NewzIntel.com

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

Category: Science

  • MIL-Evening Report: Whales sing when they’ve had a good meal – new research

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ted Cheeseman, PhD Candidate, Marine Ecological Research Centre, Southern Cross University

    Stock Photos Studios/Shutterstock

    Spanning more octaves than a piano, humpback whales sing powerfully into the vast ocean. These songs are beautifully complex, weaving phrases and themes into masterful compositions. Blue and fin whales richly fill out a bass section with their own unique versions of song.

    Together, these three species can create a marvellous symphony in the sea.

    Published today in PLOS One, our new research reveals these baleen whale species’ response to major changes in their ecosystem can be heard in their songs.

    Food for long-distance travel

    The six-year study took place in whale foraging habitat in the eastern North Pacific, off the coast of California in the United States. From this biologically rich foraging habitat, the whales migrate long distances each year to breeding habitats at lower latitudes.

    They eat little to nothing during their migration and winter breeding season. So they need to build up their energy stores during their annual residence in foraging habitat.

    This energy, stored in their gigantic bodies, powers the animals through months of long-distance travel, mating, calving, and nursing before they return to waters off California in the spring and summer to resume foraging.

    The whales eat krill and fish that can aggregate in massive schools. However, their diets are distinct.

    While blue whales only eat krill, humpback whales eat krill and small schooling fish such as anchovy. If the prey species are more abundant and more densely concentrated, whales can forage more efficiently. Foraging conditions and prey availability change dramatically from year to year.

    We wanted to know if these changes in the ecosystem were reflected in the whales’ acoustic behaviour.

    Piecing together a complex puzzle

    To track the occurrence of singing, we examined audio recordings acquired through the Monterey Accelerated Research System. This is a deep-sea observatory operated by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute and funded by the US National Science Foundation.

    Analysis of sound recordings is a highly effective way to study whales because we can hear them from quite far away. If a whale sings anywhere within thousands of square kilometres around the hydrophone, we will hear it.

    Yet, piecing together the complex puzzle of whale behavioural ecology requires diverse research methods.

    Our study used observations of the whales, including sound recordings, photo identification and diet analysis. It also used measurements of forage species abundance, characterisation of ecosystem conditions and theoretical modelling of sound propagation.

    Our ability to probe the complex lives of these giants was enhanced for humpback whales because we had a unique data resource available for this species: extensive photo identification.

    The Happywhale community science project combines photos supplied by researchers and ecotourists, and identification enabled by artificial intelligence, to recognise individual whales by the shape and coloration of their flukes.

    This unique resource enabled us to examine the local abundance of humpback whales. We could also study the timing of their annual migration and how persistently individual whales occupied the study region.

    Scientists used a deep-sea hydrophone to keep a nearly continuous record of the ocean soundscape.
    MBARI

    An increase in food – and in song

    The study began in 2015, during a prolonged marine heatwave that caused major disruption in the foraging habitat of whales and other animals throughout the eastern North Pacific.

    All three whale species sang the least during the heatwave, and sang more as foraging conditions improved over the next two years.

    These patterns provided the first indications that the singing behaviour by whales may be closely related to the food available. Remarkably, whale song is an indicator of forage availability.

    Further evidence was found in the striking differences between humpback and blue whales during the later years of the study.

    Continued increases in detection of humpback whale song could not be explained by changes in the local abundance of whales, the timing of their annual migration, or the persistence of individuals in the study region.

    However, humpback song occurrence closely tracked tremendous increases in the abundances of northern anchovy — the largest increase in 50 years. And when we analysed the skin of the humpback whales, we saw a clear shift to a fish-dominated diet.

    In contrast, blue whales only eat krill, and detection of their songs plummeted with large decreases in krill abundance. Our analysis of blue whale skin revealed they were foraging over a larger geographic area to find the food they needed during these hard times in the food web.

    Humpback song occurrence closely tracked tremendous increases in the abundances of northern anchovy.
    evantravels/Shutterstock

    Predicting long-term changes

    This research shows listening to whales is much more than a rich sensory experience. It’s a window into their lives, their vulnerability, and their resilience.

    Humpback whales emerge from this study as a particularly resilient species. They are more able to readily adapt to changes in the ecology of the foraging habitats that sustain them. These findings can help scientists and resource managers predict how marine ecosystems and species will respond to long-term changes driven by both natural cycles and human impacts.

    At a time of unprecedented change for marine life and ecosystems, collaboration across disciplines and institutions will be crucial for understanding our changing ocean.

    This work was enabled by private research centres, universities and federal agencies working together. This consortium’s past work has revealed a rich new understanding of the ocean soundscape, answering fundamental questions about the ecology of ocean giants.

    Who knows what more we will learn as we listen to the ocean’s underwater symphony?

    The study’s findings can help scientists better understand how blue whales and other baleen whales respond to long-term changes in the ocean.
    Ajit S N/Shutterstock

    This work was led by John Ryan, a biological oceanographer at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), with an interdisciplinary team of researchers from MBARI, Southern Cross University, Happywhale.com, Cascadia Research Collective, University of Wisconsin, NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Centre, University of California, Santa Cruz, Naval Postgraduate School, and Stanford University.

    Ted Cheeseman is the co-founder of citizen science project, Happywhale.

    Jarrod Santora receives funding from NOAA, NASA, and NSF.

    – ref. Whales sing when they’ve had a good meal – new research – https://theconversation.com/whales-sing-when-theyve-had-a-good-meal-new-research-250926

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: The Youth Are Macao’s Hope and Future

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    In May 2023, two satellites jointly developed by teams from Macao and the mainland were launched. Immediately afterwards, 18 faculty members and students at Macao University of Science and Technology who had worked on the project, wrote to Xi Jinping to tell him about their success. Not only did President Xi reply to their letter, he also visited their university during his December 2024 trip to Macao and praised the young team for their success.

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Backing farmers to innovate and make more money

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The Government is ramping up a programme to boost sustainably and farm productivity. 

    Agriculture Minister Todd McClay has announced the ‘Science for Farmers’ initiative will be rolled out at agricultural events around the country starting with the Dargaville, Wānaka, Feilding, and Kirwee Agricultural Shows over the next two months. 

    “Science for Farmers brings leading scientists to the regions to talk directly with farmers about research and innovation that’s already paying dividends on farms around the country,” Mr McClay says. 

    The programme is a collaboration between the Ministry for Primary Industries’ On Farm Support service and key research partners, including AgResearch, AgriZeroNZ, LIC, Massey University, Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, and the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre. 

    It provides detailed information and access to experts in many areas including on:

    • Alternative pasture types that can help farmers future-proof their pasture-based systems in a warming climate.
    • Advanced genetics to increase production whilst helping to meet environmental and emissions obligations. 
    • On-farm management systems that increase profit and enhance business resilience.

    “The Government is committed to lifting rural productivity, increasing jobs and unlocking New Zealand’s potential by going for growth.

    “Small steps can make a big difference. Every extra kilo of milksolids, kg of meat or wool, and extra tray of fruit we produce through innovation and science, puts more money into the pockets of rural New Zealand and helps achieve our goal of doubling the value of exports within 10 years”. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: China builds extreme ‘super lab’ to assist global scientists in probing mysteries of matter

    Source: China State Council Information Office 2

    Researchers work at an experimental station of the Synergetic Extreme Condition User Facility (SECUF) in Beijing, capital of China, Oct. 16, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    What astonishing phenomena might materials reveal when they are subjected to conditions mimicking the extremes of the cosmos-ultra-low temperatures, magnetic fields that are hundreds of thousands of times stronger than Earth’s, and pressure close to that at the planet’s core?
    The Synergetic Extreme Condition User Facility (SECUF), located in Beijing’s suburban Huairou District, is opening a portal for scientists to observe the bizarre phenomena of matter under such extreme environments.
    After starting construction in September 2017, the SECUF passed national acceptance review on Wednesday, marking the completion of the internationally advanced experimental facility integrating extreme conditions such as ultra-low temperature, ultra-high pressure, strong magnetic fields, and ultra-fast optical fields.
    The facility, led by the Institute of Physics (IOP) under the Chinese Academy of Sciences, is a cluster of precision-controlled “extreme environment generators.” It serves as a “super lab” for probing the frontiers of materials science. Here, scientists can explore the mysteries of matter and uncover new phenomena or laws invisible under ordinary conditions.
    The SECUF can cool materials to an extremely low temperature of 1 millikelvin, which is 1,000 times lower than the cosmic background temperature. It is capable of producing a steady 30 Tesla magnetic field, which is 600,000 times stronger than Earth’s magnetic field, according to Lv Li, the leading scientist of SECUF.
    The facility can reach an ultra-high pressure of 300 GPa, nearly equivalent to the pressure at the Earth’s core. It can generate ultra-fast laser pulses lasting 100 attoseconds, which is a billionth of a billionth of a second, to capture electron dynamics in real time.
    Under extreme conditions, materials often exhibit “magical” behaviors. For instance, superconductivity–where electrical resistance vanishes–occurs only at ultra-low temperatures. Additionally, some ordinary materials transform into superconductors under high pressure.
    Based on the SECUF, scientists are expected to discover more superconducting materials under high pressure, and even room-temperature superconductors, which is of great significance for improving computer processing speed, Lv said.
    Strong magnetic fields and ultrafast light fields allow scientists to delve deeper into the microscopic structures and dynamic behaviors of materials, experts explained.
    These extreme conditions can be combined based on different research needs at the SECUF, enabling advanced experiments in material synthesis, quantum control, and ultrafast dynamics, providing an unprecedented experimental platform for research in the fields such as materials science, physics and chemistry, Lv said.
    The completion of the facility has significantly enhanced China’s comprehensive capabilities in basic and applied basic research in the field of materials science and related areas. Researchers can conduct studies on unconventional superconductivity, topological states of matter, and novel quantum materials and devices, according to Cheng Jinguang, deputy director of the IOP.
    This experimental platform is open to scientists worldwide. So far, 13 universities and research institutions from 10 countries, including Denmark, Germany, France and Japan, have conducted experiments at the SECUF, with some experimental stations already yielding scientific results, Cheng said.
    Scientists plan to further enhance SECUF’s capabilities while keeping its doors open to global researchers, to attract more pioneers to this “extreme challenge,” unlocking discoveries that reshape humanity’s understanding of the material world. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Greenpeace obtains coordinates of coral destruction NZ Government refused to reveal

    Source: Greenpeace

    The New Zealand government is refusing to release details of the location a New Zealand bottom trawler hauled up deep sea coral late last year, despite Greenpeace offering to go and survey the damage at the site with deep sea cameras.
    But following requests from the scientist in charge of designing the impending deep sea survey, Australia has released these coordinates so that documentation of the impact can go ahead.
    The Tasman Viking, a New Zealand bottom trawler, pulled up 37kg of deep sea coral in the Lord Howe Rise area, renowned for diverse marine life in October 2024. This triggered a rule under the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO), to temporarily close the area.
    Under SPRFMO, the best available information is meant to be provided on the nature of an encounter such as this, and Greenpeace has offered to go and document the site as part of their Seamounts Expedition, due to commence in March 2025.
    But requests from Greenpeace for the coordinates of the area were declined by the New Zealand Government due to ‘commercial sensitivity’. The Australian SPRFMO Commissioner has now released these coordinates in response to requests from the expedition’s Lead Researcher.
    Greenpeace’s Ellie Hooper is calling the New Zealand government’s refusal to share the coordinates “ludicrous” and “a blatant example of the Luxon led government running interference for the fishing industry.”
    Hooper says: “In collaboration with scientists, we’re heading out to the deep ocean to survey vital habitats so we can see what lives there and how that life is being impacted by bottom trawling, including hopefully surveying this impacted site.
    “We want to add to our collective understanding of these deep sea ecosystems, about which so little is known, and to shine a light in the dark.”These coordinates have already been shared with all fishing companies and SPRFMO countries, so why is the information being hidden?
    “Australia clearly has a more progressive and transparent approach when it comes to deep-sea management, and has provided us with the opportunity to go to this area and attempt to survey it.”
    Seamounts and other underwater hills and knolls are ocean lifelines, often home to diverse coral and sponges, and are key breeding grounds for fish and feeding spots for migrating whales.
    “The main threat to these ecosystems is bottom trawling,” says Hooper.
    It’s estimated that coral brought to the surface by trawlers is only a small fraction of what’s destroyed on the seafloor.1
    Next week, Greenpeace Aotearoa will embark on its Seamounts Expedition, where deep sea cameras will be used to collect images and data of these ecosystems, and identify the species living on them.
    “To make the most informed decisions on the ocean, we need more observation and science, something that appears to be being blocked by NZ,” says Hooper. “Less than 1% of the world’s seamounts have been surveyed, and most of what we do know about these places is from what’s dragged up dead in bottom trawl nets. That’s a pretty sad reality. “We’re setting out to try and uncover some of the secrets of the deep, it’s challenging work and we don’t know exactly what we ‘ll find – but we’re committed to trying.”
    New Zealand is the only country still bottom trawling in the high seas of the South Pacific and has faced criticism for blocking protection measures at SPRFMO this month.Summary:
    • In November 2024 last year it was reported that an NZ bottom trawler, Westfleet’s Tasman Viking pulled up 37kg of deep sea coral from the Lord Howe Rise area, in the international waters of the South Pacific.
    • This triggered a suspension of all fishing in the area.
    • Greenpeace is offering to survey the impact site using deep sea cameras as part of a seamounts survey we’re carrying out in March 2025
    • But the NZ government has turned down Greenpeace’s request for the information quoting commercial sensitivities, despite all fishing operators, and SPRFMO states already being notified of the location.
    • The Australian SPRFMO Commissioner [ lead of their delegation to the RFMO] responded to requests from the Lead Researcher on the seamounts expedition, providing the coordinates of the closed area..
    • Greenpeace says NZ failing to release the data is clearly the government protecting the commercial fishing industry above gathering scientific information about the impact of the encounter.
    • After a VME encounter such as this in the SPRFMO zone [high seas], states are meant to use the best available scientific information to assess the impact. Documenting the site would inarguably be the best available information, and Greenpeace is offering to provide this with the survey.
    • The Greenpeace seamounts expedition will commence in March 2025 and is designed to gather deep sea imagery of deep sea habitats both in the waters of Aotearoa and the international waters of the South Pacific.
    • Greenpeace plans to make the findings available so they can be used to improve our collective knowledge of the deep sea.
    Notes: Coral in nets to destroyed on seafloor ratios:1. Geange, S. et al 2017, SC7-DW14, and Stephenson, F. et al 2022, SC10-DW04

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Universities – Team behind University’s first Pacific Strategy spans the Moana

    Source: University of Auckland (UoA)

    Finance Opposition spokesperson, the Hon Pesetatamalelagi Barbara Edmonds visited her alma mater, the University of Auckland to talk with Business academics and learn more about the Pacific Strategy and Pacific Academy initiatives launching this year.

    Edmonds (Fale’ula, Faleatiu, Safotu, Fasito’o/Sāmoa) is the MP for Mana and visited the University on 24 February. She met with leaders from the School of Business, Schools and Community Engagement, and the Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor Pacific.
     
    “It’s nice to be back home, it does feel like home, this is my alma mater where I did my Law and Arts degree that set me up for my career.”
     
    Edmonds says it was good to be amongst Pacific students and to have in-depth discussions focused on economic policies.
     
    “We had good discussions with the School of Business, around macro and micro economic policies that we will be testing as part of our policies that we will be forming,” she says.
     
    Pro Vice-Chancellor Pacific Professor Jemaima Sipaea Tiatia-Siau says drafting the University’s first Pacific Strategy in 142 years has been a huge task over the last year; having someone with the expertise and calibre of the Finance Opposition Spokesperson view the work undertaken highlights the strategy’s significance.
     
    “We’re grateful to have had the Hon Barbara Edmonds come onto campus, to be able to share with her the work we have undertaken.
     
    “She’s a great example of why drawing up a road map for Pacific success here at the University is important, so that our young people can flourish at the University and leave ready to take on the world.”
     
    Professor Tiatia-Siau says the Mana MP relished learning about initiatives to prepare school leavers for the university environment such as Auckland Maths Challenge and the Pacific Academy, ensuring Pacific youth were able to thrive.
     
    Edmonds says it was also important to encourage the Pacific community into the Business space.  She pivoted during her career path starting out in Health Sciences before graduating with a Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Arts in 2008, going on to become a specialist tax lawyer.
     
    A mother of eight, her path to becoming a Cabinet Minister began eight years ago while working as a private secretary for the National Party’s Ministers of Revenue, Michael Woodhouse and Judith Collins. The following year in 2017 she was appointed as a political adviser for the Labour Government’s Revenue and Police Minister Stuart Nash. She entered Parliament in 2020 as the MP for Mana and became a Cabinet Minister in 2023, holding the Internal Affairs and Pacific Peoples portfolios.
     
    “I came into the business space through the Arts and through Law, it was a very different pathway, says the 44-year-old.
     
    “I got into the area of tax through law, it’s a good indicator of broadening [your scope]. The Humanities and the Arts are important, it means you have a good grounding for a diverse career.
     
    “I’ve been really fortunate that I had a good grounding here, with the Law School and with the Faculty of Arts, and that means decades later you become a Finance Opposition spokesperson for a major political party – don’t knock the Arts!”
     
    Professor Tiatia-Siau says Edmonds’ visit to give guidance and moral support to developing the Pacific Strategy was timely.
     
    “We are this week welcoming our first-year students and we are also on the eve of a great milestone. The presence of Pesetatamalelagi the Hon. Barbara Edmonds is a show of support for the work we are doing, and she is a wonderful role model of what can be accomplished once you have secured a university education.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Spokane Police Chief Joins Cantwell for Hearing on Fentanyl Trafficking on U.S. Transportation Networks

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

    02.26.25

    Spokane Police Chief Joins Cantwell for Hearing on Fentanyl Trafficking on U.S. Transportation Networks

    Cantwell bill to help law enforcement detect more fentanyl traffickers has been endorsed by Seattle, King Co., Vancouver, Spokane, and Spokane Co. Police Departments; SPD Chief: “Any tool will help us down this road, whether it’s x-ray technology, vapor technology [or] canine technology”

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, invited Spokane Chief of Police Kevin Hall to participate in a Commerce Committee hearing titled, “Interdicting Illicit Drug Trafficking: A View from the Front Lines.”

    During the hearing, Sen. Cantwell discussed how her legislation, the Stop Smuggling Illicit Synthetic Drugs on U.S. Transportation Networks Act, could boost law enforcement’s ability to detect fentanyl being smuggled via commercial aircraft, railroads, vehicles, and ships.

    In his opening remarks, Spokane Police Chief Kevin Hall explained how cartels utilize U.S. transportation networks to traffic fentanyl across state lines: “Recent seizures highlight the scale of trafficking along transportation routes,” said Chief Hall. “[The] Spokane supply chain follows similar patterns, moving drugs from Mexico along interstates, I-19, I-10 and I-5, before reaching Eastern Washington via I-90. Spokane officers have recently encountered bulk powder fentanyl, an emerging and highly dangerous trend.”  

    “The supply chain is clear: the Chinese Triad sells precursor chemicals to Mexican drug cartels, hidden on ships and in air cargoes, and cartels make fentanyl and smuggle it through the United States,” said Sen. Cantwell. “They hide fentanyl and personal vehicles, commercial trucks, buses, trains, planes and even on unmanned aerial vehicles. So, this is a danger to our national security and our transportation security. It is very highly toxic.”

    During the hearing, Chief Hall – who previously served 32 years for the Tucson Police Department, about an hour’s drive from the Southern border — described the elaborate methods used by cartels to smuggle fentanyl pills into the country: “The investment by the cartels — and make no mistake, this is all cartel driven — is such that they will completely disassemble a vehicle, a brand new vehicle, put as much narcotics into every single void inside that vehicle, and then assemble it again. They will go through that amount of energy, put the vehicle back together, and put it on the road and it’s off on the freeways.”

    That was the case in a pair of busts led by the Tucson Police Department in October and November of 2024, when 1.7 million pills were discovered stashed away in vehicles just north of the border: “Two nondescript sedans that had to be completely disassembled in order to recover all of those narcotics,” Chief Hall said.

    “This is why I want us to have a more collaborative effort here. . . . they’re tearing cars apart, and so, what do you think a new vapor technology could help us do?” Sen. Cantwell asked.

    “Any tool will help us down this road, whether it’s x-ray technology, vapor technology, even going to like, I call old school, canine technology. They’re all very effective in different ways,” said Chief Hall.

    In September 2024, Sen. Cantwell introduced the Stop Smuggling Illicit Synthetic Drugs on U.S. Transportation Networks Act. This bill would create first-ever inspection strategies to stop drug smuggling by commercial aircraft, railroads, vehicles, and ships. The legislation would boost local, state, federal, and tribal law enforcement resources, increase inspections at ports of entry, and deploy next generation non-intrusive detection technologies – similar to handheld security wands that can detect traces of illicit substances in vehicles or on persons during inspections.

    Sen. Cantwell held a press conference with Spokane Police Chief Hall and Spokane County Sheriff John Nowels on this legislation at Spokane Fire Station 1 this past October. Photos from that press conference are available HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell’s bill aims to support law enforcement in stemming the flow of fentanyl into our communities. The bill would supply more resources to carry out actions like the major bust at SeaTac Airport and the University District neighborhood completed by the Seattle office of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) last fall, or the bust led by the Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and others that prevented more than 100 pounds of illegal drugs from being trafficked across the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation in April 2023.

    At today’s hearing, Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX) committed to working with Sen. Cantwell on legislation to stop illicit fentanyl smuggling in the United States.

    “Intercepting illicit drugs like fentanyl at airports is challenging, but we’re grateful to be working with partners at all levels to combat drugs being imported into our communities,” said Port of Seattle Commission President Toshiko Hasegawa. “Many of these drugs are in checked bags and go through a screening process, but the struggle lies in bridging the gap between technology and legal restrictions. The POSPD drug interdiction unit, alongside our drug detection canines, are successfully seizing large quantities of fentanyl pills and other substances and remain committed to making our communities and the airport safer.”

    Sen. Cantwell has pursued multiple paths to addressing the fentanyl crisis, including holding a statewide listening tour to hear directly from people on the front lines of the fentanyl crisis; urging committees of jurisdiction to convene hearings and consider legislative solutions; voting for new laws to provide funding and tools to confront the crisis; and securing funding specifically for Washington state to respond to the crisis.

    Among other measures to fight fentanyl trafficking, last year Sen. Cantwell voted for $1.69 billion in new federal funding to combat fentanyl and other illicit drugs coming into the United States, including an additional $385.2 million to increase security at U.S. ports of entry, with the goal of catching more illegal drugs like fentanyl before they make it across the border.  That funding included critical resources for Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) technology at land and seaports of entries. NII technologies—like large-scale X-ray and Gamma ray imaging systems, as well as a variety of portable and handheld technologies—allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection to help detect and prevent contraband from being smuggled into the country without disrupting flow at the border. 

    A background document on Sen. Cantwell’s legislative track record and advocacy to combat the fentanyl crisis is available HERE.

    Video of Chief Hall’s full opening remarks is HERE and a transcript is HERE. Video of Sen. Cantwell’s opening remarks is HERE; video of their Q&A is HERE; and a transcript is HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA “Gutted its Civil Service Workforce Around the Country,” Writes Cantwell in Letter to Administrator Loeffler

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
    02.26.25
    SBA “Gutted its Civil Service Workforce Around the Country,” Writes Cantwell in Letter to Administrator Loeffler
    Small Business Administration provides education and financial support to entrepreneurs, including disaster relief loans Sen. Cantwell joined all Democratic members of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship in letter demanding that Administrator Loeffler end arbitrary firings & review their legality
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last week, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, joined the Democratic members of the Small Business Committee in sending a letter to Small Business Administration (SBA) Administrator Kelly Loeffler. The letter demands answers on the recent arbitrary mass firings by the Trump administration of SBA public servants, including loan and disaster assistance staff and veterans.
    “Over the past week, the Small Business Administration (SBA) has taken unprecedented personnel actions that have gutted its civil service workforce around the country,” wrote the Senators in the letter. “This includes the firing of hundreds of SBA employees serving their probationary work period. Yet, SBA has provided us with no direct information about these terminations, including why they were undertaken, the number and identities of fired employees, or which SBA offices were impacted.”
    The Senators continued, “In order to ensure small businesses continue to receive the SBA services they need to thrive, we request the following: First, put an immediate stop to the arbitrary firings of career civil servants and reinstate them immediately, with backpay. Second, have your Deputy Inspector General conduct a thorough review of the SBA’s actions to ensure that any termination was lawful. And third, promptly brief the Committee’s minority staff on SBA’s recent personnel actions and its plan to implement the President’s deferred resignations and RIF executive order.”
    The SBA provides several key services to small business owners in Washington state, including educational programs, and financial support like disaster relief loans.
    The Senators’ letter asks the Administrator to direct the Deputy Inspector General to undertake this thorough review because President Trump recently fired the SBA Inspector General when he illegally fired at least 17 Inspectors General (IGs) in a mass Friday night firing, leaving a vacancy in that position.  Last week, Sen. Cantwell joined 26 Senate Democrats in filing an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit brought by eight of those fired IGs challenging their illegal firings by Trump.  The former SBA IG is one of the plaintiffs in that suit challenging Trump’s unlawful action.
    In a January meeting with former Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), President Donald Trump’s then-nominee to lead the SBA, Sen. Cantwell emphasized the critical importance of aid to small businesses following disasters. Earlier that month, the SBA opened two Disaster Loan Outreach Centers in Washington specifically to help businesses and residents who incurred losses during the November 2024 bomb cyclone that struck Washington state.
    In June 2024, Sen. Cantwell introduced the Small Business Artificial Intelligence Training and Toolkit Act, which would authorize the Department of Commerce to work with the SBA to create and distribute artificial intelligence resources and tools to help small business leverage AI in their operations.
    The State of Washington is home to 672,472 small businesses, making up 99.5 percent of all WA businesses and employing 1.4 million workers, or 48.4% of all Washington employees. Between March 2022 and March 2023, small businesses created 61,763 new jobs, accounting for 80.5 percent of all net job creation in WA.
    The full text of the letter is available HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Captive kākā, Charlie, to stay in Dunedin

    Source: Department of Conservation

    Date:  27 February 2025

    Professor of Animal Welfare Science Ngaio Beausoleil, from Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa Massey University’s Tāwharau Ora School of Veterinary Science, who carried out the assessment, recommended Charlie remain where she is to provide stability and allow her to adapt to her new environment over time.

    Department of Conservation Fauna Science Manager Ash Murphy says DOC is working with wildlife husbandry experts at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary (DBGA) and an avian specialist veterinarian at the Dunedin Wildlife Hospital on a plan to address recommendations in Professor Beausoleil’s report.

    “The plan includes keeping Charlie with her enclosure mate in their current aviary and maintaining her high standard of care.

    “Her keepers will gradually introduce more opportunities for Charlie to choose to have positive human interactions through training for rewards to increase her wellbeing, as recommended.

    “Any changes made to Charlie’s care including training activities will be recorded and her behaviour closely monitored to gauge whether she’s responding positively. Her diet, eating habits and weight will also continue to be monitored.

    “We encourage the public to give Charlie the time she needs to settle in, bond with her mate and enjoy her life at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary,” Ash Murphy says.

    Professor Beausoleil’s assessment concluded that Charlie is in good physical health and is well cared for at DBGA, including appropriate management of her chronic arthritis from old injuries.

    It found Charlie exhibited abnormal repetitive behaviours such as swaying and toe nibbling which had increased since her move to DBGA, as she struggled to adapt to changes in her environment.

    Charlie does not behave like a normal captive kākā because of ingrained behaviours she developed in her first year of captivity as a young bird in severely impoverished conditions prior to her transfer to Te Anau Bird Sanctuary. When Charlie is stressed, these behaviours are amplified.

    Charlie was moved from Te Anau Bird Sanctuary to Dunedin in June 2024 to join other South Island kākā at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary as part of the captive breed-for-release programme. She has been an excellent Mum and foster parent and raised multiple clutches of chicks previously.  

    In Dunedin she is currently paired up with male kākā, Bling, who she successfully bred with when they were both in Te Anau. Despite positive early signs with mating recorded several times, the pair did not produce any offspring this season.

    Following concerns raised by people about Charlie’s behaviour in Dunedin, the Ministry for Primary Industries recommended DOC commission an independent welfare assessment.

    Professor Beausoleil also made some recommendations for the kākā breed-for-release programme more generally, including developing an ‘ethogram’ or catalogue of behaviour in captive kākā and guidelines to be incorporated in an updated Kākā Husbandry Manual to enable better monitoring of kākā welfare in captive facilities.

    DOC is considering these recommendations as they relate to the South Island kākā breed-for-release programme.

    Background information

    Charlie Girl kākā welfare assessment report (PDF, 511K)

    Contact

    For media enquiries contact:

    Email: media@doc.govt.nz

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall Introduces Legislation to Halt Dangerous Viral Gain of Function Research

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
    Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) today introduced the Dangerous Viral Gain of Function Research Moratorium Act, which calls for the immediate halt of dangerous gain-of-function (GOF) research. GOF research aims to genetically alter a virus or organism to gain or lose function on its transmissibility or pathogenicity. Most evidence suggests the COVID-19 virus is more than likely the product of GOF research conducted in Wuhan, China. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee) is a cosponsor of the legislation. 
    Senator Marshall has repeatedly called for complete transparency and accountability from the federal government regarding the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. Part of this responsibility requires that all present and future gain-of-function research be halted immediately due to safety concerns.
    “History has proven that viruses can escape even the most secure labs, and gain-of-function research can kill more people than a nuclear weapon,” said Senator Marshall. “The Dangerous Viral Gain-of-Function Research Moratorium Act is critical to ensure the federal government immediately ceases funding for this irresponsible, high-risk work. The era of unaccountable taxpayer-funded science done in the name of ‘global health’ needs to end.”
    “If the COVID pandemic taught us anything, it’s that we cannot allow gain-of-function research to do more harm than good,” said Senator Blackburn. “This legislation would halt all federal research grants involving risky gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens until oversight is improved and safety guardrails become a guarantee.”
    “This bill from Senator Dr. Roger Marshall (R-KS) to stop federal funding of dangerous gain-of-function research is a common sense solution to preventing the next laboratory-acquired infection from becoming another pandemic,” said Dr. Steven Quay, M.D., PhD., Physician-Scientist and CEO of biopharmaceutical company Atossa Therapeutics.
    Click HERE to read the bill text.
    Background:
    In 2024, Senate Democrats blocked Senator Marshall’s effort to pass similar legislation.
    In 2014, The Obama Administration ordered a pause on all gain-of-function research due to increased leaks and infectious material spills from laboratories receiving government dollars.
    In 2017 – with key cabinet appointments vacant or pending Senate confirmations – the National Institute for Health (NIH) successfully advocated for lifting the moratorium.
    Reports released from the Republican-led Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic concluded that “the Wuhan Institute of Virology used NIAID money to conduct ‘gain-of-function’ studies that modified distantly related coronaviruses,” an outcome which undoubtedly led to the global COVID-19 pandemic via a lab-leak. 
    To learn more about Senator Marshall’s oversight efforts of GOF research, click here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Economics: Newest models in Microsoft’s Phi family empower developers with advanced AI capabilities

    Source: Microsoft

    Headline: Newest models in Microsoft’s Phi family empower developers with advanced AI capabilities

    We are excited to announce Phi-4-multimodal and Phi-4-mini, the newest models in Microsoft’s Phi family of small language models (SLMs). These models are designed to empower developers with advanced AI capabilities.

    We are excited to announce Phi-4-multimodal and Phi-4-mini, the newest models in Microsoft’s Phi family of small language models (SLMs). These models are designed to empower developers with advanced AI capabilities. Phi-4-multimodal, with its ability to process speech, vision, and text simultaneously, opens new possibilities for creating innovative and context-aware applications. Phi-4-mini, on the other hand, excels in text-based tasks, providing high accuracy and scalability in a compact form. Now available in Azure AI Foundry, HuggingFace, and the NVIDIA API Catalog where developers can explore the full potential of Phi-4-multimodal on the NVIDIA API Catalog, enabling them to experiment and innovate with ease. 

    What is Phi-4-multimodal?

    Phi-4-multimodal marks a new milestone in Microsoft’s AI development as our first multimodal language model. At the core of innovation lies continuous improvement, and that starts with listening to our customers. In direct response to customer feedback, we’ve developed Phi-4-multimodal, a 5.6B parameter model, that seamlessly integrates speech, vision, and text processing into a single, unified architecture.

    By leveraging advanced cross-modal learning techniques, this model enables more natural and context-aware interactions, allowing devices to understand and reason across multiple input modalities simultaneously. Whether interpreting spoken language, analyzing images, or processing textual information, it delivers highly efficient, low-latency inference—all while optimizing for on-device execution and reduced computational overhead.

    Redefining what’s possible with SLMs

    Natively built for multimodal experiences

    Phi-4-multimodal is a single model with mixture-of-LoRAs that includes speech, vision, and language, all processed simultaneously within the same representation space. The result is a single, unified model capable of handling text, audio, and visual inputs—no need for complex pipelines or separate models for different modalities.

    The Phi-4-multimodal is built on a new architecture that enhances efficiency and scalability. It incorporates a larger vocabulary for improved processing, supports multilingual capabilities, and integrates language reasoning with multimodal inputs. All of this is achieved within a powerful, compact, highly efficient model that’s suited for deployment on devices and edge computing platforms.

    This model represents a step forward for the Phi family of models, offering enhanced performance in a small package. Whether you’re looking for advanced AI capabilities on mobile devices or edge systems, Phi-4-multimodal provides a high-capability option that’s both efficient and versatile.

    Unlocking new capabilities

    With its increased range of capabilities and flexibility, Phi-4-multimodal opens exciting new possibilities for app developers, businesses, and industries looking to harness the power of AI in innovative ways. The future of multimodal AI is here, and it’s ready to transform your applications.

    Phi-4-multimodal is capable of processing both visual and audio together. The following table shows the model quality when the input query for vision content is synthetic speech on chart/table understanding and document reasoning tasks. Compared to other existing state-of-the-art omni models that can enable audio and visual signals as input, Phi-4-multimodal achieves much stronger performance on multiple benchmarks.

    Figure 1: Phi-4-multimodal audio and visual benchmarks.

    Phi-4-multimodal has demonstrated remarkable capabilities in speech-related tasks, emerging as a leading open model in multiple areas. It outperforms specialized models like WhisperV3 and SeamlessM4T-v2-Large in both automatic speech recognition (ASR) and speech translation (ST). The model has claimed the top position on the Huggingface OpenASR leaderboard with an impressive word error rate of 6.14%, surpassing the previous best performance of 6.5% as of February 2025. Additionally, it is among a few open models to successfully implement speech summarization and achieve performance levels comparable to GPT-4o model. The model has a gap with close models, such as Gemini-2.0-Flash and GPT-4o-realtime-preview, on speech question answering (QA) tasks as the smaller model size results in less capacity to retain factual QA knowledge. Work is being undertaken to improve this capability in the next iterations.

    Figure 2: Phi-4-multimodal speech benchmarks.

    Phi-4-multimodal with only 5.6B parameters demonstrates remarkable vision capabilities across various benchmarks, most notably achieving strong performance on mathematical and science reasoning. Despite its smaller size, the model maintains competitive performance on general multimodal capabilities, such as document and chart understanding, Optical Character Recognition (OCR), and visual science reasoning, matching or exceeding close models like Gemini-2-Flash-lite-preview/Claude-3.5-Sonnet.

    Figure 3: Phi-4-multimodal vision benchmarks.

    What is Phi-4-mini?

    Phi-4-mini is a 3.8B parameter model and a dense, decoder-only transformer featuring grouped-query attention, 200,000 vocabulary, and shared input-output embeddings, designed for speed and efficiency. Despite its compact size, it continues outperforming larger models in text-based tasks, including reasoning, math, coding, instruction-following, and function-calling. Supporting sequences up to 128,000 tokens, it delivers high accuracy and scalability, making it a powerful solution for advanced AI applications.

    To understand the model quality, we compare Phi-4-mini with a set of models over a variety of benchmarks as shown in Figure 4.

    Figure 4: Phi-4-mini language benchmarks.

    Function calling, instruction following, long context, and reasoning are powerful capabilities that enable small language models like Phi-4-mini to access external knowledge and functionality despite their limited capacity. Through a standardized protocol, function calling allows the model to seamlessly integrate with structured programming interfaces. When a user makes a request, Phi-4-Mini can reason through the query, identify and call relevant functions with appropriate parameters, receive the function outputs, and incorporate those results into its responses. This creates an extensible agentic-based system where the model’s capabilities can be enhanced by connecting it to external tools, application program interfaces (APIs), and data sources through well-defined function interfaces. The following example simulates a smart home control agent with Phi-4-mini.

    At Headwaters, we are leveraging fine-tuned SLM like Phi-4-mini on the edge to enhance operational efficiency and provide innovative solutions. Edge AI demonstrates outstanding performance even in environments with unstable network connections or in fields where confidentiality is paramount. This makes it highly promising for driving innovation across various industries, including anomaly detection in manufacturing, rapid diagnostic support in healthcare, and enhancing customer experiences in retail. We are looking forward to delivering new solutions in the AI agent era with Phi-4 mini.
     
    —Masaya Nishimaki, Company Director, Headwaters Co., Ltd. 

    Customization and cross-platform

    Thanks to their smaller sizes, Phi-4-mini and Phi-4-multimodal models can be used in compute-constrained inference environments. These models can be used on-device, especially when further optimized with ONNX Runtime for cross-platform availability. Their lower computational needs make them a lower cost option with much better latency. The longer context window enables taking in and reasoning over large text content—documents, web pages, code, and more. Phi-4-mini and multimodal demonstrates strong reasoning and logic capabilities, making it a good candidate for analytical tasks. Their small size also makes fine-tuning or customization easier and more affordable. The table below shows examples of finetuning scenarios with Phi-4-multimodal.

    Tasks Base Model Finetuned Model Compute
    Speech translation from English to Indonesian 17.4 35.5 3 hours, 16 A100
    Medical visual question answering 47.6 56.7 5 hours, 8 A100

    For more information about customization or to learn more about the models, take a look at Phi Cookbook on GitHub. 

    How can these models be used in action?

    These models are designed to handle complex tasks efficiently, making them ideal for edge case scenarios and compute-constrained environments. Given the new capabilities Phi-4-multimodal and Phi-4-mini bring, the uses of Phi are only expanding. Phi models are being embedded into AI ecosystems and used to explore various use cases across industries.

    Language models are powerful reasoning engines, and integrating small language models like Phi into Windows allows us to maintain efficient compute capabilities and opens the door to a future of continuous intelligence baked in across all your apps and experiences. Copilot+ PCs will build upon Phi-4-multimodal’s capabilities, delivering the power of Microsoft’s advanced SLMs without the energy drain. This integration will enhance productivity, creativity, and education-focused experiences, becoming a standard part of our developer platform.

    —Vivek Pradeep, Vice President Distinguished Engineer of Windows Applied Sciences.

    1. Embedded directly to your smart device: Phone manufacturers integrating Phi-4-multimodal directly into a smartphone could enable smartphones to process and understand voice commands, recognize images, and interpret text seamlessly. Users could benefit from advanced features like real-time language translation, enhanced photo and video analysis, and intelligent personal assistants that understand and respond to complex queries. This would elevate the user experience by providing powerful AI capabilities directly on the device, ensuring low latency and high efficiency.
    2. On the road: Imagine an automotive company integrating Phi-4-multimodal into their in-car assistant systems. The model could enable vehicles to understand and respond to voice commands, recognize driver gestures, and analyze visual inputs from cameras. For instance, it could enhance driver safety by detecting drowsiness through facial recognition and providing real-time alerts. Additionally, it could offer seamless navigation assistance, interpret road signs, and provide contextual information, creating a more intuitive and safer driving experience while connected to the cloud and offline when connectivity isn’t available.
    3. Multilingual financial services: Imagine a financial services company integrating Phi-4-mini to automate complex financial calculations, generate detailed reports, and translate financial documents into multiple languages. For instance, the model can assist analysts by performing intricate mathematical computations required for risk assessments, portfolio management, and financial forecasting. Additionally, it can translate financial statements, regulatory documents, and client communications into various languages and could improve client relations globally.

    Microsoft’s commitment to security and safety

    Azure AI Foundry provides users with a robust set of capabilities to help organizations measure, mitigate, and manage AI risks across the AI development lifecycle for traditional machine learning and generative AI applications. Azure AI evaluations in AI Foundry enable developers to iteratively assess the quality and safety of models and applications using built-in and custom metrics to inform mitigations.

    Both models underwent security and safety testing by our internal and external security experts using strategies crafted by Microsoft AI Red Team (AIRT). These methods, developed over previous Phi models, incorporate global perspectives and native speakers of all supported languages. They span areas such as cybersecurity, national security, fairness, and violence, addressing current trends through multilingual probing. Using AIRT’s open-source Python Risk Identification Toolkit (PyRIT) and manual probing, red teamers conducted single-turn and multi-turn attacks. Operating independently from the development teams, AIRT continuously shared insights with the model team. This approach assessed the new AI security and safety landscape introduced by our latest Phi models, ensuring the delivery of high-quality capabilities.

    Take a look at the model cards for Phi-4-multimodal and Phi-4-mini, and the technical paper to see an outline of recommended uses and limitations for these models.

    Learn more about Phi-4

    We invite you to come explore the possibilities with Phi-4-multimodal and Phi-4-mini in Azure AI Foundry, Hugging Face, and NVIDIA API Catalog with a full multimodal experience. We can’t wait to hear your feedback and see the incredible things you will accomplish with our new models. 

    Azure AI Foundry

    Design, customize, and manage AI apps and agents at scale.

    MIL OSI Economics –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Quantum navigation could transform how we travel. So what is it, and how does it work?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allison Kealy, Director, Innovative Planet Institute, Swinburne University of Technology

    Triff/Shutterstock

    Quantum technology is no longer confined to the lab – it’s making its way into our everyday lives. Now, it’s about to transform something even more fundamental: how we navigate the world.

    Imagine submarines travelling beneath the ocean, never needing to surface for location updates. Planes flying across continents with unshakeable precision, unaffected by signal disruptions.

    Emergency responders could navigate smoke-filled buildings or underground tunnels with flawless accuracy, while autonomous vehicles chart perfect courses through dense urban environments.

    These scenarios might sound like science fiction, but they can all be made possible with an emerging approach known as quantum navigation.

    This game-changing tech will one day redefine movement, exploration and connectivity in ways we’re only just beginning to imagine. So, what is it?

    Satellite navigation is at the heart of many things

    Global navigation satellite systems, like GPS, are deeply embedded in modern society. We use them daily for navigation, ordering deliveries and tagging photo locations. But their impact goes far beyond convenience.

    Timing signals from satellites in Earth’s orbit authenticate stock market trades and help balance the electricity grid. In agriculture, satellite navigation guides autonomous tractors and helps muster cattle.

    Emergency services rely on navigation satellite systems for rapid response, reducing the time it takes to reach those in need.

    Despite their benefits, systems like GPS are quite vulnerable. Satellite signals can be jammed or interfered with. This can be due to active warfare, terrorism or for legitimate (or illegitimate) privacy concerns. Maps like GPSJAM show real-time interference hotspots, such as those in the Middle East, areas around Russia and Ukraine, and Myanmar.

    The environment of space isn’t constant, either. The Sun regularly ejects giant balls of plasma, causing what we know as solar storms. These emissions slam into Earth’s magnetic field, disrupting satellites and GPS signals. Often these effects are temporary, but they can also cause significant damage, depending on the severity of the storm.

    An outage of global navigation satellite systems would be more than an inconvenience – it would disrupt our most critical infrastructure.

    Estimates suggest a loss of GPS would cost just the United States economy about US$1 billion per day (A$1.5 billion), causing cascading failures across interconnected systems.

    Quantum navigation to the rescue

    In some environments, navigation signals from satellites don’t work very well. They don’t penetrate water or underground spaces, for example.

    If you’ve ever tried to use Google Maps in a built-up city with skyscrapers, you may have run into issues. Tall buildings cause signal reflections that degrade accuracy, and signals are weakened or completely unavailable inside buildings.

    This is where quantum navigation could step in one day.

    Quantum science describes the behaviour of particles at scales smaller than an atom. It reveals mind-boggling effects like superposition – particles existing in multiple states simultaneously – and entanglement (when particles are connected through space and time in ways that defy classical understanding).

    These effects are fragile and typically collapse under observation, which is why we don’t notice them in everyday life. But the very fragility of quantum processes also lets them work as exquisite sensors.

    A sensor is a device that detects changes in the world around it and turns that information into a signal we can measure or use. Think automatic doors that open when we walk near them, or phone screens that respond to our touch.

    Quantum sensors are so sensitive because quantum particles react to tiny changes in their environment. Unlike normal sensors, which can miss weak signals, quantum sensors are extremely good at detecting even the smallest changes in things like time, gravity or magnetic fields.

    Their sensitivity comes from how easily quantum states change when something in their surroundings shifts, allowing us to measure things with much greater accuracy than before.

    This precision is critical for robust navigation systems.

    Our team is researching new ways to use quantum sensors to measure Earth’s magnetic field for navigation. By using quantum effects in diamonds, we can detect Earth’s magnetic field in real time and compare the measurements to pre-existing magnetic field maps, providing a resilient alternative to satellite navigation like GPS.

    Since magnetic signals are unaffected by jamming and work underwater, they offer a promising backup system.

    A quantum magnetometer used in our research.
    Swinburne University/RMIT/Phasor

    The future of navigation

    The future of navigation will integrate quantum sensors to enhance location accuracy (via Earth’s magnetic and gravitational fields), improve orientation (via quantum gyroscopes), and enable superior timing (through compact atomic clocks and interconnected timekeeping systems).

    These technologies promise to complement and, in some cases, provide alternatives to traditional satellite-based navigation.

    However, while the potential of quantum navigation is clear, making it a practical reality remains a significant challenge. Researchers and companies worldwide are working to refine these technologies, with major efforts underway in academia, government labs and industry.

    Startups and established players are developing prototypes of quantum accelerometers (devices that measure movement) and gyroscopes, but most remain in early testing phases or specialised applications.

    Key hurdles include reducing the size and power demands of quantum sensors, improving their stability outside of controlled laboratory settings, and integrating them into existing navigation systems.

    Cost is another barrier – today’s quantum devices are expensive and complex, meaning widespread adoption is still years away.

    If these challenges can be overcome, quantum navigation could reshape everyday life in subtle but profound ways. While quantum navigation won’t replace GPS overnight, it could become an essential part of the infrastructure that keeps the world moving.

    Allison Kealy is affiliated with Quantum Australia as a board member.

    Allison Kealy is a research collaborator with RMIT University and Phasor Quantum.

    – ref. Quantum navigation could transform how we travel. So what is it, and how does it work? – https://theconversation.com/quantum-navigation-could-transform-how-we-travel-so-what-is-it-and-how-does-it-work-250285

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Manipulated media: The weapon of the Right

    The re-election of Donald Trump is proof that the Right’s most powerful weapon is media manipulation, ensuring the public sphere is not engaged in rational debate, reports the Independent Australia.

    COMMENTARY: By Victoria Fielding

    I once heard someone say that when the Left and the Right became polarised — when they divorced from each other — the Left got all the institutions of truth including science, education, justice and democratic government.

    The Right got the institution of manipulation: the media. This statement hit me for six at the time because it seemed so clearly true.

    What was also immediately clear is that there was an obvious reason why the Left sided with the institutions of truth and the Right resorted to manipulation. It is because truth does not suit right-wing arguments.

    The existence of climate change does not suit fossil fuel billionaires. Evidence that wealth does not trickle down does not suit the capitalist class. The idea that diversity, equity and inclusion (yes, I put those words in that order on purpose) is better for everyone, rather than a discriminatory, hateful, destructive, divided unequal world is dangerous for the Right to admit.

    The Right’s embrace of the media institution also makes sense when you consider that the institutions of truth are difficult to buy, whereas billionaires can easily own manipulative media.

    Just ask Elon Musk, who bought Twitter and turned it into a political manipulation machine. Just ask Rupert Murdoch, who is currently engaged in a bitter family war to stop three of his children opposing him and his son Lachlan from using their “news” organisations as a form of political manipulation for right-wing interests.

    Right-wingers also know that truthful institutions only have one way of communicating their truths to the public: via the media. Once the media environment is manipulated, we enter a post-truth world.

    Experts derided as untrustworthy ‘elitists’
    This is the world where billionaire fossil fuel interests undermine climate action. It is where scientists create vaccines to save lives but the manipulated public refuses to take them. Where experts are derided as untrustworthy “elitists”.

    And it is where the whole idea of democratic government in the US has been overthrown to install an autocratic billionaire-enriching oligarchy led by an incompetent fool who calls himself the King.

    Once you recognise this manipulated media environment, you also understand that there is not — and never has been — such as thing as a rational public debate. Those engaged in the institutions of the Left — in science, education, justice and democratic government — seem mostly unwilling to accept this fact.

    Instead, they continue to believe if they just keep telling people the truth and communicating what they see as entirely rational arguments, the public will accept what they have to say.

    I think part of the reason that the Left refuses to accept that public debate is not rational and rather, is a manipulated bin fire of misleading information, including mis/disinformation and propaganda, is because they are not equipped to compete in this reality. What do those on the Left do with “post-truth”?

    They seem to just want to ignore it and hope it goes away.

    A perfect example of this misunderstanding of the post-truth world and the manipulated media environment’s impact on the public is this paper, by political science professors at the Australian National University Ian McAllister and Nicholas Biddle.

    Stunningly absolutist claim
    Their research sought to understand why polling at the start of the 2023 Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum showed widespread public support for the Voice but over the course of the campaign, this support dropped to the point where the Voice was defeated with 60 per cent voting “No” and 40 per cent, “Yes”.

    In presenting their study’s findings, the authors make the stunningly absolutist claim that:

    ‘…the public’s exposure to all forms of mass media – as we have measured it here – had no impact on the result’.

    A note is then attached to this finding with the caveat:

    ‘As noted earlier, given the data at hand we are unable to test the possibility that the content of the media being consumed resulted in a reinforcement of existing beliefs and partisanship rather than a conversion.’

    This caveat leaves a gaping hole in the finding by failing to account for how media reinforcing existing beliefs is an important media effect – as argued by Neil Gavin here. Since it was not measured, how can they possibly say there was no effect?

    Furthermore, the very premise of the author’s sweeping statement that media exposure had no impact on the result of the Referendum is based on two naive assumptions:

    • that voters were rational in their deliberations over the Referendum question; and
    • that the information environment voters were presented with was rational.

    Dual assumption of rationality
    This dual assumption of rationality – one that the authors interestingly admit is an assumption – is evidenced in their hypothesis which states:

    ‘Voters who did not follow the campaign in the mass media were more likely to move from a yes to a no vote compared to voters who did follow the campaign in the mass media.’

    This hypothesis, the authors explain, is premised on the assumption ‘that those with less information are more likely to opt for the status quo and cast a no vote’, and therefore that less exposure to media would change a vote from “Yes” to “No”. What this hypothesis assumes is that if a voter received more rational information in the media about the Referendum, that information would rationally drive their vote in the “Yes” direction. When their data disproved this hypothesis, the authors used this finding to claim that the media had no effect.

    To understand the reality of what happened in the Referendum debate, the word “rational” needs to be taken out of the equation and the word “manipulated” put in.

    We know, of course, that the Referendum was awash with manipulative information, which all supported the “No” campaign. For example, my study of News Corp’s Voice coverage — Australia’s largest and most influential news organisation — found that News Corp actively campaigned for the “No” proposition in concert with the “No” campaign, presenting content more like a political campaign than traditional journalism and commentary.

    A study by Queensland University of Technology’s Tim Graham analysed how the Voice Referendum was discussed on social media platform, X. Far from a rational debate, Graham identified that the “No” campaign and its supporters engaged in a participatory disinformation propaganda campaign, which became a “truth market” about the Voice.

    The ‘truth market’
    This “truth market” was described as drawing “Yes” campaigners into a debate about the truth of the Voice, sidetracking them from promoting their own cause.

    What such studies showed was that, far from McAllister and Biddle’s assumed rational information environment, the Voice Referendum public debate was awash with manipulation, propaganda, disinformation and fear-mongering.

    The “No” campaign that delivered this manipulation perfectly demonstrates how the Right uses media to undermine institutions of truth, to undermine facts and to undermine the rationality of democratic debates.

    The completely unfounded assumption that the more information a voter received about the Voice, the more likely they would vote “Yes”, reveals a misunderstanding of the reality of a manipulated public debate environment present across all types of media, from mainstream news to social media.

    It also wrongly treats voters like rational deliberative computers by assuming that the more information that goes in, the more they accept that information. This is far from the reality of how mediated communication affects the public.

    The reason the influence of media on individuals and collectives is, in reality, so difficult to measure and should never be bluntly described as having total effect or no effect, is that people are not rational when they consume media, and every individual processes information in their own unique and unconscious ways.

    One person can watch a manipulated piece of communication and accept it wholeheartedly, others can accept part of it and others reject it outright.

    Manipulation unknown
    No one piece of information determines how people vote and not every piece of information people consume does either. That’s the point of a manipulated media environment. People who are being manipulated do not know they are being manipulated.

    Importantly, when you ask individuals how their media consumption impacted on them, they of course do not know. The decisions people make based on the information they have ephemerally consumed — whether from the media, conversations, or a wide range of other information sources, are incredibly complex and irrational.

    Surely the re-election of Donald Trump for a second time, despite all the rational arguments against him, is proof that the manipulated media environment is an incredibly powerful weapon — a weapon the Right, globally, is clearly proficient at wielding.

    It is time those on the Left caught up and at least understood the reality they are working in.

    Dr Victoria Fielding is an Independent Australia columnist. This article was first published by the Independent Australia and is republished with the author’s permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Growth and security at heart of Prime Minister’s meeting with President Trump

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Growth and security at heart of Prime Minister’s meeting with President Trump

    The Prime Minister will be focused on delivering prosperity and security for the British people, when he meets President Trump today (Thursday 27 February) in Washington D.C.

    • Prosperity and security for working people focus of Prime Minister’s meeting with President Trump.   

    • Special relationship between UK and US critical to deliver growth and security, with further collaboration on AI and tech.    

    • Prime Minister to reiterate shared US-UK commitment to reaching a durable and lasting peace in Ukraine, and the need for Europe to step up to the challenge.

    The Prime Minister will be focused on delivering prosperity and security for the British people, when he meets President Trump today (Thursday 27 February) in Washington D.C.

    The UK and the US share a unique and historic relationship, based on shared values and a mutual commitment to economic and defence cooperation.  

    The UK and the US have one of the biggest trading relationships of any two countries in the world, worth around 400 billion dollars and supporting over 2.5 million jobs across both countries.     

    This visit comes just days after the third anniversary of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. The Prime Minister and President Trump share a commitment to delivering lasting peace in Ukraine, and the Prime Minister will reiterate the UK’s commitment to securing a just and enduring peace, bringing an end to Russia’s illegal war.     

    The Prime Minister will be clear that there can be no negotiations about Ukraine, without Ukraine and will recognise the need for Europe to play its part on global defence and step up for the good of collective European security.    

    On Tuesday, the Prime Minister announced that defence spending will increase to 2.5% of GDP from April 2027, with an ambition to reach 3% in the next parliament. This will drive economic growth and create jobs across the UK, while bolstering national security and protecting borders.   

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:    

    The world is becoming ever more dangerous, and it is more important than ever that we are united with our allies.     

    A stable economy, secure borders and national security are the foundations of my Plan for Change, and the US-UK relationship is integral to delivering them. These principles will be at the heart of discussions with President Trump today.     

    There are huge opportunities for us to deepen our special relationship, deliver growth and security, and improve the lives of working people in both our great nations.

    Both countries are world leaders in AI and advanced technologies, and the Prime Minister will be looking to build on these strong foundations to create jobs and economic growth.     

    The discussion will have a particular focus on the opportunities that further technology and AI partnerships could deliver. These include a proposal of high-ambition shared moonshot missions across top technologies including quantum and AI, and a deeper partnership on space.     

    The US and UK are the only two allied countries with trillion-dollar technology eco-systems, and the Prime Minister will make the case for further integration between the two countries’ tech sectors to make them the most efficient, ambitious technology sectors in the world.     

    In October, US tech firms announced a £6.3 billion package of investment to support UK data centres – a central pillar of the government’s plan to ramp up the country’s AI capacity. In January a further £12 billion investment from Vantage Data Centers created over 11,500 jobs as the government published its AI Opportunities Action Plan.   

    These investments represent just one facet of the deepening science, innovation, and technology collaboration between both countries. In AI, researchers from both sides of the Atlantic have dedicated research exchange programmes to share knowledge and expertise in delivering the next wave of cutting-edge innovations that improve people’s lives in areas such as personalised care, autonomous surgeries, and cancer diagnosis – on top of a broader AI partnership which has also been signed by the AI Institutes of both countries. 

    On a visit to the West Coast at the end of last year Technology Secretary Peter Kyle met a range of companies to bang the drum for further investment in the UK’s technology sector. Just two weeks ago, he also put pen to paper on a new partnership with leading AI firm Anthropic which will explore how the technology can be put to work to transform the public services that UK citizens rely on, and deliver on the government’s Plan for Change.   

    The Prime Minister will join President Trump at the White House on Thursday, where he will be greeted by the President before signing the White House Guest Book and a tete a tete at the Oval Office. This will be followed by a bilateral lunch, and a joint press conference. He will also carry out a defence focused visit.   

    On arrival on Wednesday night, he will meet a select group of CEOs from large US businesses to discuss their existing and growing presence in the UK, and the importance of UK-US trade and investment. He will outline the strength of the UK offer to investors: policy stability; an active partnership with government; an open, trading economy; and a reform agenda focused on making it easier to do business.   

    The Prime Minister will be accompanied by the Foreign Secretary David Lammy, who will join the Prime Minister’s programme at the White House.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

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

    Updates to this page

    Published 26 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: New appointments to Australia Council Board and Maritime Museum

    Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

    The Australian Government is making appointments to arts bodies and collecting institutions to ensure they remain under strong leadership.

    Ms Lauren Moss has been appointed as a member of the Australia Council Board of Creative Australia for a four-year term, replacing Ms Christine Simpson Stokes AM.

    The Hon Don Harwin has been appointed as a member of the Council of the Australian National Maritime Museum for a three-year term.

    Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke, said the appointees would lend a deep well of expertise to guide the administration of these important organisations.

    “Lauren has extensive experience having previously worked in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly for almost a decade. Her sound understanding of governance, arts and cultural issues within the Northern Territory will provide another great regional perspective to the Board.

    “Don served in the NSW Parliament for many years and his time spent as Minister for the Arts will be a great asset for the Council’s governance.”    

    Creative Australia plays a vital role in growing Australia’s cultural infrastructure, through investing in creative talent and stimulating the market for Australian stories to be told on a national and international scale.

    The Australian National Maritime Museum is dedicated to exploring Australia’s maritime history through topics of migration, archaeology, ocean science, commerce, culture and lifestyle, and  honours the stories of First Nations peoples’ living cultural connection to ancestral waters. 

    Ms Lauren Moss was elected at 27 years old as a member of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, having served as the Member for Casuarina for almost ten years. She has held portfolio positions in Equality and Inclusion, Environment, Climate Change and Water Security, Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Youth and Seniors, Education, Children, Women, Tourism, Sport and Culture, including the Arts. As Minister for Tourism, Sport and Culture, Ms Moss was responsible for initiatives including the establishment of Arts Trail funding and the Street Art Festival, increased funding for the screen sector and promotion of the economic value of the Territory’s Creative Industries. Before entering Parliament, Ms Moss was involved in various roles focusing on youth advocacy, alcohol harm minimisation and mental health, and was involved as a Youth Ambassador, Advisor and member to a number of youth mental health and youth affairs organisations. 

    The Hon Don Harwin served in the New South Wales Parliament for 23 years in a range of roles, including five years as the Minister for the Arts and 6 years as President of the Legislative Council. Mr Harwin has considerable background and experience in leadership, governance, policy, and arts advocacy. Mr Harwin currently holds a number of Board memberships including Chair of Music in the Regions Ltd and as a director of the Australia Youth Trust which supports initiatives to secure better health and education outcomes for young people in developing Commonwealth countries. Mr Harwin previously served as a Member of the Australia Council for the Arts, now operating as Creative Australia.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Australian Deputy PM: New appointments to Australia Council Board and Maritime Museum

    Source: Minister of Infrastructure

    The Australian Government is making appointments to arts bodies and collecting institutions to ensure they remain under strong leadership.

    Ms Lauren Moss has been appointed as a member of the Australia Council Board of Creative Australia for a four-year term, replacing Ms Christine Simpson Stokes AM.

    The Hon Don Harwin has been appointed as a member of the Council of the Australian National Maritime Museum for a three-year term.

    Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke, said the appointees would lend a deep well of expertise to guide the administration of these important organisations.

    “Lauren has extensive experience having previously worked in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly for almost a decade. Her sound understanding of governance, arts and cultural issues within the Northern Territory will provide another great regional perspective to the Board.

    “Don served in the NSW Parliament for many years and his time spent as Minister for the Arts will be a great asset for the Council’s governance.”    

    Creative Australia plays a vital role in growing Australia’s cultural infrastructure, through investing in creative talent and stimulating the market for Australian stories to be told on a national and international scale.

    The Australian National Maritime Museum is dedicated to exploring Australia’s maritime history through topics of migration, archaeology, ocean science, commerce, culture and lifestyle, and  honours the stories of First Nations peoples’ living cultural connection to ancestral waters. 

    Ms Lauren Moss was elected at 27 years old as a member of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, having served as the Member for Casuarina for almost ten years. She has held portfolio positions in Equality and Inclusion, Environment, Climate Change and Water Security, Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Youth and Seniors, Education, Children, Women, Tourism, Sport and Culture, including the Arts. As Minister for Tourism, Sport and Culture, Ms Moss was responsible for initiatives including the establishment of Arts Trail funding and the Street Art Festival, increased funding for the screen sector and promotion of the economic value of the Territory’s Creative Industries. Before entering Parliament, Ms Moss was involved in various roles focusing on youth advocacy, alcohol harm minimisation and mental health, and was involved as a Youth Ambassador, Advisor and member to a number of youth mental health and youth affairs organisations. 

    The Hon Don Harwin served in the New South Wales Parliament for 23 years in a range of roles, including five years as the Minister for the Arts and 6 years as President of the Legislative Council. Mr Harwin has considerable background and experience in leadership, governance, policy, and arts advocacy. Mr Harwin currently holds a number of Board memberships including Chair of Music in the Regions Ltd and as a director of the Australia Youth Trust which supports initiatives to secure better health and education outcomes for young people in developing Commonwealth countries. Mr Harwin previously served as a Member of the Australia Council for the Arts, now operating as Creative Australia.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Secretary Wright Emphasizes Importance of AI Leadership, Nuclear Modernization in Visit to Los Alamos and Sandia

    Source: US Department of Energy

    ALBUQUERQUE, NM – U.S. Secretary of Energy released the following statement after visiting Los Alamos National Laboratory yesterday and Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico earlier today.

    “It was an honor to visit Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories, two institutions with rich histories in the development of American nuclear deterrence and essential roles in our future energy innovation,” said Secretary Wright. “I look forward to working closely with the scientists and engineers of Sandia and Los Alamos to modernize our nuclear weapons systems, unleash American nuclear energy, and ensure America continues to lead the world in scientific and technical innovation.

    “More than 70 years ago, these labs played an important role in the greatest scientific and engineering concerted effort in history: the Manhattan Project. Today, we are again calling on the brilliant minds of our great nation to win the next race: AI. This rapidly evolving technology will have enormous impacts on our national security, and President Trump and I remain committed to leveraging our nation’s unparalleled research and development infrastructure to win this great power competition.”

    IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:

    Albuquerque Journal: New Mexico’s National Labs Will Play an Essential Role in Unleashing American Energy

    By U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright

    February 25, 2025

    “One of our country’s greatest assets and an envy of the world is the Department of Energy’s network of 17 National Laboratories. For over half a century, these labs have delivered groundbreaking advancements in technology and science, ensuring our nation’s security, preventing and ending wars, and playing a pivotal role in making America the most prosperous nation on earth.

    “As the nation’s Secretary of Energy and the leader of the department responsible for overseeing these labs, I am incredibly excited to be in New Mexico to visit Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque – two institutions with rich histories in the development of American nuclear deterrence and essential roles in our future energy innovation.

    “President Trump and I are united by a shared passion for energy and a simple, yet powerful vision: American energy is essential to our country’s security, the well-being of our citizens, and lives of people around the world. We want to unleash American Energy.

    “My passion for energy began with a youthful fascination with astronomy, and a curiosity as to what powers stars? Energy from nuclear fusion was the answer. Can nuclear forces only be unleashed in the center of stars, or can they be harnessed right here on earth? That question was answered right here in New Mexico.

    “As World War II raged, nuclear physics continued to rapidly advance, raising concerns that Nazi Germany might be the first to harness nuclear energy in the form of a highly destructive bomb. That was a threat too great to fathom. The answer was the greatest scientific and engineering concerted effort in history: the Manhattan Project.

    “That historic effort involved bringing the world’s greatest scientists and engineers together in Los Alamos for a frantic, secret, patriotic effort to develop, build, test and deploy nuclear weapons to win the war and the subsequent peace. This stunning effort was led by General Leslie Groves and scientific lead, physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer.

    “The development of nuclear technology and the weapons at Los Alamos, along with the work of our other laboratories around the country, changed the world. The United States secured the ultimate guarantor of our nation’s sovereignty, ensuring victory in World War II, maintaining peace for decades afterward, and ultimately triumphing in the Cold War.

    . . .

    “The responsible stewardship and modernization of the nation’s nuclear weapons systems is a top priority for the Department of Energy and this administration – alongside unleashing an American renaissance in affordable, abundant commercial nuclear energy.

    “President Trump and I are committed to leveraging our nation’s unparalleled research and development infrastructure to reduce costs for American families, strengthen the reliability of our energy system, and bolster U.S. manufacturing competitiveness and supply chain security. Our efforts will focus on advancing affordable, reliable, and secure energy technologies, which includes nuclear.

    “Just as the patriotic collaborations helped shape history over 70 years ago, the United States is once again calling on its brightest minds to drive this mission.

    “The golden era of American energy dominance is upon us. I look forward to working alongside your communities to seize this moment and secure our nation’s future.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Kneat Achieves Record Revenue for Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LIMERICK, Ireland, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — kneat.com, inc. (TSX: KSI) (OTC: KSIOF) (“Kneat” or the “Company”) a leader in digitizing and automating validation and quality processes, today announced financial results for the three- and twelve-month periods ended December 31, 2024. All dollar amounts are presented in Canadian dollars unless otherwise stated.

    • Total revenue reaches $13.7 million in the fourth quarter, an increase of 40% year over year
    • Fourth-quarter gross profit grew 48% year over year to $10.4 million
    • Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR)1 at December 31, 2024, reaches $59.7 million, an increase of 60% year over year

    “Our sustained revenue growth, expanding margins and solid traction across all areas of Validation demonstrate the durability of our business model. With companies throughout the Life Sciences adopting new technologies to drive business value, Validation’s transition to digital is set to continue, with Kneat leading the way.”

    – said Eddie Ryan, Chief Executive Officer of Kneat. 

    Q4 2024 Highlights

    • Total revenues increased 40% to $13.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $9.8 million for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • SaaS revenue for the fourth quarter of 2024 grew 41% to $12.5 million, versus $8.9 million for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Fourth-quarter 2024 gross profit was $10.4 million, up 48% from $7.0 million (adjusted)2 in gross profit for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Gross margin in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 75%, compared to 71% (adjusted)2 for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • EBITDA3 in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $1.1 million, compared with ($0.1) million (adjusted)2 for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Adjusted EBITDA3 in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $2.6 million, compared with ($0.3) million (adjusted)2 for the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Total ARR1, which includes SaaS license and recurring maintenance fees, was $59.7 million at December 31, 2024, an increase of 60% from $37.4 million at December 31, 2023.
    • SaaS ARR1, the proportion of ARR attributable to SaaS licenses, was $59.6 million at December 31, 2024, an increase of 60% from $37.3 million at December 31, 2023.

    Full Year 2024 Highlights

    • Total revenues for the full year 2024 increased 43% to $48.9 million, compared to $34.2 million for 2023.
    • SaaS revenue grew 48%, reaching $44.6 million for the full year 2024, versus $30.1 million for 2023.
    • Full-year 2024 gross profit was $36.8 million, an increase of 59% compared to $23.1 million (adjusted)2 for the full year 2023.
    • Gross margin for the full year 2024 was 75%, compared to 68% (adjusted)2 for all of 2023.
    • EBITDA3 for the full year 2024 was $5.6 million, compared with ($5.7) million (adjusted)2 for all of 2023.
    • Adjusted EBITDA3 for the full year 2024 was $7.0 million, compared with ($3.2) million (adjusted)2 for all of 2023.
    • Net Revenue Retention Rate (NRR)1, which reflects the expansion of ARR by customers on the platform at the start of 2024 over the course of the year, was 151% for the year ended December 31, 2024.

    2024 Business Highlights

    • Over the course of 2024, Kneat announced the addition of five large strategic customers, including a consumer products company; a critical care company; pharmaceutical company; a contract development and manufacturing organization; and a medical device maker.
    • In 2024, Kneat formalized its partner program further, exceeded its goal of new partner additions, and welcomed two large strategic partners, Körber and ALTEN Group, which plan to leverage Kneat Gx to digitize their own processes as well as those of their customers.
    • Throughout 2024, a number of business functions within Kneat leveraged AI tools to enhance productivity, including Customer Success, Support and R&D. Concurrently, our product team have been evaluating the potential for AI to enhance the efficiency of the Kneat Gx platform, and we expect to incorporate some AI capabilities into it this year.
    • Kneat completed two equity financings in 2024, in February and October. In total, 13,653,880 common shares of the Company were sold for aggregate gross proceeds of $55,625,110.
    • For the fourth consecutive year, Kneat was recognized as one of Ireland’s fastest-growing technology companies. At the 2024 Deloitte Technology Fast 50 Awards, which ranks the 50 fastest-growing technology companies across Ireland, Kneat was also honoured with the 2024 Scale Ireland award for global expansion.

    Kneat’s business momentum continues into 2025:

    • In January 2025, Kneat announced that it has partnered with Capgemini. The collaboration brings together Capgemini’s expertise in enterprise IT systems integration with Kneat’s digital validation platform, Kneat Gx. The partnership is designed to enable life sciences companies to seamlessly deploy Kneat Gx enterprise-wide; connect with core systems such as ERP, QMS, and DMS; and scale digital validation processes with ease.
    • Also in January 2025, Kneat announced that a European-headquartered leader in specialty therapeutics selected Kneat to digitize its validation processes.
    • In February 2025, Kneat announced that a European-headquartered global consumer products company selected Kneat to digitize its validation processes within a specialized health sciences division.

    “We expected 2024 to be a year of material progress toward profitability, and it was. Gross profit grew at almost four times the rate of operating expense in 2024 as our land and expand strategy continued to deliver. We enter 2025 with a solid balance sheet and well-positioned to invest in ways that best serve the needs of companies looking to modernize their data-intensive work processes.”

    – said Hugh Kavanagh, Chief Financial Officer of Kneat. 

    _______________
    1 ARR, SaaS ARR, and NRR are supplementary measures and are not recognized, defined or standardized measures under IFRS. These measures are defined in the “Supplementary and Non-IFRS Measures” section of this news release.
    2 The Company has adjusted the comparative consolidated financial information for immaterial errors related to the accounting for share-based compensation. Refer to note 21 to the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2024 for further details.
    3 EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are non-IFRS measures and are not recognized, defined or standardized measures under IFRS. These measures are defined in the “Supplementary and Non-IFRS Measures” section of this news release.

    Quarterly Conference Call

    Eddie Ryan, Chief Executive Officer of Kneat, and Hugh Kavanagh, Chief Financial Officer of Kneat, will host a conference call to discuss Kneat’s fourth-quarter and full-year 2024 results and hold a Q&A session for analysts and investors via webcast on February 27, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. ET.

    Interested parties can register for the live webcast via the following link:

    Register Here

    Supplementary and Non-IFRS Financial Measures

    The Company uses supplementary financial measures as key performance indicators in its MD&A and other communications. Management uses both IFRS measures and supplementary, non-IFRS financial measures as key performance indicators when planning, monitoring and evaluating the Company’s performance.

    Annual Recurring Revenue (“ARR”)

    ARR is used by Kneat to assess the expected recurring annual revenues from the customers that are live on the Kneat Gx platform at the end of the period. ARR is calculated as the licenses delivered to customers at the period end, multiplied by the expected customer retention rate of 100% and multiplied by the full agreed annual SaaS license or maintenance fee. Since many of the customer contracts are in currencies other than the Canadian dollar, the Canadian dollar equivalent is calculated using the related period end exchange rate multiplied by the contracted currency amount.

    Software-as-a-Service Annual Recurring Revenue (“SaaS ARR”)

    SaaS ARR is a component of ARR that is used by Kneat to assess the expected recurring revenues exclusively from license subscriptions to the Kneat Gx platform at the end of the period. SaaS ARR is calculated as the SaaS licenses delivered to customers at the period end, multiplied by the expected customer retention rate of 100% and multiplied by the full agreed SaaS license fee. Since many of the customer contracts are in currencies other than the Canadian dollar, the Canadian dollar equivalent is calculated using the related period end exchange rate multiplied by the contracted currency amount.

    Net Revenue Retention Rate (“NRR”)

    We believe that our Net Revenue Retention Rate is a key measure to provide insight into the long-term value of our customers and our ability to retain and expand revenue from our customer base over time. Our Net Revenue Retention Rate is calculated over a trailing twelve-month period by considering the cohort of customers on our platform as of the beginning of the period and dividing the ARR attributable to this group of customers at the end of the period by the ARR at the beginning of the period. By implication, this ratio excludes any ARR from new customers acquired during the period but includes revenue changes for this cohort base of customers during the period being measured. This measure provides insight into customer expansions, downgrades, and churn, and illustrates the level of scaling by those customers.

    Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”)

    EBITDA is calculated as net income (loss) attributable to kneat.com excluding interest income (expense), provision for income taxes, depreciation and amortization. We provide and use this non-IFRS measure of our operating performance to highlight trends in our core business that may not otherwise be apparent when relying solely on IFRS financial measures and to inform financial comparisons with other companies. A reconciliation of EBITDA to IFRS financial measures is provided in the financial statements accompanying this press release.

    Adjusted Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“Adjusted EBITDA”)

    Adjusted EBITDA is calculated as net income (loss) attributable to kneat.com excluding interest income (expense), provision for income taxes, depreciation and amortization, foreign exchange loss (gain), and stock-based compensation expense. We provide and use this non-IFRS measure of our operating performance to highlight trends in our core business that may not otherwise be apparent when relying solely on IFRS financial measures and to inform financial comparisons with other companies. A reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to IFRS financial measures is provided in the financial statements accompanying this press release.

    About Kneat

    Kneat Solutions provides leading companies in highly regulated industries with unparalleled efficiency in validation and compliance through its digital validation platform Kneat Gx. As an industry leader in customer satisfaction, Kneat boasts an excellent record for implementation, powered by our user-friendly design, expert support, and on-demand training academy. Kneat Gx is an industry-leading digital validation platform that enables highly regulated companies to manage any validation discipline from end-to-end. Kneat Gx is fully ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 certified, fully validated, and 21 CFR Part 11/Annex 11 compliant. Multiple independent customer studies show a 40% or more reduction in validation cycle times, nearly 20% faster speed to market, and 80% reduced changeover time. For more information visit www.kneat.com.

    Cautionary and Forward-Looking Statements

    Except for the statements of historical fact contained herein, certain information presented constitutes “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Such forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, the relationship between Kneat and the customer, Kneat’s business development activities, the use and implementation timelines of Kneat’s software within the customer’s validation processes, the ability and intent of the customer to scale the use of Kneat’s software within the customer’s organization, our ability to win business from new customers and expand business from existing customers, our expected use of the net proceeds from the IPF Facility and the public equity financing completed in both February and October 2024 and the anticipated effects thereof on the business and operations of the company, and the compliance of Kneat’s platform under regulatory audit and inspection. These and other assumptions, risks and uncertainties may cause Kneat’s actual results, performance, achievements and developments to differ materially from the results, performance, achievements or developments expressed or implied by forward-looking statements.

    Material risks and uncertainties relating to our business are described under the headings “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and Information” and “Risk Factors” in our MD&A dated February 26, 2025, under the heading “Risk Factors” in our Annual Information Form dated February 26, 2025 and in our other public documents filed with Canadian securities regulatory authorities, which are available at www.sedarplus.ca. Forward-looking statements are provided to help readers understand management’s expectations as at the date of this release and may not be suitable for other purposes. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Kneat assumes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as expressly required by law. Investors should not assume that any lack of update to a previously issued forward-looking statement constitutes a reaffirmation of that statement. Continued reliance on forward-looking statements is at an investor’s own risk.

    For further information:

    Katie Keita, Kneat Investor Relations
    P: + 1 902-706-9074
    E: katie.keita@kneat.com

    kneat.com, inc.
    Consolidated Statements of Loss and Comprehensive Loss
    (expressed in Canadian dollars)
     
      Three-month period ended   Year ended
      December 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   December 31, 2024   December 31, 2023
          (Adjusted)       (Adjusted)
    Revenue              
    SaaS License fees   12,537,109       8,922,491       44,569,846       30,066,905  
    On-premise license fees   –       –       –       436,126  
    Maintenance fees   123,667       46,819       322,335       277,199  
    Professional services and other   1,072,835       844,689       4,046,238       3,443,178  
    Total Revenue   13,733,611       9,813,999       48,938,419       34,223,408  
                   
    Cost of Revenue   (3,372,387 )     (2,811,181 )     (12,179,880 )     (11,091,576 )
    Gross Profit   10,361,224       7,002,818       36,758,539       23,131,832  
    Gross Margin   75 %     71 %     75 %     68 %
                   
    Expenses              
    Research and development   (4,545,776 )     (3,733,887 )     (17,268,722 )     (15,387,726 )
    Sales and marketing   (4,828,335 )     (4,500,992 )     (17,163,189 )     (14,266,739 )
    General and administrative   (1,823,992 )     (1,925,415 )     (8,273,995 )     (7,411,540 )
    Total Expenses   (11,198,103 )     (10,160,294 )     (42,705,906 )     (37,066,005 )
                   
    Operating Loss   (836,879 )     (3,157,476 )     (5,947,367 )     (13,934,173 )
                   
    Finance Expense   (1,034,424 )     (629,794 )     (3,665,098 )     (1,081,853 )
    Interest income   298,308       621       678,388       6,635  
    Foreign exchange loss/(gain)   (828,354 )     1,083,675       1,399,547       545,776  
                   
    Income (loss) before income taxes   (2,401,349 )     (2,702,974 )     (7,534,530 )     (14,463,615 )
    Income tax expense   (61,907 )     (47,342 )     (192,598 )     (55,891 )
                   
    Net loss for period   (2,463,256 )     (2,750,316 )     (7,727,128 )     (14,519,506 )
                   
    Other comprehensive loss              
    Foreign currency translation adjustment to presentation currency   411,921       750,382       (995,322 )     (263,950 )
                   
    Comprehensive loss for the period   (2,051,335 )     (1,999,934 )     (8,722,450 )     (14,783,456 )
                   
    Loss per share – Basic and diluted $ (0.03 )   $ (0.04 )   $ (0.09 )   $ (0.19 )
                   
    Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding – Basic and diluted   93,005,493       78,093,350       86,545,119       77,833,268  
                   
    Reconciliation:              
    Total income (loss) for the period   (2,463,256 )     (2,750,316 )     (7,727,128 )     (14,519,506 )
    Interest expense   863,766       629,794       3,494,441       1,081,853  
    Interest income   (298,308 )     (621 )     (678,388 )     (6,635 )
    Income taxes   61,907       47,342       192,598       55,891  
    Depreciation expense   174,751       192,038       745,639       786,085  
    Amortization expense   2,791,627       1,803,172       9,560,000       6,889,552  
    EBITDA   1,130,487       (78,591 )     5,587,162       (5,712,760 )
                   
    Adjustments to EBITDA              
    Foreign exchange (gain) loss   828,354       (1,083,675 )     (1,399,547 )     (545,776 )
    Stock-based compensation expense   669,201       834,569       2,785,906       3,049,967  
    Adjusted EBITDA   2,628,042       (327,697 )     6,973,521       (3,208,569 )
                                   
    kneat.com, inc.
    Consolidated Statements of Financial Position
    (expressed in Canadian dollars)
                   
      December 31,     December 31,  
      2024     2023  
              (Adjusted)  
    Assets              
                   
    Current assets              
    Cash   58,889,572       15,252,526  
    Amounts receivable   18,377,009       11,601,558  
    Prepayments   1,870,095       1,138,382  
        79,136,676       27,992,466  
    Non-current assets              
    Amounts receivable   2,368,006       1,650,795  
    Property and equipment   6,782,179       7,209,953  
    Intangible assets   36,290,869       29,005,092  
                   
    Total Assets   124,577,730       65,858,306  
                   
    Liabilities              
                   
    Current liabilities              
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities   8,580,104       7,874,332  
    Contract liabilities   21,631,416       13,647,071  
    Loan payable and accrued interest   4,116,723       –  
    Lease liabilities   434,096       535,832  
        34,762,339       22,057,235  
    Non-current liabilities              
    Contract liabilities   33,393       41,084  
    Lease liabilities   5,671,952       5,976,380  
    Loan payable and accrued interest   19,038,203       21,657,423  
                   
    Total Liabilities   59,505,887       49,732,122  
                   
    Equity              
    Shareholders’ equity   65,071,843       16,126,184  
                   
    Total Liabilities and Equity   124,577,730       65,858,306  
                   
    kneat.com, inc.
    Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
    (expressed in Canadian dollars)
    For the years ended
           
      December 31,   December 31,
        2024       2023  
          (Adjusted)
    Operating activities      
    Net loss for the year   (7,727,128 )     (14,519,506 )
    Charges to loss not involving cash:      
    Depreciation of property and equipment   745,639       786,085  
    Share-based compensation   3,825,512       3,998,749  
    Interest Expense   3,494,441       1,081,853  
    Tax expense   192,598       55,891  
    Amortization of the intangible asset   9,389,343       6,828,213  
    Amortization of loan issuance costs   171,593       61,164  
    Write-off of property and equipment   –       26,721  
    Impact of lease termination   –       (67,600 )
    Foreign exchange (gain)   (1,399,547 )     (545,776 )
    Decrease in non-current contract liabilities   (9,436 )     (905,846 )
    Net change in non-cash working capital related to operations   1,107,145       2,868,609  
    Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities   9,790,160       (331,443 )
           
    Financing activities      
    Payment of principal and interest on loans payable   (2,475,283 )     (630,410 )
    Proceeds from the exercise of stock options   2,086,699       295,350  
    Repayment of lease liabilities   (744,061 )     (752,802 )
    Proceeds received from loan financing   –       21,978,000  
    Issuance costs associated with loan financing   –       (624,596 )
    Proceeds received from public equity financing   55,625,110       –  
    Share issuance costs associated with public equity financing   (3,869,212 )     –  
    Net cash provided by financing activities   50,623,253       20,265,542  
           
    Investing activities      
    Additions to the intangible asset   (19,716,562 )     (17,879,014 )
    Collection of research and development tax credits   2,360,342       1,185,720  
    Additions to property and equipment   (165,592 )     (181,358 )
    Net cash used in investing activities   (17,521,812 )     (16,874,652 )
           
    Effects of exchange rates on cash   745,445       (89,399 )
           
    Net change in cash during the year   43,637,046       2,970,048  
           
    Cash – Beginning of year   15,252,526       12,282,478  
           
    Cash – End of year   58,889,572       15,252,526  
                   
                   

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Coons, colleagues introduce bipartisan, bicameral bill to restore injunctive relief for patent infringement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) today introduced the Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act of 2025. This bipartisan, bicameral bill would restore the presumption that courts will issue an injunction to stop patent infringers, strengthening protections for U.S. inventors, entrepreneurs, universities, and startups. This legislation was initially introduced in the 118th Congress. Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) and Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) also introduced the House companion bill. 

    “Thanks to a wrongheaded decision from the Supreme Court, there are now companies who steal patented technologies rather than license them from inventors and then justify their actions as simply the cost of doing business. Innovators at universities and startups who lack resources are often unable to stop patent infringement in court and are forced into licensing deals they do not want,” said Senator Coons. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will protect innovators across the country, stop the infringe-now, pay-later model in its tracks, and strengthen America’s economic competitiveness for generations to come.”

    “American ingenuity should be rewarded and protected,” said Senator Cotton. “Current patent law fails to protect inventors and leaves them vulnerable to intellectual property theft from adversaries like China. This bipartisan legislation will help solidify America’s edge in technological innovation.”

    For more than two centuries, courts granted injunctive relief in most patent cases upon a finding of infringement, preventing patent infringers from continuing to produce goods that ran afoul of patent laws. However, this practice was upended in 2006 when the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange created a four-factor test to determine whether a permanent injunction is warranted in infringement cases, altering the longstanding remedy for patent infringement.

    Since that decision, obtaining injunctive relief in patent cases has become significantly more difficult and rare. A recent study found that requests for permanent injunctions in patent cases fell by 65% for companies that use their patented technology to manufacture a product; grants of permanent injunctions to those companies fell even more significantly. Requests and grants for licensing patent owners like universities and research clinics dropped even further: Requests fell by 85%, and grants fell by 90%. 

    The RESTORE Patent Rights Act would undo the damage of the eBay decision by returning to patent owners a rebuttable presumption that an injunction is warranted after a court makes a final ruling that their rights are being infringed. This would deter predatory infringers and restore meaning to the right to exclude.

    “American innovation is only as strong as the confidence in knowing ideas cannot be stolen by competitors. In the last two decades, innovators have found it harder to obtain a permanent injunction from U.S. courts, which stops bad actors from stealing their intellectual property (IP). Our legislation will restore the rights of American innovators by ensuring permanent injunctions are accessible from U.S. courts. This bill will provide greater certainty in the protection of IP and prevent cases from being taken overseas to countries like China. When U.S. courts enforce the exclusivity of patent rights, America becomes a world leader in innovation,” said Congressman Moran.  

    “Enforceable patents are vital to our ability to invent, improve and advance – yet today, it is increasingly difficult for patent holders to enforce their rights through permanent injunctions, even after proving infringement in court,” said Congresswoman Dean. “The bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Act addresses this issue and safeguards American innovation. I’m grateful to be joined by Congressman Moran, Senator Coons, and Senator Cotton in our push to protect patentholders, including universities, research laboratories, and startups.”

    The Innovation Alliance, Council for Innovation Promotion, Association of University Technology Managers, Conservatives for Property Rights, Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA, Inventors Defense Alliance, and the Medical Device Manufacturers Association have endorsed the RESTORE Patent Rights Act.

    “The Innovation Alliance applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for reintroducing the bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Patent Rights Act. With a simple, single-sentence clarification of the law, RESTORE will bring balance back to patent law and allow small inventors to stand toe to toe with Big Tech after a court has ruled that Big Tech is stealing their inventions. We urge Congress to pass this vital bill,” said Brian Pomper, Executive Director of the Innovation Alliance.

    “Our nation’s economic success and national security depend on inventors having confidence that their intellectual property will not be unfairly exploited,” said Andrei Iancu, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2018 to 2021. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will provide inventors with the reassurance they need to propel American leadership in critical technology fields.”

    “Now more than ever, it’s critical that our leaders stand up for the startups and entrepreneurs who drive our nation’s economy and create life-changing breakthroughs,” said David Kappos, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2009 to 2013. “By passing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, Congress can reinvigorate the U.S. patent system and reaffirm America’s commitment to protecting its innovators.”

    “AUTM thanks Senator Coons and the other co-sponsors for introducing this legislation. Strengthening the ability of patent holders to protect their patents via injunction is crucial to incentivizing innovation. We look forward to working with the committee on this important legislation,” said Steve Susalka, CEO of AUTM. 

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act restores meaning to the promised exclusive rights to one’s invention. Without fully enforceable exclusive rights, the inventor’s end of the ‘patent bargain’ is broken. Since 2006, the Supreme Court’s eBay v. MercExchange ruling has made permanent injunction extremely difficult to obtain in patent infringement cases. Courts have thereby turned the right to exclude into a compulsory licensing clause. This is unjust. The RESTORE Patent Rights Act ends the judicially created categorical rule of routinely denying injunctions. It restores the historical remedy of injunctive relief in patent cases, as it is with other forms of property, including other intellectual property,” said James Edwards, Executive Director, Conservatives for Property Rights. 

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is, perhaps, the most impactful thing that can be done to empower American inventors, entrepreneurs and disruptive startups. The ability to pursue injunctive relief when a competitor infringes on a patented invention was the standard in the United States for over 200 years. The Supreme Court moved the goalposts in 2006 and set up a convoluted test that makes it nearly impossible for a growth tech startup to stop the predatory infringement of their intellectual property by larger competitors. This practice has been perfected by Big Tech companies that now routinely ingest the innovations of disruptive competitors knowing that they cannot be stopped. Patent law and legislation is often complicated. The RESTORE Act is not. It is a clear and unambiguous bill that simply restores balance between large corporations that ingest others’ IP and the startups and entrepreneurs that invent it,” said Chris Israel, Executive Director of The Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs (USIJ).

    “A functioning IP system must be fair, and as importantly, be perceived to be fair. Nondiscriminatory access to the legal system for enforcing and defending IP property rights is essential for securing the property rights necessary for investment. When innovators are unable to secure the property right embodied in a patent, investment is deterred and commercial activity, innovation and job creation impeded,” said Timothy Lee, IEEE-USA president.

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is a crucial step in safeguarding America’s small businesses, startups, and entrepreneurs from predatory patent infringement. By providing a clear path for justice and injunctive relief, this bill empowers innovators and fosters a more equitable patent system that benefits American inventors and consumers,” said Kristen Osenga, the chief policy counselor at the Inventors Defense Alliance.

    “There unfortunately continues to be ongoing efforts across the world to steal American innovations and intellectual property, and it is critical that Congress establishes new protections so that the United States can remain the global leader in medical technology innovation,” said Mark Leahy, President and CEO, Medical Device Manufacturers Association. “The ‘RESTORE Patent Rights Act’ would help restore a level playing field if enacted, and would codify the presumption that a permanent injunction will be granted after infringement is proven.  MDMA applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for their leadership in helping America’s innovators protect their intellectual property, and we will continue to work closely with them so the medical technology ecosystem can deliver the cures, therapies and diagnostics that patients and providers need.”

    The text of the bill is available here.

    A one-pager is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Compass Point and Sea Court Management Announce Strategic Partnership

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    WASHINGTON, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Compass Point Research & Trading, LLC (“Compass Point”), a leading middle market investment bank, is pleased to announce its partnership with Sea Court Management (“Sea Court”), an alternative investment management firm. Founded by industry veterans James DeNaut, Steven Quamme, and Patrick English, Sea Court shares Compass Point’s deep sector expertise and strategic focus, enabling both firms to leverage their collective knowledge and relationships to deliver capital raising and tailored advisory solutions to its clients.

    Sea Court recently closed the Sea Court Opportunity Fund I (the “Fund”), with $50 million in committed capital. The Fund is designed to support a curated group of early-and mid-stage investments, and will leverage Compass Point’s investment banking, capital markets, and research capabilities.

    Burke Hayes, Chief Executive Officer, and Head of Investment Banking for Compass Point said, “We are excited to partner with the Sea Court team, as we see this as a unique opportunity to support innovative growth companies and their investors in the early-and-mid-stages of their lifecycle. Sea Court’s expertise identifying and investing in differentiated companies makes them an ideal partner for us”.

    Jim DeNaut, Chief Executive Officer of Sea Court said “We are thrilled about our partnership with Compass Point which will enhance our ability to provide trusted advice and full cycle capital to a broader set of platform companies and sectors. Compass Point shares our focus of bringing high quality innovative and disruptive solutions companies to an expanded group of investors”.

    Over the course of his career, Jim DeNaut has advised numerous M&A, capital markets, and asset management clients. Additionally, he has more than fifteen years of experience advising and allocating capital for a variety of institutions, family offices and endowments. Prior to forming Sea Court, from 2010 to 2022, Jim served as President and Chief Executive Officer, Senior Managing Director and Head of International Investment Banking at Nomura Securities International, Inc. He also served on the Board of Directors of Nomura Holdings America, Inc. Prior to Nomura, Jim served as Senior Managing Director, Head of Global Banking Americas, and Head of Corporate and Investment Banking, Americas (2000 to 2010) at Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Prior to Deutsche Bank, Jim was a Managing Director in the Investment Banking Division at Morgan Stanley, Inc.

    Steven Quamme serves as Managing Partner of Sea Court. Prior to forming Sea Court, Steve was co-founder and President of Cartica Management, LLC, a $3 billion SEC-registered investment advisor focused exclusively on the emerging markets. Cartica’s institutional investor base included many of the world’s largest pension plans, university endowments, family offices and sovereign wealth funds. Prior to forming Cartica, Steve was the Chief Operating Officer of Breeden Partners, a $2 billion U.S. activist fund. Formerly, Steve was the founder and co-CEO of Milestone Merchant Partners (subsequently acquired by Houlihan Lokey), a full-service merchant bank that provided investment banking services and managed a series of private equity funds focused on the US and India.

    Patrick English serves as Managing Partner of Sea Court. Patrick has 25 years of experience in a broad range of professional capacities in the private equity, venture capital, real estate, hedge fund, and institutional securities industries. Prior to Sea Court, Patrick served as Partner and Chief Operating Officer at Three Mountain Capital, a discretionary global macro hedge fund that he co-founded. 

    About Compass Point

    Compass Point Research & Trading LLC is a leading full-service middle market investment bank. Our broad range of capabilities include public and private capital raising, corporate advisory services, fundamental research, Washington policy analysis and execution services. We provide innovative solutions for entrepreneurial businesses and their investors.

    Headquartered in Washington, D.C., with offices in Charleston, SC, New York, NY, and Orange County, CA, Compass Point is a member of FINRA and SIPC. For further information about Compass Point, please visit our website at www.compasspointllc.com.

    About Sea Court Management
    Sea Court Management is an alternative investment management firm that invests in early-and-mid-stage growth companies. Sea Court focuses on identifying and investing in companies with innovative technologies and businesses. Recent investments include companies in healthcare, life sciences, digital asset and technology sectors. www.seacourtcapital.com

    Media Contact:
    Christopher Nealon
    202.540.7315
    cnealon@compasspointllc.com

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: NVIDIA Announces Financial Results for Fourth Quarter and Fiscal 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    • Record quarterly revenue of $39.3 billion, up 12% from Q3 and up 78% from a year ago
    • Record quarterly Data Center revenue of $35.6 billion, up 16% from Q3 and up 93% from a year ago
    • Record full-year revenue of $130.5 billion, up 114%

    SANTA CLARA, Calif., Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA) today reported revenue for the fourth quarter ended January 26, 2025, of $39.3 billion, up 12% from the previous quarter and up 78% from a year ago.

    For the quarter, GAAP earnings per diluted share was $0.89, up 14% from the previous quarter and up 82% from a year ago. Non-GAAP earnings per diluted share was $0.89, up 10% from the previous quarter and up 71% from a year ago.

    For fiscal 2025, revenue was $130.5 billion, up 114% from a year ago. GAAP earnings per diluted share was $2.94, up 147% from a year ago. Non-GAAP earnings per diluted share was $2.99, up 130% from a year ago.

    “Demand for Blackwell is amazing as reasoning AI adds another scaling law — increasing compute for training makes models smarter and increasing compute for long thinking makes the answer smarter,” said Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of NVIDIA.

    “We’ve successfully ramped up the massive-scale production of Blackwell AI supercomputers, achieving billions of dollars in sales in its first quarter. AI is advancing at light speed as agentic AI and physical AI set the stage for the next wave of AI to revolutionize the largest industries.”

    NVIDIA will pay its next quarterly cash dividend of $0.01 per share on April 2, 2025, to all shareholders of record on March 12, 2025.

    Q4 Fiscal 2025 Summary

    GAAP
    ($ in millions, except earnings
    per share)
    Q4 FY25 Q3 FY25 Q4 FY24 Q/Q Y/Y
    Revenue $39,331 $35,082 $22,103 Up 12% Up 78%
    Gross margin 73.0% 74.6% 76.0% Down 1.6 pts Down 3.0 pts
    Operating expenses $4,689 $4,287 $3,176 Up 9% Up 48%
    Operating income $24,034 $21,869 $13,615 Up 10% Up 77%
    Net income $22,091 $19,309 $12,285 Up 14% Up 80%
    Diluted earnings per share* $0.89 $0.78 $0.49 Up 14% Up 82%
    Non-GAAP
    ($ in millions, except earnings
    per share)
    Q4 FY25 Q3 FY25 Q4 FY24 Q/Q Y/Y
    Revenue $39,331 $35,082 $22,103 Up 12% Up 78%
    Gross margin 73.5% 75.0% 76.7% Down 1.5 pts Down 3.2 pts
    Operating expenses $3,378 $3,046 $2,210 Up 11% Up 53%
    Operating income $25,516 $23,276 $14,749 Up 10% Up 73%
    Net income $22,066 $20,010 $12,839 Up 10% Up 72%
    Diluted earnings per share* $0.89 $0.81 $0.52 Up 10% Up 71%


    Fiscal 2025 Summary

    GAAP
    ($ in millions, except earnings
    per share)
    FY25 FY24 Y/Y
    Revenue $130,497 $60,922 Up 114%
    Gross margin 75.0% 72.7% Up 2.3 pts
    Operating expenses $16,405 $11,329 Up 45%
    Operating income $81,453 $32,972 Up 147%
    Net income $72,880 $29,760 Up 145%
    Diluted earnings per share* $2.94 $1.19 Up 147%
    Non-GAAP
    ($ in millions, except earnings
    per share)
    FY25 FY24 Y/Y
    Revenue $130,497 $60,922 Up 114%
    Gross margin 75.5% 73.8% Up 1.7 pts
    Operating expenses $11,716 $7,825 Up 50%
    Operating income $86,789 $37,134 Up 134%
    Net income $74,265 $32,312 Up 130%
    Diluted earnings per share* $2.99 $1.30 Up 130%

    *All per share amounts presented herein have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the ten-for-one stock split, which was effective June 7, 2024.

    Outlook
    NVIDIA’s outlook for the first quarter of fiscal 2026 is as follows:

    • Revenue is expected to be $43.0 billion, plus or minus 2%.
    • GAAP and non-GAAP gross margins are expected to be 70.6% and 71.0%, respectively, plus or minus 50 basis points.
    • GAAP and non-GAAP operating expenses are expected to be approximately $5.2 billion and $3.6 billion, respectively.
    • GAAP and non-GAAP other income and expense are expected to be an income of approximately $400 million, excluding gains and losses from non-marketable and publicly-held equity securities.
    • GAAP and non-GAAP tax rates are expected to be 17.0%, plus or minus 1%, excluding any discrete items.

    Highlights

    NVIDIA achieved progress since its previous earnings announcement in these areas: 

    Data Center

    • Fourth-quarter revenue was a record $35.6 billion, up 16% from the previous quarter and up 93% from a year ago. Full-year revenue rose 142% to a record $115.2 billion.
    • Announced that NVIDIA will serve as a key technology partner for the $500 billion Stargate Project.
    • Revealed that cloud service providers AWS, CoreWeave, Google Cloud Platform (GCP), Microsoft Azure and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) are bringing NVIDIA® GB200 systems to cloud regions around the world to meet surging customer demand for AI.
    • Partnered with AWS to make the NVIDIA DGX™ Cloud AI computing platform and NVIDIA NIM™ microservices available through AWS Marketplace.
    • Revealed that Cisco will integrate NVIDIA Spectrum-X™ into its networking portfolio to help enterprises build AI infrastructure.
    • Revealed that more than 75% of the systems on the TOP500 list of the world’s most powerful supercomputers are powered by NVIDIA technologies.
    • Announced a collaboration with Verizon to integrate NVIDIA AI Enterprise, NIM and accelerated computing with Verizon’s private 5G network to power a range of edge enterprise AI applications and services.
    • Unveiled partnerships with industry leaders including IQVIA, Illumina, Mayo Clinic and Arc Institute to advance genomics, drug discovery and healthcare.
    • Launched NVIDIA AI Blueprints and Llama Nemotron model families for building AI agents and released NVIDIA NIM microservices to safeguard applications for agentic AI.
    • Announced the opening of NVIDIA’s first R&D center in Vietnam.
    • Revealed that Siemens Healthineers has adopted MONAI Deploy for medical imaging AI.

    Gaming and AI PC

    • Fourth-quarter Gaming revenue was $2.5 billion, down 22% from the previous quarter and down 11% from a year ago. Full-year revenue rose 9% to $11.4 billion.
    • Announced new GeForce RTX™ 50 Series graphics cards and laptops powered by the NVIDIA Blackwell architecture, delivering breakthroughs in AI-driven rendering to gamers, creators and developers.
    • Launched GeForce RTX 5090 and 5080 graphics cards, delivering up to a 2x performance improvement over the prior generation.
    • Introduced NVIDIA DLSS 4 with Multi Frame Generation and image quality enhancements, with 75 games and apps supporting it at launch, and unveiled NVIDIA Reflex 2 technology, which can reduce PC latency by up to 75%.
    • Unveiled NVIDIA NIM microservices, AI Blueprints and the Llama Nemotron family of open models for RTX AI PCs to help developers and enthusiasts build AI agents and creative workflows.

    Professional Visualization

    • Fourth-quarter revenue was $511 million, up 5% from the previous quarter and up 10% from a year ago. Full-year revenue rose 21% to $1.9 billion.
    • Unveiled NVIDIA Project DIGITS, a personal AI supercomputer that provides AI researchers, data scientists and students worldwide with access to the power of the NVIDIA Grace™ Blackwell platform.
    • Announced generative AI models and blueprints that expand NVIDIA Omniverse™ integration further into physical AI applications, including robotics, autonomous vehicles and vision AI.
    • Introduced NVIDIA Media2, an AI-powered initiative transforming content creation, streaming and live media experiences, built on NIM and AI Blueprints.

    Automotive and Robotics

    • Fourth-quarter Automotive revenue was $570 million, up 27% from the previous quarter and up 103% from a year ago. Full-year revenue rose 55% to $1.7 billion.
    • Announced that Toyota, the world’s largest automaker, will build its next-generation vehicles on NVIDIA DRIVE AGX Orin™ running the safety-certified NVIDIA DriveOS operating system.  
    • Partnered with Hyundai Motor Group to create safer, smarter vehicles, supercharge manufacturing and deploy cutting-edge robotics with NVIDIA AI and NVIDIA Omniverse.
    • Announced that the NVIDIA DriveOS safe autonomous driving operating system received ASIL-D functional safety certification and launched the NVIDIA DRIVE™ AI Systems Inspection Lab.
    • Launched NVIDIA Cosmos™, a platform comprising state-of-the-art generative world foundation models, to accelerate physical AI development, with adoption by leading robotics and automotive companies 1X, Agile Robots, Waabi, Uber and others.
    • Unveiled the NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano™ Super, which delivers up to a 1.7x gain in generative AI performance.

    CFO Commentary
    Commentary on the quarter by Colette Kress, NVIDIA’s executive vice president and chief financial officer, is available at https://investor.nvidia.com.

    Conference Call and Webcast Information
    NVIDIA will conduct a conference call with analysts and investors to discuss its fourth quarter and fiscal 2025 financial results and current financial prospects today at 2 p.m. Pacific time (5 p.m. Eastern time). A live webcast (listen-only mode) of the conference call will be accessible at NVIDIA’s investor relations website, https://investor.nvidia.com. The webcast will be recorded and available for replay until NVIDIA’s conference call to discuss its financial results for its first quarter of fiscal 2026.

    Non-GAAP Measures
    To supplement NVIDIA’s condensed consolidated financial statements presented in accordance with GAAP, the company uses non-GAAP measures of certain components of financial performance. These non-GAAP measures include non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating expenses, non-GAAP operating income, non-GAAP other income (expense), net, non-GAAP net income, non-GAAP net income, or earnings, per diluted share, and free cash flow. For NVIDIA’s investors to be better able to compare its current results with those of previous periods, the company has shown a reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures. These reconciliations adjust the related GAAP financial measures to exclude stock-based compensation expense, acquisition-related and other costs, other, gains from non-marketable and publicly-held equity securities, net, interest expense related to amortization of debt discount, and the associated tax impact of these items where applicable. Free cash flow is calculated as GAAP net cash provided by operating activities less both purchases related to property and equipment and intangible assets and principal payments on property and equipment and intangible assets. NVIDIA believes the presentation of its non-GAAP financial measures enhances the user’s overall understanding of the company’s historical financial performance. The presentation of the company’s non-GAAP financial measures is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the company’s financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP, and the company’s non-GAAP measures may be different from non-GAAP measures used by other companies.

     NVIDIA CORPORATION 
      CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME 
     (In millions, except per share data) 
     (Unaudited) 
                       
          Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
          January 26,   January 28,   January 26,   January 28,
            2025       2024       2025       2024  
                       
    Revenue $ 39,331     $ 22,103     $ 130,497     $ 60,922  
    Cost of revenue    10,608       5,312       32,639       16,621  
    Gross profit   28,723       16,791       97,858       44,301  
                       
    Operating expenses              
      Research and development     3,714       2,465       12,914       8,675  
      Sales, general and administrative   975       711       3,491       2,654  
        Total operating expenses   4,689       3,176       16,405       11,329  
                       
    Operating income   24,034       13,615       81,453       32,972  
      Interest income   511       294       1,786       866  
      Interest expense   (61 )     (63 )     (247 )     (257 )
      Other, net   733       260       1,034       237  
        Other income (expense), net   1,183       491       2,573       846  
                       
    Income before income tax   25,217       14,106       84,026       33,818  
    Income tax expense   3,126       1,821       11,146       4,058  
    Net income $ 22,091     $ 12,285     $ 72,880     $ 29,760  
                       
    Net income per share:              
      Basic $ 0.90     $ 0.51     $ 2.97     $ 1.21  
      Diluted $ 0.89     $ 0.49     $ 2.94     $ 1.19  
                       
    Weighted average shares used in per share computation:              
      Basic   24,489       24,660       24,555       24,690  
      Diluted   24,706       24,900       24,804       24,940  
    NVIDIA CORPORATION
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (In millions)
    (Unaudited)
                 
            January 26,   January 28,
            2025   2024
    ASSETS        
                 
    Current assets:        
      Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities   $ 43,210   $ 25,984
      Accounts receivable, net     23,065     9,999
      Inventories     10,080     5,282
      Prepaid expenses and other current assets     3,771     3,080
        Total current assets     80,126     44,345
                 
    Property and equipment, net     6,283     3,914
    Operating lease assets     1,793     1,346
    Goodwill     5,188     4,430
    Intangible assets, net     807     1,112
    Deferred income tax assets     10,979     6,081
    Other assets      6,425     4,500
        Total assets   $ 111,601   $ 65,728
                 
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
                 
    Current liabilities:        
      Accounts payable   $ 6,310   $ 2,699
      Accrued and other current liabilities     11,737     6,682
      Short-term debt     –     1,250
        Total current liabilities     18,047     10,631
                 
    Long-term debt     8,463     8,459
    Long-term operating lease liabilities     1,519     1,119
    Other long-term liabilities     4,245     2,541
        Total liabilities     32,274     22,750
                 
    Shareholders’ equity     79,327     42,978
        Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 111,601   $ 65,728
     NVIDIA CORPORATION 
     CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS 
     (In millions) 
     (Unaudited) 
                     
          Three Months Ended     Twelve Months Ended 
         January 26,   January 28,   January 26,   January 28,
           2025       2024       2025       2024  
                      
    Cash flows from operating activities:              
    Net income $ 22,091     $ 12,285     $ 72,880     $ 29,760  
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash              
    provided by operating activities:              
      Stock-based compensation expense   1,321       993       4,737       3,549  
      Depreciation and amortization   543       387       1,864       1,508  
      Deferred income taxes   (598 )     (78 )     (4,477 )     (2,489 )
      Gains on non-marketable equity securities and publicly-held equity securities, net   (727 )     (260 )     (1,030 )     (238 )
      Other   (138 )     (109 )     (502 )     (278 )
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions:              
      Accounts receivable   (5,370 )     (1,690 )     (13,063 )     (6,172 )
      Inventories   (2,424 )     (503 )     (4,781 )     (98 )
      Prepaid expenses and other assets   331       (1,184 )     (395 )     (1,522 )
      Accounts payable   867       281       3,357       1,531  
      Accrued and other current liabilities   360       1,072       4,278       2,025  
      Other long-term liabilities   372       305       1,221       514  
    Net cash provided by operating activities   16,628       11,499       64,089       28,090  
                      
    Cash flows from investing activities:              
      Proceeds from maturities of marketable securities   1,710       1,731       11,195       9,732  
      Proceeds from sales of marketable securities   177       50       495       50  
      Proceeds from sales of non-marketable equity securities   –       –       171       1  
      Purchases of marketable securities   (7,010 )     (7,524 )     (26,575 )     (18,211 )
      Purchase related to property and equipment and intangible assets   (1,077 )     (253 )     (3,236 )     (1,069 )
      Purchases of non-marketable equity securities   (478 )     (113 )     (1,486 )     (862 )
      Acquisitions, net of cash acquired   (542 )     –       (1,007 )     (83 )
      Other   22       –       22       (124 )
    Net cash used in investing activities   (7,198 )     (6,109 )     (20,421 )     (10,566 )
                      
    Cash flows from financing activities:              
      Proceeds related to employee stock plans   –       –       490       403  
      Payments related to repurchases of common stock   (7,810 )     (2,660 )     (33,706 )     (9,533 )
      Payments related to tax on restricted stock units   (1,861 )     (841 )     (6,930 )     (2,783 )
      Repayment of debt   –       –       (1,250 )     (1,250 )
      Dividends paid   (245 )     (99 )     (834 )     (395 )
      Principal payments on property and equipment and intangible assets   (32 )     (29 )     (129 )     (74 )
      Other   –       –       –       (1 )
    Net cash used in financing activities   (9,948 )     (3,629 )     (42,359 )     (13,633 )
                      
    Change in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash   (518 )     1,761       1,309       3,891  
    Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash at beginning of period   9,107       5,519       7,280       3,389  
    Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash at end of period $ 8,589     $ 7,280     $ 8,589     $ 7,280  
                      
    Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:              
    Cash paid for income taxes, net $ 4,129     $ 1,874     $ 15,118     $ 6,549  
    Cash paid for interest $ 22     $ 26     $ 246     $ 252  
       NVIDIA CORPORATION 
       RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES 
       (In millions, except per share data) 
       (Unaudited) 
                         
             Three Months Ended      Twelve Months Ended 
            January 26,   October 27,   January 28,   January 26,   January 28,
              2025       2024       2024       2025       2024  
                             
      GAAP cost of revenue $ 10,608     $ 8,926     $ 5,312     $ 32,639     $ 16,621  
      GAAP gross profit $ 28,723     $ 26,156     $ 16,791     $ 97,858     $ 44,301  
        GAAP gross margin   73.0 %     74.6 %     76.0 %     75.0 %     72.7 %
        Acquisition-related and other costs (A)   118       116       119       472       477  
        Stock-based compensation expense (B)   53       50       45       178       141  
        Other (C)     –       –       4       (3 )     40  
      Non-GAAP cost of revenue $ 10,437     $ 8,759     $ 5,144     $ 31,992     $ 15,963  
      Non-GAAP gross profit $ 28,894     $ 26,322     $ 16,959     $ 98,505     $ 44,959  
        Non-GAAP gross margin   73.5 %     75.0 %     76.7 %     75.5 %     73.8 %
                             
      GAAP operating expenses $ 4,689     $ 4,287     $ 3,176     $ 16,405     $ 11,329  
        Stock-based compensation expense (B)     (1,268 )     (1,202 )     (948 )     (4,559 )     (3,408 )
        Acquisition-related and other costs (A)   (43 )     (39 )     (18 )     (130 )     (106 )
        Other (C)     –       –       –       –       10  
      Non-GAAP operating expenses $ 3,378     $ 3,046     $ 2,210     $ 11,716     $ 7,825  
                             
      GAAP operating income $ 24,034     $ 21,869     $ 13,615     $ 81,453     $ 32,972  
        Total impact of non-GAAP adjustments to operating income   1,482       1,407       1,134       5,336       4,162  
      Non-GAAP operating income $ 25,516     $ 23,276     $ 14,749     $ 86,789     $ 37,134  
                             
      GAAP other income (expense), net $ 1,183     $ 447     $ 491     $ 2,573     $ 846  
        Gains from non-marketable equity securities and publicly-held equity securities, net   (727 )     (37 )     (260 )     (1,030 )     (238 )
        Interest expense related to amortization of debt discount   1       1       1       4       4  
      Non-GAAP other income (expense), net $ 457     $ 411     $ 232     $ 1,547     $ 612  
                             
      GAAP net income $ 22,091     $ 19,309     $ 12,285     $ 72,880     $ 29,760  
        Total pre-tax impact of non-GAAP adjustments   756       1,371       875       4,310       3,928  
        Income tax impact of non-GAAP adjustments (D)   (781 )     (670 )     (321 )     (2,925 )     (1,376 )
      Non-GAAP net income  $ 22,066     $ 20,010     $ 12,839     $ 74,265     $ 32,312  
                             
      Diluted net income per share (E)                  
        GAAP   $ 0.89     $ 0.78     $ 0.49     $ 2.94     $ 1.19  
        Non-GAAP    $ 0.89     $ 0.81     $ 0.52     $ 2.99     $ 1.30  
                             
      Weighted average shares used in diluted net income per share computation (E)   24,706       24,774       24,900       24,804       24,936  
                             
      GAAP net cash provided by operating activities $ 16,628     $ 17,629     $ 11,499     $ 64,089     $ 28,090  
        Purchases related to property and equipment and intangible assets   (1,077 )     (813 )     (253 )     (3,236 )     (1,069 )
        Principal payments on property and equipment and intangible assets   (32 )     (29 )     (29 )     (129 )     (74 )
      Free cash flow   $ 15,519     $ 16,787     $ 11,217     $ 60,724     $ 26,947  
                             
       
                             
      (A) Acquisition-related and other costs are comprised of amortization of intangible assets, transaction costs, and certain compensation charges and are included in the following line items:
            Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
            January 26,   October 27,   January 28,   January 26,   January 28,
              2025       2024       2024       2025       2024  
        Cost of revenue   $ 118     $ 116     $ 119     $ 472     $ 477  
        Research and development   $ 27     $ 23     $ 12     $ 79     $ 49  
        Sales, general and administrative   $ 16     $ 16     $ 6     $ 51     $ 57  
                             
      (B) Stock-based compensation consists of the following:      
            Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
            January 26,   October 27,   January 28,   January 26,   January 28,
              2025       2024       2024       2025       2024  
        Cost of revenue   $ 53     $ 50     $ 45     $ 178     $ 141  
        Research and development   $ 955     $ 910     $ 706     $ 3,423     $ 2,532  
        Sales, general and administrative   $ 313     $ 292     $ 242     $ 1,136     $ 876  
                             
      (C) Other consists of IP-related costs and assets held for sale related adjustments
     
      (D) Income tax impact of non-GAAP adjustments, including the recognition of excess tax benefits or deficiencies related to stock-based compensation under GAAP accounting standard (ASU 2016-09).
                             
      (E) Reflects a ten-for-one stock split on June 7, 2024
     NVIDIA CORPORATION 
     RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP OUTLOOK 
         
         Q1 FY2026 Outlook 
        ($ in millions)
         
    GAAP gross margin   70.6 %
      Impact of stock-based compensation expense, acquisition-related costs, and other costs   0.4 %
    Non-GAAP gross margin   71.0 %
         
    GAAP operating expenses $ 5,150  
      Stock-based compensation expense, acquisition-related costs, and other costs   (1,550 )
    Non-GAAP operating expenses $ 3,600  
           

    About NVIDIA
    NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA) is the world leader in accelerated computing.

    Certain statements in this press release including, but not limited to, statements as to: AI advancing at light speed as agentic AI and physical AI set the stage for the next wave of AI to revolutionize the largest industries; expectations with respect to growth, performance and benefits of NVIDIA’s products, services and technologies, including Blackwell, and related trends and drivers; expectations with respect to supply and demand for NVIDIA’s products, services and technologies, including Blackwell, and related matters including inventory, production and distribution; expectations with respect to NVIDIA’s third party arrangements, including with its collaborators and partners; expectations with respect to technology developments and related trends and drivers; future NVIDIA cash dividends or other returns to stockholders; NVIDIA’s financial and business outlook for the first quarter of fiscal 2026 and beyond; projected market growth and trends; expectations with respect to AI and related industries; and other statements that are not historical facts are risks and uncertainties that could cause results to be materially different than expectations. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include: global economic and political conditions; NVIDIA’s reliance on third parties to manufacture, assemble, package and test NVIDIA’s products; the impact of technological development and competition; development of new products and technologies or enhancements to NVIDIA’s existing product and technologies; market acceptance of NVIDIA’s products or NVIDIA’s partners’ products; design, manufacturing or software defects; changes in consumer preferences or demands; changes in industry standards and interfaces; unexpected loss of performance of NVIDIA’s products or technologies when integrated into systems; and changes in applicable laws and regulations, as well as other factors detailed from time to time in the most recent reports NVIDIA files with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, including, but not limited to, its annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Copies of reports filed with the SEC are posted on the company’s website and are available from NVIDIA without charge. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and speak only as of the date hereof, and, except as required by law, NVIDIA disclaims any obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances.

    © 2025 NVIDIA Corporation. All rights reserved. NVIDIA, the NVIDIA logo, GeForce RTX, NVIDIA Cosmos, NVIDIA Spectrum-X, NVIDIA DGX, NVIDIA DRIVE, NVIDIA DRIVE AGX Orin, NVIDIA Grace, NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano, NVIDIA NIM and NVIDIA Omniverse are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of NVIDIA Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. Other company and product names may be trademarks of the respective companies with which they are associated. Features, pricing, availability and specifications are subject to change without notice.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/aabe86db-ce89-4434-b83c-495082979801

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: NTA and Enlight Sign a $22m Power Purchase Agreement

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NTA, a government-owned company building the light rail and metro in the Tel Aviv metropolitan region, will operate the mass transit network using clean energy supplied by Enlight

    The agreement significantly reduces NTA’s electricity costs

    TEL AVIV, Israel, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Enlight Renewable Energy (“Enlight”, “the Company”, NASDAQ: ENLT, TASE: ENLT.TA), a leading renewable energy platform, announced today that NTA Metropolitan Mass Transit System Ltd. (“NTA”) has signed a 5-year PPA with an aggregate value of $22m, and also includes an option to significantly increase purchase volumes through the life of the contract.

    The agreement was signed within the framework of Israel’s deregulated electricity market, which allows independent power producers to enter into direct sales agreements with consumers. The agreement follows others reached by Enlight in recent months, with NTA joining Big Shopping Centers, SodaStream, Applied Materials, Amdocs, and other noteworthy companies in purchasing green electricity from Enlight. Serving as examples of environmental responsibility, these firms’ decision to switch to clean energy consumption will positively impact Israel’s economy. In January 2025, the Weizmann Institute of Science, based in Rehovot, signed an agreement with Enlight to supply all of the Institute’s electricity needs for the next 12 years.

    The agreement with Enlight will help NTA, which is building the light rail and metro networks in the Tel Aviv metropolitan region, to reduce its electricity costs significantly. It will also reduce annual carbon emissions equivalent to the planting of approximately 380,000 new trees per year or removing about 9,000 private fuel-powered vehicles from the road annually.

    Itamar Ben Meir, CEO of NTA, commented, “We welcome this important agreement with Enlight. The mass transit system being built by NTA is good news for the congested Tel Aviv region, and is similar to advanced countries around the world in its use of renewable energy. Green power dramatically cuts air pollution as well as representing a significant cost savings. Each light rail train removes more than 100 private cars from the road, reducing traffic congestion and wasted time, while increasing comfort and safety.”

    Gilad Peled, CEO of Enlight MENA, commented, “Enlight congratulates NTA on its transition to clean and environmentally friendly energy. The deal with Enlight will allow NTA to save millions of Shekels of public funds on its electricity bill, while simultaneously serving as an environmental leader. The agreement drives Enlight MENA’s growth further after doubling our revenues in Israel last year to over $150m. This agreement further reinforces the fact that today, clean energy is also the cheapest form of energy. Moreover, clean energy’s rising share of the deregulated power market leads to greater competition and lower electricity prices for all Israeli consumers.”

    About NTA

    NTA is a government-owned company building metropolitan Tel Aviv’s mass transit network as part of the largest infrastructure project ever initiated in Israel. The network comprises three light rail lines, including the Red Line, which already transports millions of passengers every month, and the Green and Purple Lines, which are expected to begin commercial operation in the coming years. The light rail network will be joined by three metro lines that will connect into the Tel Aviv region from Rehovot in the south and Kfar Saba in the north. With an annual expected ridership of 850 million passengers and 2 million trips per day, the project’s total cost is estimated at approximately ILS 200bn.

    About Enlight Renewable Energy

    Founded in 2008, Enlight develops, finances, constructs, owns, and operates utility-scale renewable energy projects. Enlight operates across the three largest renewable segments today: solar, wind and energy storage. A global platform, Enlight operates in the United States, Israel and 10 European countries. Enlight has been traded on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange since 2010 (TASE: ENLT) and completed its U.S. IPO (Nasdaq: ENLT) in 2023. Learn more at www.enlightenergy.co.il.

    Contacts:

    Yonah Weisz
    Director IR
    investors@enlightenergy.co.il

    Erica Mannion or Mike Funari
    Sapphire Investor Relations, LLC
    +1 617 542 6180
    investors@enlightenergy.co.il

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements as contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements contained in this press release other than statements of historical fact, including, without limitation, statements regarding the Company’s expectations relating to the Project, the PPA and the related interconnection agreement and lease option, and the completion timeline for the Project, are forward-looking statements. The words “may,” “might,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “target,” “seek,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue,” “contemplate,” “possible,” “forecasts,” “aims” or the negative of these terms and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, though not all forward-looking statements use these words or expressions. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, the following: our ability to site suitable land for, and otherwise source, renewable energy projects and to successfully develop and convert them into Operational Projects; availability of, and access to, interconnection facilities and transmission systems; our ability to obtain and maintain governmental and other regulatory approvals and permits, including environmental approvals and permits; construction delays, operational delays and supply chain disruptions leading to increased cost of materials required for the construction of our projects, as well as cost overruns and delays related to disputes with contractors; our suppliers’ ability and willingness to perform both existing and future obligations; competition from traditional and renewable energy companies in developing renewable energy projects; potential slowed demand for renewable energy projects and our ability to enter into new offtake contracts on acceptable terms and prices as current offtake contracts expire; offtakers’ ability to terminate contracts or seek other remedies resulting from failure of our projects to meet development, operational or performance benchmarks; various technical and operational challenges leading to unplanned outages, reduced output, interconnection or termination issues; the dependence of our production and revenue on suitable meteorological and environmental conditions, and our ability to accurately predict such conditions; our ability to enforce warranties provided by our counterparties in the event that our projects do not perform as expected; government curtailment, energy price caps and other government actions that restrict or reduce the profitability of renewable energy production; electricity price volatility, unusual weather conditions (including the effects of climate change, could adversely affect wind and solar conditions), catastrophic weather-related or other damage to facilities, unscheduled generation outages, maintenance or repairs, unanticipated changes to availability due to higher demand, shortages, transportation problems or other developments, environmental incidents, or electric transmission system constraints and the possibility that we may not have adequate insurance to cover losses as a result of such hazards; our dependence on certain operational projects for a substantial portion of our cash flows; our ability to continue to grow our portfolio of projects through successful acquisitions; changes and advances in technology that impair or eliminate the competitive advantage of our projects or upsets the expectations underlying investments in our technologies; our ability to effectively anticipate and manage cost inflation, interest rate risk, currency exchange fluctuations and other macroeconomic conditions that impact our business; our ability to retain and attract key personnel; our ability to manage legal and regulatory compliance and litigation risk across our global corporate structure; our ability to protect our business from, and manage the impact of, cyber-attacks, disruptions and security incidents, as well as acts of terrorism or war; the potential impact of the current conflicts in Israel on our operations and financial condition and Company actions designed to mitigate such impact; changes to existing renewable energy industry policies and regulations that present technical, regulatory and economic barriers to renewable energy projects; the reduction, elimination or expiration of government incentives for, or regulations mandating the use of, renewable energy; our ability to effectively manage our supply chain and comply with applicable regulations with respect to international trade relations, tariffs, sanctions, export controls and anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws; our ability to effectively comply with Environmental Health and Safety and other laws and regulations and receive and maintain all necessary licenses, permits and authorizations; our performance of various obligations under the terms of our indebtedness (and the indebtedness of our subsidiaries that we guarantee) and our ability to continue to secure project financing on attractive terms for our projects; limitations on our management rights and operational flexibility due to our use of tax equity arrangements; potential claims and disagreements with partners, investors and other counterparties that could reduce our right to cash flows generated by our projects; our ability to comply with tax laws of various jurisdictions in which we currently operate as well as the tax laws in jurisdictions in which we intend to operate in the future; the unknown effect of the dual listing of our ordinary shares on the price of our ordinary shares; various risks related to our incorporation and location in Israel; the costs and requirements of being a public company, including the diversion of management’s attention with respect to such requirements; certain provisions in our Articles of Association and certain applicable regulations that may delay or prevent a change of control; and other risk factors set forth in the section titled “Risk factors” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and our other documents filed with or furnished to the SEC.

    These statements reflect management’s current expectations regarding future events and speak only as of the date of this press release. You should not put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee that future results, levels of activity, performance and events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or will occur. Except as may be required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, after the date on which the statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Anti-DEI guidance from Trump Administration misinterprets the law and guts educators’ free speech rights

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul M. Collins Jr., Professor of Legal Studies and Political Science, UMass Amherst

    The Trump administration letter aims to stop teachers from discussing many topics with students. Hill Street Studios, DigitalVision/Getty Images

    The Trump administration’s attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion have continued in the form of a “Dear Colleague” letter from the Department of Education to educational institutions – from preschools through colleges and universities.

    This letter demands that schools abandon what the Trump administration refers to as “DEI programs” and threatens to withhold federal funding if schools don’t comply.

    According to President Donald Trump, these so-called DEI programs – found in the government, corporate and educational sectors and intended to reduce discrimination and promote the equitable treatment of people – are a form of antiwhite racism that hurt national unity and violate antidiscrimination laws.

    Although the letter does not have the force of law, it nonetheless signals how the Trump administration plans to aggressively take legal and financial action against educational institutions that refuse to comply, starting on Feb. 28.

    As a result, the Trump administration’s threat to remove federal funding, which both public and private educational institutions rely heavily on, is likely to coerce compliance, at least to some degree.

    As the letter explains, “The Department will vigorously enforce the law on equal terms as to all preschool, elementary, secondary, and postsecondary educational institutions, as well as state educational agencies, that receive financial assistance.”

    Thus, these directives have the potential to fundamentally change education in America.

    As professors of legal studies, we’ve taken a close look at the “Dear Colleague” letter. Here’s how the letter infringes on free speech, misunderstands the law and undermines education.

    Will professors still be able to teach about America’s history of racism?
    Jeff Gritchen/Digital First Media/Orange County Register via Getty Images

    Restricting free speech

    The First Amendment to the Constitution protects the right of the people to express viewpoints without fear of punishment by the government.

    The Trump administration’s attacks on DEI are part of a broader assault on freedom of speech in which Trump targets media, businesses and everyday Americans the president disagrees with.

    By directing schools, colleges and universities to stop DEI policies, the “Dear Colleague” letter clearly restricts free speech rights. That’s the case because creating and pursuing DEI policies is a type of freedom of expression. Banning DEI practices is a form of viewpoint discrimination, which is prohibited by Supreme Court precedent that covers the speech of educational institutions as well as their faculty and staff.

    For instance, the letter aims to prevent educational institutions from pursuing missions and policies that promote the concepts of DEI. Such missions are common in higher education and can be found in universities from the conservative Brigham Young University to the liberal University of Vermont.

    Frequently, these missions are pursued by requiring students to take courses that encourage them to learn about perspectives or cultures that are different from their own.

    While the letter is not clear about which courses it would consider a problem, targeting any topics serves to suppress the free speech rights and academic freedom of faculty, including their freedom to design and teach courses.

    This vagueness may be part of the threat. After all, if teachers aren’t sure what they might get punished for, they may be extra cautious and censor themselves.

    Misunderstanding the law

    Aside from being vague, the letter also seems to willfully misrepresent the 2022 Supreme Court decision ending race-based affirmative action in higher education, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College.

    In that case, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a narrow majority opinion declaring simply that university admissions policies could not aim to create incoming classes with particular racial balances.

    Roberts’ opinion was silent on any other type of educational policy. It also states explicitly that “nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,” so long as they are evaluated for admission as an individual.

    And yet, the “Dear Colleague” letter takes this decision and runs with it in multiple different directions. First, it falsely claims that the decision prohibits schools from eliminating standardized testing in their admissions process, something many schools have chosen to do in recent years.

    Second, the letter falsely states, in contradiction with the ruling’s own text, that the decision applies much more broadly than the context of admissions, to “hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.”

    Thus, according to the letter, any program that targeted a particular group for differential treatment based on their race would come under government scrutiny, including programs designed to assist students of color, to house students according to affinity groups, and to diversify university faculty.

    There is simply no reading of the Students for Fair Admissions decision that suggests such an encroachment on the inner workings of educational institutions. Roberts’ majority opinion says only that students should be evaluated as individuals when applying to colleges and universities.

    Effort to undermine education

    What history will the Trump administration letter stop from being taught?
    Tomasz Śmigla, iStock/Getty Images Plus

    In sum, the letter places educators, especially those of us who teach about American law and government, in an impossible position.

    It states that “educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism,’” suggesting that the U.S. does not have such a history.

    But, for example, in order to teach why affirmative action is now unconstitutional, we would have to explain the concept of strict scrutiny to our students. Strict scrutiny is when a court examines a law very carefully to make sure that it does not promote an unconstitutional racial or religious classification. It is a kind of review that is used routinely and appropriately by courts, and was used to strike down affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions.

    That level of judicial review exists because, in the words of Roberts in Students for Fair Admissions, “for almost a century after the Civil War, state-mandated segregation was in many parts of the Nation a regrettable norm. This Court played its own role in that ignoble history, allowing in Plessy v. Ferguson the separate but equal regime that would come to deface much of America.”

    In other words, the Supreme Court created strict scrutiny as a judicial antidote to the systemic racism that it had helped perpetuate.

    Even more basically, it is impossible to teach constitutional law without acknowledging the Three-Fifths Compromise or the Fugitive Slave Clause, both of which embedded the property rights of slaveowners into the founding documents of this country, denying enslaved people full citizenship and its rights.

    To not teach students about such topics is, we believe, to fail in our role as educators. To forbid teaching it is an attack on the core mission of educational institutions in a democracy. And even more, this letter aims to prevent teachers from critiquing what the letter itself says and from explaining its own context and history.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Anti-DEI guidance from Trump Administration misinterprets the law and guts educators’ free speech rights – https://theconversation.com/anti-dei-guidance-from-trump-administration-misinterprets-the-law-and-guts-educators-free-speech-rights-250574

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Trian Comments on Solventum’s Sale of its Purification & Filtration Business

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Trian Fund Management, L.P. (“Trian”), which beneficially owns ~5% of Solventum Corporation (NYSE: SOLV) (“Solventum” or the “Company”) and is the Company’s largest active shareholder, commented on Solventum’s recently announced sale of its Purification & Filtration business to Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc (NYSE: TMO) (“Thermo Fisher”). Trian issued the following statement:

    “Trian commends Solventum on the announced sale of its Purification & Filtration business and believes this is an important first step in the Company’s value creation journey. We believe that part of what attracted strategic interest at such a high valuation multiple was the division’s differentiated technology and material science – attributes inherited from 3M which are present at Solventum’s remaining businesses, and which we believe remain underappreciated by the market today.

    Notably, in conjunction with the acquisition, Thermo Fisher issued public comments which Trian believes confirm that there is a meaningful cost reduction opportunity at Solventum:

    “Excluding financing costs, the transaction is expected to be accretive by $0.28 in that period. This reflects the very strong day one cost synergies when Solventum’s allocated segment costs are replaced by lower run rate costs within Thermo Fisher.”

    Thermo Fisher’s release goes on to suggest that it believes it can more than double the profitability of Purification & Filtration under its corporate umbrella, relative to the business’ current profit as part of Solventum, with much of that improvement driven by lower allocated costs.

    Trian, in its January letter to shareholders, highlighted that Solventum has a significant opportunity to right size costs and realize higher margins while reinvesting more in growth.

    Inside of 3M, Solventum averaged 3-4% organic growth and a 26-27% EBIT margin. Trian believes that Solventum should be able to deliver faster organic growth and higher margins as a focused, standalone company. Trian looks forward to the Company delivering a Long Range Plan that reflects the business’ potential when it hosts its investor day in March.”

    About Trian Fund Management, L.P.
    Founded in 2005, Trian Fund Management, L.P. (“Trian”) is a multi-billion dollar investment management firm. Trian is a highly engaged shareowner that combines concentrated public equity ownership with operational expertise. Leveraging the 50+ years’ operating experience of our Founding Partners, Nelson Peltz and Peter May, Trian seeks to invest in high quality but undervalued and underperforming public companies and to work collaboratively with management teams and boards to help companies execute operational and strategic initiatives designed to drive long-term sustainable earnings growth for the benefit of all shareholders.

    Media Contacts:
    Anne A. Tarbell
    (212) 451-3030
    atarbell@trianpartners.com

    Paul Caminiti / Pamela Greene / Jacqueline Zuhse
    Reevemark
    (212) 433-4600
    Trian@reevemark.com

    Investor Contact:
    Matt Underhill
    (212) 451-3171
    munderhill@trianpartners.com

    Disclaimer

    Except as otherwise set forth in this press release, the views expressed in this press release reflect the opinions of Trian Fund Management, L.P. and its affiliates (“Trian”), and are based on publicly available information with respect to Solventum Corporation (the “Company”). Trian recognizes that there may be confidential information in the possession of the Company that could lead it or others to disagree with Trian’s conclusions. Trian reserves the right to change any of its opinions expressed herein at any time as it deems appropriate and disclaims any obligation to notify the market or any other party of any such change, except as required by law. Trian disclaims any obligation to update the information or opinions contained in this press release. For the avoidance of doubt, this press release is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Company.

    This press release is provided merely as information and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as, an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security nor as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security. Funds managed by Trian currently beneficially own shares of the Company. These funds are in the business of trading – buying and selling– securities and intend to continue trading in the securities of the Company. You should assume such funds may from time to time sell all or a portion of their holdings of the Company in open market transactions or otherwise (including via short sales), buy additional shares (in open market or privately negotiated transactions or otherwise), or trade in options, puts, calls, swaps or other derivative instruments relating to such shares.

    Some of the materials in this press release contain forward-looking statements. All statements contained herein that are not clearly historical in nature or that necessarily depend on future events are forward-looking, and the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “potential,” “could,” “opportunity,” “estimate,” “plan,” and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. The projected results and statements contained herein that are not historical facts are based on current expectations, speak only as of the date of these materials and involve risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, performances or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performances or achievements expressed or implied by such projected results and statements. Assumptions relating to the foregoing involve judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic competitive and market conditions and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond the control of Trian.

    Certain financial projections and statements made herein have been derived or obtained from filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or other regulatory authorities and from other third-party reports. Trian shall not be responsible or have any liability for any misinformation contained in any third-party, SEC or other regulatory filing or third-party report.

    There is no assurance or guarantee with respect to the prices at which any securities of the Company will trade, and such securities may not trade at prices that may be implied herein. The estimates, projections and potential impact of the opportunities identified by Trian herein are based on assumptions that Trian believes to be reasonable as of the date of this press release, but there can be no assurance or guarantee (i) that any of the proposed actions set forth in this press release will be completed, (ii) that the actual results or performance of the Company will not differ, and such differences may be material, or (iii) that any of the assumptions provided in this press release are accurate.  This press release does not recommend the purchase or sale of any security.

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: There’s a new ‘rapid review’ into school bullying. Research shows we need to involve the whole school to stop it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona MacDonald, Principal Research Fellow, Institute for Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities, Victoria University

    shutterstock LBeddoe/Shutterstock

    About one in four students report being regularly bullied in Australian schools.

    Children who are bullied can feel anxious and excluded, stop sleeping and eating well, and lose interest in school. There are serious potential long-term effects, which include anxiety and depression. Being bullied is also a risk factor for suicidal thoughts and behaviours.

    Following the 2024 death of Sydney Year 7 student Charlotte O’Brien, the federal government wants to develop a national standard to address bullying in schools.

    It has just announced a “rapid review” of bullying in schools, to be done in six months (though not before the federal election). This will look at what schools currently do to address bullying and what they should be doing.

    What does the research tell us works when it comes to addressing bullying in schools?

    What is bullying?

    Bullying is behaviour that is aggressive, intentional, repetitive and unprovoked.

    It also involves a power imbalance in favour of the perpetrator.

    As well as physical abuse, these behaviours can involve verbal teasing, harassment, damaging property, and antisocial behaviours such as spreading gossip or excluding someone. It can happen in person or online.

    Bullying can mean a child stops wanting to go to school.
    Doria Nippot/Shutterstock



    Read more:
    5 questions your child’s school should be able to answer about bullying


    Initial responses to bullying

    Much of the early research response to incidents on school bullying focused on the perpetrator and victim, and what the school should do in response to the bullying incident.

    This involved senior teachers such as the principal and school counsellor meeting with the perpetrator and victim and their parents/guardians. Here they would work out strategies to try and make amends and prevent future incidents.

    For example, a perpetrator may have had to apologise to the victim and take on additional responsibilities in the school. They may also be warned about suspension or exclusion.

    But these responses do not address the complexity of bullying. This includes the reasons why a child might bully another as well as its broader impact. Often other students are also inadvertently involved in or affected by bullying. Seeing someone else being bullied can be upsetting, students may feel angry, sad or concerned they may also be bullied.

    The shift to prevention

    So more recent research has emphasised the importance of prevention to reduce rates of school bullying. This could include anti-bullying policies, classroom rules and discussions about bullying as well as information for parents.

    This relies on what researchers call a “whole school approach”. Instead of bullying being seen as the responsibility of the principal or other senior teachers to deal with a few “at risk” kids, it is the responsibility of all staff, students and parents – and even the broader community.

    This means students are educated to understand what is and is not bullying and what to do if they witness it. It also means teachers have clear policies to follow and a clear understanding of “gateway behaviours,” which can escalate into bullying. Parents likewise know what to do if their child is being bullied or the kinds of behaviours that can lead up to it – such as namecalling or eyerolling.

    Other measures could include a dedicated staff member to champion anti-bullying measures in the school and partnerships with community members and organisations. This could be junior sporting clubs or even the school crossing guard (who can provide information about antisocial behaviours they observe).

    The aim is to create a school culture which is safe and supportive for students, where harmful behaviour is clearly understood and dealt with early if it happens.

    A whole school approach sees students invovled in prevention bullying at their school.
    Monkey Business Images/ Shutterstock



    Read more:
    Why do kids bully? And what can parents do about it?


    The importance of data

    Current research also emphasises the importance of schools regularly collecting, analysing and acting on data about bullying and the school environment. This enables schools to identify changes within the school environment before they escalate to bullying.

    Schools already collect data about their students and behaviours, including attendance, playground incidents and their attitudes to school. But many don’t have the time or expertise to analyse it.

    Listening to students

    Research also shows anti-bullying efforts are more effective when students are involved.

    This helps build trust between students, families and school staff, gives students a sense of ownership about solutions. Importantly it also enables young people to share their perspectives about what will work in their lives and classrooms.

    This could include schools regularly asking students about bullying and other issues they are having at schools and genuinely considering their suggestions about how to improve both prevention and responses.

    Fiona MacDonald received funding from Alannah & Madeline Foundation for this research.

    Nina Van Dyke received funding from the Alannah & Madeline Foundation for this research.

    – ref. There’s a new ‘rapid review’ into school bullying. Research shows we need to involve the whole school to stop it – https://theconversation.com/theres-a-new-rapid-review-into-school-bullying-research-shows-we-need-to-involve-the-whole-school-to-stop-it-250519

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Intense heat changes our biology and can make us age significantly faster: study

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rongbin Xu, Research Fellow in Health and Epigenetics, Monash University

    PorporLing/Shutterstock

    Heat takes it out of you. After a long, hot day, we feel tired and grumpy.

    But sustained periods of heat do more than that – they age us faster. Cumulative heat stress changes our epigenetics – how our cells turn on or off gene switches in response to environmental pressure.

    Now, new research from the United States explores the pressing question of how extreme heat affects humans. The findings are concerning. The more days of intense heat a participant endured, the faster they aged. Longer periods of extreme heat accelerated ageing in older people by more than two years.

    As the climate heats up, humans will be exposed to more and more heat – and our bodies will respond to these stresses by ageing faster. These findings are especially pertinent to Australia, where heatwaves are expected to become more frequent and intense in a warmer world.

    How, exactly, does heat age us?

    Ageing is natural. But the rate of ageing varies from human to human. As we go through life, our bodies are affected by stresses and shocks. For instance, if we don’t get enough sleep over a long period, we will age faster.

    While heat can directly sicken or kill us, it also has a long tail. Sustained heat stresses our bodies and make them less efficient at doing the many jobs needed to stay alive. This is what we mean when we say it accelerates biological ageing. This deterioration is likely to precede the later development of diseases and disabilities.

    What does that look like on a genetic level? You might think your genes don’t change over your life, and this is mostly true (apart from random mutations).

    But what does change is how your genes are expressed. That is, while your DNA stays the same, your cells can switch some of its thousands of genes off or on in response to stresses. At any one time, only a fraction of the genes in any cell are turned on – meaning they are busy making proteins.

    This is known as epigenetics. The most common and best understood pathway here is called DNA methylation (DNAm). Methylation here refers to a chemical our cells can use to block a DNA sequence from activating and producing proteins with various functions. Cellular changes in DNAm can lead to proteins being produced more or less, which in turn can flow on to affect physiological functions and our health status. This can be both bad or good.

    Heat stress can alter the pattern of which genes are turned off or on, which in turn can affect our rate of ageing.

    Severe heat stress can be remembered in cells, leading them to change their DNAm patterns over time. In laboratory testing, the effect is pronounced in fish, chickens, guinea pigs and mice.

    To date, much research on how heat affects epigenetics has focused on animals and plants. Here, the evidence is clear – even a single episode of extreme heat has been shown to have a long-lasting effect on mice.

    But only a couple of studies have been done involving humans, and they have been limited. This is the gap this new research is intended to help fill.

    Sustained heat changes how our cells express genes – accelerating ageing.
    aleks333/Shutterstock

    What did the study find?

    The study by researchers at the University of Southern California involved almost 3,700 people, with an average age of 68 years.

    Heat affects older people more than younger people. Our ability to control our body temperature drops as we age, and we are less resilient to outside stresses and shocks. We also know periods of extreme heat trigger a wave of illness and death, especially among older people.

    The study set out to better understand what happens to human bodies at a biological level when they’re exposed to intense heat over the short, medium and longer term.

    To do this, the researchers took blood samples and measured epigenetic changes at thousands of sites across the genome, which were used to calculate three clocks measuring biological age, named PcPhenoAge, PCGrimAge and DunedinPACE.

    Ageing is natural – but the speed at which we age can change.
    Bricolage/Shutterstock

    Then, they looked at the levels of heat each participant would have been exposed in their geographic areas over the preceding six years, which was 2010–16. They used the US heat index to assess heat, from caution (days up to 32°C), extreme caution (32–39°C) and danger (39–51°C). They used regression modelling to see how much faster people were ageing over the normal rate of ageing.

    The effect of heat was clear in the three biological clocks. Longer term exposure to intense heat increased biological age by 2.48 years over the six year period of the study according to PCPhenoAge, 1.09 years according to PCGrimAge and 0.05 years according to DunedinPACE.

    Over the period of the study, the effect was up to 2.48 years faster than normal ageing, where one calendar year equals one biological year of ageing. That is, rather than their bodies ageing the equivalent of six years over a six year period, heat could have aged their bodies up to 8.48 years.

    Importantly, the biological clocks differ quite substantially and we don’t yet know why. The authors suggest the PCPhenoAge clock may capture a broader spectrum of biological ageing, covering both short term and longer term heat stress, while the other two may be more sensitive to long term heat exposure.

    The way these researchers have conducted their study gives us confidence in their findings – the study sample was large and representative, and the use of the heat index rather than air temperature is an improvement over previous studies. However, the findings don’t account for whether the participants had airconditioning in their homes or spent much time outside.

    We need to know more

    Perhaps surprisingly, there has been little research done to date on what heat does to human epigenetics.

    In 2020, we conducted a systemic review of the science of how environment affects human epigenetics. We found only seven studies, with most focused on the effect of cold rather than heat.

    Now we have this new research which sheds light on the extent to which heat ages us.

    As we face a warmer future, our epigenetics will change in response. There is still a lot of work to do to see how we can adapt to these changes – or if we even can, in some parts of the world.

    Rongbin Xu received funding from VicHealth.

    Shuai Li receives funding from NHMRC, Cancer Australia, Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Council Victoria and NIH.

    – ref. Intense heat changes our biology and can make us age significantly faster: study – https://theconversation.com/intense-heat-changes-our-biology-and-can-make-us-age-significantly-faster-study-250784

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: We analysed almost 1,000 social media posts about 5 popular medical tests. Most were utterly misleading

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brooke Nickel, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, University of Sydney

    C-R-V/Shutterstock

    When Kim Kardashian posted on Instagram about having had a full-body MRI, she enthused that the test can be “life saving”, detecting diseases in the earliest stages before symptoms arise.

    What Kardashian neglected to say was there’s no evidence this expensive scan can bring benefits for healthy people. She also didn’t mention it can carry harms including unnecessary diagnoses and inappropriate treatments.

    With this post in mind, we wanted to explore what influencers are telling us about medical tests.

    In a new study published today in JAMA Network Open, we analysed nearly 1,000 Instagram and TikTok posts about five popular medical tests which can all do more harm than good to healthy people, including the full-body MRI scan.

    We found the overwhelming majority of these posts were utterly misleading.

    5 controversial tests

    Before we get into the details of what we found, a bit about the five tests included in our study.

    While these tests can be valuable to some, all five carry the risk of overdiagnosis for generally healthy people. Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a condition which would have never caused symptoms or problems. Overdiagnosis leads to overtreatment, which can cause unnecessary side effects and stress for the person, and wasted resources for the health system.

    As an example, estimates suggest 29,000 cancers a year are overdiagnosed in Australia alone.

    Overdiagnosis is a global problem, and it’s driven in part by healthy people having tests like these. Often, they’re promoted under the guise of early screening, as a way to “take control” of your health. But most healthy people simply don’t need them.

    These are the five tests we looked at:

    The full-body MRI scan claims to test for up to 500 conditions, including cancer. Yet there is no proven benefit of the scan for healthy people, and a real risk of unnecessary treatment from “false alarm” diagnoses.

    The “egg timer” test (technically known as the AMH, or anti-mullarian hormone test) is often falsely promoted as a fertility test for healthy women. While it may be beneficial for women within a fertility clinic setting, it cannot reliably predict the chance of a woman conceiving, or menopause starting. However, low results can increase fear and anxiety, and lead to unnecessary and expensive fertility treatments.

    Multi-cancer early detection blood tests are being heavily marketed as the “holy grail of cancer detection”, with claims they can screen for more than 50 cancers. In reality, clinical trials are still a long way from finished. There’s no good evidence yet that the benefits will outweigh the harms of unnecessary cancer diagnoses.

    The gut microbiome test of your stool promises “wellness” via early detection of many conditions, from flatulence to depression, again without good evidence of benefit. There’s also concern that test results can lead to wasted resources.

    Testosterone testing in healthy men is not supported by any high-quality evidence, with concerns direct-to-consumer advertising leads men to get tested and take testosterone replacement therapy unnecessarily. Use of testosterone replacement therapy carries its own risk of potential harms with the long-term safety in relation to heart disease and mortality still largely unknown.

    Multi-cancer early detection blood tests are heavily marketed.
    Yuri A/Shutterstock

    What we found

    Together with an international group of health researchers, we analysed 982 posts pertaining to the above tests from across Instagram and TikTok. The posts we looked at came from influencers and account holders with at least 1,000 followers, some with a few million followers. In total, the creators of the posts we included had close to 200 million followers.

    Even discounting the bots, that’s a massive amount of influence (and likely doesn’t reflect their actual reach to non-followers too).

    The vast majority of posts were misleading, failing to even mention the possibility of harm arising from taking one of these tests. We found:

    • 87% of posts mentioned test benefits, while only 15% mentioned potential harms

    • only 6% of posts mentioned the risk of overdiagnosis

    • only 6% of posts discussed any scientific evidence, while 34% of posts used personal stories to promote the test

    • 68% of influencers and account holders had financial interests in promoting the test (for example, a partnership, collaboration, sponsorship or selling for their own profit in some way).

    Further analysis revealed medical doctors were slightly more balanced in their posts. They were more likely to mention the harms of the test, and less likely to have a strongly promotional tone.

    The vast majority of posts we looked at were misleading.
    DimaBerlin/Shutterstock

    As all studies do, ours had some limitations. For example, we didn’t analyse comments connected to posts. These may give further insights into the information being provided about these tests, and how social media users perceive them.

    Nonetheless, our findings add to the growing body of evidence showing misleading medical information is widespread on social media.

    What can we do about it?

    Experts have proposed a range of solutions including pre-bunking strategies, which means proactively educating the public about common misinformation techniques.

    However, solutions like these often place responsibility on the individual. And with all the information on social media to navigate, that’s a big ask, even for people with adequate health literacy.

    What’s urgently needed is stronger regulation to prevent misleading information being created and shared in the first place. This is especially important given social media platforms including Instagram are moving away from fact-checking.

    In the meantime, remember that if information about medical tests promoted by influencers sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

    Brooke Nickel receives fellowship funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). She is on the Scientific Committee of the Preventing Overdiagnosis Conference.

    Joshua Zadro receives fellowship funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

    Ray Moynihan has received research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

    – ref. We analysed almost 1,000 social media posts about 5 popular medical tests. Most were utterly misleading – https://theconversation.com/we-analysed-almost-1-000-social-media-posts-about-5-popular-medical-tests-most-were-utterly-misleading-247362

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 – A10-0012/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024

    (2024/2081(INI))

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    – having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights,

    – having regard to Articles 2, 3, 8, 21 and 23 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

    – having regard to Articles 17 and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other United Nations human rights treaties and instruments,

    – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

    – having regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

    – having regard to the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,

    – having regard to the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol thereto,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 and United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 43/29 of 22 June 2020 on the prevention of genocide,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment  of 10 December 1984 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 18 December 2002,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  of 12 December 2006 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 13 December 2006,

    – having regard to the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1976,

    – having regard to the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, proclaimed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 36/55 of 25 November 1981,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities of 18 December 1992,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by consensus by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 53/144 on 9 December 1998,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 13 September 2007,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas of 28 September 2018,

    – having regard to the Programme of Action of the Cairo International Conference of Population and Development in 1994 and its review conferences,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 and the two Optional Protocols thereto, adopted on 25 May 2000,

    – having regard to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which entered into force on 24 December 2014, and the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports of 5 June 1998,

    – having regard to the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of September 1995 and its review conferences,

    – having regard to the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted on 25 September 2015, in particular goals 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 and 16 thereof,

    – having regard to the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration adopted on 19 December 2018 and the United Nations Global Compact on Refugees adopted on 17 December 2018,

    – having regard to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on 17 July 1998, which entered into force on 1 July 2002,

    – having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and the International Criminal Court on cooperation and assistance of 10 April 2006[1],

    – having regard to the Council of Europe Conventions of 4 April 1997 for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, and the Additional Protocols thereto, of 16 May 2005 on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and of 25 October 2007 on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse,

    – having regard to the Council of Europe Convention of 11 May 2011 on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention), which not all Member States have ratified but which entered into force for the EU on 1 October 2023,

    – having regard to Protocols Nos 6 and 13 to the Council of Europe Convention of 28 April 1983 for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the Abolition of the Death Penalty,

    – having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 of 7 December 2020 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses[2],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe[3],

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 January 2024 on EU Priorities in UN Human Rights Fora in 2024,

    – having regard to the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, adopted by the Council on 17 November 2020 and its Mid-term Review adopted on 9 June 2023,

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 27 May 2024 on the alignment of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024 with the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027,

    – having regard to the EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) III – an ambitious agenda for gender equality and women’s empowerment in external action (JOIN(2020)0017),

    – having regard to the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0152),

    – having regard to the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0698),

    – having regard to the EU strategy on the rights of the child (COM(2021)0142),

    – having regard to the EU Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 (COM(2021)0101),

    – having regard to the EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0565),

    – having regard to the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation (COM(2020)0620),

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on human rights defenders, adopted by the Council on 14 June 2004 and revised in 2008, and the second guidance note on the Guidelines’ implementation, endorsed in 2020,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them, adopted by the Council on 8 December 2008,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL) of 2005, as updated in 2009,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on the death penalty, as updated by the Council on 12 April 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by LGBTI persons, adopted on 24 June 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief, adopted by the Council on 24 June 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on freedom of expression online and offline, adopted by the Council on 12 May 2014,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on non-discrimination in external action, adopted by the Council on 18 March 2019,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, adopted by the Council on 17 June 2019,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on human rights dialogues with partner/third countries, approved by the Council on 22 February 2021,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on children and armed conflict, approved by the Council on 24 June 2024,

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 12 September 2012 entitled ‘The roots of democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with Civil Society in external relations’ (COM(2012)0492),

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 10 March 2023 on the role of the civic space in protecting and promoting fundamental rights in the EU,

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859[4],

    – having regard to the Commission proposal of 14 September 2022 for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453),

    – having regard to the joint proposal from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 for a Council regulation on restrictive measures against serious acts of corruption (JOIN(2023)0013),

    – having regard to the 2023 EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World,

    – having regard to its Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, which in 2024 was awarded to María Corina Machado, as the leader of the democratic forces in Venezuela, and President-elect Edmundo González Urrutia, representing all Venezuelans inside and outside the country fighting for the reinstitution of freedom and democracy,

    – having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2019 on EU Guidelines and the mandate of the EU Special Envoy on the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU[5],

    – having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2020 on Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy[6],

    – having regard to its resolution of 19 May 2021 on human rights protection and the EU external migration policy[7],

    – having regard to its resolution of 8 July 2021 on the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (EU Magnitsky Act)[8],

    – having regard to its resolution of 28 February 2024 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2023[9], and to its previous resolutions on earlier annual reports,

    – having regard to its resolutions on breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (known as urgency resolutions), adopted in accordance with Rule 150 of its Rules of Procedure, in particular those adopted in 2023 and 2024,

    – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0012/2025),

    A. whereas the EU is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, as set out in Articles 2 and 21 TEU; whereas the EU’s action worldwide must be guided by the universality and indivisibility of human rights and by the fact that the effective protection and defence of human rights and democracy is at the core of the EU’s external action;

    B. whereas consistency and coherence across the EU’s internal and external policies are key for achieving an effective and credible EU human rights policy, and in defending and supporting freedom and democracy;

    C. whereas democratic systems are the most suitable to guarantee that every person has the ability to enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms; whereas effective rules-based multilateralism is the best organisational system to defend democracies;

    D. whereas the EU strongly believes in and fully supports multilateralism, a rules-based global order and the set of universal values, principles and norms that guide the UN member states and that the UN member states have pledged to uphold, in accordance with the UN Charter; whereas a world of democracies, understood as a world of political systems that defend and protect human rights worldwide, is a safer world, as democracies have significant checks and balances in place to prevent the unpredictability of autocracies;

    E. whereas the rise in authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism threatens the global rules-based order, the protection and promotion of freedom and human rights in the world, as well as the values and principles on which the EU is founded;

    F. whereas in December 2023, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrated its 75th anniversary; whereas today, more than ever since the UN’s foundation, totalitarian regimes challenge the UN Charter’s basic principles, seek to rewrite international norms, undermine multilateral institutions and threaten peace and security globally;

    G. whereas in November 2024, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child celebrated its 35th anniversary;

    H. whereas the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action is regarded as a turning point for the global agenda on gender equality and will celebrate its 30th anniversary in 2025;

    I. whereas the legitimacy and functioning of the international rules-based order are dependent on compliance with the orders of, and respect for, international bodies, such as United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and orders and decisions of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court (ICC); whereas multilateralism is being challenged by increasing global threats, such as terrorism and extremism, which threaten compliance with such orders and decisions, as well as, generally, with provisions of international law, human rights law and international humanitarian law in emerging and ongoing conflict situations; whereas international institutions, their officials, and those cooperating with them, are the subject of attacks and threats; whereas the international community, including the EU, has a responsibility to uphold the international rules-based order by enforcing universal compliance, including by its partners;

    J. whereas the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court establishes a framework of accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; whereas the independence of the ICC is vital to ensure that justice is delivered impartially and without political interference;

    K. whereas the 2023 Mid-term Review of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, now extended to 2027, has shown that, despite the progress achieved so far, more needs to be done, in cooperation with like-minded democratic partners, especially in the context of the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption;

    L. whereas human rights defenders (HRDs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) are crucial partners in the EU’s efforts to safeguard and advance human rights, democracy and the rule of law, as well as to prevent conflicts globally; whereas state and non-state actors around the world are increasingly censoring, silencing and harassing, among others, HRDs, CSOs, journalists, religious communities, opposition leaders and other vulnerable groups in their work, shrinking the civil space ever further; whereas this behaviour includes measures encompassing strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), restrictive government policies, transnational repression, defamation campaigns, discrimination, intimidation and violence, including extrajudicial and extraterritorial killings, abductions, and arbitrary arrests and detention; whereas attacks on HRDs are increasingly extending to their families and communities, including those living in exile;

    M. whereas gender equality is a core EU value, and the human rights of women and girls, including their sexual and reproductive rights, continue to be violated across the world; whereas women experience unique and disproportionate impacts from conflicts, climate change and migration, including increased risks of gender-based violence, economic marginalisation and barriers to accessing resources; whereas women HRDs and CSOs continue to experience shrinking space for their critical work, as well as threats of violence, harassment and intimidation;

    N. whereas the past year has been marked by a further proliferation of laws on ‘foreign agents’ or foreign influence, including in countries with EU candidate status, targeting CSOs and media outlets and attempting to prevent them from receiving financial support from abroad, including from the EU and its Member States, fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship;

    O. whereas in 2024, more than half the world’s population went to the polls, and many of these elections were marked by manipulation, disinformation and attempts at interference from inside or outside the country;

    P. whereas the 2024 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warns of a decline in the intent of states and other political forces to protect press freedom; whereas, according to RSF, 47 journalists and media workers have been killed, most of them in conflict zones, and 573 have been imprisoned since 1 January 2024;

    Q. whereas 251 million children and young people are deprived of their fundamental right to education and remain out of school, according to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2024; whereas girls and women are affected not only by poverty but also by cultural norms, gender bias, child marriage and violence through official, discriminatory policies that prevent them from accessing education and the labour market and attempt to erase them from public life;

    R. whereas at least one million people are unjustly imprisoned for political reasons, among them several laureates and finalists of Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought;

    S. whereas environmental harm and the impacts of climate change are intensifying precariousness, marginalisation and inequality, and increasingly displacing people from their homes or trapping them in unsafe conditions, thereby heightening their vulnerability and jeopardising their human rights;

    Global challenges to democracy and human rights

    1. Reasserts the universality, interdependence, interrelatedness and indivisibility of human rights and the inherent dignity of every human being; reaffirms the duty of the EU and its Member States to promote and protect democracy and the universality of human rights around the world; calls for the EU and its Member States to lead by example, in line with its values, to promote and strictly uphold human rights and international justice;

    2. Insists that respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms must be the cornerstone of the EU’s external policy, in line with its founding principles; strongly encourages the EU and its Member States, to that end, to strive for a continued ambitious commitment to make freedom, democracy and human rights and their protection a central part of all EU policies in a streamlined manner and to enhance the consistency between the EU’s internal and external policies in this field, including through all of its international agreements;

    3. Stresses that the EU must be fully prepared to counter the rise of authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism, as well as the increasing violations of the principles of universality of human rights, democracy and international humanitarian law;

    4. Condemns the increasing trend of violations and abuses of human rights and democratic principles and values across the world, such as, among others, threats of backsliding on human rights, notably women’s rights, as well as executions, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and ill treatment, gender-based violence, clampdowns on civil society, political opponents, marginalised and vulnerable groups including children and elderly people, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, and  ethnic and religious minorities; condemns, equally, slavery and forced labour, excessive use of violence by public authorities, including violent crackdowns on peaceful protests and other assemblies, systematic and structural discrimination, instrumentalisation of the judiciary, censorship and threats to independent media, including threats in the digital sphere such as online surveillance and internet shutdowns, political attacks against international institutions and the rules-based international order, and increasing use of unlawful methods of war in grave breach of international humanitarian law and human rights law; deplores the weakening of the protection of democratic institutions and processes, and the shrinking space for civil societies around the world; denounces the transnational repression, by illiberal regimes, of citizens and activists who have sought refuge abroad, including on EU soil;

    5. Notes with deep concern the ongoing international crisis of accountability and the challenge to the pursuit of ending impunity for violations of core norms of international human rights and humanitarian law in conflicts around the world; reaffirms the neutrality and importance of humanitarian aid in all conflicts and crises; underlines the serious consequences of discrediting and attacking the organisations of multilateral forums, such as the UN, which can foster a culture of impunity and undermine the trust in and functioning of the UN system; calls for the EU to uphold the international legal system and take effective measures to enforce compliance;

    6. Notes with satisfaction that there are also ‘human rights bright spots’ within this context of major challenges to human rights worldwide; highlights, in particular, the work of CSOs and HRDs; underlines the need for a more strategic communication on human rights and democracy by spreading news about positive results, policies and best practices; supports the Good Human Rights Stories initiative[10] as a way of promoting positive stories about human rights and recommends that it be updated; underlines the role of the EU’s public and cultural diplomacy, as well as international cultural relations, in the promotion of human rights, and calls for the Strategic Communication and Foresight division of the European External Action Service (EEAS) to increase its efforts in this regard;

    Strengthening the EU’s toolbox for the promotion and protection of human rights and democracy around the world

    7. Notes with concern the increasing divide worldwide; stresses the shared responsibility of the EU to continue defending democratic values and principles and human rights, international justice, peace and dignity around the world, which are even more important to defend in the current volatile state of global politics; calls upon the EU to keep communication channels open with different stakeholders and to continue to develop a comprehensive toolbox to strengthen human rights and democracy globally;

    EU action plan on human rights and democracy

    8. Observes that the EU and its Member States have made substantial progress in implementing the EU action plan on human rights and democracy, although they have not reached all of its goals, in part also due to the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption; welcomes, in this sense, the extension of the action plan until 2027, with a view to maximising the synergies and complementarity between human rights and democracy at local, national and global levels;

    EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights

    9. Fully supports the work of the EUSR for Human Rights in contributing to the visibility and coherence of the EU’s human rights actions in its external relations; upholds the EUSR’s central role in the EU’s promotion and protection of human rights by engaging with non-EU countries and like-minded partners; underlines the need for close cooperation between the EUSR for Human Rights and other EUSRs and Special Envoys in order to further improve this coherence, and calls for greater visibility for the role of the EUSR for Human Rights; calls for the EUSR to be supported in his work with increased resources and better coordination with EU delegations around the world; regrets, despite continuous calls, Parliament’s exclusion from the process of selecting the EUSR; insists on the need for the EUSR to report back to Parliament regularly;

    Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe and the human rights and democracy thematic programme

    10. Recalls the fundamental role of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe, including its thematic programme on human rights and democracy, as a flagship EU instrument in promoting and protecting human rights and democracy around the world; highlights the need to engage with civil society in all the EU’s relevant external activities, including the Global Gateway Strategy which is financed through the NDICI-Global Europe; reiterates the importance of streamlining a human-rights based approach in the EU’s external action instruments; underlines Parliament’s role in the instrument’s programming process and calls on the Commission and the EEAS to share all relevant information in a timely manner in order to enable Parliament to play its role accordingly, in particular during high-level geopolitical dialogues with the Commission and in the mid-term review process as well as in its resolutions; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to ensure that a response is provided to the recommendation letters following each geopolitical dialogue and each resolution; urges the Commission to develop and launch a comprehensive, centralised website dedicated to the NDICI-Global Europe, including information on all the multiannual indicative programmes, detailing their respective budgets, associated actions and the financial allocations they are backing, organised both by country and by theme; notes that the NDICI-Global Europe and all future instruments must focus on the fundamental drivers of ongoing challenges, including the need to strengthen the resilience of local communities and democracy support activities by supporting economic development;

    11. Calls for independent, ex ante assessments to determine the possible implications and risks of projects with regard to human rights, in line with Article 25(5) of  Regulation (EU) 2021/947; calls for independent human rights monitoring throughout the implementation of projects in third countries, especially in relation to projects entailing a high risk of violations; calls for a suspension of projects that (in)directly contribute to human rights violations in non-EU countries; reiterates the prohibition on allocating EU funds to activities that are contrary to EU fundamental values, such as terrorism or extremism; calls on the Commission to share all human rights-related assessments with Parliament in a proactive manner;

    EU trade and international agreements

    12. Reiterates its call to integrate human rights assessments and include robust clauses on human rights in agreements between the EU and non-EU countries, supported by a clear set of benchmarks and procedures to be followed in the event of violations; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to ensure that the human rights clauses in current international agreements are actively monitored and effectively enforced and to improve their communication with Parliament concerning considerations and decisions regarding this enforcement; reiterates that in the face of persistent breaches of human rights clauses by its partner countries, including those related to the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus programme, the EU should react swiftly and decisively, including by suspending the agreements in question if other options prove ineffective; calls for the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal to be implemented, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, or for the Commission’s Single Entry Point to be adapted to allow complaints regarding failure to comply with human rights clauses to be submitted; calls on the EU institutions to engage regularly with the business community and civil society in order to strengthen the links between international trade, human rights and economic security; calls for the EU to ensure human rights promotion and protection through its Global Gateway investments and projects, by ensuring that they do no harm;

    EU human rights dialogues

    13. Stresses the important role of human rights dialogues within the EU’s human rights toolbox and as a key vehicle for the implementation of the EU action plan on human rights and democracy; highlights that these dialogues must address the overall situation of human rights and democracy with the relevant countries; notes that human rights dialogues should be seen as a key element of sustained EU engagement and not as a free-standing instrument, and that the persistent failure of non-EU countries to genuinely engage in dialogues and to implement key deliverables should lead to the use of other appropriate foreign policy tools; recalls that these dialogues need to be used in conjunction and synergy with other instruments, using a more-for-more and a less-for-less approach; reiterates the need to raise individual cases, in particular those of Sakharov Prize laureates and those highlighted by Parliament in its resolutions, and ensure adequate follow-up; calls on the EEAS and EU delegations to increase the visibility of these dialogues and their outcomes, ensuring that they are results-oriented and based on a clear set of benchmarks that can be included in a published joint press statement, and to conduct suitable follow-up action on it; calls for the enhanced and meaningful involvement of civil society in the dialogues; stresses that genuine CSOs must not be impeded from participating in human rights dialogues and that any dialogue must include all genuine CSOs without any limitations;

    EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (GHRSR – EU Magnitsky Act)

    14. Welcomes the increasing use of the EU GHRSR as a key political tool in the EU’s defence of human rights and democracy across the world; regrets, however, that its use has continued to be limited, especially in the current geopolitical landscape; notes, however, the challenges that the requirement of unanimity poses in the adoption of sanctions and reiterates its call on the Council to introduce qualified majority voting for decisions on the GHRSR; recalls, in this regard, the formal request submitted by Parliament to the Council in 2023, on calling an EU reform convention, with the aim, among others, of increasing the number of decisions taken by qualified majority; calls for a stronger use of the GHRSR and other ad hoc sanctions regimes on those responsible for serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, including high-level officials; fully supports the possibility of imposing targeted anti-corruption sanctions within the EU framework in this regard, which has been a long-standing priority of Parliament, whether through its inclusion in the GHRSR or under a different regime; highlights the need for the complete enforcement of sanctions and calls for circumventions to be tackled;

    Democracy support activities

    15. Reiterates its concern regarding the increasing attacks by authoritarian and illiberal regimes on democratic principles, values and pluralism; stresses that the defence and support of democracy around the world is increasingly becoming of geopolitical and strategic interest; emphasises the importance of Parliament’s efforts in capacity-building for partner parliaments, promoting mediation and encouraging a culture of dialogue and compromise, especially among young political leaders, and empowering women parliamentarians, HRDs and representatives from civil society and independent media; reiterates its call on the Commission to continue and expand its activities in these areas by increasing funding and support for EU bodies, agencies and other grant-based organisations; stresses the critical importance of directly supporting civil society and persons expressing dissenting views, particularly in the current climate of growing global tensions and repression in increasing numbers of countries; reiterates the importance of EU election observation missions and Parliament’s contribution to developing and enhancing their methodology; calls for the development of an EU toolbox to be used in cases of disputed or non-transparent election results in order to prevent political and military crises in the post-election environment; calls for enhanced EU action to counter manipulative and false messages against the EU in election campaigns, in particular in countries that receive significant EU humanitarian and development assistance and in countries that are candidates for EU membership; calls for enhanced collaboration between Parliament’s Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group, the relevant Commission directorates-general and the EEAS;

    EU support for human rights defenders

    16. Is extremely concerned by the continuing restriction of civil society space and rising threats to the work of HRDs and members of CSOs, as well as their families, communities and lawyers, and finds particularly concerning the increasingly sophisticated means used to persecute them; strongly condemns their arbitrary detentions and killings; deplores the harassment of CSOs through legislative provisions such as foreign agents laws and similar, and other restrictions they face; deplores the fact that women HRDs continue to face relentless and ever more sophisticated violations against them, including targeted killings, physical attacks, disappearances, smear campaigns, arrests, judicial harassment and intimidation; notes with concern that these attacks seem designed to systematically silence women HRDs and erase their voices from the public sphere; supports wholeheartedly the work of HRDs and EU action to ensure their protection worldwide; underscores the pressing need for a comprehensive and timely revision of the EU Guidelines on HRDs, with a view to addressing the emerging challenges and threats, and to ensuring their applicability and effectiveness in the protection of HRDs globally, while integrating gender-sensitive and intersectional approaches in the updated Guidelines, reflecting the diverse backgrounds and experiences of HRDs, and taking into account the specific vulnerabilities they may face; calls for the complete and consistent application of the EU Guidelines on HRDs by the EU and its Member States; calls for efforts to enhance communication strategies to increase the visibility of EU actions and channels for the protection of and the support mechanisms for HRDs;

    17. Raises serious concerns over the increasing phenomenon of transnational repression against HRDs, journalists and civil society; calls for the formulation of an EU strategy harmonising national responses to transnational repression;

    18. Expresses deep concern regarding the increasingly precarious financial landscape faced by HRDs and communities advocating for rights, particularly within a global context characterised by intensifying repression; notes that, as a result of the current geopolitical context, HRDs’ need for support has increased; calls, therefore, for the EU and its Member States to make full use of their financial support for HRDs, ensuring the establishment of flexible, accessible and sustained funding mechanisms that enable these defenders to continue their vital work in the face of mounting challenges;

    19. Insists that the EEAS, the Commission and the EU delegations pay particular attention to the situation of the Sakharov Prize laureates and finalists at risk and take resolute action, in coordination with the Member States and Parliament, to ensure their well-being, safety or liberation;

    20. Welcomes the update of the EU Visa Code Handbook in relation to HRDs and calls for its full and consistent application by the Member States; reiterates its call for the Commission to take a proactive role in the establishment of a coordinated approach among the Member States for HRDs at risk, for instance streamlining visa procedures and promoting harmonisation in the EU’s visa application process;

    Combating impunity and corruption

    21. Underlines that both impunity and corruption enable and aggravate human rights violations and abuses and the erosion of democratic principles; welcomes the anti-corruption actions in EU external policies in the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 on the fight against corruption (JOIN(2023)0012); supports the anti-corruption provisions included in the EU trade agreements with non-EU countries; stresses the important role of civil society and journalists in non-EU countries in the oversight of the fight against impunity and corruption; calls for the EU and its Member States to increase their efforts in justice reforms, the fight against impunity, and the improvement of transparency and of anti-corruption institutions in non-EU countries; encourages the EU and its Member States to coordinate more closely with allies and partners wherever possible in order to counter systemic corruption that enables autocrats to maintain power, deprives societies of key resources and undermines democracy, human rights and the rule of law;

    22. Insists on the need for the EU to take clear steps to recognise the close link between corruption and human rights violations in order to target economic and financial enablers of human rights abusers;

    EU actions at multilateral level

    23. Reaffirms that promoting the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights around the world requires strong international cooperation at a multilateral level; underlines the particularly important role of the UN and its bodies as the main forum which must be able to effectively advance efforts for peace and security, sustainable development and respect for human rights and international law; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue supporting the work of the UN, its agencies and special procedures, both politically and financially, to ensure that it is fit for purpose, and to push back against the influence of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes; stresses that the current multilateral order needs to fully incorporate into its architecture the new global actors, especially those focusing on democracy and human rights; reiterates the need for the EU and its Member States to speak with one voice at the UN and in other multilateral forums in order to effectively tackle global challenges to human rights and democracy in multilateral forums and to support the strongest possible language in line with international human rights standards; calls, to this end, for progress in ensuring that the EU has a seat in international organisations, including the UN Security Council, in addition to the existing Member States’ seats; calls for EU delegations to play a stronger role in multilateral forums, for which they should have appropriate resources available;

    24. Is deeply concerned by growing attacks against the rules-based global order by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, including through unprovoked and unjustified aggression against peaceful neighbours and through the undermining of the functioning of UN bodies, namely the abuse of veto power at the UN Security Council; underlines that the diminished effectiveness of these bodies brings with it real costs in terms of conflicts, lives lost and human suffering, and seriously weakens the general ability of countries to deal with global challenges; calls on the Member States and like minded partners to develop a robust strategy and to intensify their efforts to reverse this trend and to send a united and strong message of support to those organisations when they are attacked or threatened; believes that the UN, its bodies, and other multilateral organisations are in need of reform, in order to address these growing challenges and threats;

    25. Reiterates the strong support of the EU for the International Court of Justice and the ICC as essential, independent and impartial jurisdictional institutions amid a particularly challenging time for international justice; recalls that a well-funded ICC is essential for the effective prosecution of serious international crimes; welcomes the political and financial support the EU has given to the ICC, including the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC, and the launch of the ‘Global initiative to fight against impunity for international crimes’ offering financial support to CSOs dedicated to fostering justice and accountability for international crimes and serious human rights violations, including by facilitating survivors’ participation in legal proceedings; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and intensify their support to the ICC – including to the ICC Trust Fund for Victims – with the necessary means, including resources and political backing, and to use all instruments at their disposal to combat impunity worldwide and enable the ICC to fulfil its mandate effectively; calls on all the Member States to respect and implement the actions and decisions of the International Court of Justice and all organs of the ICC, including the OTP and the Chambers, to urge other countries to join and cooperate with the court, including to enforce ICC arrest warrants, and to support their work as an independent and impartial international justice institution everywhere in the world; regrets the failure of some ICC member states to execute ICC arrest warrants, thereby undermining the court’s work; calls for the EU to urge non-EU countries, including its major partners, to recognise the ICC and become a state party to the Rome Statute;

    26. Stresses the importance of not politicising the ICC, as trust in the court is eroded if its mandate is misused; condemns, in particular and in the most critical terms, the political attacks, sanctions and other coercive measures introduced or envisaged against the ICC itself and against its staff; calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to cooperate to work on solutions in order to protect the institution of the ICC and its staff from any future sanctions that would threaten the functioning of the court;

    27. Recognises universal jurisdiction as an important tool of the international criminal justice system to prevent and combat impunity and promote international accountability; calls on the Member States to apply universal jurisdiction in the fight against impunity;

    28. Calls for the EU and its Member States to lead the global fight against all forms of extremism and welcomes the adoption of an EU strategy to this end; demands that the fight against terrorism be at the top of the EU’s domestic and foreign affairs agenda;

    Upholding international humanitarian law

    29. Notes with concern the increasing disregard for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, particularly in the form of ongoing conflicts around the world; strongly condemns the increase in deliberate, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilians and civilian objects in multiple conflict settings; underlines that it is of the utmost importance that all UN and humanitarian aid agencies are able to provide full, timely and unhindered assistance to all people in vulnerable situations and calls on all parties to armed conflicts to fully respect the work of these agencies and ensure they can meet the basic needs of civilians without interference; denounces attempts to undermine UN agencies delivering humanitarian aid; urges all parties to armed conflicts to protect civilian populations, humanitarian and medical workers, and journalists and media workers; calls on all parties to armed conflicts to respect the legitimacy and inviolability of UN peacekeeping missions; calls on all states to unconditionally and fully conform with international humanitarian law; calls on the international community, and the Member States in particular, to promote accountability and the fight against impunity for grave breaches of international humanitarian law; calls for the systematic creation of humanitarian corridors in regions at war and in combat situations, whenever necessary, in order to allow civilians at risk to escape conflicts, and strongly condemns any attacks on them; demands unhindered access for humanitarian organisations monitoring and assisting prisoners of war, as provided for in the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War; expects international organisations to abide by international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war; calls for international cooperation and assistance in the return of forcibly deported persons, in particular children and hostages;

    30. Reiterates its call on the Member States to help contain armed conflicts and serious violations of human rights or international humanitarian law by strictly abiding by the provisions of Article 7 of the UN Arms Trade Treaty of 2 April 2013 on Export and Export Assessment and Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008 defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment;

    31. Given the gendered impacts of armed conflicts, deplores the insufficient priority and focus given to sexual and gender-based violence and to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the EU’s humanitarian and refugee response; reiterates that humanitarian crises intensify SRHR- and gender-related challenges and recalls that in crisis zones, particularly among vulnerable groups such as refugees and migrants, women and girls are particularly exposed to sexual violence, sexually transmitted diseases, sexual exploitation, rape as a weapon of war and unwanted pregnancies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give high priority to gender equality and SRHR in their humanitarian aid and refugee response, as well as accountability and access to justice and redress for sexual and reproductive rights violations and gender-based violence, including in terms of training for humanitarian actors, and existing and future funding;

    Team Europe approach

    32. Recognises the potential for stronger alignment in approaches to human rights protection and promotion between EU institutions, Member States’ embassies and EU delegations in non-EU countries, particularly in encouraging those countries to comply with their international obligations and to refrain from harassment and persecution of critical voices; emphasises the opportunity for Member States’ embassies to take an increasingly active role in advancing and safeguarding human rights, while also supporting civil society in these countries; calls for the EU and its Member States to use all possible means to urge countries to release political prisoners; highlights the importance of shared responsibility between Member States and EU delegations in these efforts; calls for the EU and its Member States to intensify their collective efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and to support democracy worldwide; encourages careful monitoring and assessment of the capacity of EU delegations to ensure that each one has a designated point of contact for cases of human rights violations, and that this mandate is allocated sufficient resources to respond in an effective and timely manner; reiterates, in this context, the importance, for the EU delegations, of existing EU guidelines related to specific areas of human rights;

    Responding to universal human rights and democracy challenges

    Right to freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

    33. Condemns any action or attempt to legalise, instigate, authorise, consent or acquiesce to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment methods under any circumstances; condemns the increasing reports of the use of torture by state actors in many different contexts, including in custodial and extra-custodial settings – of political prisoners, among others – and in conflict situations around the world, notably in violation of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War, as well as the killing of prisoners of war, which amounts to a war crime, and reiterates the non-derogable nature of the right to be free from torture or other forms of inhuman or degrading treatment; reiterates the EU’s zero-tolerance policy to torture and other ill-treatment and calls on the relevant institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights, to take a thorough stance on any such case;

    34. Reiterates its calls for universal ratification of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol thereto, and for the need for states to bring their national provisions in this respect in line with international standards; reiterates, in accordance with the revised Guidelines on the EU’s policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019, the importance of engaging with relevant stakeholders in the fight to eradicate torture, and to monitor places of detention;

    Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association

    35. Reiterates the need to protect the EU democratic space and the exercise of fundamental freedoms therein, particularly freedoms of assembly and association; highlights the growing violent repression of protest and peaceful assemblies within the EU civic space, with cases of torture and ill-treatment resulting in deaths and other serious violations; underscores the need to strengthen this fundamental right in conjunction with the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment;

    Right to food, water and sanitation

    36. Recalls that the right to food, including having physical and economic access to adequate food or the means to its procurement, is a human right; is extremely concerned about the challenges to the right to food worldwide, especially in situations of war and conflicts; condemns the increasing reports of the weaponisation of food in situations of armed conflict; calls for the EU and its Member States to promote mandatory guidelines on the right to food without discrimination within the UN system; urges the EU and the Member States to fully support, politically and financially, organisations and agencies working to secure the right to food in conflict zones; recalls the importance of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas in view of attaining food security; commends the work of the UN World Food Programme, in this regard;

    37. Reaffirms the rights to safe drinking water and to sanitation as human rights, both rights being complementary; underlines that access to clean drinking water is indispensable to a healthy and dignified life and is essential for the maintenance of human dignity; highlights the fact that the right to water is a fundamental precondition for the enjoyment of other rights, and as such must be guided by a logic grounded in the public interest, and in common public and global goods; underscores the importance of the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, and urges the EU institutions and the Member States to implement and promote their application in non-EU countries and in multilateral forums;

    Climate change and the environment

    38. Highlights that climate change and its impact on the environment has direct effects on the effective enjoyment of all human rights; recognises the important work of CSOs, indigenous peoples and local communities, land and environmental HRDs and indigenous activists for the protection of a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, including access to land and water sources; deplores the risks that environmental HRDs and indigenous activists face and calls for their effective protection to be guaranteed; notes that communities contributing the least to climate change are the ones more likely to be affected by climate risks and natural disasters and calls, in this regard, for increasing support to the most vulnerable groups; recalls that indigenous peoples and local communities play an important role in the sustainable management of natural resources and the conservation of biodiversity; recalls that the transition to clean energy must be fair and respect everyone’s fundamental rights; reiterates the importance of the achievement of the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) for the protection of the human rights of present and future generations;

    39. Notes with deep concern the increasing threats to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment posed by the deployment of weapons of mass destruction and other forms of warfare that adversely and disproportionately affect the environment; stresses the need to effectively address the displacement of people caused by environmental destruction and climate change, which increases the risk of human rights violations and heightens vulnerabilities to different forms of exploitation; recognises that children face more acute risks from climate-related disasters and are also one of the largest groups to be affected; calls for the EU to focus on addressing the impacts of climate change on the enjoyment of the rights of the child;

    Rights of the child

    40. Calls for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights, including for those most marginalised and those in the most vulnerable situations, through all of the EU’s external policies; calls for more concerted efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of children’s rights in crisis or emergency situations; condemns the decline in respect for the rights of the child and the increasing violations and abuses of these rights, including through violence, early and forced marriage, sexual abuse including genital mutilation, trafficking, child labour, honour killings, recruitment of child soldiers, lack of access to education and healthcare, malnutrition and extreme poverty; further condemns the increase in deaths of children in situations of armed conflict and stresses the need for effective protection of children’s rights in active warfare; calls for new EU initiatives to promote and protect children’s rights, with a view to rehabilitating and reintegrating conflict-affected children, ensuring that they have a protected, family- and community-based environment as a natural context for their lives, in which assistance and education are fundamental elements; reiterates its call for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights through all EU external policies; calls on all countries to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as a matter of urgency, in order to allow for the universal ratification of this foundational instrument;

    41. Stresses the importance of closing the financing gap that would enable countries to meet their SDG 4 targets on quality education and ensure access to education for all children and young people; reiterates its calls to address cultural norms and gender biases that prevent girls and women from receiving an education and urges the creation of gender-responsive education systems worldwide;

    42. Stresses that education represents the starting point for cultivating principles and values that contribute to the personal development of children, as well as to social cohesion and democracy, and the rule of law around the world; to that end calls for the EU to promote its values through supporting access to education and learning for women and girls;

    Rights of women and gender equality

    43. Stresses that women’s rights and gender equality are indispensable and indivisible human rights, as well as a basis for the rule of law and inclusive resilient democracies; deplores the fact that millions of women and girls continue to experience discrimination and violence, especially in the context of conflicts, post-conflict situations and displacements, and are denied their dignity, autonomy and even life; condemns the impunity with which perpetrators commit violations against women HRDs; is appalled by the use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war and stresses the need to shed light on these instances, and for better international cooperation on fighting impunity for these crimes; calls for the EU, its Member States and like-minded partners to step up their efforts to ensure the full enjoyment and protection of women’s and girls’ human rights, and to incorporate a gender mainstreaming approach across all policies, taking into account the differentiated impacts of global challenges such as climate change or conflicts; condemns in the strongest terms the increasing attacks on SRHR around the world, as well as gender-based violence; strongly deplores cases of female genital mutilation, honour killings, child marriages and forced marriages; welcomes the accession of the EU to the Istanbul Convention and strongly encourages the remaining EU Member States to ratify the Istanbul Convention without further delay; calls for the EU and its international partners to strengthen their efforts to ensure that women fully enjoy human rights and are treated equally to men; emphasises the importance of safeguarding the rights of women, ensuring that their health, safety and dignity are protected, particularly in the context of healthcare access and workplace protections; underlines the need to keep opposing and condemning, in the strongest terms, anti-abortion laws that punish women and girls with decades-long jail sentences, even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant woman is at risk; stresses the need to pursue efforts to fully eradicate the practice of female genital mutilation; fully supports the role of the EU Ambassador for Gender and Diversity;

    44. Recognises that gender apartheid constitutes a systematic and institutionalised form of oppression, depriving women and girls of fundamental rights solely on the basis of their gender; notes with deep concern the entrenchment of gender apartheid in certain regions, where women face extensive restrictions on education, employment, healthcare and freedom of movement, often underpinned by legal and cultural frameworks that reinforce gender-based discrimination; urges the EU and the Member States to proactively address gender apartheid through strengthened diplomatic efforts, targeted economic measures and accountability mechanisms that support civil society organisations advocating for gender equality; calls for the formal recognition of gender apartheid as a distinct human rights violation and for support for international initiatives for its classification as a crime against humanity, thus contributing to the establishment of a global accountability standard;

    Rights of refugees and asylum seekers

    45. Denounces the erosion of the human rights and the safety of refugees, asylum seekers and forcibly displaced persons; reaffirms their inalienable human rights and fundamental right to seek asylum; recalls the obligation of states to protect them in accordance with international law; underlines the importance of identification and registration of individuals, including children, as a key tool for protecting refugees and ensuring the integrity of refugee protection systems, preventing human trafficking and the recruitment of children into armed militias; calls for the EU and its Member States to effectively uphold their rights in the EU’s asylum and migration policy and in the EU’s cooperation with partner countries in this regard; deplores the increasing xenophobia, racism and discrimination towards migrants, as well as the different forms of violence they face, including during their displacement, and the many barriers they face, including in access to healthcare; condemns the instrumentalisation of migration at EU borders by foreign actors, which constitutes hybrid attacks against the Member States as well as a dehumanisation of migrants; stresses that the EU should step up its efforts to acknowledge and develop ways to address the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement, building the resilience of migrants’ communities of origin and helping them offer their members the possibility to enjoy a decent life in their home country; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and, where possible, step up their support for countries hosting the most refugees, as well as for transit countries; reiterates that close cooperation and engagement with non-EU countries, with full respect for fundamental rights, remain key to preventing migrant smuggling; stresses, in this regard, that the dissemination of information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of smuggling are crucial, as well as of the migration laws of the destination countries, in order to prevent the undertaking of unnecessarily risky journeys by those who do not have grounds for asylum; calls for EU-funded humanitarian operations to take into consideration the specific needs and vulnerabilities of children and to ensure their protection while they are displaced; underlines the importance of developing an effective framework of safe and legal pathways to the EU and welcomes, in this regard, the Commission communication on attracting skills and talent to the EU[11], including the development of talent partnerships with partner countries; calls for respect for the principle of non-refoulement to countries where the life and liberty of people would be threatened; calls for the EU and its Member States to discuss the phenomenon of instrumentalised migration orchestrated by authoritarian regimes and organised crime groups, and emphasises the need to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this phenomenon, develop effective countermeasures, and consider its implications for the human rights framework;

    46. Reaffirms that no agreement with a non-EU country designated as a transit country should be concluded without Parliament’s scrutiny, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to include robust human rights clauses, monitoring mechanisms and impact assessments therein; reiterates its call on the Commission to integrate ex ante human rights impact assessments into such agreements;

    Rights of LGBTIQ+ persons

    47. Deplores the human rights violations, including discrimination, persecution, violence and killings, against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, non-binary, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) persons around the world; is extremely concerned by the spreading of hatred and anti-LGBTIQ+ narratives and legislation that target LGBTIQ+ persons and HRDs; calls for the adoption of policies that protect LGBTIQ+ people and give them the tools to safely report a violation of their rights, in line with the EU Guidelines to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by LGBTI Persons; expresses special concern over LGBTIQ+ people living under non-democratic regimes or in conflict situations, and calls for rapid response mechanisms to protect them as well as their defenders; reiterates its calls for the full implementation of the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 as the EU’s tool for improving the situation of LGBTIQ+ people around the world; calls for  the use of the death penalty to be rejected under all circumstances, including any legislation that would impose the death penalty for homosexuality; calls for the EU and its Member States to further engage the countries with such legislation in reconsidering their position on the death penalty; notes further that the imposition of the death penalty on the basis of such legislation is arbitrary killing per se, and a breach of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

    Rights of persons with disabilities

    48. Is concerned by the challenges to the full enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities; reiterates its calls for the EU to assist partner countries in the development of policies in support of carers of persons with disabilities; calls for the raising of social awareness and the combating of discriminatory behaviours against persons with disabilities; points to the additional complications faced by persons with disabilities in conflict situations and natural disasters, as they are more vulnerable to violence and often do not receive adequate support; urges all parties to conflict situations worldwide to take adequate measures to mitigate the risks to them as much as possible; emphasises the need to safeguard children with disabilities from any form of exploitation; calls for the EU, in its external policy, to make use of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 as a tool to improve the situation of persons with disabilities, particularly concerning poverty and discrimination, but also problems with access to education, healthcare and employment, and participation in political life; encourages the EU to support partner countries in developing inclusive economic policies that promote accessible vocational training and employment opportunities for persons with disabilities, fostering their full and active economic participation;

    Rights of elderly people

    49. Reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States to develop new avenues to strengthen the rights of elderly people, taking into account the multiple challenges they face, such as age-based discrimination, poverty, violence and a lack of social protection, healthcare and other essential services, as well as barriers to employment; calls for the implementation of specific measures to combat the risk of poverty for older women through increased social support; underlines the work of the UN Open-ended Working Group on Ageing on a legally binding instrument to strengthen the protection of the human rights of older people and calls for the EU and its Member States to consider actively supporting that work; stresses the need for a cross-cutting intergenerational approach in EU policies, in order to build and encourage solidarity between young people and elderly people;

    Right to equality and non-discrimination

    50. Reiterates its condemnation of all forms of racism, intolerance, antisemitism, Islamophobia, persecution of Christians, xenophobia and discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, social class, disability, caste, religion, belief, age, sexual orientation or gender identity; condemns the growing international threat of hate speech and speech that incites violence, including online; reiterates the crucial role of education and dialogue in promoting tolerance, understanding and diversity; calls for the adoption or the strengthening of mechanisms for reporting discriminatory behaviours as well as access to effective legal remedies, to help end the impunity of those who engage in this behaviour;

    Right to life: towards the universal abolition of the death penalty

    51. Reiterates its principled opposition to the death penalty, which is irreversible and incompatible with the right to life and with the prohibition of torture, and a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment; stresses that the EU must be relentless in its pursuit of the universal abolition of the death penalty as a major objective of its human rights foreign policy; notes that despite the trend in some non-EU countries to take steps towards abolishing the death penalty, significant challenges in this regard still exist; deplores the fact that in other non-EU countries the number of death sentences that have been carried out has reached its highest level in the last five years; reiterates its call for all countries to completely abolish the death penalty or establish an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty (sentences and executions) as a first step towards its abolition; urges, in this regard, the EU to intensify diplomatic engagement with countries that continue to practise the death penalty, encouraging dialogue and cooperation on human rights issues and providing support for the development of judicial reforms that could lead towards its abolition;

    Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief

    52. Reiterates its concern regarding violations of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief; is concerned about the worldwide increase in intolerance towards different religious communities; deplores the instrumentalisation of religious or belief identities for political purposes and the exclusion of persons belonging to religious and belief minorities and religious communities, including from political participation, as well as the destruction and vandalism of sites and works of art of cultural and historical value, in certain non-EU countries; stresses that the freedom to choose one’s religion, to believe or not to believe is a human right that cannot be punished; condemns, therefore, the existence and implementation of so-called apostasy laws and blasphemy laws that lead to harsh penalties, degrading treatment and, in some cases, even to death sentences; calls for the abolition of apostasy laws and blasphemy laws; stresses that the Special Envoy for the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU should be granted more resources so that he can efficiently carry out his mandate; highlights the need for the Special Envoy to continue to work closely and in a complementary manner with the EUSR for Human Rights and the Council Working Party on Human Rights; calls for the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, to raise these issues at UN human rights forums and to continue working with the relevant UN mechanisms and committees; calls for the EU to request and consolidate reports by EU delegations on the state of freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief;

    53. Recalls that most of the drivers of violent conflicts worldwide involve minority grievances of exclusion, discrimination and inequalities linked to violations of the human rights of minorities, as observed by the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues; stresses the need to mainstream the protection of the rights of minorities and for the development of protection mechanisms at the level of the UN; recalls the obligations of states to protect the rights of their national, ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic minorities within their respective territories; calls on the Commission to support the protection of the rights of persons belonging to minorities worldwide, including this as a priority under the human rights and democracy thematic programme of the EU’s NDICI-Global Europe;

    Right to freedom of expression, academic freedom, media freedom and the right to information

    54. Emphasises the critical significance of freedom of expression and access to trustworthy and diverse sources of information for sustaining democracy and a thriving civic space; recalls that democracies can only function when citizens have access to independent and reliable information, making journalists key players in the safeguarding of democracy; is therefore seriously concerned about the increasing restrictions on freedom of expression in numerous countries worldwide, particularly for journalists, through censorship, enforced self-censorship, so-called foreign agents laws and the misuse of counter-terrorism or anti-corruption laws to suppress journalists and civil society groups; is concerned by the use of hate speech against journalists, both online and offline, leading to a deterrent effect; raises concerns, additionally, about the physical security of journalists and media workers and their being targeted in conflict zones; notes the number of journalists killed in conflict situations in 2023, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, has increased alarmingly – by 85 % – since 2022;

    55. Calls urgently for the EU to back trustworthy media and information outlets that promote the accountability of authorities and support democratic transitions, while stressing the need to preserve the principles of pluralism, transparency and independence; highlights the role played by fact checkers in the media landscape, ensuring that the public can trust the information they receive; is concerned that they are therefore major targets for attacks by illiberal regimes that originate and disseminate disinformation, propaganda and fake news; condemns the extensive use of SLAPPs to silence journalists, activists, trade unionists and HRDs globally; welcomes, in this context, the directive designed to shield journalists and HRDs from abusive legal actions and SLAPPs; encourages lawmakers in non-EU countries to develop legislation with the same goal, as part of broader efforts to promote and protect media freedom and pluralism; requests that attacks on media freedom, as well as the persistent and systematic erosion of the right to information, be taken into account in the EU’s monitoring of the compliance of international agreements;

    56. Welcomes the Commission’s plan to finance initiatives that support journalists on legal and practical matters, including beyond the EU, through the European Democracy Action Plan; calls for the EU to strengthen its efforts to aid targeted journalists globally, recalling that independent journalists are on the frontline of the fight against disinformation, which undermines democracies; acknowledges the contribution to achieving this goal of programmes such as the now-defunct Media4Democracy and other EU-funded activities, including those of the European Endowment for Democracy; urges the EU to help make reliable news sources available to more people living in countries that restrict press freedom;

    57. Remains deeply concerned by the deteriorating state of press freedom around the world; condemns the censorship of journalists, HRDs and CSOs through the application of so-called foreign agents laws, as well as other legislative and non-legislative measures adopted by authoritarian and illiberal regimes;

    58. Reaffirms its commitment to protecting and promoting academic freedom as a key component of open and democratic societies; underlines the attacks to academic freedom not only by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, but also by extreme and populist forces worldwide; calls for the development of benchmarks for academic freedom into institutional quality assurance within academic rankings, procedures and criteria;

    59. Notes with concern that more than half of the world’s population lives within environments of completely or severely restricted levels of academic freedom, which has severe consequences for the right to education, the enjoyment of the benefits of scientific progress and the freedom of opinion and expression; urges the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to halt censorship, threats or attacks on academic freedom, and especially the imprisonment of scholars worldwide; welcomes the inclusion of academics at risk in the EU Human Rights Defenders Mechanism; calls on the Commission to ensure continued high-level support for the Global Campus of Human Rights, which has provided a safe space for students and scholars who had to flee their countries for defending democracy and human rights;

    Rights of indigenous peoples

    60. Notes with regret that indigenous peoples continue to face widespread and systematic discrimination and persecution worldwide, including forced displacements; condemns arbitrary arrests and the killing of human rights and land defenders who stand up for the rights of indigenous peoples; stresses that the promotion of the rights of indigenous peoples and their traditional practices are key to achieving sustainable development, combating climate change and conserving biodiversity; urges governments to pursue development and environmental policies that respect economic, social and cultural rights, and that are inclusive of indigenous peoples and local populations, in line with the UN SDGs; reiterates its call for the EU, its Member States and their partners in the international community to adopt all necessary measures for the recognition, protection and promotion of the rights of indigenous people, including as regards their languages, lands, territories and resources, as set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the principle of free, prior and informed consent; calls on all states to ensure that indigenous peoples and local communities are included in the deliberations and decision-making processes of international climate diplomacy; encourages the Commission to continue to promote dialogue and collaboration between indigenous peoples and the EU;

    Right to public participation

    61. Deplores that the right to participate in free and fair elections is not respected in authoritarian, illiberal, and totalitarian regimes; highlights that these regimes conduct fake elections with the aim of entrenching their power, as they lack real political contestation and pluralism; is alarmed by current trends in electoral processes, such as the increasing decline in electoral participation and democratic performance or the growing disputes concerning the credibility of elections; highlights with deep concern the growing interference by some states in other countries’ elections through hybrid tactics; reaffirms the necessity of increasing political representation of women, young people and vulnerable groups and to guarantee the public participation of minorities; underlines that distrust in the electoral process can be exacerbated not only by irregularities but also by public statements, including from participants; emphasises that public perception of electoral process is as crucial as the process itself, as its manipulation can lead to polarisation or targeted attacks; calls on non-EU countries to reinforce their efforts to clearly communicate all the steps of their respective electoral processes and systems, as well as the existing accountability mechanisms in case of irregularities; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to analyse and report to Parliament their initiatives to tackle the challenges posed by articifical intelligence (AI) in electoral processes;

    Human rights, business and trade

    62. Stresses the role of trade as a major instrument to promote and improve the human rights situation in the EU’s partner countries; urges the Commission to improve coordination between the EU’s trade, investment and development policies and prioritise and promote the development of human rights through EU trade policies, including the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus; notes, however, that there has been little to no improvement in some of the countries concerned; stresses the responsibilities of states and other actors, such as corporations, to mitigate the effects of climate change, prevent their negative impact on human rights and promote appropriate policies in compliance with human rights obligations; deplores the detrimental effects of some excessive and exploitative business activities on human rights and democracy; welcomes the harmonisation resulting from the adoption of the Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence with binding EU rules on responsible corporate behaviour with regard to human, labour and environmental rights; further welcomes the Regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market[12] and calls for its swift implementation at Member State level; calls for the implementation of the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, and for the adaptation of the Commission’s Single Entry Point to allow for the submission of complaints regarding failures to comply with human rights clauses, which should be accessible, citizen-friendly and transparent; calls for the EU to continue its efforts to eliminate child labour, and forced and bonded labour; stresses the importance of remediation and access to justice measures that are in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, including financial and non-financial measures in consultation with the victims; calls on the Council to adopt an ambitious mandate for the EU to engage in the ongoing negotiations on the UN legally binding instrument on business and human rights as soon as possible;

    63. Highlights that in many regions of the world, micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) are often the driving force of local economies with an increasing number of women running them; underlines that MSMEs account for 90 % of businesses, 60 to 70 % of employment and 50 % of gross domestic product worldwide; highlights the importance of MSMEs in their contribution to the 2030 Agenda and the achievement of the SDGs, namely those on the eradication of poverty and decent working conditions for all;

    Human rights and digital technologies

    64. Is concerned by the threat that AI can pose to democracy and human rights, especially if it is not duly regulated; highlights the need for oversight, robust transparency and appropriate safeguards for new and emergent technologies, as well as a human-rights based approach; welcomes the Council conclusions on Digital Diplomacy of 26 June 2023 to strengthen the EU’s role and leadership in global digital governance, in particular its position as a shaper of the global digital rulebook based on democratic principles; welcomes, in this regard, the adoption of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act which aims to harmonise the rules on AI for protecting human rights, and the advantages that AI can bring to human wellbeing; is deeply concerned about the harmful consequences of the misuse of AI and deepfakes, particularly for women and children; notes with concern the adverse effects of the ‘fake content industry’ on the right to information and press freedom, including the rapid development of AI and the subsequent empowerment of the disinformation industry[13]; condemns the use of new and emerging technologies, such as facial recognition technology and digital surveillance, as coercive instruments and their use in the increasing harassment, intimidation and persecution of HRDs, activists, journalists and lawyers; calls on the Council for the listing under the EUGHRSR of state and non-state actors that are engaging in these practices; notes with concern the rapid development of AI in military applications, as well as the potential development and deployment of autonomous systems that could make life-or-death decisions without human input;

    65. Recalls that the international trade in spyware to non-EU countries where such tools are used against human rights activists, journalists and government critics, is a violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter;

    66. Welcomes the adoption in May 2024 of the first Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, aimed at ensuring that activities within the entire life cycle of AI systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law; reiterates the need for greater legislative attention to be paid to the profound changes arising from activities within the life cycle of AI systems, which have the potential to promote human prosperity, individual and social well-being, sustainable development, gender equality, and the empowerment of all women and girls, but also pose the risk of creating or exacerbating inequalities and incentivising cyber and physical violence, including violence experienced by women and individuals in vulnerable situations;

    67. Stresses that the internet should be a place where freedom of expression prevails; considers, nevertheless, that the rights of individuals need to be respected; is of the opinion that, where applicable, what is considered to be illegal offline, should be considered illegal online; expresses concern for the growing number of internet shutdowns; highlights that internet shutdowns are often used by authoritarian regimes, among others, to silence political dissidence and curb political freedom; calls urgently for the EU to combat this alarming phenomenon, including considering allowing EU-based providers to offer safe communication tools to people who have been thereby deprived of online access; urges the EU to take a firm stance against any attempts by tech giants to circumvent or undermine national legal systems and independent court decisions, and to protect democratic principles and implement measures to maintain the integrity of elections, as well as to protect the right to information, especially during electoral periods;

    °

    ° °

    68. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations Secretary-General, the President of the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, the President of the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the European Union Heads of Delegation.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    Each year, the European Parliament adopts three annual reports on the EU’s foreign, security and defence, and human rights policies.

     

    The three reports are on:

     

    • the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy – annual report 2024 (based on the report of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy to the European Parliament on the Common Foreign and Security Policy) – competence of the AFET Committee,

    • Human Rights and Democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (based on the EU Annual report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World) – competence of the DROI Subcommittee, and

    • the implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy – annual report 2024 (based on the report of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy to the European Parliament on the Common Foreign and Security Policy) – competence of the SEDE Subcommittee.

     

    These reports monitor and assess the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, including the EU policy on Human Rights and the Common Security and Defence Policy. They are a key component of the European Parliament’s contribution to EU foreign policy making, most notably in regard to the strengthened right of scrutiny conferred to the European Parliament by the Treaty of Lisbon. It is essential that the European Parliament responds to the annual reports issued by other institutions as soon as they are published.

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

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Partnership for Democracy/International Dalit Solidarity Network

    Clean Clothes Campaign

    Protection International

    Race & Equality

    FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights

    International Partnership for Human Rights

    Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies

    Front Line Defenders

    Save the Children

    Avocats Sans Frontières

    Center for Reproductive Rights

    Reporters without Borders

    End FGM European Network

     

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

     

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do ), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    ANNEX II: INDIVIDUAL CASES RAISED BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT FROM DECEMBER 2023 TO JANUARY 2025

     

    COUNTRY

     

    Individual

    BACKGROUND

    ACTION TAKEN BY THE PARLIAMENT

    AFGHANISTAN

     

    Manizha Seddiqi Ahmad Fahim Azimi

    Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee  Ezatullah Zwab

    Manizha Seddiqi, Ahmad Fahim Azimi, Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee and Ezatullah Zwab are human rights defenders who have been detained in Afghanistan.

    In its resolution of 14 March 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, including Manizha Seddiqi, Ahmad Fahim Azimi, Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee and Ezatullah Zwab;

     

    – Calls for victims of violence against women and girls to be released from prison, where they are being held in inhumane conditions to the detriment of their mental and physical health.

     

    ALGERIA

     

    Boualem Sansal

    French-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal was detained on 16 November 2024 by the Algerian authorities, his whereabouts remained unknown for over a week, during which time he was denied access to his family and legal counsel; he was subsequently charged with national security-related offences under Article 87bis of the Algerian Penal Code, and he is awaiting trial.

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the arrest and detention of Boualem Sansal and calls for his immediate and unconditional release;

     

    – Equally condemns the arrests of all other activists, political prisoners, journalists, human rights defenders and others detained or sentenced for exercising their right to freedom of opinion and expression, including journalist Abdelwakil Blamm and writer Tadjadit Mohamed, and calls for their release;

     

    – Reiterates, as enshrined in the EU-Algeria Partnership Priorities, the importance of the rule of law in order to consolidate freedom of expression; stresses that renewing this agreement must be based upon continued and substantial progress in the aforementioned domains and underscores that all future disbursements of EU funds should consider the progress made in this regard.

     

    AZERBAIJAN

     

    Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu

    Ilhamiz Guliyev

    Ulvi Hasanli Sevinj Vagifgizi

    Nargiz Absalamova

    Hafiz Babali,

    Elnara Gasimova Aziz Orujov

    Rufat Muradli

    Avaz Zeynalli

    Elnur Shukurov

    Alasgar Mammadli

    Farid Ismayilov

     

    Gubad Ibadoghlu, a political economist and opposition figure, was arrested by Azerbaijani authorities in July 2023 and remained in detention until 22 April 2024, when he was transferred to house arrest; his health has deteriorated significantly since his arrest, as a result of torture, inhumane detention conditions and refusal of adequate medical care, thus endangering his life.

     

    Ilhamiz Guliyev, a human rights defender, was arbitrarily arrested on 4 December 2023 on dubious accusations of drug trafficking after he testified as whistleblower about the police tampering with evidence against government critics; he is facing up to 12 years in prison.

     

    Tofig Yagublu, Akif Gurbanov, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev are political prisoners, and Ulvi Hasanli, Sevinj Vagifgizi, Nargiz Absalamova, Hafiz Babali, Elnara Gasimova, Aziz Orujov, Rufat Muradli, Avaz Zeynalli, Elnur Shukurov, Alasgar Mammadli, Farid Ismayilov are human rights defenders and journalists.

    In its resolution of 25 April 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges Azerbaijan to immediately and unconditionally release Ilhamiz Guliyev; notes that Gubad Ibadoghlu has been released and placed under house arrest and calls on the authorities to lift the travel ban and drop all charges against him; calls on Azerbaijan to urgently ensure that he receives an independent medical examination by a doctor of his own choosing and to allow him to receive treatment abroad;

     

    – Urges Azerbaijan to immediately and unconditionally release all other political prisoners, including Tofig Yagublu, Akif Gurbanov, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, human rights defenders and journalists Ulvi Hasanli, Sevinj Vagifgizi, Nargiz Absalamova, Hafiz Babali, Elnara Gasimova, Aziz Orujov, Rufat Muradli, Avaz Zeynalli, Elnur Shukurov, Alasgar Mammadli, Farid Ismayilov, as well as EU and other nationals.

     

    AZERBAIJAN

     

    Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu, Anar Mammadli, Kamran Mammadli, Rufat Safarov and Meydan TV

    Political prisoner and 2024 Sakharov Prize finalist Gubad Ibadoghlu remains under house arrest; the European Court of Human Rights ruled that his health condition is critical, requiring hospitalisation and urgent heart surgery.

     

    Civil society leader Anar Mammadli has been in pre-trial detention since April 2024 on bogus charges, with his health deteriorating due to denied healthcare.

     

    In early December 2024, the Azerbaijani authorities arrested MeydanTV journalists Aynur Ganbarova, Aytaj Ahmadova, Khayala Agayeva, Natig Javadli and Aysel Umudova, and journalists Ramin Jabrayilzade and Ahmad Mukhtar; they also arrested Baku Journalism School deputy director Ulvi Tahirov, political leader Azer Gasimli and human rights defender Rufat Safarov; all face unfounded, politically motivated charges.

     

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the Azerbaijani authorities to immediately end the crackdown on all dissident groups and unconditionally release and drop all charges against human rights defenders, journalists and political and other activists prosecuted under fabricated, politically motivated charges;

     

    – Demands that the authorities immediately lift the travel ban on Ibadoghlu, unconditionally drop all charges against him and allow him to receive urgent treatment abroad; deplores the fact that Ibadoghlu was not allowed to attend the Sakharov Prize ceremony or connect remotely;

     

    – Calls on Azerbaijan to lift undue restrictions on independent media by aligning its laws on the registration and funding of non-governmental groups and media with Venice Commission recommendations; demands that the authorities end the repression of MeydanTV, ToplumTV, Abaz Media and Kanal13;

     

    – Calls for EU sanctions under its global human rights sanctions regime to be imposed on Azerbaijani officials responsible for serious human rights violations, including Fuad Alasgarov, Vilayat Eyvazov and Ali Naghiyev.

     

    BELARUS

     

    Marina Adamovich, Mikalai Statkevich  Tatsiana Seviarynets, Pavel Seviarynets Daria Losik

    Ihar Losik

    Mikalai Kazlou

    Ryhor Kastusiou Mikalai Statkevich Pavel Seviarynets

    Marina Adamovich, wife of Mikalai Statkevich (political prisoner), Tatsiana Seviarynets, mother of Pavel Seviarynets (political prisoner), and earlier-arrested Daria Losik, wife of Ihar Losik (political prisoner), have suffered interrogations and detentions by the KGB. 

     

    Mikalai Kazlou, Ryhor Kastusiou, Mikalai Statkevich and Pavel Seviarynets, all political prisoners, face isolation, torture, denial of medical care and forced labour.

    In its resolution of 14 December 2023, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the recent wave of mass arrests in Belarus and urges the illegitimate Lukashenka regime to cease repression, especially any gender-based persecution, and reminds the regime of its international obligations;

     

    – Calls for the immediate unconditional release and compensation of all more than 1 400 political prisoners, as well as their families and arbitrarily detained persons, while restoring their full rights.

     

    BELARUS

     

    Mikola Statkevich

    Ales Bialiatski

    Maria Kalesnikava Siarhei Tsikhanouski Viktar Babaryka Maksim Znak

    Pavel Sevyarynets Palina Sharenda-Panasiuk

    Andrzej Poczobut  Ihar Losik

    Former presidential candidate and 2020 Sakharov Prize laureate Mikola Statkevich has been imprisoned on politically motivated charges for 14 years; he is kept in solitary confinement under maximum security; his health is deteriorating and his lawyers and family have been denied information and contact for over 300 days.

     

    Prominent Belarusian political prisoners, including Ales Bialiatski, Maria Kalesnikava, Siarhei Tsikhanouski, Viktar Babaryka, Maksim Znak, Pavel Sevyarynets, Palina Sharenda-Panasiuk, Andrzej Poczobut and Ihar Losik, have been subjected to similar isolation.

    In its resolution of 8 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Demands the immediate, unconditional release of Mikola Statkevich and all 1 500 political prisoners; calls for the withdrawal of all charges against them, their full rehabilitation and financial compensation for the damage suffered as a result of being deprived of liberty;

     

    – Insists that the prisoners must receive proper medical assistance and access to lawyers, family, diplomats and international organisations, which can assess their condition and provide aid; regrets the inaction of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Belarus;

     

    – Strongly condemns the unjustified, politically motivated sentences and continued repression of Belarusian democratic forces, civil society, human rights defenders, trade unionists, journalists, clergy, political activists and their family members.

     

    CHINA

     

    Ding Yuande

    Ma Ruimei

     

    On 12 May 2023 Falun Gong practitioners Mr Ding Yuande and his wife Ms Ma Ruimei were arrested without a warrant; Ms Ma was released on bail, but was then intimidated by police because of a rescue campaign launched by their son abroad.

     

    Mr Ding was detained with no family visits for eight months; on 15 December 2023 he was sentenced to three years in prison with a CNY 15 000 fine.

    In its resolution of 18 January 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly urges the PRC to immediately end the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners and other minorities, including Uyghurs and Tibetans; demands the immediate and unconditional release of Mr Ding and all Falun Gong practitioners in China;

     

    – Calls for the PRC to end domestic and transnational surveillance and control and the suppression of religious freedom; urges the PRC to abide by its obligations under international law and its own constitution to respect and protect human rights.

     

    CHINA

     

    Ilham Tohti

    Gulshan Abbas

    In 2014 Ilham Tohti was convicted of politically motivated charges of ‘separatism’ and sentenced to life imprisonment; he worked to foster dialogue between Uyghurs and Han Chinese; he was awarded the 2019 Sakharov Prize. Gulshan Abbas has been serving a 20-year sentence on fallacious terrorism-related charges relating to activities of her sister, a defender of the human rights of persecuted Uyghurs in the PRC.

     

     

    Gulshan Abbas, is a Uyghur retired doctor, who was forcibly disappeared in retaliation of her sisters public criticism of the treatment of Uyghurs. She has received a 20-year sentence in 2020, for participating in a terrorist organisation.

     

    In its resolution of 10 October 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the PRC’s violations of the human rights of Uyghurs and people in Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau and mainland China;

     

    – Urges the PRC to immediately and unconditionally release Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas, as well as those arbitrarily detained in China and those mentioned by the EU during the 57th session of the UN Human Rights Council, guarantee their access to medical care and lawyers, provide information on their whereabouts and ensure family visiting rights; calls for the EU and the Member States to apply pressure in this respect at every high-level contact;

     

    – Demands that the PRC authorities halt their repression and targeting of Uyghurs with abusive policies, including intense surveillance, forced labour, sterilisation, birth prevention measures and the destruction of Uyghur identity, which amount to crimes against humanity and a serious risk of genocide; calls for the closure of all internment camps;

     

    – Strongly condemns the PRC for not implementing the recommendations of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR); calls on the PRC to allow the OHCHR independent access to XUAR and invites the OHCHR to issue a comprehensive situational update and an action plan for holding the PRC accountable;

     

    – Welcomes the EU’s forced labour regulation and insists on its full implementation; calls on businesses operating in the PRC, particularly in XUAR, to comply with their HR due diligence obligations.

     

    CUBA

     

    José Daniel Ferrer Garcia

     

    Human rights defender and opposition leader José Daniel Ferrer García was detained on 11 July 2021 in the context of widespread protests in Cuba, and has been held in isolation since 14 August 2021; the Cuban regime has imprisoned, harassed and intimidated him for over a decade for his peaceful political activism; since March 2023, he has been held incommunicado and his family have received no information about his health and have been denied the right to visit him.

    In its resolution of 19 September 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – The Cuban regime holds political prisoners in the most appalling conditions; whereas reports indicate that José Daniel Ferrer is in a critical condition and has been held without access to medical treatment, with inadequate food and in unsanitary conditions, which constitute forms of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment;

     

    – The human rights situation in Cuba is alarming, particularly for dissidents, who are subjected to worrying levels of surveillance and arbitrary detention; whereas the number of political prisoners is unknown but reliable sources state that the regime holds over a thousand prisoners, including minors; whereas among the many political prisoners are Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara and Lizandra Gongora, whose health condition is critical;

     

    – Urges the Cuban regime to immediately and unconditionally release José Daniel Ferrer and all persons politically and arbitrarily detained for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly;

     

    – Condemns the torture and inhuman, degrading and ill-treatment perpetrated by the Cuban authorities against José Daniel Ferrer and the other political prisoners; calls for the families of victims of the regime’s persecution to be granted immediate access to them, pending their release, and for the victims to be given medical care.

     

    CRIMEA

    Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov

    Crimean journalist and human rights defender Iryna Danylovych was abducted in 2022, accused of possessing explosives and sentenced to 6 years and 11 months of imprisonment; NGO activist Tofik Abdulhaziiev was arrested in 2019 and sentenced to 12 years in a maximum security prison on trumped-up charges, and since 2023 is being held in a prison some 2 700 km away from Crimea; citizen journalist Amet Suleymanov was sentenced to 12 years of prison in 2021.

     

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns Russia’s continuous targeting of ethnic Ukrainians and systematic persecution of indigenous Crimean Tatars, which aims to erase their identity, heritage and culture, echoing, for the Crimean Tatars, the genocidal deportations of 1944; considers that Crimea’s future is tied to its recognition as the Crimean Tatars’ historic homeland;

     

    – Condemns the persecution of journalists, civil society activists and human rights defenders and the deportation of civilians including political prisoners from Crimea to penitentiary institutions across Russia, contrary to international law;

     

    – Demands the immediate and unconditional release of Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov and other political prisoners; calls for immediate medical care to be provided; denounces the upholding of verdicts against seriously ill individuals, which constitutes a blatant violation of international human rights standards; calls on the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN to establish the whereabouts of civilian detainees from Crimea.

     

    DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

     

    Jean-Jacques Wondo

    Jean-Jacques Wondo, a Belgian-Congolese security, military and political expert, was arrested following a failed coup on 19 May 2024, for which he was accused of being the ‘intellectual perpetrator’, on 13 September 2024, Wondo and 36 others were sentenced to death by a military court.

     

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the sentencing to death of Wondo and others and the grave violations of their right to a fair trial;

     

    – Urges the DRC Government to immediately overturn the death sentences, reinstate a moratorium on executions and take steps towards the full abolition of the death penalty;

     

    –  Expresses deep concern about Wondo’s deteriorating health, calls for him to be given immediate access to medical treatment and insists on his immediate release;

     

    – Calls for systemic reforms to be implemented in the DRC to rebuild the judiciary into an independent, fair and efficient institution that guarantees due process and the protection of fundamental rights.

     

    GREECE

     

    George Karaivaz

    George Karaivaz was a journalist who have been murdered on 9 April 2021.

    In its resolution of 7 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Is deeply concerned by the failure of law enforcement and the judicial authorities in Greece to make progress in the investigation into the murder of the Greek journalist George Karaivaz on 9 April 2021; notes that two suspects were arrested in April 2023, but otherwise there has not been any discernible activity in the police investigation; strongly urges the authorities to take all the necessary steps towards conducting a thorough and effective investigation, and to bring those involved in the murder, at any level, to justice; urges the authorities to request assistance from Europol.

     

    HONG KONG

     

    Andy Li

    Joseph John

    Andy Li, a pro-democracy activist and key witness in Jimmy Lai’s trial, allegedly confessed, under torture, to conspiracy and collusion with foreign entities.

     

    Joseph John, a HK-Portuguese dual national, is the first extraterritorial application of the NSL to an EU citizen; John was arrested for allegedly posting anti-China social media content and committing, from Europe, incitement to ‘secession’, and was sentenced on 11 April 2024 to five years’ imprisonment.

    In its resolution of 25 April 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the HK Government to immediately and unconditionally release Li, John, Lai, Kok Tsz-lun and all other pro-democracy representatives and activists detained for exercising their freedoms and democratic rights, and to drop all charges against them;

     

    – Highlights the SNSO’s undermining of press freedoms; calls on the authorities to stop harassing and prosecuting journalists.

     

    HONG KONG/ CHINA

     

    Jimmy Lai

    Jimmy Lai has been detained since 2020 on trumped-up charges; his trial started in 2023 after various delays; he denied these charges and faces life imprisonment; his British lawyer has been refused permission to represent him. Jimmy Lai a British national since 1996, is a Hong Kong media tycoon, and a known pro- democracy supporter.  Political prisoners in HK endure difficult conditions, often affecting their health, throughout lengthy pre-trial detentions, as with 76-year-old Lai, who has diabetes and has been denied Communion in prison.

     

    45 pro-democracy politicians, activists and journalists were sentenced for subversion, in the ‘Hong Kong 47’ case, for organising unofficial election primaries; their trials were the largest national security trials to date;

     

    In its resolution of 28 November 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the sentencing of pro-democracy activists on national security charges, in violation of international law; calls for the repeal of the NSL and the SNSO; denounces the degradation of basic freedoms in HK;

     

    – Urges the HK Government to immediately and unconditionally release all pro-democracy activists, including Lai and Chung, and to drop all charges against them;

     

    – Calls on the EEAS and the Member States to warn China that its actions in HK will have consequences for EU-China relations; calls on the Council to review its 2020 conclusions on HK and to impose targeted sanctions on John Lee and other HK and Chinese officials responsible for human rights violations, to revoke HK’s favourable customs treatment and review the status of the HK Economic Trade Office in Brussels; urges the Member States to file an ICJ case against China’s decision to impose the NSL on HK and Macau.

     

    IRAN

     

    Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi

    Kurdish activists, social worker Pakhshan Azizi and advocate for women’s rights Verisheh (Wrisha) Moradi were sentenced to death for ‘armed rebellion against the state’.

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Denounces the Iranian regime’s unrestrained repression of human rights, in particular the targeting of women activists; strongly condemns the death sentence against Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi; demands that Iran immediately and unconditionally release all unjustly imprisoned human rights defenders and political prisoners, including Pakhshan Azizi, Wrisha Moradi and at least 56 other political prisoners on death row;

     

    – Calls for the EU and its Member States to increase support for Iranian human rights defenders and expresses its full support and solidarity with Iranians united in the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ movement;

     

    – Urges the Iranian authorities to immediately release, safely repatriate and drop all charges against EU nationals, including Olivier Grondeau, Cécile Kohler, Jacques Paris and Ahmadreza Djalali; strongly condemns Iran’s use of hostage diplomacy; calls for the EU and its Member States to undertake joint diplomatic efforts and work collectively towards their release;

     

    – Strongly condemns the murder of Jamshid Sharmahd; urges the Islamic regime in Iran to provide details of the circumstances of his death and for his remains to be immediately returned to his family;

     

    – Reiterates its call on the Council to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organisation and to extend EU sanctions to all those responsible for human rights violations, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, President Masoud Pezeshkian, Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i, Prosecutor-General Mohammad Movahedi-Azad and Judge Iman Afshari;

     

    – Urges the Iranian authorities to provide the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran and the UN fact-finding mission with full, unimpeded access to enact their mandates.

     

    KYRGYZSTAN

     

    Temirlan Sultanbekov

    Temirlan Sultanbekov is the leader of the Kyrgyzstan Social Democrats party (SDK), he and other party officials have been arrested for vote-buying allegations, with an audiotape of unknown origin serving as the primary evidence, for which the judicial authorisation is unclear and its connection with the detainees unknown.

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the Kyrgyz authorities to immediately release Mr Sultanbekov and other party officials and adopt alternative measures to detention, while respecting their right to due process in line with the civil and political rights guaranteed under the Kyrgyz constitution and international obligations; calls on the authorities to ensure his safety and well-being;

     

    – Urges the Kyrgyz government to halt its campaign of intimidation and legal persecution against opposition parties, independent media outlets and journalists; is concerned by the adoption of the Russian-style ‘foreign agents’ law; urges the Kyrgyz authorities to drop all charges against human rights defenders, including Makhabat Tazhibek Kyzy, Azamat Ishenbekov, Aktilek Kaparov and Ayke Beishekeeva, journalists from the Temirov Live and Ait Ait Dese channels.

     

    RUSSIA

     

    Alexei Navalny

    Vladimir Kara-Murza

    Yuri Dmitriev

    Ilya Yashin

    Alexei Gorinov

    Lilia Chanysheva Ksenia Fadeeva, Vadim Ostanin

    Daniel Kholodny Vadim Kobzev

    Igor Sergunin

    Alexei Liptser Viktoria Petrova Maria Ponomarenko Alexandra Skochilenko

    Svetlana Petriychuk Evgenia Berkovich Dmitry Ivanov

    Ioann Kurmoyarov Igor Baryshnikov Dmitry Talantov Alexei Moskalev

    Oleg Orlov

    Boris Kagarlitsky

    Ivan Safronov

     

    Alexei Navalny, a prominent Russian political figure and the 2021 laureate of the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, perished in a Siberian penal colony north of the Arctic Circle while serving a unfounded, politically motivated prison sentence. He had been in detention since 17 January 2021, the date on which he returned to Russia following medical rehabilitation after an attempted state-sponsored assassination using the internationally banned nerve agent Novichok; he had previously been detained and arrested many times and had been sentenced, on fabricated and politically motivated grounds, to long prison terms in evident attempts to stop his political activities and anti-corruption campaigns.

     

    Vladimir Kara-Murza, Yuri Dmitriev, Ilya Yashin, Alexei Gorinov, Lilia Chanysheva, Ksenia Fadeeva, Vadim Ostanin, Daniel Kholodny, Vadim Kobzev, Igor Sergunin, Alexei Liptser, Viktoria Petrova, Maria Ponomarenko, Alexandra Skochilenko, Svetlana Petriychuk, Evgenia Berkovich, Dmitry Ivanov, Ioann Kurmoyarov, Igor Baryshnikov, Dmitry Talantov, Alexei Moskalev, Oleg Orlov, Boris Kagarlitsky and Ivan Safronov are political prisoners.

     

    In its resolution of 29 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the murder of Alexei Navalny; expresses its wholehearted condolences to his family, associates and colleagues, and to his countless supporters across Russia; expresses its full support to Yulia Navalnaya in her determination to continue the work started by Alexei Navalny with her support, and to the Anti-Corruption Foundation founded by Navalny, which is continuing its work under the new circumstances;

     

    – Calls on the Russian authorities to drop all arbitrary charges and to immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners and arbitrarily detained persons.

    TAJIKISTAN

     

    Abdullo Ghurbati Daler Imomali Zavqibek Saidamini Abdusattor Pirmuhammadzoda Ulfatkhonim Mamadshoeva Khushruz Jumayev Khurshed Fozilov

    Manuchehr Kholiknazarov Buzurgmehr Yorov

     

    Abdullo Ghurbati, Daler Imomali, Zavqibek Saidamini, Abdusattor Pirmuhammadzoda, Ulfatkhonim Mamadshoeva, Khushruz Jumayev and Khurshed Fozilov are journalists who have been sentenced to between seven and over 20 years in prison in retaliation for their coverage of social issues and human rights abuses, including in GBAO.

     

    Manuchehr Kholiknazarov and Buzurgmehr Yorov  are human rights lawyers who have been detained.

    In its resolution of 18 January 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the ongoing crackdown, including anti-extremism legislation, against independent media, government critics, human rights activists and independent lawyers; condemns the closure of independent media and websites, including the online media outlets Pamir Daily News, New Tajikistan 2 and Akhbor.com;

     

    – Condemns all politically motivated trials and the lack of fair and public hearings by independent courts; urges the authorities to stop persecuting journalists, immediately and unconditionally release those who have been arbitrarily detained and drop all charges against them, stop the persecution of lawyers defending government critics and release human rights lawyers Manuchehr Kholiknazarov and Buzurgmehr Yorov;

     

    – Urges the government to ensure that detainees have access to adequate healthcare; calls for a thorough investigation into allegations of mistreatment in custody and forced confessions, and those responsible to be brought to justice.

     

    TÜRKIYE

     

    Bülent Mumay

    Bülent Mumay is a Turkish journalist and coordinator of the Istanbul bureau of Deutsche Welle’s Turkish editorial office, was sentenced to 20 months in prison for social media posts about a pro-government company’s seizure of Istanbul Municipality’s subway funds during the AKP administration; his appeal was rejected, and his tweets removed.

    In its resolution of 10 October 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the sentence against Bülent Mumay, which follows a broader pattern of silencing critical journalism; calls on the Turkish authorities to drop the charges against Bülent Mumay, and all arbitrarily detained media workers and journalists, as well as political opponents, human rights defenders, civil servants and academics;

     

    –  Is deeply concerned about the ongoing deterioration of democratic standards in Türkiye, relentless crackdown on any critical voices and targeting of independent journalists, activists and opposition members amid frequent reports of legal intimidation, censorship and financial coercion as ways to suppress criticism and investigative journalism.

     

    VENEZUELA

     

    Rocío San Miguel

    General Hernández Da Costa 

    Ronald Ojeda

    María Corina Machado

    Juan Freites

    Luis Camacaro Guillermo Lopez Emil Brandt

     

    Rocío San Miguel is a lawyer and human rights activist with Spanish nationality, who got kidnapped by the Venezuelan regime on 9 February 2024, and sentenced on politically motivated grounds of suspected conspiracy against Nicolás Maduro and his regime; she is currently being detained in El Helicoide prison, which is known for human rights abuses, including torture.

     

    Hernández Da Costa has been a political prisoner since August 2018; on 19 February 2024, he was forcibly transferred to El Rodeo 1 prison, designed to detain political prisoners; an unknown number of prisoners, including some EU citizens, were also transferred; the general suffers from medical ailments that require constant treatment, which he is being denied.

     

    Ronald Ojeda was a former political prisoner who escaped the Maduro regime, and got murdered in Chile.

     

    Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro, Guillermo Lopez and Emil Brandt are four campaign coordinators working for the opposition to the regime’s presidential candidate, and have been detained on political grounds.

     

    In its resolution of 14 March 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Demands the immediate unconditional release of all political prisoners and arbitrarily detained persons, and the full restoration of their rights; exhorts the regime to cease its policy of repression and attacks on civil society and the opposition;

     

    – Strongly condemns the Maduro regime for imprisoning hundreds of political prisoners;

     

    – Calls on the international community to support a return to democracy in Venezuela, particularly in the light of the upcoming elections, in which the leader of the opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, must be allowed to fully participate.

    VENEZUELA

     

    Maria Corina Machado

    Juan Freites

    Luis Camacaro Guillermo López

    Maria Corina Machado was selected as the presidential candidate of the democratic opposition to the regime, winning with 92,35 % of the votes in the primary elections. She got a disqualification of 15 years.

     

    For several months, members of María Corina Machado’s campaign team – including Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro and Guillermo López, who were unlawfully detained and have since been reported missing.

    In its resolution of 8 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all the arbitrarily arrested political and social leaders, including three campaign staffers of the presidential candidate of the opposition to the regime María Corina Machado, namely Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro and Guillermo Lopez;

     

    – Strongly condemns the attempts to disqualify the presidential candidate of the democratic opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, and others, such as Henrique Capriles, from holding public office;

     

    – Urges the Venezuelan regime to immediately stop the persecution of the primary winner and thus fully legitimate candidate of the opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, and other opposition politicians.

     

     

     

     

    ANNEX III: LIST OF SAKHAROV PRIZE LAUREATES AND FINALISTS IMPRISONED AND DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY

     

    Year of Sakharov Prize award

    Name and surname

    Laureate / Finalist

    Country

    Situation (Detention / house arrest / temporarily released)

    Length of prison sentence

    Start date of detention

    2024

    Gubad Ibadoghlu

    Finalist

    Azerbaijan

    Under travel ban

     

    A court rejected Ibadoglu’s appeal against the travel ban on 3/12/2024

    2021

    Alexei Navalny

    Laureate

     

    Russia

    Deceased in prison on 16/2/2024

     

    3,5 + 9 + 19 years

    Last detained 17/2/21, last sentenced 4/8/23

    2020

    Siarhei Tsikhanouski

     

    Maryia Kalesnikava

     

    Mikola Statkevich

     

     

    Ales Bialiatski

    Laureate

     

    Laureate

     

    Laureate

     

     

    Laureate

    Belarus

     

    Detention

     

    Detention

     

    Detention

     

     

    Detention

    18 years

     

    11 years

     

    14 years

     

     

    10 years

     

    Detained 29/5/20, sentenced 14/12/21

    Detained 07/9/20, sentenced 06/9/21

    Last detained 31/5/20, last sentenced 14/12/21

    Last detained 15/7/21, last sentenced 03/03/23

    2020

    Porfirio Sorto Cedillo, José Avelino Cedillo, Orbin Naún Hernández, Kevin Alejandro Romero, Arnold Javier Aleman, Ever Alexander Cedillo, Daniel Marquez and Jeremías Martínez Díaz

    Finalists

    Honduras

    Detention

    Unknown

    1/9/2019, released on 24/2/2022, after a ruling by the Supreme Court of Honduras

    2019

    Ilham Tohti

    Laureate

    China

    Detention

    Unknown

    23/9/2014

    2018

    Nasser Zefzafi

     

    Finalist

    Morocco

    Detention

    20 years

    5/4/2019

    2017

    Dawit Isaak

    Finalist

    Eritrea

    Incommunicado detention

    Unknown

    23/9/2001

    2015

    Raif Badawi

    Laureate

    Saudi Arabia

    Released on 11/3/2022, since then under a 10-year travel ban

     

    10 years

    First sentenced on 17/12/2012, but announced on 30/3/2013

    2012

    Nasrin Sotoudeh

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Jafar Panahi

    Laureate

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Laureate

    Iran

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Iran

    Detention, on temporary medical furlough since July 2021, arrested again 29/10/2023 and released 15/11/2023

     

    Detained in 2022,

    released on 3/2/2023 after hunger strike

    38 years

     

     

     

     

     

     

    6 years

    6/3/2019 (most recent)

     

     

     

     

     

    compelled in July 2022 to serve a 10-years old prison sentence

    2011

    Razan Zaitouneh

    Laureate

    Syria

    Kidnapped in 2013. Presumptions of detention and death.

     

    9/12/2013

    2009

    Memorial – Oleg Orlov

    Laureate

     

     

    Russia

    Released on 1/8/2024 as part of a prisoner exchange with the US and Germany

    2.5 years

    Latest sentence in February 2024. Memorial as legal entity liquidated in January 2022.

     

     

    ANNEX IV: LIST OF RESOLUTIONS

    List of resolutions adopted by the European Parliament from December 2023 to January 2025 and related directly or indirectly to human rights violations in the world

     

     

    Country/Region

    Date of adoption in plenary

     

    Title

    Africa

     

     

    Algeria

    23.01.2025

    The case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria

    Democratic Republic of the Congo

    23.01.2025

    The case of Jean-Jacques Wondo

     

    Gambia

     

    25.04.2024

    On the proposed repeal of the law banning female genital mutilation in The Gambia

    Nigeria

    08.02.2024

    On the recent attacks on Christmas Eve in Plateau State in Nigeria

    Sudan

    18.01.2024

    On the threat of famine following the spread of the conflict in Sudan

    Tanzania

    14.12.2023

    On the Maasai Communities in Tanzania

    Americas

     

     

    Cuba

    29.02.2024

    On the critical situation in Cuba

    Cuba

    19.09.2024

    The case of José Daniel Ferrer García in Cuba

    Guatemala

    14.12.2023

    On the attempt at a coup d’état in Guatemala

    Venezuela

    08.02.2024

    On further repression against the democratic forces in Venezuela: attacks on presidential candidate María Corina Machado

     

    Venezuela

     

    14.03.2024

    On the case of Rocío San Miguel and General Hernández Da Costa, among other political prisoners in Venezuela

    Venezuela

    19.09.2024

    Situation on Venezuela

    Venezuela

    23.01.2025

    Situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025

    Asia

     

     

     

    Afghanistan

     

     

    14.03.2024

    On the repressive environment in Afghanistan, including public executions and violence against women

    Afghanistan

    19.09.2024

    The deteriorating situation of women in Afghanistan due to the recent adoption of the law on the “Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice”

     

    Azerbaijan

     

    25.04.2024

    On Azerbaijan, notably the repression of civil society and the cases of Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu and Ilhamiz Guliyev

    Azerbaijan

    19.12.2024

    Continued repression of civil society and independent media in Azerbaijan and the cases of Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu, Anar Mammadli, Kamran Mammadli, Rufat Safarov and Meydan TV

    Cambodia

    28.11.2024

    The shrinking space for civil society in Cambodia, in particular the case of the labour rights organisation CENTRAL

     

    China

     

    18.01.2024

    On the ongoing persecution of Falun Gong in China, notably the case of Mr Ding Yuande

    China

     

    10.10.2024

    The cases of unjustly imprisoned Uyghurs in China, notably Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas

    China/ Taiwan

    24.10.2024

    Misinterpretation of UN resolution 2758 by the People’s Republic of China and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan

     

    Hong Kong

     

    25.04.2024

    On the new security law in Hong Kong and the cases of Andy Li and Joseph John

    Hong Kong/ China

     

    28.11.2024

    Hong Kong, notably the cases of Jimmy Lai and the 45 activists recently convicted under the national security law

    Kyrgyzstan

    19.12.2024

    Human rights situation in Kyrgyzstan, in particular the case of Temirlan Sultanbekov

    Tajikistan

    18.01.2024

    On Tajikistan: state repression against the independent media

     

    Tibet

     

    14.12.2023

    On the abduction of Tibetan children and forced assimilation practices through Chinese boarding schools in Tibet

    Middle East

     

     

     

    Iran/Israel

     

    25.04.2024

    On Iran’s unprecedented attack against Israel, the need for de-escalation and an EU response

     

    Iran

     

    08.02.2024

    On the increased number of executions in Iran, in particular the case of Mohammad Ghobadlou

    Iran

    28.11.2024

    The increasing and systematic repression of women in Iran

    Iran

    23.01.2025

    Systematic repression of human rights in Iran

    Iraq

    10.10.2024

    Iraq, notably the situation of women’s rights and the recent proposal to amend the Personal Status Law

     

    Palestine

     

    18.01.2024

    On the humanitarian situation in Gaza, the need to reach a ceasefire and the risks of regional escalation

     

    Palestine

     

    14.03.2024

    On the immediate risk of mass starvation in Gaza and the attacks on humanitarian aid deliveries

    Europe and Eastern Partnership countries

     

     

     

    Azerbaijan/Armenia

     

    13.03.2024

    On closer ties between the EU and Armenia and the need for a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia

    Azerbaijan/ Armenia

    24.10.2024

    Situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia

     

    Belarus

     

    14.12.2023

    On the unknown status of Mikola Statkevich and the recent attacks on Belarusian politicians’ and activists’ family members

     

    Belarus

     

    08.02.2024

    on the new wave of mass arrests in Belarus of opposition activists and their family members

    Belarus

    19.09.2024

    The severe situation of political prisoners in Belarus

    Belarus

    22.01.2025

    Actions to address the continued oppression and fake elections in Belarus

    Crimea

    19.12.2024

    11th year of the occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and the deteriorating human rights situation in occupied Crimea, notably the cases of Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov

     

    Georgia

     

    25.04.2024

    On attempts to reintroduce a foreign agent law in Georgia and its restrictions on civil society

    Georgia

    09.10.2024

    The democratic backsliding and threats to political pluralism in Georgia

    Georgia

    28.11.2024

    Georgia’s worsening democratic crisis following the recent parliamentary elections and alleged electoral fraud

    Greece

    07.02.2024

    On the rule of law and media freedom in Greece

     

    Hungary

     

    24.04.2024

    On ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU regarding Hungary to strengthen the rule of law and its budgetary implications

    Hungary

    18.01.2024

    On the situation in Hungary and frozen EU funds

    Moldova

    09.10.2024

    Strengthening Moldova’s resilience against Russian interference ahead of the upcoming presidential elections and a constitutional referendum on EU integration

     

    Russia

     

    29.02.2024

    On the murder of Alexei Navalny and the need for EU action in support of political prisoners and oppressed civil society in Russia

     

    Russia

     

    08.02.2024

    On Russiagate: allegations of Russian interference in the democratic processes of the European Union

     

     

    Russia

     

     

    25.04.2024

    On new allegations of Russian interference in the European Parliament, in the upcoming EU elections and the impact on the European Union

     

    Russia

     

    25.04.2024

    On Russia’s undemocratic presidential elections and their illegitimate extension to the occupied territories

    Russia

     

    14.11.2024

    EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia

    Russia

     

    23.01.2025

    Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine

    Russia/ North Korea

    28.11.2024

    Reinforcing EU’s unwavering support to Ukraine against Russia’s war of aggression and the increasing military cooperation between North Korea and Russia

    Serbia

    08.02.2024

    On the situation in Serbia following the elections

     

    Slovakia

     

    17.01.2024

    On the planned dissolution of key anti-corruption structures in Slovakia and its implications for the rule of law

    Türkiye

    10.10.2024

    European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2024 on the case of Bülent Mumay in Türkiye

    Cross-cutting issues

     

     

    Children liberty

    13.12.2023

    On the situation of children deprived of liberty in the world

     

    LGBTIQ rights

     

    08.02.2024

    On the implementation of the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

     

     

    Protection of journalists

     

     

    27.02.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings

     

    Human rights and democracy

     

    28.02.2024

    Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2023

    Foreign and security policy

    28.02.2024

    Implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 2023

     

     

    Media freedom

     

     

    13.03.2024

    On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market

     

     

    Forced labour

     

     

    23.04.2024

    On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market

    Right of abortion

    11.04.2024

    On including the right to abortion in the EU Fundamental Rights Charter

     

     

    Due diligence

     

     

    24.04.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive

     

    Fundamental rights

     

    18.01.2024

    On the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union – annual report 2022 and 2023

    Hate speech

    18.01.2024

    On extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime

     

     

    Business and human rights

     

     

    18.01.2024

    On shaping the EU’s position on the UN binding instrument on business and human rights, in particular on access to remedy and the protection of victims

    Freedom of scientific research

    17.01.2024

    On promotion of the freedom of scientific research in the EU

    Citizens, equality, rights and values

    16.01.2024

    On the implementation of the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme 2021-2027

     

     

    Violence against women

     

     

    24.04.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating violence against women and domestic violence

     

    Human beings traffic

     

    23.04.2024

    On preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme – A10-0021/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme

    (2024/2109(INI))

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to Articles 179 to 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    – 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 Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013[2],

    – having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2021/764 of 10 May 2021 establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and repealing Decision 2013/743/EU[3],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/819 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology[4],

    – having regard to Decision (EU) 2021/820 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the Strategic Innovation Agenda of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) 2021-2027: Boosting the Innovation Talent and Capacity of Europe and repealing Decision No 1312/2013/EU[5],

    – having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2085 of 19 November 2021 establishing the Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe and repealing Regulations (EC) No 219/2007, (EU) No 557/2014, (EU) No 558/2014, (EU) No 559/2014, (EU) No 560/2014, (EU) No 561/2014 and (EU) No 642/2014[6],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/1092[7],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 entitled ‘A new ERA for Research and Innovation’ (COM(2020)0628),

    _ having regard to the Commission communication of 22 October 2024 entitled ‘Implementation of the European Research Area (ERA) – Strengthening Europe’s Research and Innovation: The ERA’s Journey and Future Directions’ (COM(2024)0490),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2021 on the Global Approach to Research and Innovation Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world (COM(2021)0252),

    – having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2022 on a global approach to research and innovation: Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world[8],

    – having regard to its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council[9],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 July 2023 entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ (COM(2023)0457),

    – having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2023 on young researchers[10],

    – having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 with recommendations to the Commission on promotion of the freedom of scientific research in the EU[11],

    – having regard to the European Research and Innovation Area Committee Opinion of 26 June 2024 on Guidance for the next Framework Programme for Research & Innovation,

    – having regard to the partnership evaluation reports published in 2024 on eight of the nine Knowledge and Innovation Communities, namely EIT Urban Mobility, EIT Climate-KIC, EIT Food, EIT InnoEnergy, EIT Health, EIT Manufacturing, EIT Raw Materials, and EIT Digital,

    – having regard to the Report of the CERIS Expert Group of November 2024 entitled ‘Building resilience in the civil security domain based on research and technology’,

    – having regard to European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 of September 2022 entitled ‘Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget– Not as high as reported’,

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 January 2016 entitled ‘On the Response to the Report of the High Level Expert Group on the Ex Post Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme’(COM(2016)0005),

    – having regard to Enrico Letta’s report of 17 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’,

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

    – having regard to the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe of 16 October 2024 entitled ‘Align, Act, Accelerate: Research, Technology and Innovation to boost European Competitiveness,

    – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0021/2025),

    A. whereas Horizon Europe (HEU) is the EU’s largest centrally managed funding programme and the largest publicly funded research and development (R&D) programme in the world; whereas Parliament initially proposed a budget of EUR 120 billion rather than the EUR 93.4 billion left after the revision of the multiannual financial framework;

    B. whereas investments in R&D are essential for EU competitiveness, societal progress and innovation; whereas the report on the Future of European Competitiveness (the Draghi report) and the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe (the Heitor report) recommended a budget for the 10th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10) of EUR 200 billion and EUR 220 billion respectively;

    C. whereas the FP must be founded on European values, scientific independence, freedom and excellence, as well as on high European ethical standards and a drive to improve European competitiveness as well as to address societal challenges;

    D. whereas the Draghi report showed that Europe is a world leader in science and innovation with the second highest share of high quality scientific publications and the third highest share of patent applications globally; whereas the Draghi report also concluded that the value chain that goes from research to innovative products that improve citizens’ lives in the EU is less effective compared to the US and China in translating good research into successful businesses providing quality jobs, new products and services to European citizens, as illustrated by the persistent gap between the US and EU in innovation performance, and the closing gap between the EU and China; whereas the Draghi report highlights that Europe lags particularly when it comes to the scaling up of start-ups;

    E. whereas Commissioner Zaharieva, in her hearing with Parliament, committed to fighting for an independent and simplified FP and expressed her support for an increased budget and more expert-driven governance;

    F. whereas the Heitor report outlines that in the first three years of Horizon Europe, 7 474 SMEs (34 % of all participants) were participating in the programme and that more than half of Horizon Europe SMEs are new to EU research, development and innovation programmes; whereas the success rates of SME applications has strongly improved (up to 19.9 % from 12 % in Horizon 2020);

    G. whereas the Letta report proposes the establishment of a ‘fifth freedom’ to encompass research, innovation and education as a new dimension of the single market, as the four original freedoms are fundamentally based on 20th-century theoretical principals;

    H. whereas the Letta report’s ‘freedom to stay’ reiterates the importance of avoiding internal brain drain, and the Heitor report’s ‘Choose Europe’ initiative sets out to foster research careers and turn the current European brain drain into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035;

    General observations on Horizon Europe and Research and Innovation (R&I)

    1 Recalls that we are at a crucial moment for R&I, and that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that Europe needs to put ‘research and innovation at the heart of our economy’ during the presentation to Parliament of her programme for her second term as president of the European Commission in July 2024;

    2. Notes that the Draghi, Letta and Heitor reports consider R&I to be of central importance to achieving European competitiveness and stress the urgent need to act not to fall behind; stresses that a strong commitment is needed to achieve a future framework programme that constitutes a crucial contribution to the competitiveness of Europe and its overall welfare;

    3. Recalls that the Draghi and the Heitor reports are a wake-up call for Europe to face global competition and the significant rise of Chinese science in recent years; welcomes the higher success rate of HEU compared to Horizon 2020 (H2020); appreciates HEU’s responsiveness in crises, such as COVID-19 and geopolitical challenges, but regrets not only the lack of additional funding but also the continuous funding cuts, which compromise original priorities;

    4. Regrets that there have been negative experiences with the implementation of HEU because the shift from H2020 to HEU has mostly been experienced as an increase in complexity and bureaucracy; underlines that the success rates in some parts of the programme are still so low as to discourage potentially excellent applications, especially from researchers from research institutions with smaller budgets and SMEs; considers that strategic planning  should lead to more substantial benefits for the quality of the programming and a strengthened commitment of all R&I stakeholders, which so far do not seem to have materialised sufficiently; believes that FP10 should be built on instruments under Horizon Europe that have proven to be effective and efficient;

    5. Highlights the importance of an agile FP; notes that the Heitor report outlines the importance of responding to the fast-changing field of science and innovation and recommends a radical reform in engaging practitioners in the governance  of the  programme, notably through the two proposed new Councils as well as less prescriptive calls; recalls that the Draghi report notes that the current governance of the FP is slow and bureaucratic, that its organisation should be redesigned to be more outcome-based and evaluated by top experts and that the future FP should be governed by people with a proven track record at the frontier of research or innovation; notes that innovative ideas cannot always be predicted and programmed and underlines the need for sufficient funding that is not pre-programmed in order to tap the full potential of developing innovation;

    6. Highlights the importance of having an FP based on excellence in order to ensure the participation of the best researchers in Europe through the whole programme; argues that one of the critical weakness of the EU R&I policy landscape is also linked to the lack of a meaningful, integrated and complementary approach between place-based and excellence-driven R&I activities, in particular between the FP and the R&I window of the cohesion policy, which are of the same order of magnitude in terms of the EU budget; notes that the scale-up and commercialisation of research results remains a big challenge in Europe;

    7. Recalls the recommendation by the Heitor report to foster an attractive and inclusive European research, development and innovation ecosystem; recalls the recommendation by the Letta report to foster the development of a fifth freedom in the single market; recalls the observation of the Draghi report that the fragmentation of the EU innovation ecosystem is one of the root causes of Europe’s weak innovation performance; recalls that the Treaties situate the FP in the development of the European Research Area; is convinced that to maximise the impact of the framework programme, it needs to be embedded in a broader European research policy that ensures that Europe is an attractive location for research activities which attracts global talent, which effectively translates science into economic growth and societal progress, and which effectively addresses the innovation gap within the EU; considers that the upcoming European Research Area Act (ERA Act) should aim at achieving this Europe; recognises that there are still significant obstacles to ‘brain circulation’ among Member States, including the recognition of qualifications;

    8. Insists on the absolute need for that Member States to adopt concrete commitments to reach a target of 3 % of GDP spending on R&D by 2030; notes that the EU is investing significantly less than other global powers, and that it has failed to reach the 3 % target for more than two decades, investing 2.24 % of its GDP in R&D in 2022, for example, compared to 3.5 % in the US; underlines that each year the EU under invests in R&D worsens the situation and deepens the gap with third countries; specifies that major discrepancies exist between the R&D intensity of the 27 EU Member States, with five reaching the 3 % spending target, while some others are below 1 %; recalls that, at less than 7 % of the total[12], the EU budget’s contribution to R&D spending is a very minor share of the overall public spending on R&D in the EU; notes that national spending for research should not be cut in response to  the availability of EU research funding as alternative funding; highlights that a joint effort between European and national funding for research and innovation is needed; underlines as well the important role of private investment in research and innovation in order to complement public funding; regrets that European private investment in research, development and innovation is lagging behind that in China and the US, reaching 1.3 % of GDP in the EU, compared to 2.4 % in the US and 1.9 % in China; insists, therefore, on the vital role of EU intervention as a catalyst for R&D spending, and on the need for further coordination and alignment  between national and EU R&D spending;

    9. Insists on the vital role of long-term public funding to support excellent basic research, driven by scientific curiosity with the only aim of advancing scientific knowledge and without an obvious nor immediate benefit, sometimes characterised by serendipity;

    10. Highlights recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation, which states that in order to guarantee scientific excellence, and in line with Article 13 of the Charter, the programme should promote the respect of academic freedom in all countries benefiting from its funds; underlines that while several incidents regarding academic freedom took place in several countries benefiting from Horizon Europe funds, the Commission has not used this recital effectively to address specific problems; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to propose a legislative proposal on the freedom of scientific research; calls on the Commission to present such a legislative proposal in line with Parliament’s resolution of 17 January 2024;

    11. Supports the high levels of climate spending in the first years of Horizon Europe; urges the Commission to stay on course to achieve the overall climate spending target of 35 % over the full lifetime of the programme;

    12. Highlights that Horizon Europe is on track to meet its climate spending targets without, according to the Horizon Europe Programme Guide, considering the Do No Significant Harm principle in the evaluation of proposals, unless it was relevant for the content of the call; underlines that there is no legal obligation or legal basis for the horizontal application of either the Do No Significant Harm principle or the Do No Harm principle; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to assess the current approach and the new approach to the application of the Do No Significant Harm principle, including the legal basis for its application, and to share the assessment with Parliament; urges the Commission to report to Parliament, before the start of FP10, on the impact of the use of Do No (Significant) Harm under Horizon Europe, including an estimate of the associated costs of its implementation for the Commission and beneficiaries, and its impact on the simplification of project applications;

    13. Considers that during the implementation of Horizon Europe, several major global events put thousands of researchers at risk, including in the EU’s neighbourhood, leading to significant spikes in applications by researchers at risk for an emergency placement in Europe; concludes, however, that under the current programme, the EU does not have sufficient funding available to support researchers at risk and that efforts by some Member States and NGOs are fragmented;

    14. Affirms the importance of international cooperation for the advancement of science; is concerned in this regard that international cooperation has declined under Horizon Europe compared to Horizon 2020; encourages the Commission to seek and conclude other association agreements with third countries, restates[13] and emphasises that Parliament’s ability to give meaningful consent to international agreements specifically concerning the participation of countries referred to in Article 16(1)d of the Horizon Europe Regulation in EU programmes is impeded where such agreements do not provide for a structure that guarantees parliamentary scrutiny under a consent procedure for association to a specific EU programme;

    15. Welcomes in particular the association of the UK and Switzerland to Horizon Europe as it recognises the fact that UK and Swiss science and innovation are an integral part of the European science and innovation ecosystem; restates its concern about the amended Protocol in 2023 and its provisions regarding the automatic rebate for the UK; emphasises that any international agreement on the association of Switzerland to EU programmes should fully respect the prerogative of Parliament to provide meaningful consent in line with its resolution on association agreements for the participation of third countries in Union programmes;

    16. Takes note of the Commission white paper on options for enhancing support for research and development involving technologies with dual-use potential; considers that nearly all respondents to the public consultation on the white paper rejected option 3; emphasises that many respondents considered that the implications of options 1 and 2 were not clear enough to allow them to determine which option would be preferable; highlights that it is widely recognised that the current constellation requires improvement to ensure the efficient use of public funds and to boost Europe’s technological sovereignty; notes that Commissioner Zaharieva committed, in her hearing with Parliament, to continuing this evaluation, potentially through a new study to ensure the views expressed are representative of all stakeholders;

    17. Notes that significant advances have been made in the framework of Horizon Europe with gender equality plans (GEPs) as an eligibility criterion and the gender dimension in the content of R&I as an award criterion by default across the programme; recognises that recent analyses confirm that the GEP eligibility criterion has had a catalytic effect;

    Observations on competitiveness

    18. Is deeply convinced that EU spending on science, research and innovation is the best investment in our common European future and for increasing competitiveness and societal progress, and successfully closing the innovation gap; agrees with Mr Draghi that all public R&D spending in the EU should be better coordinated at EU level, meaning properly aligning investments with the EU’s strategic priorities, focusing on funding initiatives that achieve relevant impact and create added value, and that a reformed and strengthened FP is crucial to achieving this; underlines that, in order to ensure real added value, R&D spending should also be better coordinated at national level between Member States; reiterates that the reformed fiscal rules exclude national funds used to co-finance EU programmes, and calls for this possibility to be put to full use in order to boost EU research funding;

    19. Underlines the importance of standardisation activities to ensure that European companies can effectively capitalise on the competitive advantage from research and innovation;

    20. Underlines the significant role of research and innovation across different industrial sectors that contributes to creating jobs and increasing European competitiveness compared to third countries;

    21. Emphasises the importance of the European Innovation Council (EIC) for Europe’s competitiveness; highlights in this regard that investments under the EIC are bridging the ‘valley of death’ and lead to innovations of a disruptive nature that have breakthrough and scale-up potential; highlights also the unique proposition of the EIC Accelerator to provide tailor-made support for high-potential, non-bankable start-ups;

    22. Welcomes the fact that 44 % of the Horizon Europe budget to date has contributed to the digital and industrial transitions, most notably by stimulating cooperation for technology development, which are fundamental for European competitiveness;

    23. Strongly believes that, beyond their key role for long-term and sustainable competitiveness, applied research, development and innovation policies are instrumental to avoid, anticipate and cope with the main global and societal challenges;

    Observations on technical implementation

    24. Considers that administrative simplification stagnated under Horizon Europe given that 32 % of participants consider applying to Horizon Europe to be more burdensome than Horizon 2020, while nearly half of participants report no difference[14], is concerned about the ‘exploded cumulative transaction and administrative costs’[15]; notes that on average beneficiaries reported spending 6-10 % of their project budget on administrative costs, with 48 % reporting administrative costs of more than 10 %, including a 10 % share of beneficiaries reporting administrative costs of more than 20 %; deplores the fact that the time-to-grant under Horizon Europe is longer than it was under Horizon 2020, and that it exceeds the target of eight months set by the Commission[16]; insists on further administrative simplification, streamlining of the relevant procedures, cost cutting and a greater focus on applicants, and underlines that simplification must be for the benefit of the applicants, while ensuring that applications contain all the information needed for the evaluation of their excellence;

    25. Recalls that the first full version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon Europe was published only in May 2024, more than three years after the start of the programme; notes that without a full version of this document, beneficiaries are not fully informed of the legal and financial conditions associated with signing a Grant Agreement; recalls that the first version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon 2020 was published before the official start of the programme; notes that the apparent cause of the delayed publication is the corporate approach to Model Grant Agreements which the Commission took for EU programmes under the current multiannual financial framework;

    26. Notes that there are various opinions and experiences among different beneficiaries regarding the functionality of lump sums; recognises that some beneficiaries do not consider the introduction of lump-sum funding to be a simplification for them; underlines that the 2024 assessment of lump sum funding presents unclear data, which leaves important worries and questions unanswered, such as the uncertainty of the impact of an ex-post audit, while confirming other objections, such as the artificial increase of the number of work packages[17]; considers that this assessment confirms that lump-sum funding can be a simplification for some beneficiaries, but not for all[18];

    27. Considers that the simplification offered by lump-sum funding consists of removing all obligations on actual cost reporting by beneficiaries to the Commission and removing financial ex-post audits for projects; welcomes the fact that this results in a lower error rate; underlines, however, that the error rate is a tool to ensure proper spending of public funds and not a goal in itself; warns, in that context, against putting at risk the quality of the spending of a highly successful programme by ramping up the use of lump sums too quickly;

    28. Observes that the average size of consortia in Horizon Europe is significantly larger than in Horizon 2020[19]; considers that consortia foster collaboration and that bigger consortia contribute to broader, and potentially more diverse, collaboration; underlines, however, that managing bigger consortia also requires more time and effort both in the proposal preparation phase and in the project implementation phase, which takes away resources from performing research; considers, furthermore, that more complex consortia are less attractive to join for newcomers, given the complexity and the resources as well as the experience needed to manage them;

    29. Underlines the importance of an open and accessible programme with low thresholds for applying in order to ensure participation of newcomers as well as SMEs; underlines that more than half of SME participants in Horizon Europe are newcomers[20]; considers that administrative burdens, the time investments needed and the complexity of applications risk discouraging SMEs from participating in the programme[21]; notes that the simple, small and fast grants of the SME Instrument under H2020 were a magnet for newcomer SMEs[22];

    30. Considers that the Commission has not succeeded in creating agile but strong management of HEU, which has led to complex implementation; expects that the interim evaluation report should address shortages and possible solutions;

    Observations on Pillar 1

    31. Recognises the importance of Pillar 1 in promoting scientific excellence and attracting highly-skilled research, through the European Research Council (ERC), and programmes such as the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions (MSCA);

    32. Welcomes the continued success of the ERC; underlines that its success is dependent on the independence of the Scientific Council; stresses that the last few years have shown that the presence of a capable and committed president of the Scientific Council with respected scientific credentials is essential for the functioning and independence of the ERC; notes that the bottom-up calls and independent governance of the ERC Scientific Council have proven highly effective;

    33. Highlights the ability of both the ERC and the MSCA to attract scientific talent to Europe; notes the valuable contribution of the MSCA to European scientific leadership; notes with worry the low success rates in the MSCA;

    34. Underlines that research projects funded under Pillar 1 should adhere to the principle of ‘high risk/high gain’; suggests clarifying evaluation criteria to strictly ensure the realisation of ‘high risk/high gain’ when evaluating research proposals; observes that ‘high risk’ also means employing new research methods;

    35. Emphasises that research infrastructures, in particular digital research infrastructures, provide a vital platform for researchers and innovators across disciplines and sectors to share data, methods and expertise, fostering the development and application of new technologies to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty; welcomes, particularly in this regard, the progress made on the European Open Science Cloud and the European Museums Cloud;

    Observations on Pillar 2

    36. Emphasises that collaborative research is at the heart of the European framework programmes; recognises the importance of Pillar 2, which serves as a vital strategic tool, fostering pan-European collaboration by pooling resources and knowledge, and aligning public and private R&I agendas; notes that collaboration would not occur without EU funding at a similar rate, highlighting the unique added value of EU collaboration programmes, in particular for enabling Europe to address complex societal challenges and integrate businesses into critical, continent-wide value chains; considers that Pillar 2 has fostered research collaboration and has in particular been able to support joint research and innovation agendas for technology maturation through the joint undertakings, which contributes to the competitiveness of the EU;

    37. Considers Pillar 2 a strategic tool for enabling pan-European collaboration and pooling of knowledge and resources, attracting private investments, and for bringing together public and private stakeholders across Europe to tackle complex societal challenges; believes it is important to continue support for these collaborations; acknowledges, however, the complexity of Pillar 2; believes that the implementation of this pillar remains too complex and should be improved, simplified and streamlined with a view to targeting results rather than solely addressing expenditure; notes that the number of instruments involved such as a multitude of partnerships, the complex, top-down administrative implementation of missions, and the many budgetary shifts have resulted in unnecessary complexity which discourages applicants, and especially newcomers, from participating; emphasises the importance of the accessibility of these instruments, particularly for SMEs from across all European regions, in order to enable participation for all excellent researchers and innovators as well as to foster the absorption capacities of companies; welcomes the announcement of the rebalancing in Pillar 2 towards a better equilibrium between the different types of R&I activities, from fundamental research to market-oriented innovation, as announced in the second strategic plan for Horizon Europe; notes in that context the conclusion in the European Research and Innovation Area Committee opinion on FP10 that the Cluster structure of Horizon Europe creates an unnecessary obstacle for participants looking for funding, in particular newcomers, as well as the conclusion of the Draghi report that ‘[t]he programme should consolidate the overall fragmented and heterogeneous activities’;

    Observations on Pillar 3

    38. Notes that scaling up and commercialising research outcomes remains Europe’s greatest challenge; recalls the decisive role of entrepreneurship, for instance in the commercial and economic exploitation of excellent applied research into breakthrough innovation;

    39. Highlights that the European Innovation Council is filling a widely recognised investment gap for scale-up finance for break-through innovations[23]; takes note of the very low success rate under the EIC and considers this a confirmation of the relevance of EIC funding as well as a worrying signal of underfunding of the programme; welcomes that fact that the EIC was completed as an instrument by the introduction of transition activities because these complete the innovator’s journey from early idea to scale-up by facilitating technology maturation and validation; underlines the quality and relevance of the advice provided by the EIC Board and recalls in this regard the importance of expert advice to guide the implementation of the framework programme;

    40. Considers that the EIC is a needed and excellent instrument in principle; agrees that streamlining and boosting the EIC, attracting private investments and supporting the commercialisation of research is at the core of Pillar 3, as confirmed by the Heitor report; regrets, however, that the Commission made some implementation decisions that led the EIC away from its intended purpose to help companies scale up; recognises that the EIC should have the flexibility to strategically maximise its potential to support breakthrough technology; firmly believes that the EIC can achieve its full potential if the legal and institutional setting of the programme is clarified and strengthened;

    41. Regrets that not all of Parliament’s recommendations set out in its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council have been implemented, most notably the recommendation that a thorough assessment be made of ways to improve the EIC’s implementation, considering as an option the establishment of an independent EU body under Article 187 TFEU as the main entity responsible for implementing the EIC; regrets, moreover, that its recommendation to ensure the implementation of both the equity and grant components with direct coordination between the two components has been ignored;

    42. Draws attention to the work of the programme managers in the EIC; strongly believes in the approach of strategic intelligence developed by experts with widely recognised expertise in the field to effective programming of strategic challenge-based calls; appreciates, in particular, the work done by programme managers to help projects find and realise added value by bringing together projects with a common interest;

    43. Notes the generally positive assessments (in particular in terms of EU added value) made by independent experts of the Knowledge and Innovation Communities; notes that EIT KICs contribute to strengthening links between higher education and business as well as to closing the ‘skills gap’, and that synergies should be explored with the academies introduced in recent EU legislation (e.g. Net Zero Industry Act, Critical Raw Materials Act, Cybersecurity Package); highlights, moreover, that the EIT regional innovation scheme (RIS) activities contribute to reducing the European innovation capacity divide; recalls that more synergies to bridge the innovation divide should be created between the EIT and other actions such as the EU preparatory action entitled ‘Innovation for place-based transformation’ and believes that the EIT KICs could improve synergies within the framework programme (in pillar 3 activities and between pillars), and establish concrete synergies between excellence-driven and place-based innovation, for instance via the implementation of successors of R&I activities led by the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, such as the Interregional Innovation Investments (I3) instrument;

    44. Regrets to conclude, however, that the relevance of the EIT as a programme is questioned by several stakeholders, including some of its biggest beneficiaries; underlines that in principle the concept of knowledge and innovation communities is appreciated by stakeholders as a useful instrument for effective innovation ecosystem development and integration; considers that the two main concerns raised are the financial self-sustainability requirement for KICs[24] and the central management by the EIT organisation which is too bureaucratic and burdensome, and which creates governance difficulties for the KICs[25]; concludes that for many stakeholders the financial and other costs, including the high burden of participating in a KIC, outweigh the benefits of the relatively little funding support relevant for them;

    45. Regrets that, although some efforts have already been made, synergies between the EIC, the EIT and the ERC are not sufficiently developed;

    Observations on Part 4

    46. Welcomes that participation of entities from widening countries has increased in HEU; acknowledges that the innovation divide persists, notwithstanding a slight decrease in the disparities in innovation performance across Europe, in spite of two decades of widening efforts; underlines, however, that the existence of this innovation gap in Europe has negative consequences for the EU as a whole given that it means available talent is left unused and economic disparities within the EU can be expected to grow; notes that this low participation can be partially explained by structural factors, including inadequate national public investment in R&D, which undermines the effectiveness of the national R&I systems, as reflected by low scores on the European Innovation Scoreboard; notes, furthermore, that there is a link between high levels of FP participation and high levels of national public investment in R&D; is strongly convinced that without national reforms, the innovation gap cannot be closed, regardless of the efforts made at European level, and refers to the European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 on this matter; recognises that new and more effective mechanisms to increase widening are needed, but that financing for these actions should primarily come from the national level and be complemented by cohesion policy funds; calls on the Commission to ensure that the upcoming ERA Act lays down strong obligations for Member States to improve the functioning of their R&I system in order to eliminate subpar performance due to structural challenges;

    47. Underlines the importance of the Seal of Excellence under Horizon Europe; considers that the Seal in part mitigates the persistent issue of underfunding in Horizon Europe, which significantly hampers the ability to adequately support all high-quality proposals; acknowledges furthermore that the Seal can contribute to improving the relative participation of researchers from widening countries; emphasises, however, that the Seal cannot be considered as a substitute for direct financial support, particularly because the Seal is not a guarantee for funding;

    48. Notes that a thriving European innovation ecosystem requires strong and well-connected place-based innovation ecosystems and that a better connected European innovation ecosystem will be essential for enhancing the competitiveness of Europe, its resilience and strategic autonomy; recognises that collaboration among territorial ecosystems enables European regions to leverage their combined strengths to develop innovative solutions more efficiently; underlines that this collaboration also accelerates the commercialisation and scaling of technologies, bolstering the EU’s competitiveness also globally; recognises the vital role of public research organisations, including universities, as drivers of place-based innovation;

    Observations on missions and partnerships

    49. Highlights the science communication role of the missions and the need to strengthen this even further because this will bring research results closer to society and help address the challenge of distrust in R&I, while simultaneously helping gain societal approval for public investments in R&I; recalls that the Commission communication entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ did not constitute a positive assessment of the missions and concluded that missions had failed on core objectives such as crowding in external funding;

    50. Recalls the fundamental role of partnerships in bringing together the Commission and private and/or public partners, and is of the opinion that they must receive continuous support with a defined target and scope; emphasises that public-private partnership governance structures should be streamlined and simplified to avoid unnecessary burdens and enhance focus on key priorities; considers the joint undertakings as very useful instruments to foster better coordination and alignment of research agendas across the EU, as well as to foster co-investment in R&D between the public and private sectors; notes with regret that the Joint Undertakings have not yet resulted in increased R&D spending by European industry overall;

    Recommendations for the remaining part of Horizon Europe

    51. Notes that no significant changes in the implementation of the missions have taken place since the publication of the communication; concludes that the current approach to missions is not sufficiently oriented towards fostering creative novel and R&I ideas to address challenges; believes mission-oriented programming should have objectives that can be reached through R&I, should be implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas to achieve the mission, and should be managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the EIC programme managers; considers that mission-oriented programming should first and foremost be a novel approach to research programming which puts more emphasis on bottom-up research ideas, which fosters interdisciplinarity and in particular creates space for synergies between Social Sciences, Humanities and the Arts (SSHA)-driven and technology-driven activities, to address problems; therefore calls on the Commission to pilot this approach in the remaining years of Horizon Europe by spending the majority of the funds allocated to the missions through openly formulated calls that invite proposals for R&I activities that can contribute to achieving a specific objective; encourages the Commission to consider whether it is appropriate to continue funding each mission under Horizon Europe and to find additional funding and support for the continuation of the missions in other parts of the EU budget and at national as well as regional level, where appropriate;

    52. Supports the proposal in the Heitor report to set up an experimental unit under Horizon Europe to experiment with new implementation methods and instruments in order to foster real simplification for participants and to develop a more agile implementation of the programme; urges the Commission to launch, from 2025, a task force to improve the efficacy of the European Semester, in line with the EU’s share towards the 3 % target, as clearly described in the Draghi and Heitor reports and reiterated by European leaders in the Budapest Declaration on the New European Competitiveness Deal;

    53. Insists that the Commission should continue the use of lump-sum funding under HEU, and apply it to beneficiaries for which the assessments show it to be clearly experienced as a simplification, such as SMEs and projects for which there is solid evidence that it is a genuine simplification; underlines in that regard that the intended ramping up of the use of lump sums for the 2026-2027 work programme remains questionable given the existing worries and unknowns regarding the impact of lump sums with regard to the simplification they offer to some beneficiaries and their impact on the quality of the projects funded; calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to ensure sound and efficient use of EU funds before increasing the share of the Horizon Europe budget spend through lump sums in the last years of Horizon Europe and to explore the further improvement of the system to ensure lump-sum funding leads to genuine simplification for beneficiaries; supports the recommendation of the European Court of Auditors to define the scope of ex-post controls for lump-sum grants;

    54. Supports the Heitor report’s urgent call to introduce a ‘Choose Europe’ co-funding line and to turn the current ‘European brain drain’ into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035, noting that this should be considered a major and unique opportunity for Europe in the current uncertain geopolitical context, in particular following the recent US election, and should therefore be implemented urgently from 2025;

    55. Calls on the Commission to restore EIC autonomy and agility without delay in order to get rid of existing complex processes that lead to lower implementation; believes the EIC transition activities should be open to proposals based on results from any FP project, regardless of which programme part funded that project;

    56. Urges the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to rely on recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation to enforce more respect for academic freedom in the EU as well as in associated countries, in particular to use it as a basis to openly and directly address blatant violations of academic freedom by national governments;

    57. Recommends that the use of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle should be accompanied by detailed guidance from the Commission on how compliance with the principle will be evaluated in the context of the specific call in which the principle is used;

    Recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme (FP10)

    58. Calls for FP10 to be a stand-alone EU programme, in the context of the upcoming discussion of the highly anticipated Competitiveness Fund, as announced by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her speech of 17 July 2024 in Strasbourg, dedicated to EU research and innovation excellence and strategic technology development, with a substantially higher budget appropriate  for achieving the 3 % GDP spending target and sufficient to fund  at least 75 % of the excellent[26] proposals submitted; recommends that FP10 focus on three core objectives:

    (a) creating a European competition of ideas, and a funnel to accelerate the development from fundamental science to innovation scale-up, providing support for blue-sky and basic research as well as strengthening the deployment and exploitation of innovative solutions,

    (b) supporting strategic research initiatives which require large-scale and European collaboration, as the programme’s ability to prioritise these initiatives will be of utmost importance for Europe’s ability to address the societal challenges it faces as well as for European industry and SMEs, including for technology maturation and fostering of European ecosystems, to address the competitiveness gap with our global competitors, focussing on the development of priority innovative advanced technologies and their translation into concrete applications of innovative products, processes and services,

    (c) advancing the ERA, including by addressing the innovation gap in Europe;

    59. Recommends that the Commission ensure user-oriented, science-led, effective and efficient implementation of the programme, including by:

    (a) implementing an improved governance, inspired by the findings of the Heitor expert group and the Draghi report, addressing the need to improve the programme’s agility, which should:

    i. be oriented towards facilitating the best science, technology development and innovation,

    ii. contribute to EU priorities on the terms of science and innovation,

    iii. be based on the principle of self-governance, through which recognised, independent specialists from the relevant field that act in the public interest can  advise on how research and innovation can best contribute to the achievement of the policy priorities set by policymakers; recommends, as part of implementing this principle, setting up new Councils in line with the Heitor report to deliver expert advice on the strategic priorities of the programme as well as on the formulation of call texts to ensure their quality,

    (b) including positions for programme managers for the EIC, comparable to programme managers at the American ARPA-style agencies, who are experts appointed from outside the Commission with a proven track record in the relevant field, appointed for a predefined period, as special advisers to the Commissioner responsible for research and innovation to ensure their seniority in the Commission, to manage strategic visionary portfolios of projects, fostering collaboration between projects where relevant across the whole programme for their mutual benefit and set out challenges based on strategic intelligence and with a view to fostering global leadership for Europe in specific areas of their field,

    (c) implementing a radical simplification in the administrative work related to the application for and management of FP10 projects, following the proposal of the Heitor report to trust first and check later for the application system as well as keeping the information requested in applications to an absolute minimum – no information which is not absolutely necessary for a good qualitative evaluation of the scientific or innovative quality of a proposal should be included in the proposal stage,

    (d) promoting synergies and coordinated programming and implementation with other programmes and sectoral policies in particular with the future new industrial policy and the next important projects of common European interest dealing with research, development and innovation at national and EU level;

    60. Recommends that the GEPs as eligibility criteria for funding should be maintained in FP10 in their current form as a permanent and integral element of EU research funding requirements;

    61. Recommends that the general objective on advancing the ERA should  lead to the development of an excellent, unified and well-functioning European Research Area that attracts  talent, integrates  newcomers in existing networks and provides access to world leading research and technology infrastructures while remaining open for excellent research proposals irrespective of the supporting research institution and supports joint early research programmes with national funders; underlines that the forthcoming ERA Act needs to ensure increased national investments, national reforms and the elimination of barriers to the free movement of knowledge, technology and researchers, to create the conditions for FP10 to support the achievement of a well-functioning ERA;

    62. Considers that the Research Infrastructures, COST and Teaming programmes should contribute to the achievement of this general objective; is convinced that FP10 should provide for an instrument for strategic investments in technology infrastructures; believes that the MSCA is a crucial instrument for achieving this objective as it facilitates the mobility across the EU and between sectors of the best and the brightest who are selected based on the excellence of their proposal; believes that, to further the integration of the ERA, participation of entities from areas with low research performance should be encouraged in the programme;

    63. Firmly believes that FP10 should include a newly established European fellowship programme for researchers at risk, incorporating the lessons learnt from the ongoing preparatory action, to achieve this general objective;

    64. Continues to support the knowledge triangle approach of the EIT to foster innovation in Europe; believes that a reformed and refocussed EIT should contribute to the achievement of this general objective, given its particular role of integrating the European innovation ecosystem;

    65. Believes that in FP10 an expanded and interlinked ERC and EIC should be the engine for a European competition of ideas and that an increase of their budgets should be prioritised in the FP10 budget; recommends that these programmes be designed so that they create a European, bottom-up funnel for innovation to develop quickly from fundamental science to innovation scale-up;

    66. Considers that the EIC can only succeed if it can (i) offer blended finance as a single project and (ii) act with the same predictability and agility as private actors on the venture capital market through a tailor-made legal entity for its implementation; underlines that the strengthened autonomy and self-governance of both the ERC and the EIC are crucial to achieving this; considers in this regard that new options must be investigated to ensure their independence and long-term stability, such as creating dedicated legal entities;

    67. Considers that the expansion of the EIC and ERC should include increased funding for blue-sky, collaborative and early research projects; recommends this expansion to fund smaller projects and consortia in order to lower the barrier to participation, to increase the success rate and to encourage experimentation with new ideas and collaborations; considers that both the EIC Pathfinder and the ERC Synergy Grants have a role to play in this expanded space for bottom-up collaborative research; underlines that the EIC Pathfinder should continue to fund Challenges, but they should be reformed from Challenge-based calls to ARPA-style Challenges which leave space for bottom-up proposals while securing strategic technology development;

    68. Urges the Commission to design FP10 such that it can effectively support strategic research, technology development and deployment initiatives, focussing on a limited number of priorities to support research-based competitiveness and the resilience of key sectors in the European economy as well as to address societal challenges with 2040 as the time horizon and which require cross-border collaboration due to the scale and complexity of the issue at hand; believes that these initiatives could take the form of (i) societal mission-oriented programmes which address socio-economic and/or ecological challenges, (ii) technology mission-oriented programmes to accelerate the development of strategic technologies in Europe, and (iii) joint undertakings to secure joint investments by the private sector, Member States and the EU;

    69. Is furthermore convinced that a share of the budget of FP10 should remain available for higher Technology Readiness Level collaborative calls to support strategic collaboration not covered in the strategic initiatives, in particular this budget could be used for strategic calls developed by the programme managers to further develop an emerging ecosystem;

    70. Emphasises that mission-oriented programmes under FP10 should be fundamentally differently organised than the current missions in Horizon Europe; calls on the Commission to implement mission-oriented programmes under FP10 that set objectives that can be reached through R&I, implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas, fostering interdisciplinarity, including between SSHA-driven and technology-driven activities, to achieve the mission, and managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the pilot under Horizon Europe; underlines that the successful management of these mission-oriented programmes requires outstanding expertise on the topic of the missions rather than generic expertise;

    71. Underlines that procedures for obtaining support under FP10 must align with companies’ realities; is of the opinion that, to this end, an industry-oriented application procedure, building on the experience of the Fast Track to Innovation from Horizon 2020, should be re-introduced under FP10, in particular where the programme aims to support strategic initiatives;

    72. Is convinced that a strategic approach to international cooperation is more important than ever; believes that global collaboration in science is essential for the knowledge development of humanity, but cannot be pursued in a naive manner; recommends that the Commission develops a clear strategic policy framework for its decisions on international collaboration which includes (i) a clear policy on the association of third countries which recognises that association is a tool for political partnerships, (ii) a structured process for determining how open or closed FP10 projects need to be to foster the best possible research while also considering the strategic interests of the EU, and (iii) a plan to boost global collaboration through the programme;

    73. Underlines the importance of FP10’s compliance with the Council recommendation on research security; calls on the Commission to include in the strategic approach whether the right balance between security and openness can be best achieved at the level of programmes, calls or selected projects; believes as well that, beyond the agility of the framework programme itself, delivering resilience must be mainstreamed to become an integral part of all the applied research, development and innovation activities of the next framework programme, in a differentiated manner depending on the topic and the type of activity; believes in particular that innovation activities close to the market must take into account the risk of increased dependency on third countries stemming from them, and the necessary enhanced strategic autonomy of the EU;

    74. Recommends in principle maintaining the civilian nature of the next framework programme and leaving calls specifically for defence applications to the successor of the European Defence Fund; urges the Commission further to develop options to strengthen the synergies between civilian and defence R&D spending; calls on the Commission in particular to explore how the exploitation of dual-use potential can be maximised, especially through interventions after project selection rather than in call or programme definition; underlines that academic freedom includes the right of researchers to decide to what research and development they wish to contribute;

    75. Recommends that the programme should recognise the role of interdisciplinary research in addressing societal challenges, also including a better integration of SSHA; reiterates the need for sufficient funding for research projects that address societal challenges and that fall within the area of SSHA;

    76. Recommends the introduction of research actions in order to foster and encourage more lower Technology Readiness Level research and basic research;

    77. Notes that the allocation of at least 35 % of Horizon Europe expenditure to climate objectives served the general EU objective of mainstreaming climate actions into its sectoral policies and funds; considers this an ambitious target to ensure that FP10 adequately funds science, research and innovation that support the EU climate objectives;

    78. Underlines that any potential application of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle under FP10 should, in line with Article 33(2)d of the Financial Regulation, be set out in the FP10 legislation;

    79. Recommends that the central role of standardisation in driving innovation, enhancing competitiveness, and ensuring impactful, market-ready solutions be recognised in FP10 by ensuring that costs associated with standardisation activities, where relevant in projects, are clearly recognised as eligible for reimbursement under the programme as well as by offering support to researchers in their standardisation activities;

    80. Insists that rules regarding the association of third countries to FP10 should require that these associations can only be concluded through international agreements, which requires the consent of the Parliament for each specific association to a specific EU programme, including for the scope of that association;

    81. Notes that FP10 should take into account the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a way to foster European research and development while identifying specific risks that may arise form an abusive use of AI in the scientific environment and the corresponding mitigation measures;

    °

    ° °

    82. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah, addresses Maha Shivratri festival organized by Isha Foundation in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah, addresses Maha Shivratri festival organized by Isha Foundation in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

    Maha Shivratri is not just a festival but a profound night of self-awakening, when the entire universe resonates itself with the presence of Shiva, only then can the true essence of Shivaratri be experienced

    Lord Shiva is a benevolent consciousness who embodies both destruction and protection

    Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has brought global recognition to Yoga by commemorating International Yoga Day and Sadguru has given a new dimension to Yoga through Adi Yogi

    Any account of India’s spiritual history is incomplete without mentioning rich Tamil culture

    Isha Yoga Centre has become a global center for yoga, sadhana, devotion, self-knowledge and liberation

    The 112-ft grand statue of Adi Yogi symbolizes the 112 paths to spiritual enlightenment

    Sadguru has brought science and spirituality together and proved that meditation, energy, and state of consciousness are not mere beliefs but fundamental aspects of science

    Posted On: 26 FEB 2025 9:51PM by PIB Delhi

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah, today addressed the Maha Shivratri celebrations organized by the Isha Foundation in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.

    Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah extended greetings to the countrymen on the occasion of of Maha Shivratri. He said that from Somnath to Kedarnath, Pashupatinath to Rameswaram, and Kashi to Coimbatore, the entire nation is immersed in the devotion of Lord Shiva today. Shri Shah highlighted the spiritual significance of this day, noting that while the Maha Kumbh concludes in Prayagraj, a grand “Maha Kumbh of devotion” is unfolding in Coimbatore. He emphasized that Maha Shivratri is not just a festival but a profound night of self-awakening. He said when the entire universe resonates itself with the presence of Shiva, only then can the true essence of Shivaratri be experienced. He further said that this sacred day marks the divine union of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati, paving the way for the soul’s union with Shiva, thereby opening the path to salvation through unwavering devotion.

    Union Home Minister Shri Amit Shah said that Lord Shiva is not just a symbol but a benevolent consciousness who embodies both destruction and protection, each playing a vital role in our lives. He said Shiva is described as Shambhu and Swayambhu, representing both truth and beauty. Known as Bhole Nath and Maha Kaal, Shiva is present here in Coimbatore as Adi Yogi, the first yogi. Shri Shah emphasized that Shiva is not merely an idol but the fundamental foundation of existence itself. He said that Maha Shivratri is a testament to the culmination of devotion and faith, where the true offering is not material but our unwavering dedication to the path of devotion.

    Shri Amit Shah said that this place created by Sadguru is not just a pilgrimage but has become a global center for yoga, sadhana, devotion, self-knowledge and liberation. He praised the Isha Yoga Center for bringing positive transformation into the lives of millions through yoga and meditation. He highlighted the significance of the 112-ft grand statue of Adi Yogi, which symbolizes the 112 paths to spiritual enlightenment. He said that visiting this sacred space reminds us that the ultimate goal of life is to attain Shivatva—the state of divine consciousness. Shri Shah said that the Isha Yoga Center serves as a bridge connecting people, especially the youth, with spirituality. He said that by coming here, one embarks on a journey from mere awareness to cosmic consciousness, self-interest to selflessness, and individual existence to universal oneness. He commended Sadguru for not only inspiring the youth towards spirituality but also offering them a profound and intelligent understanding of religion.

    Union Home Minister said that the phrase “A Mystic Man on a Mission” perfectly describes Sadguru. He praised Sadguru Jaggi Vasudev for guiding the world on the path of a meaningful and conscious life. He said that through Sadguru, the world has come to understand the eternal wisdom that true knowledge begins with understanding oneself. Shri Shah emphasized that the journey to transforming the world starts with self-transformation. He lauded Sadguru’s efforts in making people aware to the value of India’s most precious heritage—its soil—and spreading a profound environmental message across the globe. He said that Sadguru has emerged as a true national asset, inspiring millions and bringing the essence of India’s spiritual heritage to the fore.

    Shri Amit Shah said that Sadguru has given a new dimension to Yoga through Adi Yogi, while Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has brought global recognition to Yoga by commemorating International Yoga Day. He emphasized that Yoga is not just a practice but a journey that takes us from Sva (self) to Sarv (universal), from Aham (ego) to Vayam (togetherness), from Sankalp (resolve) to Siddhi (attainment), and from Vairagya (detachment) to Samadhi (ultimate consciousness). Shri Shah highlighted that despite its ancient roots, Yoga remains highly relevant in the modern world and continues to evolve dynamically. He described Yoga as a force that unites the mind, body, and soul, bridges the gap between the individual and the Supreme, and ultimately paves the way for deep devotion and spiritual fulfillment.

    Union Home Minister Shri Amit Shah said that any account of India’s spiritual history is incomplete without mentioning rich Tamil culture. He said that Tamil Nadu is a land enriched with countless living examples of spirituality, carrying forward an unbroken legacy of wisdom and devotion. Shri Shah said the Maha Shivratri celebrations organized by Sadguru are amazing, unimaginable, and beyond words. He hailed Sadguru for creating a spiritual pilgrimage that seamlessly blends science and spirituality, proving that meditation, energy, and state of consciousness are not mere beliefs but fundamental aspects of science. He said that Sadguru has made people realize that Shiva is not just a deity but an eternal presence, a universal consciousness, and that awakening Shivatva—the essence of Shiva—is the true path to self-realization.

    *****

    RK/VV/PR/PS

    (Release ID: 2106511) Visitor Counter : 93

    Read this release in: Hindi

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 27, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 370 371 372 373 374 … 542
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

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

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress