, Yvan Verougstraete, Mariateresa Vivaldini, Andrea Wechsler, Angelika Winzig, Auke Zijlstra

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    René Aust, Per Clausen, Pietro Fiocchi, Hanna Gedin, Radan Kanev, Rihards Kols, Marion Maréchal, Jutta Paulus, Massimiliano Salini, Davor Ivo Stier, Dimitris Tsiodras, Brigitte van den Berg, Marion Walsmann

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Raffaele Topo, Marianne Vind

    Date tabled

    31.1.2025

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Spain’s inefficient management delays essential EU funds – P-000249/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-000249/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Diego Solier (ECR), Nora Junco García (ECR)

    The Spanish Government’s failure to apply to the EU Solidarity Fund to address the damage caused by the October–November 2024 DANA (severe flash flooding) reflects a worrying administrative laziness that puts the interests of Valencian citizens, and the country as a whole, at risk. Despite the fact that the Commission confirmed the availability of this mechanism, Spain has unjustifiably delayed its application, exhausting the regulatory deadline of 12 weeks. This contrasts with the diligence of other countries, such as Germany and Italy, which activated this fund in 2023 to respond swiftly to similar disasters.

    This delay not only denotes inefficient management, but also exposes affected communities to further hardship while the timeline for gaining access to necessary resources is prolonged. Moreover, it is unacceptable to publicly contradict each other on the state of affairs, as demonstrated by the official letter from the Commission Vice-President for Cohesion and Reforms. Valencians deserve a government committed to their welfare, not excuses and delays.

    In view of this:

    • 1.Does the Commission plan to improve control mechanisms to ensure that EU Solidarity Fund resources are requested and managed efficiently?
    • 2.What is the Commission’s assessment of the impact of the Spanish Government’s delay in applying for these funds on the communities affected by the DANA?

    Submitted: 21.1.2025

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Political assault on media freedom and pluralism in Spain – E-002226/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is aware of the developments the Honourable Member refers to in the question. Royal Decree-Law 5/2024 was approved by the Spanish Government on 22 October 2024 and validated by the Spanish Congress on 30 October 2024.

    The Commission attaches great importance to the principles of media freedom and pluralism, which are fundamental pillars of democratic societies.

    The European Media Freedom Act[1], which entered into force on 7 May 2024 and will apply from 8 August 2025, aims to ensure editorial independence of public service media providers, in accordance with their public service remit as defined at national level in line with Protocol No 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, attached to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union[2].

    Protocol No 29 recognises the Member States’ freedom to define, organise and finance public service broadcasting. Nevertheless, all Member States have agreed to a set of European standards and guiding principles relating to independence, the regulatory and policy framework, funding, appointments, accountability, management, transparency, and openness in this domain[3].

    The Commission will continue to monitor developments concerning the public service broadcasters, both at national and regional levels, taking into account the provisions in the European Media Freedom Act.

    • [1] Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU (European Media Freedom Act) (OJ L, 2024/1083, 17.04.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1083/oj).
    • [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/tfeu_2012/pro_29/oj
    • [3] Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 on public service media governance.
    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – The right to petition the European Parliament – 03-02-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    The right to petition the European Parliament was formally set out in the Maastricht Treaty as one of the rights of European Union citizenship. Parliament’s predecessors, from the beginnings of the Communities in the 1950s, had already recognised the importance of receiving petitions from citizens, and this has become a major expression of Parliament’s role as the direct representative of EU citizens. The European Parliament’s practice is based on those of national parliaments, but is often more extensive in terms of scope. The right of petition has developed substantially over time. In particular, petitions addressed to the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions (PETI committee) and then transferred to the European Commission can potentially lead to infringement procedures against Member States. There are, however, still some problems regarding exercise of the right of petition – particularly concerning the responsiveness of the Commission and how to involve national parliaments more effectively. The PETI committee plays a key role in the election of the European Ombudsman, as it is responsible for organising the hearings of the nominees. The committee attaches paramount importance to the examination and public discussion of petitions at its meetings and petitioners have the right to present their petitions. They frequently take the floor in the discussion, thereby actively contributing to the work of the committee. In this way, efficient communication takes place between Parliament, the Commission and citizens. This briefing modifies and further develops a briefing published in 2015.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Weapons trafficking to Sudan – E-000350/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000350/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Gaetano Pedulla’ (The Left), Pasquale Tridico (The Left), Danilo Della Valle (The Left), Per Clausen (The Left), Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left), Sebastian Everding (The Left)

    UN report S/2024/65, investigations by non-governmental organisations (Human Rights Watch, Refugees International, Amnesty International) and articles by journalists in many authoritative media sources, such as the New York Times, put forward allegations implicating the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in supporting the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan. In particular, the UAE is alleged to be implicated in weapons trafficking, inter alia using French technology, despite UN warnings.

    • 1.Can the Commission clarify its assessment of the UAE’s role in this conflict with particular reference to the latter’s involvement with a group accused of human rights abuses and atrocities against civilians?
    • 2.What diplomatic efforts is the Commission currently pursuing to address and deter any support by the UAE for armed groups in Sudan, including as regards working with international partners to address this worrying support and ensure accountability?
    • 3.Is the Commission prepared to consider sanctions or other policy measures against any individuals or entities within the UAE that are found to be complicit in supporting Sudanese armed groups responsible for documented abuses?

    Submitted: 27.1.2025

    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Erdoğan’s political ally, Devlet Bahçeli, cultivates a climate of war against Greece – E-000342/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000342/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Nikolaos Anadiotis (NI)

    On 15 January 2025, in a speech to the Turkish Parliament, de facto co-ruler of Türkiye Devlet Bahçeli, leader of the Nationalist Movement Party, which provides support to the Erdoğan government, once again made unacceptable and provocative statements against Greece. Referring to the Aegean Dodecanese Islands, he emphasised that he considers them Turkish, saying, verbatim, ‘If we have to go to war, it will be a celebration for us. We are told by God to sacrifice our lives many times for national values’[1].

    At the same time, Turkish ‘analysts’ on CNN Turk are presenting maps on which all the Aegean islands are shown in the colours of Türkiye, clamouring, ‘we will fight!’ and ‘we will do what has to be done and go and take them!’ They also show the range of missiles extending to mainland Greece. Türkiye considers itself to have achieved victory in Syria and appears insatiable and undaunted by a war against Greece and EU territories, preparing its public opinion accordingly.

    In light of the above, does the Commission intend to manage the issue by immediately cutting off funding to Türkiye altogether?

    Submitted: 27.1.2025

    • [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eCzeAjWjH8 (Δελτίο Ειδήσεων ΣΚΑΙ, 15/01/2025)
    Last updated: 3 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde – A10-0004/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    (11267/2024 – C10‑0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE))

    (Consent)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the draft Council decision (11267/2024),

     having regard to the draft agreement (11026/2024),

     having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), and Article 218(7), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10‑0087/2024),

     having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

     having regard to Rule 107(1) and (4), and Rule 117(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Development,

     having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries (A10-0004/2025),

    1. Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement;

    2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Cabo Verde.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    The Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde (FPA) offers fishing opportunities for 56 EU vessels for tuna and related species in Cabo Verde’s waters.

    The new agreement covers a period of five years and will offer EU vessels the possibility to fish 7 000 tonnes of tuna and tuna-like species in Cabo Verde’s waters. In return, the EU will pay Cabo Verde a financial contribution of 780 000€ per year (EUR 3 900 000 for the entire duration of the Protocol), from which 350 000€ is related to a reference tonnage of 7 000 tonnes, and 430 000€ to support for developing Cabo Verde’s sectoral fisheries policy.

    The rapporteur highlights the strategic importance of Cabo Verde, as a relevant player in the Atlantic Ocean, remembering that the EU and Cabo Verde have developed a cooperative relationship for more than four decades, with respect and political dialogue. Currently, Cabo Verde and the EU share common values such as democracy, respect for Human Rights and the Rule of Law, the promotion of multilateralism, and Cabo Verde is part of a regional group, called Macaronesia, which includes the Azores, Madeira, Canaries and Cabo Verde. The evolution of relations in these fields led to the creation of the EU-Cabo Verde Special Partnership in 2007, which continues to evolve.

    The rapporteur stresses the importance of the EU-Cabo Verde SFPA for the EU fleet fishing for tuna and related species in the Atlantic Ocean, following strict EU criteria with regard to fisheries management, resource conservation and environmental sustainability, while at the same time strictly respecting the human rights and contributing for local socioeconomic development.

    The rapporteur considers that this is a balanced Agreement, in which the remuneration for the fishing opportunities is lower than the EU contribution to support the development of Cabo Verde fisheries sector. This Protocol puts special emphasis on promoting decent working conditions for fishing activity, scientific capacity building, observation and management of the marine environment and marine protected areas. It promotes sustainable fisheries management, fisheries control and the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU). It also contains new provisions to improve vessel monitoring, the management of fishing authorizations and enhanced management measures for shark stocks. The Protocol responds to Cabo Verde’s desire to strengthen the industrialization and competitiveness of its fishing sector.

    In accordance with Article 218(6) TFEU, the consent of the European Parliament is required in order for the Council to adopt a decision on the conclusion of the Agreement.

    In the light of the above, the Rapporteur recommends to Parliament to give its consent to the conclusion of the Agreement.

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

     

    BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS (22.11.2024)

    for the Committee on Fisheries

    on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    (COM(2024)0236 – C10‑0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE))

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Hélder Sousa Silva 

     

    The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

     having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union[1],

     having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources[2], and in particular point 20 thereof,

    A. whereas the financial contribution for the entire duration of the Protocol is EUR 3 900 000 (i.e. EUR 780 000 per year), based on:

    (a) a reference tonnage of 7 000 tonnes, for which an annual amount linked to access has been set at EUR 350 000;

    (b) support for developing Cabo Verde’s sectoral fisheries policy, amounting to EUR 430 000 per year;

    B. whereas the implementation of the Protocol requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:

    EUR million (to three decimal places)

    DG MARE

     

     

    Year
    2024

    Year
    2025

    Year
    2026

    Year
    2027

    Year
    2028

    TOTAL

    Operational appropriations

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Budget line 08.05.01

    Commitments

    (1a)

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    3.900

    Payments

    (2 a)

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    0.780

    3.900

     

    C. whereas the annual amount for commitment and payment appropriations is established during the annual budgetary procedure, including for the reserve line for protocols not yet having entered into force at the beginning of the year;

    1. Notes that the support allocated to the Protocol should meet the objectives of cooperation in the fields of sustainable exploitation of fishery resources, aquaculture, sustainable development of the oceans, protection of the marine environment, and the blue economy; considers that this should be thoroughly scrutinised to ensure that this is done effectively during the implementation of the Protocol; notes that the support has a direct link to the principles of the Samoa Agreement[3] reinforcing the Union’s external action towards African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and taking account, in particular, of the Union’s objectives with regard to democratic principles and human rights, strengthening EU presence in the region and the cooperation with an important strategic partner;

    2. Recommends that, for future agreements, an impact assessment of the added value and socio-economic benefits derived from the previous agreement be taken into account; considers that this assessment should guide the negotiation and renewal of subsequent agreements to ensure that they align with the objectives of sustainable development and efficient use of the EU’s financial resources;

    3. Notes that the Protocol implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement with Cabo Verde had not yet entered into force at the beginning of this year;

    4. Recalls that the IIA requires that amounts provided for in the budget for the renewal of fisheries agreements that enter into force after 1 January of the financial year concerned be put in the reserve;

    5. Recalls that the use of the appropriations in the reserve requires a transfer in accordance with Article 31 of the Financial Regulation for the amount concerned from reserve line 30 02 02 to operational line 08 05 01;

    6. Recalls that the Financial Regulation requires the Commission to only sign a protocol with financial implications when appropriations are available on the operational line;

    7. Notes that the Protocol with Cabo Verde was signed on 23 July 2024;

    8. Expresses its concern that no request for a transfer was submitted to the Committee on Budgets before the signing of the Protocol;

    9. Takes note of the information from the Commission that for 2024 part of the unused appropriations for the implementation of the fisheries agreement with Greenland was available on operational line 08 05 01 and would be used for the implementation of the Protocol with Cabo Verde;

    10. Considers that this practice does not respect the provisions of the IIA; furthermore, maintains that appropriations are to be used for the purpose for which they have been entered into the budget;

    11. Notes the relatively small amount linked to the implementation of the Protocol with Cabo Verde, which might explain why the Commission has deviated from the required procedure; considers this to be a special situation that can be accepted by way of an exception;

    12. Demands that the Commission act in compliance with the provisions of the IIA for any future fisheries agreement regardless of the amount involved;

    13. Stresses that the financial programming of line 08 05 01 needs to be enough to cater for the financial obligations for 2025-2027, subject to the decision of the budgetary authority in the annual budgetary procedures; in this regard, notes that line 08 05 01 in the 2025 Draft Budget and in the Council Position on the 2025 Draft Budget includes an amount of EUR 150 560 000 in commitment appropriations and EUR 135 275 000 in payment appropriations; calls for scrutiny regarding the financial programming of line 08 05 01 in the annual budgets of 2026 and 2027;

    14. Concludes that the Committee on Budgets is in a position to advise the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible, to recommend approval of the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde.

     

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    Title

    Conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    References

    11267/2024 – C10-0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE)

    Committee(s) responsible

    PECH

     

     

     

     Date announced in plenary

    BUDG

    19.9.2024

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment

     Date appointed

    Hélder Sousa Silva

    16.9.2024

    Discussed in committee

    14.10.2024

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    21.11.2024

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    26

    5

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Tomasz Buczek, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Thomas Geisel, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Fabienne Keller, Janusz Lewandowski, Giuseppe Lupo, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Matjaž Nemec, Danuše Nerudová, Ruggero Razza, Bogdan Rzońca, Hélder Sousa Silva, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Joachim Streit, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Auke Zijlstra

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Moritz Körner, Tiago Moreira de Sá

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Christophe Bay, Udo Bullmann, Andrzej Buła, Gheorghe Falcă, Ştefan Muşoiu, Jan-Christoph Oetjen

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    26

    +

    ECR

    Ruggero Razza, Bogdan Rzońca

    NI

    Thomas Geisel

    PPE

    Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Andrzej Buła, Gheorghe Falcă, Janusz Lewandowski, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Danuše Nerudová, Hélder Sousa Silva

    PfE

    Tiago Moreira de Sá

    Renew

    Fabienne Keller, Moritz Körner, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Joachim Streit

    S&D

    Udo Bullmann, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Giuseppe Lupo, Ştefan Muşoiu, Matjaž Nemec, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs

    Verts/ALE

    Ignazio Roberto Marino, Nicolae Ştefănuță

     

    5

    PfE

    Christophe Bay, Tomasz Buczek, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Auke Zijlstra

     

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

     : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT (5.12.2024)

    for the Committee on Fisheries

    on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    (11267/2024 – C10‑0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE))

    Rapporteur for opinion: Rosa Estaràs Ferragut

     

    SHORT JUSTIFICATION

    The Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde (FPA) entered into force on 30 March 2007 for a period of 5 years, being tacitly renewable. A previous 5-year Protocol to the FPA entered into force on 20 May 2019 and expired on 19 May 2024.

    With a view to adopt a new Protocol to the FPA, the European Commission conducted negotiations with the Republic of Cabo Verde. Following these negotiations, a new Protocol was initialled on 15 April 2024. This new Protocol covers a period of five years, allowing Union vessels to access Cabo Verde’s fishing zone and to fish for tuna and associated species there, in compliance with the measures adopted by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). The aim is also to enhance cooperation between the EU and Cabo Verde, thereby creating a partnership framework within which to develop a sustainable fisheries policy and the responsible exploitation of fishery resources in Cabo Verde’s waters, in the interest of both Parties.

    The EU’s financial contribution allocated to the Protocol is EUR 780 000 per year. This total is broken down into an annual amount of EUR 350 000 for access to fishery resources and another EUR 430 000 for the development of Cabo Verde’s sectoral fisheries policy, which represents an increase for sectoral support in comparison with the previous protocol. 

    Cabo Verde’s economy heavily relies on fisheries, which plays a crucial role in food security and employment for local communities. Artisanal fishing is vital for the livelihoods of many coastal communities. However, commercial fishing operations are also prominent targeting high-value species like tuna, which can affect local resources. Challenges such as overfishing, illegal fishing and climate change pose significant threats to fish stocks, marine ecosystems, and the livelihoods of local communities that depend on fishing. Furthermore, while women play a vital role in the fisheries sector of Cabo Verde, social norms and institutional barriers reinforce their marginalisation especially in rural areas. Overall, fisheries in Cabo Verde are a vital part of the economy and culture, and, therefore, there is a pressing need for sustainable management to ensure the long-term health of marine ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.

    Your rapporteur takes the view that the Protocol promotes the responsible and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources and the development of the national fisheries policy in Cabo Verde and is in the interest of both Parties. For this reason, your rapporteur is proposing that the protocol be approved.

    *******

    The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible, to recommend approval of the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde (2024-2029).

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur for the opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    Title

    Conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    References

    11267/2024 – C10-0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE)

    Committee(s) responsible

    PECH

     

     

     

    Opinion by

     Date announced in plenary

    DEVE

    19.9.2024

    Rapporteur for the opinion

     Date appointed

    Rosa Estaràs Ferragut

    15.10.2024

    Date adopted

    4.12.2024

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    15

    0

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Barry Andrews, Robert Biedroń, Udo Bullmann, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Niels Geuking, Charles Goerens, György Hölvényi, Murielle Laurent, Reinhold Lopatka, Isabella Lövin, Lukas Mandl, Tiago Moreira de Sá, Kristoffer Storm, Marco Tarquinio

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Monika Hohlmeier

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    15

    +

    ECR

    Kristoffer Storm

    PPE

    Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Niels Geuking, Monika Hohlmeier, Reinhold Lopatka, Lukas Mandl

    PfE

    György Hölvényi, Tiago Moreira de Sá

    Renew

    Barry Andrews, Charles Goerens

    S&D

    Robert Biedroń, Udo Bullmann, Murielle Laurent, Marco Tarquinio

    Verts/ALE

    Isabella Lövin

     

     

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

     : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol (2024-2029) implementing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cabo Verde

    References

    11267/2024 – C10-0087/2024 – 2024/0133(NLE)

    Date of consultation or request for consent

    26.7.2024

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    PECH

     

     

     

    Committees asked for opinions

     Date announced in plenary

    DEVE

    19.9.2024

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral

    19.9.2024

     

     

     

    Discussed in committee

    4.9.2024

    4.12.2024

     

     

    Date adopted

    28.1.2025

     

     

     

     

    BUDG

    21.11.2024

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    22

    4

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Thomas Bajada, Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Asger Christensen, Carmen Crespo Díaz, Ton Diepeveen, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, Siegbert Frank Droese, Nicolás González Casares, Anja Hazekamp, France Jamet, Isabelle Le Callennec, Isabella Lövin, Giuseppe Milazzo, Francisco José Millán Mon, Jessica Polfjärd, André Rodrigues, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Sander Smit, António Tânger Corrêa, Emma Wiesner

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Mélissa Camara, Sofie Eriksson, Sebastian Everding

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Kinga Kollár

    Date tabled

    30.1.2025

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    22

    +

    ECR

    Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Giuseppe Milazzo, Bert-Jan Ruissen

    PPE

    Carmen Crespo Díaz, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, Kinga Kollár, Isabelle Le Callennec, Francisco José Millán Mon, Jessica Polfjärd, Sander Smit

    PfE

    Ton Diepeveen, António Tânger Corrêa

    Renew

    Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Asger Christensen, Emma Wiesner

    S&D

    Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Thomas Bajada, Sofie Eriksson, Nicolás González Casares, André Rodrigues

    Verts/ALE

    Mélissa Camara, Isabella Lövin

     

    4

    ESN

    Siegbert Frank Droese

    PfE

    France Jamet

    The Left

    Sebastian Everding, Anja Hazekamp

     

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

     : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-Evening Report: A deadly bird flu strain is headed for Australia – and First Nations people have the know-how to tackle it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nell Reidy, Research Fellow, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University

    ChameleonsEye/Shutterstock

    A virulent strain of bird flu continues to spread across the world. Australia, New Zealand and Pacific nations are the only countries free from the infection, but this will no doubt change.

    Known as “Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza” or H5N1, the bird flu strain had killed more than 300 million birds worldwide as of December last year, including both poultry and wild bird populations.

    Birds have always been part of the cultures and livelihoods of Australia Indigenous people. They feature in songs and dance, and are used for food and customary practices such as ceremonies and craft. Many of these practices continue today.

    To date however, Indigenous peoples have not been adequately included in federal government planning for the arrival of H5N1.

    So what is the likely result? Agencies and organisations will be ill-prepared to support Indigenous people experiencing intense social and cultural shock. And the opportunity to draw from the strengths of Indigenous organisations to tackle this impending disaster will have been squandered.

    What is H5N1?

    First identified in Hong Kong in 1997, H5N1 has since spread globally.

    H5N1 is a viral infection primarily affecting birds – both poultry and wildlife. As overseas experience has shown, it can lead to population declines in wild birds and disrupt local ecosystems. Infected birds may exhibit symptoms such as lethargy, respiratory distress and neurological signs such as paralysis, seizures and tremors, and sudden death.

    The virus also affects mammals including humans.
    Since November 2003, more than 900 human cases have been reported across 24 countries. About half these people died.

    While Australia has suffered several severe avian influenza epidemics since the 1970s, the H5N1 strain has not yet affected birds in Australia. But when it does, the damage may be profound.

    Birds are vital to Indigenous culture

    Australia’s diverse, unique bird population comprises about 850 species, 45% of which exist only in Australia.

    Birds are highly significant to many Indigenous groups.

    The adult magpie goose and its eggs, for example, are an important food source for groups in the Kakadu region.

    In Tasmania, Indigenous groups are revitalising customary practices by harvesting mutton birds. And bird feathers are used by Indigenous artisans in fashion and jewellery-making.

    If H5N1 makes birds sick and diminishes their populations, Indigenous people’s livelihoods and wellbeing – social, emotional, and spiritual – will be severely affected.

    Many birds are already struggling

    Of greatest concern are the fate of threatened and endangered bird species. Indeed, Australia’s Threatened Species Commissioner, Dr Fiona Fraser, has warned the forthcoming H5N1 event may be more ecologically devastating than the 2019–20 bushfires.

    Migratory birds, such as waders that travel from Siberia to lake systems throughout Australia, may take years or decades to return – if they return at all.

    Even relatively healthy bird populations, such as emus, may be at risk in areas where local populations are dwindling.

    The challenge has become more pronounced following the 2019–20 bushfires that affected vast areas of Australia’s southeast. Biodiversity in these burnt forests was later found to have declined, especially in bird populations.

    These challenges mean Australia’s native bird populations may struggle to remain healthy and sustainable, and their availability to Indigenous groups is likely to diminish.

    Mobilising Indigenous know-how

    Indigenous people are deeply engaged in caring for Country and caring for their communities. This makes them a strategic asset when planning for the arrival of H5N1.

    For example, Indigenous rangers are deeply engaged in land and water management including habitat restoration and biodiversity surveys. So, they are well placed to protect and monitor native species.

    Traditional Owners and Indigenous rangers manage 87 dedicated “Indigenous Protected Areas” covering 90 million hectares of land and six million hectares of sea.

    Indigenous health organisations will also be crucial to identifying human illness, should rare animal-to-human transmissions occur.

    Shire councils and land councils are also well-placed to identify and monitor the impacts of bird flu.

    It’s time for Indigenous inclusion

    Indigenous inclusion in the federal government’s response to the threat H5N1 has been late and inadequate

    This means Australia is already behind in supporting Indigenous groups to understand the threat and how to respond if they observe it – including how to deal with sick or dead birds.

    To fill these gaps in public information, National Indigenous Disaster Resilience at Monash University has produced a bird flu fact sheet.

    Indigenous community organisations demonstrated an extraordinary capacity for leadership during COVID-19. The muscle memory to mobilise in response to another outbreak remains strong.

    Indigenous groups must be centred in preparing and responding to H5N1. What’s more, Indigenous culture needs to be foregrounded when considering how the virus might affect the social, psychological, spiritual, and economic wellbeing of communities.


    In response to concerns raised in this article, a spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry said the federal government was “working to engage with First Nations communities to ensure we meet community needs” before and during an outbreak of H5N1.

    The department’s Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy was surveilling for avian influenza in northern Australia, including working with Indigenous Rangers. Indigenous engagement has also included presentations delivered virtually and on-country.

    “By fostering close partnerships with First Nations communities and Indigenous rangers, and leveraging access to a broad collaborative network, NAQS is able to facilitate trusted avenues for First Nations communities and Indigenous rangers to report concerns about wild bird health across northern Australia,” the spokesperson said.

    States and territories were planning local responses, and nationally coordinated, culturally appropriate communication activities were being developed. The spokesperson said Parks Australia was also working with Traditional Owners at jointly managed national parks, and with the Indigenous Protected Areas network, in developing plans to prepare and respond to any H5N1 detection.

    Bhiamie Williamson is a director of Country Needs People, and the Australian Indigenous Governance Institute

    Vinod Balasubramaniam receives funding from Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia.

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

    ref. A deadly bird flu strain is headed for Australia – and First Nations people have the know-how to tackle it – https://theconversation.com/a-deadly-bird-flu-strain-is-headed-for-australia-and-first-nations-people-have-the-know-how-to-tackle-it-245758

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: New Yorkers Will Feel The Freeze: Gillibrand, AG James Sound The Alarm On Disastrous Ramifications Of What A Trump Administration Federal Funding Freeze Could Mean For New Yorkers’ Safety And Economic Well-Being

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Kirsten Gillibrand

    Today, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and New York State Attorney General Tish James sounded the alarm on the disastrous ramifications of President Trump’s ongoing attempts to freeze grants and loans disbursed by the federal government. A federal funding freeze would severely harm New Yorkers, from aid to seniors to funds to address food insecurity and homelessness to critical money for law enforcement.

    “The chaos, uncertainty, and disorder fueled by the Trump administration is wreaking economic havoc on families and communities across New York,” said Senator Gillibrand. “A government funding freeze would put both the public safety and well-being of New Yorkers at risk. The Trump administration seems intent on harming New York families. While so much remains in question from this past week, it is imperative that everyone know what is at stake for our city, state, and nation.”

    “The public servants who go to work every day to care for New Yorkers and keep them safe rely on federal funds to do their jobs,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James. “This administration is putting New Yorkers in danger by pushing massive cuts to resources that support our most vulnerable communities and public safety efforts statewide. I am leading a coalition of attorneys general to end this destructive policy, and I thank Senator Gillibrand for her partnership as we fight to protect these funds that keep our communities safe.”

    “From our non-profits to our public schools, Trump’s reckless funding freeze would have devastating consequences for New Yorkers, particularly with regard to low-income students and the innumerable programs and services they rely upon,” said New York State Senator John Liu. “It’s politics at its worst that puts partisanship before the wellbeing of the most vulnerable among us who depend on federal aid to access essential support services.”

    “The ill-conceived White House budget freeze continues to cause great fear, uncertainly, and worry for tens of thousands of community-based nonprofit organizations nationwide — as well as for the tens of millions of the most vulnerable Americans whom we collectively serve,” said Joel Berg, CEO of the nonpartisan nonprofit organization Hunger Free America. “Any threats to nutrition assistance programs are especially counterproductive, undermining the Administration’s claim that it wants to improve public health.” 

    “The chaos and confusion caused by the Trump Administration’s freeze on contacts is having an immediate and harmful effect on older New Yorkers and family caregivers” said Allison Nickerson Executive Director of LiveOn NY. “Federal programs, like Meals on Wheels and housing assistance, provide life-sustaining support and relief to older adults who are already struggling to make ends meet. Older New Yorkers and citizens across the country expect their government to support them, not pull the rug out from under them. LiveOn NY is grateful Senator Gillibrand continues to fight for the fundamental services that New York’s older adults rely on every day.

    While some federal programs are still accessible for the moment, others have been suspended, such as select United States Department of Justice grants. A federal funding freeze has the potential to block billions of dollars in federal grants for New York State. For example: 

    Federal Counter-Terrorism Funding

    1. $290M was allotted to New York for State Fiscal Year 2025.

    Senior Nutrition/Meals on Wheels

    1. $66M was awarded to New York State-based entities in FY2024 for senior nutrition programs like Meals on Wheels.
    2. These grants include HHS’ Older Americans Act Title III Part C Nutrition Services and HHS’ Nutrition Services Incentives Program.

    Homeless Shelters

    1. $368M was awarded to New York State-based entities in FY2024 to fund homeless shelters, including $227 million for entities in New York City. 
    2. These grants include programs HUD’s Continuum of Care Program and HUD’s Emergency Solutions Grant Program.

    Food Banks

    1. $15M was awarded to New York State-based entities in FY2024 for programs that distribute food to people in need, such as food banks. 
    2. The funding was awarded through USDA’s The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).

    Disability Programs

    1. $60B in Medicaid grant funding was awarded to New York State in FY2024.
    2. On top of Medicaid, New York State-based entities were awarded $70 million in federal grants for programs, research, and services benefiting people with disabilities in FY2024.
    3. This includes at least $9 million for entities in New York City.

    FEMA Assistance to Firefighters

    1. $13.6M in Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grants was awarded to New York municipalities and fire departments in FY2024 to help recruit and train firefighters.
    2. $17.8M in Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) was awarded to New York municipalities and fire departments in FY2024 to help purchase firefighting vehicles and equipment. 
    3. Since FY2023, the FDNY has been awarded over $2M in AFG funding.

    FEMA Port Security Grant Program

    1. $14.1M was awarded to New York State in FY2024. 
    2. This included $3.8M for the FDNY,$6.6M for the NYPD, and $880K for the Port Authority.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Eastern DR Congo crisis increasing risk of mpox transmission, WHO chief warns

    Source: United Nations 4

    By Vibhu Mishra

    Peace and Security

    The worsening security situation in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has forced many mpox patients to flee treatment centres, increasing the risk of transmission, the UN health agency (WHO) warned on Monday.

    Fighting escalated sharply in late January, as Rwanda-backed M23 rebels seized control of parts of North Kivu, including areas near the regional capital Goma, and advanced towards South Kivu.

    Before the latest violence, mpox cases had been stabilizing, said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, in a speech to the agency’s executive board.

    Health system overwhelmed

    Healthcare facilities are struggling to cope with a surge in casualties, alongside patients suffering from multiple endemic diseases, including mpox, cholera, malaria and measles.

    WHO reported that shells hit a hospital in Goma, resulting in civilian casualties, including infants and pregnant women. Stocks of essential medicines in Minova (South Kivu) are rapidly depleting, as M23 rebels advance towards the city.

    The agency said health partners are doing “everything possible” to provide lifesaving services “despite the risks posed by heavy artillery and the proximity of frontline fighting.”

    Concerns over attacks on civilians, sexual violence, and other human rights violations have also reached alarming levels.

    IDPs at risk, again

    Ongoing clashes also threatens hundreds of thousands of internally displaced people (IDPs) sheltering in Goma, along with the aid workers supporting them.

    Thousands of displaced people sheltering close to Goma have had to flee for safety as heavy bombing and shelling struck close to the camps due to the proximity of military installations,” the UN World Food Programme (WFP) reported.

    Many displaced families are now staying with host communities, while others are setting up temporary shelters in schools and public buildings. Host communities themselves could face “significant humanitarian needs”.

    WFP

    An IDP camp in eastern DRC hosting tens of thousands of vulnerable families.

    Infrastructure hit

    The violence has severely damaged essential infrastructure, including water, electricity, and communication networks.

    In Goma, water and electricity remain cut off and people are forced to rely on unsafe water, increasing risk of disease outbreaks. Telecommunications (phones) and Internet access is also disrupted.

    Public and private property – including WFP and non-governmental organization-run warehouses – have been looted.

    “Coupled with severed access to the city, food and other essential supplies are almost depleted,” WFP said, adding that scarcity has driven prices up, making it even harder for vulnerable communities to afford basic necessities.

    Hard-won development gains at risk

    In addition to threatening the safety and wellbeing of millions, the fighting has put years of hard-won development gains at risk.

    Achim Steiner, Administrator of the UN Development Programme (UNDP) underscored that it is not just a humanitarian emergency but a development crisis jeopardizing progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

    “Every day the conflict continues, access to education and healthcare is disrupted, businesses collapse, and vital infrastructure is damaged – deepening hardship for communities and eroding the foundation for long-term recovery, resilience and sustainable development,” he said in a statement on Sunday.

    “I call on all actors to prioritize dialogue, uphold international humanitarian law, and pursue a peaceful resolution to this crisis,” he added.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Canadian National Charged With Stealing Approximately $65 Million in Cryptocurrency From Two DeFi Protocols

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Defendant Exploited Vulnerabilities in the KyberSwap and Indexed Finance Decentralized Finance Protocols to Steal from Investors

    An indictment was unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging Andean Medjedovic with wire fraud, computer hacking and attempted extortion for stealing approximately $65 million in cryptocurrency from the KyberSwap and Indexed Finance decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, which are sophisticated financial platforms residing on cryptocurrency blockchains.  Medjedovic is also charged with laundering the proceeds of the theft.  He is currently at large.

    John J. Durham, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; Antoinette Bacon, Supervisory Official of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; Harry T. Chavis, Jr., Special Agent in Charge, Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, New York (IRS-CI); James E. Dennehy, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI); and William S. Walker, Special Agent in Charge, Homeland Security Investigations New York (HSI) announced the indictment.

    “As alleged, the defendant executed a highly sophisticated scheme to exploit two decentralized finance protocols and steal tens of millions of dollars’ worth of cryptocurrency from investors,” stated United States Attorney Durham.  “My Office remains at the forefront in prosecuting cutting-edge cases involving new and emerging technologies, demonstrating our commitment to protecting all financial markets, including the digital assets markets.  Criminals like the defendant who take advantage of new technologies to harm investors will be held accountable no matter where in the world they carry out their schemes.”   

    Mr. Durham expressed his appreciation to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission’s Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit for their valuable assistance during the investigation. 

    “This was a sophisticated fraud that exploited vulnerabilities in ‘smart contracts’, resulting in the theft of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency,” stated IRS-CI New York Special Agent in Charge Chavis.  “It’s alleged that Medjedovic executed a hack that stole nearly $65 million in crypto between two schemes, leaving liquidity pool investors in the red.  In investigating this case, IRS-CI New York’s Cyber group worked closely with its federal partners while leveraging resources from IRS-CI’s Cyber Attaché at Europol and the J5 Cyber Group. Even with the complexities of DeFi, we tracked down who is responsible for this large-scale theft, and he is now a wanted man.”

    “Hackers can at times be painted in a flattering light by pop culture, some admiring their skills and acumen. They’re stealing money that isn’t theirs, and they’re breaking the laws of this country. We allege Andean Medjedovic violated several of those laws, and he, along with all the other cyber criminals who believe they’re untouchable, will face justice,” stated FBI Assistant Director in Charge Dennehy.

    “These charges are a result of HSI New York’s determination to disrupt Andean Medjedovic’s alleged sophisticated far-reaching transnational cybercrime and seek justice for the millions of dollars syphoned from financial platforms,” stated HSI New York Special Agent in Charge Walker.  “Our global reach, experience and extensive knowledge of the cyber domain allow us to rapidly develop investigations into bad actors who seek to exploit the cryptocurrency market. Our federal partnerships across the globe made this investigation a success to include support from the HSI attaché offices in the Netherlands.”

    KyberSwap and Indexed Finance were developers of automated market-making services called “liquidity pools” that allowed users to swap cryptocurrency tokens with each other.  The liquidity pools were managed by computer code called “smart contracts” and relied on investor contributions of cryptocurrency.  As alleged, Medjedovic used manipulative trading to exploit vulnerabilities in the KyberSwap and Indexed Finance smart contracts. These manipulative trades enabled Medjedovic to drain approximately $65 million in cryptocurrency that belonged to investors from the KyberSwap and Indexed Finance liquidity pools.

    The KyberSwap Exploit

    As alleged in the indictment, in 2023, Medjedovic planned and executed a scheme to exploit vulnerabilities in the KyberSwap protocol.  KyberSwap was a DeFi protocol and developer of liquidity pools on several public blockchains, including the Ethereum and Arbitrum networks. Liquidity pools use user-contributed cryptocurrency to facilitate trading and market-making in cryptocurrencies. The KyberSwap liquidity pools were managed by computer code or “smart contracts” called automated market makers or “AMMs,” which set prices in the KyberSwap liquidity pools.

    In November 2023, Medjedovic exploited vulnerabilities in the KyberSwap computer code to drain the KyberSwap liquidity pools.  Medjedovic used hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowed cryptocurrency to create artificial prices in the KyberSwap liquidity pools.  Medjedovic then calculated precise combinations of trades that would cause the KyberSwap AMM to “glitch,” in his words, allowing him to steal tens of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency from the liquidity pools. In total, Medjedovic stole approximately $48.8 million in investors’ cryptocurrency from 77 KyberSwap liquidity pools on six public blockchains.

    Following the exploit, Medjedovic attempted to extort the developers of the KyberSwap protocol, as well as KyberSwap’s investors and the members of the de-centralized autonomous organization or “DAO” that governed the KyberSwap protocol.  Medjedovic demanded control of the KyberSwap protocol and the KyberSwap DAO in exchange for which he would return approximately 50% of the cryptocurrency that he had stolen.

    Medjedovic also attempted to launder the proceeds of his theft, including through “bridge” protocols used to transfer cryptocurrency from one blockchain to another, and through a cryptocurrency “mixer” used to conceal the source of digital assets. After one bridge protocol froze several of his transactions, Medjedovic agreed to pay an undercover law enforcement agent posing as a software developer approximately $80,000 to circumvent the bridge protocol’s restrictions and release approximately $500,000 in stolen cryptocurrency.

    The Indexed Finance Exploit

    As alleged in the indictment, Medjedovic committed a similar exploit of the Indexed Finance DeFi protocol.  Indexed Finance liquidity pools are referred to as “index pools,” and function similarly to a mutual fund or exchange-traded fund in traditional finance.  Instead of holding a basket of traditional equities, the index pools held an index of digital tokens contributed by users.

    In October 2021, Medjedovic used manipulative trading to exploit two Indexed Finance liquidity pools on the Ethereum network.  Medjedovic used hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowed cryptocurrencies to distort a process called “re-indexing,” which was used by the Indexed Finance smart contracts to add a new token to the liquidity pools.  Medjedovic used the borrowed cryptocurrency to engage in manipulative trading to cause the Indexed Finance smart contracts to set artificial prices during the re-indexing process.  He then stole approximately $16.5 million in investor cryptocurrency from the liquidity pools.

    Beginning after the Indexed Finance exploit, in or around 2022, Medjedovic conspired with another person to launder the proceeds of his illegal conduct through cryptocurrency exchange accounts that were opened using false information, and by using a cryptocurrency mixer.  Among other things, Medjedovic maintained a step-by-step playbook for moving large amounts of cryptocurrency through the mixer, which he titled a “moneyMovementSystem.” In other documents, Medjedovic discussed circumventing “know your customer” or “KYC” procedures and using cryptocurrency exchange accounts opened with false KYC information for “hacks and cashing out.”

    The charges in the indictment are allegations and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.                    

    The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Business and Securities Fraud and National Security and Cybercrime Sections, with the Justice Department Criminal Division’s National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team (NCET). Assistant U.S. Attorneys Nick M. Axelrod and Andrew D. Reich of the Eastern District of New York and NCET Trial Attorney Tian Huang of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case with assistance from Paralegal Specialists Liam McNett and Madison Bates.  SEC Enforcement Attorney Daphna A. Waxman, formerly a member of the NCET, provided significant assistance.

    Valuable assistance was provided by the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs.  The Office thanks the Netherlands’ Public Prosecution Service and the Dutch National Police’s Cybercrime Unit in The Hague and United States Customs and Border Protection, New York Field Office.

    The Defendant:

    ANDEAN MEDJEDOVIC
    Age: 22
    Canada

    E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 24-CR-529 (NGG)

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: New York Man Arrested in Dallas Airport on Healthcare Fraud Charges

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    NEW ORLEANS, LA – U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans announced that ROBERT LAKE (“LAKE”), age 62, a resident of East Rockaway, New York, was arrested in the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, after disembarking from an international flight, after being previously indicted for federal healthcare fraud.

    LAKE had been indicted on October 18, 2025 for one count of conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1347 and 1349, and three counts of healthcare fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347.  According to the indictment, LAKE was a licensed prosthetist and orthotist who operated his own durable medical equipment (“DME”) supply companies, TRISETO and ORTHO WORKS.  From 2017 to around July 2019, LAKE purchased doctors’ orders for medically unnecessary orthotic braces and submitted claims to Medicare.  After Medicare revoked TRISETO’s enrollment in the program in July 2019, LAKE shifted to selling doctors’ orders through his marketing company, CRANIAL SCIENTIFIC, in exchange for kickbacks.  The doctors’ orders were medically unnecessary and, at times, manipulated at LAKE’s direction.

    LAKE is charged with conspiring with others, including Houma resident, Patrick Haydel.  Haydel had previously pled guilty to his role in this same fraudulent scheme.  Haydel and LAKE later learned that several physicians complained that they never signed the orders sold by LAKE, and further that Medicare beneficiaries and their caregivers, complained they neither requested nor needed the DME they received.  After the government executed a search warrant on Haydel’s business, LAKE transferred over $2 million to a Philippine account.  In total, LAKE and Haydel submitted more than $17 million in fraudulent DME claims to Medicare, for which Medicare reimbursed them more than $8 million.

    As to each count, LAKE faces up to ten years in prison, followed by up to three years of supervised release after release from prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or twice the gross gain to LAKE or the gross loss to any victims, and a mandatory $100 special assessment fee.

    U.S. Attorney Evans reiterated that an indictment is merely a charge and that the guilt of the defendant must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    U.S. Attorney Evans praised the work of the Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General.  Trial Attorney Kelly Walters of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas Moses, Healthcare Fraud Coordinator for the Eastern District of Louisiana, are prosecuting the case.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Global: Banning wildlife trade can increase trade of other threatened species

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Takahiro Kubo, Senior Researcher in National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) & Visiting Researcher in ICCS, University of Oxford

    Governments often use bans to protect wildlife that’s most threatened by trade. However, in our recent study we ask the question: could banning wildlife trade in one threatened species increase the trade in other threatened species?

    The expansion of online markets has made it easier for people to buy and sell wildlife. This potential for larger-scale commercial trade creates a potential threat to wildlife, particular when populations are small, which is often the case for species that inhabit islands.

    To deal with the risk of overexploitation, the government of Japan, one of the world’s largest wildlife markets, banned the trade of three threatened species: the giant water bug, the Tokyo salamander and the golden venus chub.

    While the ban successfully halted legal sales of the policy-targeted species, it had an unintended consequence: an increase in the sales of similar, non-banned species, some of which are threatened.

    This pattern, known as the “spillover effect”, suggests that when a species is no longer available, demand often moves to alternative species rather than disappearing entirely. However, these effects affected different species in different ways, with the spillover lasting for more than a year for water bugs, but disappearing over the same period for the salamanders and freshwater fish.

    These spillovers can be problematic as they can drive buyers to seek exotic pet species from other countries or even continents. Based on past experience in Japan and elsewhere, we know that these are often then released into nature by those that can no longer keep them. This increases the pressure on native fauna through competition and the spread of disease which may threaten not only native wildlife but also human health. Our findings highlight the need for a more comprehensive approach to wildlife trade regulations – one that considers both direct conservation efforts and indirect global impacts.

    Balancing bans

    While wildlife trade bans can play an important step, their ability to address overexploitation on their own is limited. To conserve species, we need complementary strategies that can manage demand and monitor supply.

    Prior to a ban, it is key to work to reduce the demand for the species to be targeted or redirect it to species that are well managed and not of conservation concern. This would be likely to minimise the effects of any unintended spillover after the trade ban comes into effect. If buyers understand why a species is at risk and are offered sustainable alternatives, they may be less likely to shift their interest to other vulnerable wildlife.

    Governments also need to enforce stronger monitoring to be able to track which species are traded and in what amount. This may be hard to implement across all trade but is feasible when we talk about online legal trade, which represents a large part of the global wildlife trade. Instead of focusing only on banned species, authorities should keep an eye on similar species that could become the next target for trade.

    For this to be effective, international cooperation, in the form of data sharing, for example, is critical since wildlife trade crosses borders. Countries need to work together to track and regulate trade so that bans don’t simply push demand to other regions.

    Finally, promoting legal, ethical and sustainable alternatives – such as responsible captive breeding programs or well-managed wild source populations – can help meet consumer demand without harming wild species.

    Our study serves as an important reminder: conservation has no silver bullets and we must be willing to embrace a multitude of tools if we are to deal with the different sides of an issue as complex as the wildlife trade. If we only focus on banning species without considering how the market will react, we risk simply moving the risk of extinction from one species to the next. A well-rounded approach – one that includes consumer behaviour change, improved monitoring and sustainable alternatives – offers the best chance of protecting wildlife for the long term.


    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Takahiro Kubo receives funding from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). He is a member of the IUCN SSC CEC Behaviour Change Taskforce.

    Diogo Veríssimo is the Chair of the IUCN SSC CEC Behaviour Change Taskforce.

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

    ref. Banning wildlife trade can increase trade of other threatened species – https://theconversation.com/banning-wildlife-trade-can-increase-trade-of-other-threatened-species-247148

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why should humanities education persist in an AI age? Self-development, to start

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Johannes Steizinger, Associate Professor of Philosophy, McMaster University

    Since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots has become rampant among students in higher education.

    While some might be ambivalent about the impact of generative AI on higher education, many instructors in the humanities scramble to adapt their classes to the new reality and have declared a crisis of their teaching model.

    Professors and students alike argue that unrestricted use of generative AI threatens the purpose of an education in disciplines like philosophy, history or literature. They say that, as a society, we should care about this loss of intellectual competencies.

    But why is it important that traditional learning not become obsolete — as some predict?

    Today, when corrupt leaders promote AI development, AI reflects repressive political biases. There are serious concerns about AI disinformation, so it’s critical to consider the original purpose of modern universities.

    I consider this question as a historian of philosophy who has examined how modern ideas have intersected with democratic and fascist societies.

    Ideas informing the modern university

    The idea of the modern university emerged amid the European Enlightenment. Inspired by a new ideal of humanity focused on an individual’s independence from authorities and traditions, philosophers such as Wilhelm von Humboldt, Friedrich Schleiermacher and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel introduced education as the proper path to self-development.

    The German term Bildung captures this broad understanding of the educational process, denoting the activity of shaping yourself according to your inner purpose.

    For the philosophers of Bildung, self-development couldn’t take place in isolation but required a community of equals where mutual recognition and critical engagement with each other unlocked everyone’s potential.

    They envisioned the university as a community of learners where teachers facilitate the self-development of students by supporting their critical faculties instead of adapting them to fulfil predetermined roles for society. They believed education should prepare for lifelong learning about the self and world.




    Read more:
    Does a university undergraduate degree lead to a ‘good job?’ It depends what you mean


    Concern about concentration of power

    It was Humboldt who turned these lofty ideals into concrete reforms, laying the groundwork for the modern university and its research-led teaching model. For Humboldt, the realm of Bildung had political significance.

    Living under Prussian absolutism, he feared the paternalism of the state that turned its citizens into loyal subjects under the pretence of furthering their spiritual and material welfare.

    He was critical of the attempt of Frederick the Great, the Prussian king, to regulate economic life and to control private consumption. Humboldt saw such a concentration of power as a despotic tendency that all forms of government could succumb to, including oligarchy and democracy. He therefore insisted on spaces for individual expression and free association. Literary salons were the initial community space for Bildung, and were a model for the modern idea of universities.

    A drawing by Georg Melchior Kraus depicts the salon of Duchess Anna Amalia, showing, among others, writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in discussion. The image suggests the important role of women and community in the Bildungs context.
    (Wikimedia)

    Women, Black philosophers shape ideals

    Yet, as critical thinkers such as Germaine de Staël have noted from early on, the Enlightenment betrayed the universal aspiration of its ideals by restricting their application mostly to a certain class of white and male Europeans.

    The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen from 1789 restricted active citizenship to male property owners and did not abolish slavery. Advocacy for applying equal rights to all was soon taken up by members of oppressed groups to justify their emancipatory pursuits.

    Early feminists in late 19th-century Germany, such as the philosopher and writer Hedwig Dohm, demanded access to educational institutions so that women could also “become who they are.”

    We find a similar battle cry in the United States, where writer and educator Anna Julia Cooper regarded the higher education of Black women as a key step to social change.

    Both point to thinkers outside the European canon of male authors that helped shape the idea of Bildung. Its emancipatory appeal should not surprise us, since a plausible definition of the main harm of oppression is that it deprives individuals of the capacity to self-develop and to express shared experiences collectively. The opportunity to develop one’s capacities in accordance with one’s true values is a key characteristic of a just society.




    Read more:
    How whiteness was invented and fashioned in Britain’s colonial age of expansion


    Understanding as a collaborative process

    I believe that the idea of Bildung still captures the value of humanities education. In-depth engagement with the complex manifestation of human cultures seen in philosophical ideas, forms of knowledge or literary texts fosters important skills necessary for self-development.

    Students learn critical thinking, enabling them to question authorities and discern their own convictions from received values. They experience thinking as a process which takes time and demands the exploration of different points of view — similar to democratic decision-making.

    Methods to understand others are therefore an important subject of the humanities. The humanities nurture the ability to connect and to develop solidarity with each other.

    The classroom itself is a space where students experience understanding as a collaborative process by discussing with their peers and the instructor.

    Instructors must actualize high-level pedagogical goals by creating concrete exercises through which intellectual skills can be learned and practised.

    Assessing claims, justifying evaluations

    Writing an essay has been the pinnacle of traditional humanities education, since it demands employing the full set of interpretative tools such as identifying sources, analyzing arguments, assessing claims and justifying evaluations independently. It also demands expressing oneself intellectually.

    Basic analytic skills such as formulating an argument or giving an objection can be taught in class. But in-class assignments cannot replace pondering an issue over some time and expressing one’s interpretation of it.

    The important exercise of individual study is deprived of its value when students use technological shortcuts to complete writing tasks. AI-driven chatbots undermine a key part of the learning process through which students improve their critical thinking. This happens through sustained engagement with complex issues, through which students grow by overcoming challenges and practising habits of thinking.

    Relying on AI can undermine processes through which students improve their critical thinking.
    (Pexels/Cottonbro)

    Dangers of ‘cognitive offloading’

    Empirical studies show the negative impact of delegating cognitive tasks to external aids, also called cognitive offloading, on critical thinking skills. Cognitive offloading can have dire political consequences. While we do not live under absolutism anymore, the ugly head of despotism raises its head again.

    In the U.S., as seen recently in Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration, the economic elite dominates the political system. Tech oligarchs have found a president who is using his vast powers to further their interests and is prepared to do so without checks and balances.

    More than ever, we need citizens who have learned to think for themselves and developed capacities for paying attention to and caring about complex challenges in our ever-changing world.

    At their best, the humanities are a laboratory to cultivate essential skills for critically assessing the status quo and imagining better alternatives in both political and economic life.

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

    ref. Why should humanities education persist in an AI age? Self-development, to start – https://theconversation.com/why-should-humanities-education-persist-in-an-ai-age-self-development-to-start-246099

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-Evening Report: Should Australia mandate cancer warnings for alcoholic drinks?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Visontay, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Alcohol and Long-term Health, University of Sydney

    Hryshchyshen Serhii/Shutterstock

    Alcohol causes huge harm in Australia, responsible for 5,800 new cancer cases per year. Yet many of us remain in the dark about its health risks.

    In January, the United States’ Office of the Surgeon General, the country’s leading public health spokesperson, recommended warnings about alcohol’s cancer risks should be displayed on drink packaging.

    These messages have already been made obligatory in Ireland and South Korea.

    So, do they work? And should we mandate them here?

    Isn’t a glass of wine or two good for me?

    Most of us know heavy drinking is unhealthy.

    Yet the belief a few glasses of wine helps protect against heart disease and other conditions has persisted. That is despite evidence in recent years showing the benefits have been overestimated and the harms underplayed.

    In fact, any level of alcohol use increases the risk for several types of cancer, including colorectal cancer (affecting the large intestine and rectum) and breast cancer.

    In recent years, the evidence has strengthened showing alcohol plays a clear, causal role increasing cancer risk and other serious health problems, as well as all-cause mortality.

    One study estimated how many new cancer cases will develop across the lifetimes of the 18.8 million Australian adults who were alive in 2016. It predicted a quarter of a million (249,700) new cancers – mostly colorectal – will arise due to alcohol.

    We know what causes this harm. For example, acetaldehyde – a chemical produced by the body when it processes alcohol – is carcinogenic.

    Alcohol also increases cancer risk through “oxidative stress”, an imbalance in the body’s antioxidants and free radicals which causes damage to DNA and inflammation.

    It can also affect hormone levels, which raises the risk for breast cancer in particular.

    Australians unaware of the risk

    While the harms are well-known to researchers, many Australians remain unaware.

    Figures vary, but at best only 59% of us know about the direct link between alcohol and cancer (and at worst, just one in five are aware).

    Perhaps the best evidence this message has failed to sink in is our continued love affair with alcohol.

    In 2022–23 69% of us drank alcohol, with one in three doing so at levels deemed risky by the National Health and Medical Research Council. For both men and women, that means having more than ten standard drinks per week or more than four in one day.




    Read more:
    Mother’s little helper: interviews with Australian women show a complex relationship with alcohol


    What are other countries doing?

    Like Australia, the US already has warnings on alcohol about its impacts on unborn children and a person’s ability to operate cars and machinery.

    The US Surgeon General wants additional explicit warnings about cancer risk to be compulsory.

    Alcohol packaging in Australia warns about pregnancy risk.
    Adam Calaitzis/Shutterstock

    This follows Ireland, the first country to mandate cancer labels for alcohol. From 2026, alcohol packaging will include the warning: “there is a direct link between alcohol and fatal cancers”.

    Other countries, including Norway and Thailand, are also reportedly investigating cancer warning labels.

    Since 2017, alcohol producers in South Korea have had to choose between three compulsory warning labels – two of which warn of cancer risks. However they can instead opt for a label which warns about alcohol’s risks for dementia, stroke and memory loss.

    Will Australia follow suit?

    Australian health bodies have been advocating for cancer warnings on drink packaging for over a decade.

    Currently, whether to include warnings about alcohol’s general health risks is at the discretion of the manufacturer.

    Many use vague “drink responsibly” messages or templates provided by DrinkWise, an organisation funded by the alcohol industry.

    Pregnancy warning labels (“Alcohol can cause lifelong harm to your baby”) only became obligatory in 2023. Although this covers just one of alcohol’s established health effects, it has set an important precedent.

    We now have a template for how introducing cancer and other health warnings might work.

    With pregnancy labels, the government consulted public health and industry bodies and gave a three-year transition period for manufacturers to adjust. We even have examples of colour and formatting of required labels that could be adapted.

    Perhaps most promisingly, four in five surveyed Australians support adding these cancer-specific warnings.

    Cancer warnings already feature on some tobacco products in Australia.
    Galexia/Shutterstock

    Would it work?

    We know the existing “drink responsibly”-style warnings are not enough. Research shows consumers find these messages ambiguous.

    But would warnings about cancer be an improvement? Ireland’s rules are yet to come into effect, and it’s too early to tell how well South Korea’s policy has worked (there are also limitations give manufacturers can choose a warning not related to cancer).

    But a trial of cancer warnings in one Canadian liquor store found they increased knowledge of the alcohol–cancer link by 10% among store customers.

    Cancer messages would likely increase awareness about risks. But more than that – a 2016 study that tested cancer warnings on a group of 1,680 adults across Australia found they were also effective at reducing people’s intentions to drink.

    The evidence suggests a similar policy could replicate the success of cancer warnings on cigarette packaging – first introduced in the 1970s – at increasing knowledge about risks and reducing consumption. Smoking rates in Australian adults have declined steadily since these warnings were first introduced.

    It may take years before Australia changes its rules on alcohol labelling.

    In the meantime, it’s important to familiarise yourself with the current national low-risk drinking guidelines, which aim to minimise harm from alcohol across a range of health conditions.

    Rachel Visontay receives funding from the University of Sydney and the University of New South Wales.

    Louise Mewton receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Dementa Australia, Australian Rotary Health, National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care (DoHAC).

    ref. Should Australia mandate cancer warnings for alcoholic drinks? – https://theconversation.com/should-australia-mandate-cancer-warnings-for-alcoholic-drinks-246890

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley Call for Reinstatement of Inspectors General Illegally Fired by Trump

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)

    February 03, 2025

    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley said today they are demanding the immediate reinstatement of Inspectors General (IGs) from at least 18 government agencies, in a letter to Donald Trump strongly condemning his recent decision to remove them from their crucial posts. 

    The IGs who were removed included those overseeing the Departments of Defense, State, Education, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Energy, Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of Personnel Management, the Small Business Administration, the Social Security Administration, and the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. In the letter, which Wyden and Merkley sent with 30 colleagues, the senators underscored that Trump’s actions violated the law and threaten the independence of these non-partisan watchdogs.   

    “Inspectors General are responsible for providing independent oversight of federal programs by working to root out waste, fraud, and abuse and protect taxpayer dollars – oversight our federal agencies desperately need,” the senators wrote. “The federal government and the American people count on these officials to operate in a professional and non-partisan way to hold our government accountable—regardless of who is in power.  Without strong, qualified, and independent officials to lead these critical efforts, the Administration risks wasting taxpayer dollars, and allowing fraud and misconduct to go unchecked.” 

    The senators continued: “While the President has the authority to remove Inspectors General from office, Congress has established clear requirements to ensure such removals are transparent and are not politicized,” wrote the senators. “With respect to your firings Friday night, Congress has not received either the mandatory 30-day notice or a rationale for their removal.  Because your actions violated the law, these IGs should be reinstated immediately, until such time as you have provided in writing ‘the substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons’ for each of the affected Inspectors General and the 30-day notice period has expired.”   

    Full text of the letter is here. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: Issuers from the Eurasian Economic Union countries will gain access to organized trading throughout the space

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Central Bank of Russia –

    At the next meeting of the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council, which was held in Almaty, an Agreement on cross-border admission to the placement and circulation of securities in organized trading in the EAEU member states was signed.

    This is the first document aimed at regulating the securities market in order to build a common financial market in the territory of the union countries.

    The agreement provides an opportunity for exchanges from the EAEU member states to list securities of issuers from other countries of the union on terms no less favourable than for “their” issuers.

    Preview photo: TippaPatt / Shutterstock / Fotodom

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    HTTPS: //vv. KBR.ru/Press/Event/? ID = 23336

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Monaca Resident Pleads Guilty to Charges of Sexual Exploitation of Minors and Obstructing Justice

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PITTSBURGH, Pa. – A resident of Monaca, Pennsylvania, pleaded guilty in federal court to charges related to the sexual exploitation of minors and obstructing justice, Acting United States Attorney Troy Rivetti announced today.

    Nicholas Sittig, 28, pleaded guilty on January 30, 2025, to two counts before United States District Judge William S. Stickman IV.

    In connection with the guilty plea, the Court was advised that, from in and around August 2023 until in and around April 2024, Sittig employed, used, persuaded, induced, enticed, and coerced a minor, who resided in California, to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct. In and around December 2023, when Sittig became aware that federal law enforcement officers were investigating him, Sittig induced the minor to aid him in destroying records and documents related to his sexual offenses against the minor—namely, his contact information within the minor’s cellular telephone and Snapchat messages between himself and the minor—with the intent to impede, obstruct, and influence the investigation. The Court was further advised that agents with Homeland Security Investigations had identified a second minor, residing in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, whom Sittig similarly exploited online from December 2023 through March 2024.

    Judge Stickman scheduled sentencing for June 5, 2025. The law provides for a total sentence of not less than 15 years and up to 50 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. Under the federal Sentencing Guidelines, the actual sentence imposed is based upon the seriousness of the offenses and the prior criminal history, if any, of the defendant.

    Pending sentencing, the defendant remains detained.

    Assistant United States Attorney Heidi M. Grogan is prosecuting this case on behalf of the government.

    Homeland Security Investigations-Pittsburgh, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (San Francisco and Pittsburgh), the Pennsylvania State Police, the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, and the Monaca Police Department conducted the investigation that led to the prosecution of Sittig.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Russellton Resident Charged with Sexual Exploitation of Minor

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PITTSBURGH, Pa. – A resident of Russellton, Pennsylvania, has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Pittsburgh on charges of violating federal law regarding the sexual exploitation of minors, Acting United States Attorney Troy Rivetti announced today.

    The two-count Indictment named Michael Rearick, 43, as the sole defendant.

    According to the Indictment, from April 21, 2023, until April 23, 2023, Rearick traveled and transported a minor from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to Canada, with the intent that the minor engage in criminal activity and illicit sexual activity.

    The law provides for a maximum total sentence of not less than 10 years and up to life in prison, a fine of $250,000, or both. Under the federal Sentencing Guidelines, the actual sentence imposed would be based upon the seriousness of the offenses and the prior criminal history, if any, of the defendant.

    Assistant United States Attorney Heidi M. Grogan is prosecuting this case on behalf of the government.

    Homeland Security Investigations-Pittsburgh, the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, and the West Deer Township Police Department conducted the investigation leading to the Indictment.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    An indictment is an accusation. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

    MIL Security OSI