It seems that at the recent EU-Ukraine Summit the ambassadors of the EU member states approved the decision to impose individual sanctions against 6 people involved in the illegal construction of the Kerch Strait bridge.
Kerch Strait bridge (“the Crimean Bridge”): individual sanctions against 6 people involved in the illegal construction of the Kerch Strait bridge.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019. *** In assenza di un accordo sull’uscita del Regno Unito dall’UE, non vi sarà un periodo transitorio e le regole UE termineranno di applicarsi nel Regno Unito a partire dal 30 marzo 2019.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019.
Brexit: European Commission publishes Communication on preparing for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Comunicazione della Commission sulla fase preparatoria alla Brexit
Brexit: European Commission publishes Communication on preparing for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU
The European Commission has today adopted a Communication outlining the ongoing work on the preparation for all outcomes of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.
If the Withdrawal Agreement is ratified before 30 March 2019, most of the legal effects of Brexit will apply as of1 January 2021, i.e. after a transition period of 21 months, the terms of which are set out in the draft WithdrawalAgreement.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL
Protection of intra-EU investment
Migration and Asylum: Commission takes further steps in infringement procedures against Hungary. La Commissione ha deferito l’Ungheria davanti alla Corte di giustizia per violazione delle regole in materia di migrazione e asilo.
Migration and Asylum: Commission takes further steps in infringement procedures against Hungary
The European Commission has today decided to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for non-compliance of its asylum and return legislation with EU law.
Today the European Commission is announcing provisional safeguard measures concerning imports of a number of steel products. These measures will address the diversion of steel from other countries to the EU market as a result of the recently imposed US tariffs. The safeguard measures will come into effect on Thursday 19 July. Traditional imports of steel products will not be affected.
Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of Google’s search engine – Antitrust: la Commissione infligge a Google un’ammenda di 4.34 miliardi di € per pratiche illegali riguardanti i dispositivi mobili Android volte a rafforzare la posizione dominante del motore di ricerca di Google
The European Commission has fined Google €4.34 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules. Since 2011, Google has imposed illegal restrictions on Android device manufacturers and mobile network operators to cement its dominant position in general internet search.
Iran institutes proceedings against the United States with regard to a dispute concerning alleged violations of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States, and requests the Court to indicate provisional measures
Iran claims that, through the “8 May sanctions” and further sanctions that have been announced, the United States “has violated and continues to violate multiple provisions” ofthe 1955 Treaty.
Tokyo, 17 July 2018
The EU and Japan successfully concluded today their talks on reciprocal adequacy. They agreed to recognise each other’s data protection systems as ‘equivalent’, which will allow data to flow safely between the EU and Japan.
Tokyo, 17 July 2018: At the EU-Japan summit in Tokyo, Presidents Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk, and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, signed today the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA).
State aid: Commission adopts Best Practices Code to streamline and speed up State aid control – Aiuti di Stato, la Commissione adotta un codice di Best Practices per semplificare e velocizzare il controllo degli aiuti di Stato
The European Commission has adopted a new Best Practices Code for State aid control. The Code provides guidance to the Commission, Member States, businesses and other stakeholders on the day-to-day conduct of State aid procedures, to improve their effectiveness, transparency and predictability.
Beijing, 16 July 2018_ The 20th Summit between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China held today in Beijing has underlined that this partnership has reached a new level of importance for our own citizens, for our respective neighbouring regions and for the international community more broadly.
“Today, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross announced that Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corporation, of Shenzhen, China (“ZTE Corporation”) and ZTE Kangxun Telecommunications Ltd. of Hi-New Shenzhen, China (“ZTE Kangxun”) (collectively, “ZTE”) has placed $400 million in escrow at a U.S. bank. Shortly after the deposit, the Department lifted the denial order on ZTE pursuant to a June settlement agreement that included the harshest penalties and strictest compliance measures ever imposed in such a case. The escrow funds are in addition to the $1 billion penalty imposed by Commerce that ZTE paid to the U.S. Treasury last month.
“While we lifted the ban on ZTE, the Department will remain vigilant as we closely monitor ZTE’s actions to ensure compliance with all U.S. laws and regulations,” said Secretary Ross. “Three interlocking elements – a suspended denial order, the $400 million in escrow, and a compliance team selected by and answerable to the Department – will allow the Department to protect U.S. national security.”
The $1.4 billion paid under the new settlement agreement are in addition to the $892 million in penalties ZTE has already paid to the U.S government under a March 2017 settlement agreement.
ZTE will also be required by the new agreement to retain a team of special compliance coordinators selected by and answerable to the Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) for a period of 10 years. Their function will be to monitor on a real-time basis ZTE’s compliance with U.S. export control laws. This is the first time BIS has achieved such stringent compliance measures in any case. The new agreement once again imposes a denial order that is suspended, this time for 10 years, which BIS can activate in the event of additional violations during the ten-year probationary period. Finally, ZTE also has replaced the entire board of directors and senior leadership for both entities.
The purpose of this settlement is to modify ZTE’s behavior while setting a new precedent for monitoring to assure compliance with U.S. law. The unprecedented access afforded the compliance team by this agreement vastly improves the speed with which the Department of Commerce can detect and deal with any violations.”
The seventh review of the trade policies and practices of China takes place on 11 and 13 July 2018. The basis for the review is a report by the WTO Secretariat and a report by the Government of China.
Trade Policy Reviews are an exercise, mandated in the WTO agreements, in which member countries’ trade and related policies are examined and evaluated at regular intervals. Significant developments that may have an impact on the global trading system are also monitored. All WTO members are subject to review, with the frequency of review depending on the country’s size.
Every year, the European Commission draws up an annual report on its monitoring of the application of EU law in response to requests from the European Parliament and the EU countries. These EU country factsheets provide a national breakdown on the application of EU law for 2017.
U.S. Department of Commerce to Host Public Hearing on the Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Automobiles and Automotive Parts
The U.S. Department of Commerce will host a public hearing on its Section 232 investigation of imports of automobiles and automotive parts on Thursday, July 19 in the U.S. Department of Commerce Auditorium. The hearing, which begins at 8:30 a.m., will feature testimony from approximately 45 individuals, representing domestic and international companies, industry groups, labor, and foreign countries. Officials from the Department of Defense will also be participating.
This hearing provides an opportunity for stakeholders to present information and advice relevant to the investigation on the effects of imports of automobiles and automotive parts on national security.
The investigation will consider all relevant facts and input from stakeholders compiled during the notice and comment process before reaching a final determination, which will be based on facts and the statutory requirements. Information from Thursday’s hearing and the more than 2,300 public comments submitted on this issue, in addition to rebuttal comments, will be considered in the Department of Commerce’s investigation and analysis.
Switzerland has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 12 July.
Switzerland claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.
UK white paper on
THE FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE EUROPEAN UNION
Aid planned by the United Kingdom in favour of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station: the rules of the European Union on State aid are applicable to measures relating to the area of nuclear energy
the rules of the European Union on State aid are applicable to measures relating to the area of nuclear energy
the Commission did not err in taking the view that the UK was entitled to define the development of nuclear energy as being a public-interest objective, even though that objective is not shared by all of the Member States
The General Court notes in this regard that the objective of promoting nuclear power, and, more specifically, of promoting the creation of new nuclear energy production capacities, is related to theEuratom Community’s goal of facilitating investment in the nuclear field. Furthermore, it followsfrom the FEU Treaty that each Member State has the right to choose between the different energy sources those which it prefers.
JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Fifth Chamber)
12 July 2018 (*)
(State aid — Aid planned by the United Kingdom in favour of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station — Contract for Difference, Secretary of State Agreement and Credit Guarantee — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market — Article 107(3)(c) TFEU — Public interest objective — Promotion of nuclear energy — Need for State intervention — Guarantee Notice — Determination of the aid element — Proportionality — Investment aid — Operating aid — Right to submit observations — Public procurement procedure — Obligation to state reasons)
In Case T?356/15,
Republic of Austria, represented initially by C. Pesendorfer and M. Klamert, and subsequently by G. Hesse and M. Fruhmann, acting as Agents, and by H. Kristoferitsch, lawyer,
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, represented by D. Holderer, acting as Agent, and by P. Kinsch, lawyer,
European Commission, represented by É. Gippini Fournier, R. Sauer, T. Maxian Rusche and P. N?me?ková, acting as Agents,
Czech Republic, represented by M. Smolek, T. Müller and J. Vlá?il, acting as Agents,
French Republic, represented initially by G. de Bergues, D. Colas and J. Bousin, and subsequently by D. Colas and J. Bousin, acting as Agents,
Hungary, represented initially by M. Fehér and M. Bóra, subsequently by B. Sonkodi, then by A. Steiner, acting as Agents, and by P. Nagy, lawyer, and finally by A. Steiner,
Republic of Poland, represented by B. Majczyna, acting as Agent,
Romania, represented initially by R. Radu and M. Bejenar, and subsequently by M. Bejenar and C.?R. Can??r, acting as Agents,
Slovak Republic, represented by B. Ricziová, acting as Agent,
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented initially by C. Brodie and S. Brandon, subsequently by C. Brodie, S. Simmons and M. Holt, then by C. Brodie, S. Simmons and D. Robertson, then by C. Brodie, and finally by C. Brodie and Z. Lavery, acting as Agents, and by T. Johnston, Barrister, and A. Robertson QC,
Terrorism, the UK Supreme Court on the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1989. What is “knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect” ?
The appellants relied on the well-established principle that whenever a statutory section creates a criminal offence but does not refer to the offender’s state of mind (“mens rea”), there is a presumption that to give effect to the will of Parliament, the court must read in words requiring mens rea .
While it is an important principle, it is a principle of statutory construction. It does not empower the court to substitute the plain words used by Parliament for a different provision on the grounds that the court would have done so differently by providing for an element, or a greater element, of mens rea.
The presumption must give way to either the plain meaning of the words of the statute, or to other relevant pointers to meaning which clearly demonstrate what was intended. The first port of call for any issue of construction is the words of the Act .
The words of section 17(b) of the Act suggest an objective test for mens rea at first sight. Thus, it is very difficult to see this statutory provision as one which is silent as to the intent required for the commission of the offence .
An offence of providing funding towards terrorism first appeared on the statute books in 1976 and was re-enacted in identical form in 1984. Those sections required proof either of knowledge or of actual suspicion. However, the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1989 made a change and introduced thewords “knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect” in place of “knowing or suspecting”. Thesechanges were deliberate. They are inexplicable unless it was the Parliamentary intention to widen the scope of the offences to include those who had, objectively assessed, reasonable cause to suspect that the money might be put to terrorist use. The change can only have been intended to remove the requirement for proof of actual suspicion. The court cannot ignore this clear Parliamentary decision[18-19].
It would be an error to suppose that the form of offence-creating words in section 17(b) create an offence of strict liability. Unlike an offence of strict liability, the accused’s state of mind is relevant for section 17(b). The requirement of an objectively assessed cause for suspicion focuses attention on what information the accused had. The requirement is satisfied when, on the information available to the accused, a reasonable person would suspect that the money might be used for terrorism .
Prime Minister Theresa May said:
Today in detailed discussions the Cabinet has agreed our collective position for the future of our negotiations with the EU.
Our proposal will create a UK – EU free trade area which establishes a common rule book for industrial goods and agricultural products. This maintains high standards in these areas, but we will also ensure that no new changes in the future take place without the approval of our Parliament.
As a result, we avoid friction in terms of trade, which protects jobs and livelihoods, as well as meeting our commitments in Northern Ireland.
We have also agreed a new business-friendly customs model with freedom to strike new trade deals around the world.
Next week we will be publishing a white paper which will set out more details of how we will be taking back control of our money, laws and borders.
Now we must all move at pace to negotiate our proposal with the EU to deliver the prosperous and secure future all our people deserve.
Boris Johnson resigns as foreign secretary
Brexit Secretary David Davis, who has been leading UK negotiations to leave the EU, has resigned from government.
Brexit Secretary David Davis has resigned
Upon the request of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a meeting of the Joint Commission of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was held on 6 July in Vienna at ministerial level.
The Joint Commission met to discuss the way forward to ensure the continued implementation of the nuclear deal in all its aspects and review unresolved issues arising from the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the agreement and the announced re-imposition of sanctions lifted under the JCPOA and its Annex II.
Russia: EU prolongs economic sanctions by six months. Il Consiglio ha prorogato le sanzioni economiche riguardanti settori specifici dell’economia russa fino al 31 gennaio 2019.
On 5 July 2018, the Council prolonged economic sanctions targeting specific sectors of the Russian economy until 31 January 2019.
This decision follows an update from President Macron and Chancellor Merkel to the European Council of 28-29 June 2018 on the state of implementation of the Minsk agreements, to which the sanctions are linked.
The Council adopted this decision today by written procedure and, in line with the rule for all such decisions, unanimously.
Il 5 luglio 2018 il Consiglio ha prorogato le sanzioni economiche riguardanti settori specifici dell’economia russa fino al 31 gennaio 2019.
La decisione fa seguito all’aggiornamento del presidente Macron e della cancelliera Merkel al Consiglio europeo del 28 e 29 giugno 2018 in merito allo stato di attuazione degli accordi di Minsk, a cui sono collegate le sanzioni.
Il Consiglio ha adottato tale decisione in data odierna mediante procedura scritta e, come di regola per tutte le decisioni di questo tipo, all’unanimità.
Le misure riguardano i settori finanziario, dell’energia, della difesa e dei beni a duplice uso. Introdotte inizialmente per un anno il 31 luglio 2014 in risposta alle azioni della Russia che destabilizzavano la situazione in Ucraina, sono state rafforzate nel settembre 2014.
The WTO’s nineteenth monitoring report on Group of 20 (G20) trade measures covering the period from mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018, issued on 4 July, shows that new trade-restrictive measures from G20 economies have doubled compared to the previous review period. The report also shows that G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, with the rate increasing slightly. The report’s findings should be of ‘real concern’ to the international community, according to Director-General Roberto Azevêdo.
Members expressed their concerns over possible measures by the United States regarding extra duties on the import of automobiles, including cars, SUVs, vans, light trucks and automotive parts, at the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) held on 3 and 4 of July. Over 40 members — including the 28 European Union members — took the floor to warn of the “serious disruption” to world markets and the multilateral trading system that may arise as a result of these potential measures, particularly in light of the large proportion of global trade accounted for by these products.
The item was discussed at the request of Japan and the Russian Federation, which were of the view that such measures could trigger a spiral of counter-measures and result in serious disruption to the rules-based multilateral trading system. They recalled that the issue of US investigations under Section 232 provisions has been raised over the past year in several WTO bodies – the CTG and the Committee on Safeguards – only to see things change for the worse. Both Japan and Russia reserved their right to protect their legitimate rights and interests as provided for under WTO rules.
The European Union echoed these concerns and said that there can be no justification for measures to restrict imports of cars, car parts and light trucks on grounds of national security, as there is no apparent economic threat to a US industry which has steadily expanded domestic production over the last 10 years. Any trade restrictive measures in the sector will have a serious negative impact not only on the EU but on the global economy overall, the EU said.
China stressed that the measures at stake mostly involve products for civilian use and that, as such, they do not pose a threat to national security. According to Beijing, these are simply protectionist measures that will significantly distort trade and global value chains and will bring serious challenges to the multilateral trading system. China said it stands ready to work with all WTO members to tackle this challenge and to take concrete action in order to safeguard the authority of the WTO and fight against unilateralism and protectionism.
Other members – Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Turkey, Costa Rica, Hong Kong China, Venezuela, Singapore, Brazil, Korea, Mexico, Qatar, Thailand and India – also raised concerns with the announced US investigation, which in their view will trigger a cycle of measures and counter-measures that will harm all members with negative effects on international trade.
On the impact of the existing US tariffs on steel and aluminium, some members pointed out that the additional tariffs in force since 23 March are already having negative effects on the supply chains, on producers and exporters, on the US downstream industry, and finally on US consumers. It was recognized that there is a serious problem of global overcapacity in the steel and aluminium sectors, but these members noted that import duties at the border will not solve it – it needs to be addressed through dialogue and negotiations in international fora such as the OECD.
In response, the United States said that the US Section 232 investigation on steel and aluminium is an issue that has been referred to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and, therefore, should not belong to the CTG agenda. The US referred other members to the statements made on this issue in the Safeguards Committee, as well as the Dispute Settlement Body, for further information on the US position on this issue.
U.S. government has moved to block China Mobile from offering services to the U.S. telecommunications market for national security reasons.
The U.S. government has moved to block China Mobile from offering services to the U.S. telecommunications market, recommending its application be rejected because the firm posed national security risks.
It said the company was “subject to exploitation, influence and control by the Chinese government” and that its application posed “substantial and unacceptable national security and law enforcement risks in the current national security environment”.
Rule of Law: Commission launches infringement procedure to protect the independence of the Polish Supreme Court. Stato di diritto: Procedimento d’infrazione della Commissione a tutela dell’indipendenza della Corte suprema polacca.
Today, the European Commission has launched an infringement procedure by sending a Letter of Formal Notice to Poland regarding the Polish law on the Supreme Court.
On 3 July, 27 out of 72 Supreme Court judges face the risk of being forced to retire – more than one in every three judges – due to the fact that the new Polish law on the Supreme Court lowers the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 70 to 65. This measure also applies to the First President of the Supreme Court, whose 6-year mandate would be prematurely terminated. According to the law, current judges are given the possibility to declare their will to have their mandate prolonged by the President of the Republic, which can be granted for a period of three years and renewed once. There are no criteria established for the President’s decision and there is no possibility for a judicial review of this decision.
The Commission is of the opinion that these measures undermine the principle of judicial independence, including the irremovability of judges, and thereby Poland fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union read in connection with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
La Commissione ha avviato in data odierna un procedimento d’infrazione nei confronti della Polonia inviandole una lettera di costituzione in mora per la legge sulla Corte suprema.
Poiché la nuova legge polacca abbassa da 70 a 65 anni l’età pensionabile obbligatoria per i giudici della Corte suprema, il 3 luglio 27 dei 72 giudici – più di uno su tre – rischiano di essere collocati in pensione d’ufficio. La misura si applica anche al primo presidente della Corte suprema, che vedrebbe terminare in anticipo il suo mandato sessennale. La legge consente agli attuali giudici di chiedere una proroga del mandato attivo al presidente della Repubblica, che può concederlo per un triennio, rinnovabile una sola volta. La decisione del presidente non è subordinata ad alcun criterio e contro di essa non è ammesso ricorso per via giudiziaria.
La Commissione ritiene che queste misure ledano il principio di indipendenza della magistratura, in particolare nell’aspetto dell’inamovibilità dei giudici, e che la Polonia venga quindi meno agli obblighi assunti con l’articolo 19, paragrafo 1, del trattato sull’Unione europea (TUE) in combinato disposto con l’articolo 47 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea.
La Commissione ha già affrontato il tema della legge sulla Corte suprema nel dialogo sullo Stato di diritto tenuto con le autorità polacche, ma senza ottenere risultati soddisfacenti: nonostante le affermazioni delle autorità polacche, la Commissione non ritiene che la consultazione del Consiglio nazionale della magistratura introdotta nel processo rappresenti effettivamente una garanzia, perché i criteri alla base sono vaghi e il parere del Consiglio non è vincolante. Per effetto della riforma dell’8 dicembre 2017, inoltre, i giudici membri del Consiglio nazionale della magistratura sono ormai nominati dal parlamento polacco, in una procedura che non soddisfa i criteri europei d’indipendenza della magistratura.
Dato lo stallo del dialogo sullo Stato di diritto e l’imminenza dell’applicazione del nuovo regime di pensionamento ai giudici della Corte suprema, la Commissione ha deciso di avviare con urgenza un procedimento d’infrazione. Il governo polacco disporrà di un mese di tempo per rispondere alla lettera di costituzione in mora. La Commissione è peraltro pronta a continuare con la Polonia il dialogo sullo Stato di diritto in corso, che a suo giudizio resta la sede privilegiata per risolvere la questione della minaccia sistematica che incombe sullo Stato di diritto nel paese.
The EU’s Customs Union celebrates its 50th anniversary on July 1, one of the greatest achievements of the European Union.
Borne out of the landmark post-war agreements that paved the way for European integration, the Customs Union opened for business in 1968. By abolishing customs tariffs for trade in goods within what is now the EU, the Customs Union marked the first decisive step towards the EU becoming the world’s largest trading bloc, with the 28 customs administrations of the EU acting as though they were one entity.
Over the past 50 years, the Customs Union has developed into a cornerstone of our Single Market, keeping EU borders safe and protecting our citizens from prohibited and dangerous goods such as weapons and drugs. It also facilitates an ever-growing portion of global trade: EU customs handled 16% of the world’s commerce in 2017.
On 29 June 2018, the Russian Federation requested consultations with the United States concerning certain measures imposed by the United States to allegedly adjust imports of steel and aluminium into the United States.
The EU ambassadors of the member states confirmed, on behalf of the Council, the provisional agreement reached on 19-20 June between the Bulgarian Presidency and the European Parliament on the Energy Union governance regulation.
European Council (Art. 50) meeting (29 June 2018) – Conclusions – Riunione del Consiglio europeo (Articolo 50) (29 giugno 2018)
The European Council establishes the composition of the European Parliament after Brexit – Il Consiglio europeo stabilisce la composizione del Parlamento europeo a seguito della Brexit
La decisione riduce e ridistribuisce i seggi del Parlamento europeo a seguito della decisione del Regno Unito di recedere dall’Unione europea. La nuova composizione comporterà una riduzione delle dimensioni dal Parlamento europeo, che passerà da 751 a 705 membri.
Dei 73 seggi resi vacanti dalla Brexit, 27 saranno riassegnati per rispecchiare meglio il principio della proporzionalità degressiva.
I 27 seggi saranno assegnati a: Francia (+5), Spagna (+5), Italia (+3), Paesi Bassi (+3), Irlanda (+2), Svezia (+1), Austria (+1), Danimarca (+1), Finlandia (+1), Slovacchia (+1), Croazia (+1), Estonia (+1), Polonia (+1) e Romania (+1). Nessuno Stato membro perderà seggi.
Decisione del Consiglio
The decision reduces and redistributes European Parliament seats following the decision by the United Kingdom to exit the European Union. The new composition will reduce the size of the European Parliament from 751 to 705 Members (MEP’s).
Of the 73 seats vacated by Brexit, 27 will be re-allocated to better reflect the principle of degressive proportionality.
The 27 seats will be distributed to France (+5), Spain (+5), Italy (+3), Netherlands (+3), Ireland (+2), Sweden (+1), Austria (+1), Denmark (+1), Finland (+1), Slovakia (+1), Croatia (+1), Estonia (+1), Poland (+1) and Romania (+1). No member state will lose any seats.
EU to ban data localisation restrictions – A breve il divieto UE sulle restrizioni in materia di localizzazione dei dati
The EU is moving to boost its data economy by creating a single market for data storage and processing services, such as cloud computing. This freedom to choose a data service provider anywhere in Europe is expected to lead to more innovative data- driven services and more competitive prices for businesses, consumers and public administrations. Member states’ ambassadors endorsed the new rules today, following a provisional agreement with the European Parliament on 19 June.
” Free movement of data is crucial for unlocking the vast potential of the data economy. This legislation will ensure that data is allowed to flow freely, allowing companies and public administrations to store and process non-personal data wherever they choose in the EU. These rules will provide legal certainty and trust in the increasing use of data-driven innovations for the benefit of all citizens.
Ivaylo Moskovski, Bulgarian Minister for Transport, Information Technology and Communications
The reform will remove any restrictions imposed by member states’ public authorities on the geographical location for storing or processing non-personal data, unless such restrictions are justified on grounds of public security. Important sources of non-personal data include the rapidly expanding Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and machine learning. Current uses of aggregate and anonymised sets of non-personal data include for example big data analytics and precision farming.
To ensure that the rules will work in practice, member states must either repeal their data localisation requirements or notify those that are permitted to the Commission. The text clarifies that member states’ public administrations are not prevented from insourcing the provision of services involving data processing.
If a data set contains both personal and non-personal data, the general data protection regulation will apply to the personal data part of the set, while the non-personal data will be covered by the free flow of data regulation.
Member states’ competent authorities will continue to have access to data even when it is stored or processed in another country. This may be necessary for example for the purposes of regulatory or supervisory control.
The draft regulation also encourages the development of codes of conduct to make it easier for users of data processing services to switch service providers or to port their data back to their own IT systems.
Removing data localisation restrictions is considered a key factor in ensuring that the data economy can achieve its full potential and double its value to 4% of European GDP in 2020.
With this agreement, the Council and the Parliament succeeded in meeting the June 2018 deadline that EU leaders set for this priority dossier in the European Council in October 2017.
L’UE mira a stimolare l’economia dei dati creando un mercato unico per i servizi di conservazione e trattamento dei dati, come il cloud computing. Tale libertà di scegliere un fornitore di servizi di dati ovunque in Europa dovrebbe tradursi in servizi basati sui dati più innovativi e in prezzi più competitivi per le imprese, i consumatori e le amministrazioni pubbliche. Oggi gli ambasciatori degli Stati membri hanno approvato le nuove norme, dopo aver raggiunto un accordo provvisorio con il Parlamento europeo il 19 giugno.
” La libera circolazione dei dati è fondamentale per liberare l’ampio potenziale dell’economia dei dati. Tale normativa garantirà la libera circolazione dei dati e consentirà alle imprese e alle amministrazioni pubbliche di archiviare e trattare i dati non personali ovunque scelgano di farlo nell’UE. Tali norme garantiranno certezza del diritto e fiducia nel crescente utilizzo di innovazioni guidate dai dati a vantaggio di tutti i cittadini.
Ivaylo Moskovski, ministro bulgaro dei trasporti, della tecnologia dell’informazione e delle comunicazioni
La riforma eliminerà le restrizioni in materia di ubicazione geografica imposte dalle autorità pubbliche degli Stati membri per quanto riguarda la conservazione o il trattamento dei dati non personali, a meno che tali restrizioni siano giustificate da motivi di sicurezza pubblica. Importanti fonti di dati non personali includono l’internet degli oggetti, l’intelligenza artificiale e l’apprendimento automatico, che sono in rapida espansione. Gli attuali utilizzi dei set aggregati e anonimizzati di dati non personali comprendono, ad esempio, l’analisi dei megadati e l’agricoltura di precisione.
Per garantire che le norme siano efficaci nella pratica, gli Stati membri devono abrogare i loro obblighi di localizzazione dei dati o comunicare alla Commissione quelli che sono autorizzati. Il testo specifica che le amministrazioni pubbliche degli Stati membri possono internalizzare la prestazione di servizi in materia di trattamento dei dati.
Se un set di dati contiene dati sia personali che non personali, ai dati personali del set si applicherà il regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati, mentre i dati non personali rientreranno nel campo di applicazione del regolamento sulla libera circolazione dei dati.
Le autorità competenti degli Stati membri continueranno ad avere accesso ai dati anche se conservati o trattati in un altro paese. Ciò potrebbe risultare necessario, ad esempio, ai fini di un controllo regolamentare o di vigilanza.
Il progetto di regolamento incoraggia inoltre l’elaborazione di codici di condotta affinché sia più agevole per gli utenti di servizi di trattamento dati cambiare fornitore di servizi o ritrasferire i propri dati verso i propri sistemi informatici.
L’eliminazione delle restrizioni in materia di localizzazione dei dati è considerata un fattore essenziale per consentire all’economia basata sui dati di raggiungere il pieno potenziale e raddoppiare il proprio valore fino ad arrivare al 4% del PIL europeo nel 2020.
Con questo accordo il Consiglio e il Parlamento hanno rispettato il termine, ovvero giugno 2018, che i leader dell’UE avevano fissato per questo fascicolo prioritario nel Consiglio europeo di ottobre 2017.