Establishing an EU Resettlement Framework: Frequently asked questions

MIL OSI – Source: European Union – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Establishing an EU Resettlement Framework: Frequently asked questions

Why is the Commission proposing an EU Resettlement Framework?
The aim of the proposal is to establish a common European policy on resettlement by providing for a permanent framework with a unified procedure for resettlement across the EU. The EU Resettlement Framework will channel EU financial support towards a structured framework based on a common approach and procedures and away from the current ad hoc multilateral and national resettlement initiatives. While the Member States will remain the ones deciding on how many people will be resettled each year, by coordinating national efforts and acting as a whole, the EU will have a greater impact and will be able to contribute collectively and with one single voice to global resettlement efforts.
Resettlement is an integral part of the larger objective to establish a robust and effective European approach for sustainable migration management. Providing safe and legal pathways to the EU for persons in need of international protection will contribute to reducing irregular migration and help breaking the business model of smuggling networks. It is also a concrete demonstration of international solidarity and responsibility sharing with those countries to which or within which a large number of persons in need of international protection has been displaced.
What common EU rules does the proposal foresee?
The proposal provides common EU rules for:

The admission of third country nationals through resettlement;

The procedures governing all stages of the resettlement process;

The types of status to be accorded to resettled persons by Member States;

The decision making procedures for the implementation of the framework;

The financial support for the Member States’ resettlement efforts within the EU resettlement framework.

How will the new scheme be implemented?
The new EU resettlement framework will be implemented through an annual EU resettlement plan and operationalised by one or more targeted EU resettlement schemes.
The annual EU resettlement plan, adopted by the Council on a proposal from the Commission, determines the maximum total number of persons to be resettled based on the participation and contributions made by the Member States to the total number of persons to be resettled. The annual plan should also indicate the overall geographical priorities for resettlement. Given that resettlement will be supported by the EU budget, the proposal foresees that the Commission presents its proposal for the annual EU resettlement plan together with its proposal on the draft EU annual budget. The Council should be able to react quickly and adopt an implementing act within two months.
As soon as possible after the adoption of the annual EU resettlement plan by the Council, the Commission establishes each year one or more targeted EU resettlement schemes to operationalise the EU resettlement plan.
For each targeted EU resettlement scheme, the Commission will set the precise number out of the total number of persons to be resettled from a concrete third country or geographical region and details about the participation of the Member States consistent with the annual EU resettlement plan. The scheme will also include a description of the target group(s) of persons to be resettled and specify a geographical area covering one or more third countries from which resettlement will take place. The starting date and duration of each targeted EU resettlement scheme will also be specified as well as which resettlement procedure will apply. An ordinary procedure should be seen as the norm, unless an expedited procedure is warranted on humanitarian grounds or in case of urgent legal or physical protection needs.
Does the proposal contain a distribution key?
No, the maximum total number of persons to be resettled to the EU every year within the EU resettlement framework will be set by the Council in the annual EU resettlement plan. The Member States remain the ones deciding on how many people they will resettle each year. When discussing the annual resettlement plan or targeted EU resettlement schemes, the Commission and the Council should take into account the discussions within the High-Level Resettlement Committee, composed of representatives of the EU Institutions and Member States. The Associated States, the EU Asylum Agency, UNHCR and IOM can also be invited to join the Committee.
How will the annual EU resettlement plan and the targeted EU resettlement schemes be adopted?
The Council adopts annual EU resettlement plans through an implementing act on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. The Commission adopts targeted EU resettlement schemes through Commission implementing acts.
How will the resettlement procedure work step-by-step?
The EU Resettlement Framework will allow for two types of standard resettlement procedures: an ordinary or an expedited resettlement procedure. Both procedures will consist of the following four stages: identification, registration, assessment and decision.
Member States are responsible for identifying the persons to be resettled. The identification can be made either through a referral by the UNHCR, or where applicable, the new EU Asylum Agency (currently EASO) or relevant international bodies, or by the Member States themselves. After registering the third-country nationals and stateless persons for whom they intend to conduct the resettlement procedure, Member States will assess whether these persons meet the eligibility criteria and whether they are not excluded in accordance with exclusion grounds. Under the ordinary procedure, in the case of a positive decision Member States will grant to the persons to be resettled a refugee status or a subsidiary protection status. Under the expedite procedure, after the admission to the resettling Member State, the person to be resettled will apply for international protection, and follow the asylum procedure as stipulated by the EU asylum law. Member States will make all arrangements necessary for the departure of the third-country nationals and, with a view to facilitating a rapid, smooth, and effective integration into the host society, offer a pre-departure orientation programme.
Who can qualify for resettlement and how will persons eligible for resettlement be identified?
The possibility for resettlement under the new EU Resettlement Framework is foreseen for third-country nationals and stateless persons who are in need of international protection and have been displaced to a third country or within their own country due to a well-founded fear of persecution or due to substantial grounds for believing that they would face a real risk of suffering serious harm.
Persons falling within at least one of the following vulnerability categories are eligible: women and girls at risk, children and adolescents at risk, including unaccompanied children, survivors of violence and/or torture, including on the basis of gender, persons with medical needs or disabilities, persons with legal and/or physical protection needs, and persons with socio-economic vulnerability. Persons with family links to third-country nationals or stateless persons or EU citizens legally residing in a Member State or who are dependent on them are also eligible.
What are the grounds for exclusion from resettlement under the EU Resettlement Framework?
Persons who have irregularly entered, irregularly stayed in, or attempted to irregularly enter the territory of a Member States during the last five years prior to resettlement will be excluded from participation in the EU Resettlement Framework.
Exclusion also applies to third-country nationals and stateless persons whom a Member State has, during the last five years prior to resettlement, refused to resettle.
Persons will also be excluded from resettlement on the basis of the security criteria set out in the Regulation, notably persons for whom there are reasonable grounds for considering that they: have committed a crime against peace, a war crime or a crime against humanity; a serious crime; are a danger to the community, public policy or security.
What are the criteria for determining the priority countries or regions of resettlement?
The EU will seek partnerships with key third countries of origin and transit through a coherent and tailored engagement where the EU and its Member States act in a coordinated manner, as announced in the Commission Communication on Establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration.
For each targeted resettlement scheme, the Commission will list a specific geographical area covering one or more third countries from which resettlement will take place, taking into account the annual EU resettlement plan. When doing so, the Commission will take into account:

The number of persons in need of international protection displaced to or within a third country and migratory flows of such persons to the Member States;

Complementarity with financial and technical assistance provided to third countries to which or within which persons in need of international protection have been displaced;

The EU’s overall relations with third countries;

Ongoing resettlement efforts worldwide.

What is the difference between the ordinary and the expedited procedure?
The EU Resettlement Framework will allow for two types of standard resettlement procedures: an ordinary or an expedited resettlement procedure.
The ordinary resettlement procedure reflects the resettlement standards and practices usually followed by Member States. It includes a full assessment of qualification for international protection in the third country and foresees that Member States grant refugee status or subsidiary protection status to the resettled person. The procedure should be conducted as soon as possible and within eight months after Member States have registered the third-country nationals or stateless persons concerned. For complex cases, this period may be extended by four months.
The expedited resettlement procedure reflects the approach agreed in the Standard Operating Procedures for the resettlement of Syrians from Turkey under the EU-Turkey Statement. This procedure is foreseen in cases where there are specific humanitarian grounds or urgent legal or physical protection needs. The resettlement procedure should be conducted within four months of the registration. For complex cases, the period may be extended by two months. The assessment of the international protection needs under the expedited resettlement procedure will be limited to an assessment of the eligibility for subsidiary protection without assessing a qualification for a refugee status.
The same level of security checks should be conducted for both types of procedure.
How can the EU Resettlement Framework contribute to increasing resettlement to Europe?
The proposal provides for a more stable collective framework for resettlement in the EU by reducing divergences among the national resettlement practices and procedures. A common stable and reliable resettlement framework, supported through EU funding, will help to gradually scale up Member States’ resettlement efforts.
Will all EU Member States participate in the Resettlement Framework?
The participation of Member States will be decided by the Council for each annual EU resettlement plan together with the contribution of each Member State to the maximum overall number. The UK and Ireland may take part in the implementation of the Regulation if they choose to do so, in accordance with the relevant Protocols attached to the Treaties. Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. The Associated States will be invited to participate.
Are applications for asylum lodged before or after the departure of the resettled person?
Persons eligible for resettlement do not apply for asylum as part of the resettlement procedure. In case of a positive outcome of the resettlement procedure under the ordinary procedure, they will be granted an international protection status (either refugee or subsidiary protection status) as part of the resettlement procedure prior to their admission to the territory of the resettling Member State.
Persons admitted via the expedited resettlement procedure, for whom no full refugee qualification assessment has been made, will be able to apply for international protection upon their admission to the resettling Member State. The resettling Member State will be responsible for the examination of such applications.
What about the family members of resettled refugees?
Member States must ensure that the family unity of persons being resettled is maintained. This means that close family members will be resettled together.
How will the EU resettlement schemes be financed?
The EU resettlement schemes will be funded through the EU’s Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF). Member States taking part in this fund will be entitled to a lump sum of €10,000 for each person they resettle under this scheme, regardless of which resettlement procedure is followed. When the Commission proposes a Council implementing act establishing the annual Union resettlement plan, it will also adopt a proposal on the draft Union annual budget including the resources for the implementation of the annual Union resettlement plan for that year.
Will the proposed Framework replace the EU-wide approach from 20 July 2015, the 1:1 scheme and the voluntary humanitarian admission scheme with Turkey?
The proposal builds on the current EU resettlement initiatives, as well as the ongoing national resettlement schemes. It sets out a more structured and common approach to resettlement for the future.
Can Member States still have their national resettlement schemes?
Yes. Member States may still adopt or implement national resettlement schemes, but these schemes should not jeopardise the attainment of the EU objectives set out in this proposal. For example, through their national schemes Member States will be able to contribute an additional number of resettlement places to the EU resettlement schemes, going beyond their agreed contribution.
Can the national resettlement schemes still be financed by EU funding?
EU funding will only be provided to Member States when resettling through the EU Resettlement Framework. Resettlements under national resettlement schemes outside of this framework will not be supported financially from the EU budget.
For more information
Press release: Enhancing legal channels: Commission proposes to create common EU Resettlement Framework
Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework and amending Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council
Press release: Completing the reform of the Common European Asylum System: Towards an efficient, fair and humane asylum policy
Frequently asked questions: Reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTSHEET – Asylum procedures: reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTHSEET – Qualification: Reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTSHEET – Reception Conditions: reforming the Common European Asylum System

Reforming the Common European Asylum System: Frequently asked questions

MIL OSI – Source: European Union – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Reforming the Common European Asylum System: Frequently asked questions

The Common European Asylum System provides common minimum standards for the treatment of all asylum seekers. It consists of a legal framework covering all aspects of the asylum process and a support agency – the European Asylum Support Office (EASO). However, in practice, the current system leaves a lot of discretion to Member States, and as a result is still characterised by differing treatment of asylum seekers and varying recognition rates amongst EU Member States. These divergences encourage secondary movements and asylum shopping.
In April 2016, in line with the approach set out in the European Agenda on Migration, the Commission set out steps to be taken towards a more humane, fair and efficient European asylum policy as well as a better managed legal migration policy. In May 2016, the Commission presented a first package of legislative proposals, establishing a sustainable and fair Dublin system for determining the Member State responsible for examining asylum applications, reinforcing the Eurodac system and establishing a European Agency for Asylum.
The functioning of the Common European Asylum System relies on establishing common standards for the examination of applications for international protection and for recognition of protection needs at the European Union level.
The Commission is today proposing to complete the reform of the Common European Asylum System through:

the establishment of a common EU asylum procedure for all applications for international protection by replacing the current Asylum Procedures Directive with a Regulation;

ensuring maximum harmonisation of the standards for the qualification and content of protection for refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection by replacing the current Qualification Directive with a Regulation;

a reform of the Reception Conditions Directive to further harmonise reception conditions of applicants for international protection in the EU.

1. A proposal for a new Asylum Procedures Regulation
The Asylum Procedures Directive establishes the procedure and safeguards to be applied during the asylum procedure.
What are the main weaknesses of the existing Asylum Procedures Directive?
Procedures for obtaining and withdrawing international protection currently differ between Member States, for instance as regards the time taken for examining a claim, procedural guarantees provided to applicants and the use of accelerated and inadmissibility examination procedures. The current procedures are generally too complex, too lengthy and applicants are not treated the same way in each Member State. These discrepancies between Member States’ procedures contribute to differences in recognition rates, secondary movements, so called asylum shopping and ultimately, to an unfair distribution of responsibilities among Member States. The degree of harmonisation of national procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection that was achieved through the recast Asylum Procedures Directive, adopted in 2013, has proven to be insufficient to address these problems.
Why is the Commission proposing to replace the Directive with a Regulation?
The Commission is proposing the adoption of a Regulation which will establish a common Union asylum procedure for all applications for international protection, irrespective of which Member State the applications are examined in. The replacement of a legal instrument which requires transposition into national law with another instrument whose provisions are clear, precise and directly applicable is the best way to secure the full harmonisation of asylum procedures and create a common procedure applicable to all Member States. A Regulation is directly applicable, which means that it can be directly relied upon by both the applicants for international protection and by the authorities. This is the most effective way for guaranteeing the rights of applicants and equity in the treatment of applications across all Member States.
What are the main objectives of the proposal?
The new Asylum Procedures Regulation will:

Establish a common procedure for international protection applicable in the same way in all Member States;

Make the procedure faster, simpler and more effective;

Provide the tools for national authorities to examine and decide upon applications efficiently, fight abuse and prevent secondary movements;

Ensure common procedural guarantees for the individual applicants.

How will the new Regulation simplify and clarify the procedure for international protection?
The proposal clarifies the various procedural steps and concepts, starting from access to the procedure to the final decision on an application for international protection – ensuring a common procedure for all Member States. The Regulation contains the specific timelines, tasks and responsibilities of the competent national authorities for every step of the procedure, and clearer obligations, rights and procedural safeguards for the applicants.
What are the steps for filing an asylum application?
Access to the procedure is based on a three-step approach: making, registering and lodging an application.
An application is considered to be made as soon as the person expresses a wish to receive international protection from a Member State. From the moment an application is made the person becomes an applicant and benefits from the rights under the Asylum Procedure Regulation and the Reception Conditions Directive.
The application needs to be registered promptly and at the latest within three working days from when it is made. The authorities registering the application have a duty to inform the applicant of his/her rights and obligations as well as the consequences in case of non-compliance.
Lodging is the final step to access the procedure. Applicants must be given an effective opportunity to lodge their application within ten working days from when their application is registered. At this stage, applicants must submit all the elements at their disposal in order to substantiate and complete their applications. This is an important step since it triggers the timeline for the examination of the applications.
What would the duration be for processing an application?
The overall duration of the administrative procedure remains at a maximum of six months from the lodging. This may be prolonged once by three months in exceptional cases of disproportionate pressure on the asylum system or due to the complexity of the case (the current Directive foresees the possibility to prolong the procedure by 9 months). The procedure may be temporarily suspended because of changes in the country of origin. In those cases, the procedure should not exceed 15 months.
Will time limits for the accelerated and admissibility examination procedure be introduced?
The introduction of time limits is being proposed for the duration of the accelerated examination procedure (maximum two months) and for the admissibility procedure (maximum one month). In cases where an applicant comes from a first country of asylum or a safe third country, the admissibility of the claim must be examined within ten working days.
Will time limits for appeals be introduced?
Yes, time limits are set for lodging appeals, as well as for the duration of the first appeal stage. The time limits for lodging an appeal range from one week to one month, depending on the type of procedure that led to the rejection of the application. For decisions at the first appeal stage, the time limit varies from two to six months, depending again on the type of procedure that led to the rejection of the application. This may be prolonged by three months in cases involving complex issues of fact or law.
No specific time limits are foreseen for subsequent appeals. However, the right to stay during such subsequent appeals will be exceptional, and a decision on it will have to be taken during a period of one month from the lodging of the further appeal.
Does the proposal foresee the possibility to extend these time limits?
The time limits foreseen for the registering, lodging and processing of applications may be exceptionally extended in situations where a Member State receives a disproportionate number of simultaneous applications. This exception is provided for to support the Member States in cases of disproportionate pressure on the asylum system. However, to ensure an effective process, extending the time limits should be a measure of last resort.
Will the use of the accelerated procedure become compulsory in certain cases?
Yes, under certain limited grounds which include cases where applicants makes clearly inconsistent or false representations, misleads the authorities with false information, or comes from a safe country of origin. Similarly, an application should be examined under the accelerated examination procedure where it is clearly abusive, such as when the applicant seeks to delay or frustrate the enforcement of a return decision, or when the applicant has absconded.
When can an application be declared inadmissible?
If applicants have already found a first country of asylum where they enjoy protection, or where their applications can be examined by a safe third country, applications must be declared inadmissible. Subsequent applications without new relevant elements or findings, and separate unjustified applications by a spouse, partner, dependant adult or accompanied minor, are also to be declared inadmissible.
At which stage is the admissibility assessment done?
The first Member State in which an application has been lodged should examine the admissibility on account of the first country of asylum or safe third country, before determining the Member State responsible in accordance with the new Dublin Regulation.
Is the processing of subsequent applications also being simplified?
Yes. Subsequent applications are first subject to a preliminary examination to determine if the applicant brings forward relevant new elements or findings. If this is not the case, the subsequent application is to be dismissed as inadmissible or as manifestly unfounded. The personal interview may be dispensed with where, from the written submissions, it is clear that the application does not give rise to relevant new elements or findings, or that it is clearly without tangible prospects of success. Where subsequent applications are rejected, there will be no automatic right to remain on the territory of the Member State.
Why are obligations set out for applicants during the procedure?
A common procedure cannot be effectively achieved if certain obligations are not fulfilled by applicants. The aim is to make the applicant take more responsibility throughout the procedure. This is also a way to combat abuse and to offer Member States the efficient tools to fight secondary movements. At the same time, this would avoid a situation where a limited number of Member States are examining the bulk of applications for international protection.
What are the main obligations for applicants under the new proposal?
The main obligations are the following:

The applicant must apply for international protection in the Member State of first entry or where he or she is legally present. This obligation derives from the proposed Dublin reform;

The applicant must cooperate with the authorities; he/she must provide the necessary details to establish his/her identity and for the examination of the applications, as well as fingerprints and a facial image;

The applicant must remain in the Member State examining the application, and he /she must respect reporting obligations according to the recast Reception Conditions Directive.

What happens if the applicant doesn’t fulfil his or her obligations?
Non-compliance with these obligations may lead to an application being rejected as abandoned under a procedure for implicit withdrawal. Where applicants abscond, their application will be examined under an accelerated examination procedure. Where an application is rejected as abandoned or rejected following an accelerated examination procedure, the applicant will no longer have an automatic right to remain on the territory of the Member State. In cases of subsequent applications, applicants do not enjoy the right of free legal assistance and they do not have a right to remain.
Will the border procedure change?
The border procedure provides for the possibility to decide at the border or transit zones of A Member State on the admissibility of an applicant and the substance of an application. Access to the territory should be granted in order the application to be processed if, within four weeks, no decision has been taken by the Member State.
The border procedure remains optional since this kind of procedure normally implies the use of detention. It can be applied for examining the admissibility or the merits of applications on the same grounds as under an accelerated examination procedure. A decision needs to be taken within four weeks, which is also the currently applicable time limit. If no decision is taken within those four weeks, the applicant gains the right to enter and remain on the territory.
Can the border procedure and the accelerated examination procedures be applied to unaccompanied minors?
The application of these special procedures is limited with regard to unaccompanied minors. More generally, adequate support needs to be provided to vulnerable applicants for these procedures to apply to them.
How will the proposal reinforce the guarantees for every applicant?
All applicants must be fully informed of their rights, obligations and of the consequences of not complying with their obligations. The proposal widens the scope for free legal assistance, which will also be available during the administrative procedure. Applicants will therefore, at their request and where necessary, receive free legal assistance and representation throughout all stages of the procedure.
The applicants have a right to be heard in a personal interview subject to a few exceptions. Applicants will be provided interpretation and may be assisted by a legal adviser during the personal interview. A personal interview is also provided for in the context of withdrawal of status.
Reinforced safeguards are provided for applicants with special procedural needs and unaccompanied minors.
How will the new rules reinforce the guarantees for unaccompanied minors?
The best interest of the child is the primary consideration in all procedures applicable to unaccompanied minors in line with Article 24 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The proposal reinforces the guarantees that are available for vulnerable persons, and in particular for unaccompanied minors. The Commission has in particular foreseen several measures aimed at securing prompt and effective guardianship for these children. The responsible authorities have to appoint a guardian as soon as possible and no later than five working days from the moment an unaccompanied minor makes an application for asylum. The time limit for lodging for unaccompanied minors will only start from the moment the guardian is appointed and meets with the child.
Is the right to be heard respected in the new proposal?
Yes. The applicants have the right to be heard through a personal interview on the admissibility or merits of their application, irrespective of the type of administrative procedure applied to their case. The personal interview may only be omitted in limited cases, when the determining authority is certain to take a positive decision on the application or it is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstance beyond his or her control or in the context of subsequent applications under certain conditions.
What about the right to remain on the territory of a Member State during the procedure?
As a general rule, for an asylum applicant to be able to exercise his or her right to an effective remedy, he or she has the right to remain until the time limit for lodging a first level of appeal expires and where the applicant exercises such right, pending the outcome of the remedy.
Asylum applicants have the right to remain on the territoryof the Member State for the duration of the administrative procedure. However, this does not constitute an entitlement to residence, and it does not give the applicant the right to travel to another Member State without authorisation. Exceptions from the right to remain during the administrative procedure are limited to certain cases of subsequent applications and cases of surrender or extradition to a Member State, third country or an international court.
What about the rules concerning safe countries?
The Commission considers that the ‘safe country’ concepts constitute a critical aspect of a common approach. It is an essential tool to support the swift processing of applications. Therefore, the proposal clarifies these concepts, and makes their application mandatory, including in individual cases.
Is the Commission considering establishing a European list of safe countries?
The Commission proposes to progressively move towards full harmonisation in this area. It proposes the full replacement of national safe country lists with European lists or designations in five years’ time from the entry into force of the Asylum Procedures Regulation.
In September 2015, following to the European Council conclusions of 25-26 June, the Commission proposed an EU common list of safe countries of origin to allow for swifter processing of individual asylum applications from candidates originating from countries considered to be safe across the EU, and for faster returns if the individual assessments of the applications confirm no right of asylum. The Commission proposed to add Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey to this list. Other countries can be added in future following a thorough assessment by the European Commission. The LIBE Committee of the European Parliament endorsed the Commission’s proposal for an EU common list on 7 July.
A similar list of safe third countries is also to be established, in accordance with the criteria set out in the regulation, at a later stage following the legislative procedure.
How will the new EU Agency for Asylum support the Member States?
With its new mandate, the Agency will be able to provide Member States with the necessary operational and technical assistance to help them to register and process applications within the appropriate time limit. The mandate of the Agency provides that, where no request for assistance is made by a Member State and where due to disproportionate pressure the asylum system in a Member State becomes ineffective to such an extent that it jeopardises the functioning of the Common European Asylum System, the Agency may, based on an implementing decision of the Commission, take measures in support of that Member State. Moreover, the Agency will assist the Commission in assessing the situation in third countries designated as safe country of origin or safe third countries at Union level.
Does the new proposal foresee the possibility for Member States to help each other in times of crisis?
Yes, this is foreseen in the new proposal. The authorities of other Member States and international organisations may also assist in the registration and examination of applications.
 
2. A proposal for a new Qualification Regulation
The Qualification Directive establishes common grounds for granting international protection and foresees a series of rights for its beneficiaries (residence permits, travel documents, access to employment and education, social welfare and healthcare).
What are the main weaknesses of the existing Qualifications Directive?
Recognition rates still vary between Member States and the type of protection status granted also differs from one country to another (Geneva Convention refugee status versus subsidiary protection status). In addition, there is a considerable disparity in the duration of the residence permits, as well as in the access to specific rights, especially social assistance. The differences of recognition and level of rights provided by Member States can contribute to secondary movements and undue pull factors to certain Member States. Moreover, the absence of systematic reviews of the status for example when changes in countries of origin could have an impact on the need for protection makes the system of protection permanent, thereby providing for protection even if it is not needed anymore.
Why is the Commission proposing to replace the Directive with a Regulation?
The Commission is proposing to replace the Qualification Directive with a Regulation to ensure maximum harmonisation of the standards for the qualification and content of protection for refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. Applicants for international protection must have the same chance of obtaining the same form of protection, or having their claim rejected, irrespective of where they apply for asylum in the Union.
How will the proposal harmonise the common criteria for recognising applicants for international protection?
The new proposal includes prescriptive rules, replacing the current optional ones concerning the duty of the applicant to substantiate the application, the assessment of the internal protection alternatives and the grounds for withdrawal on the basis of being a danger to the security of the Member State or having been convicted for a particularly serious crime.
How can the reform ensure more convergence of asylum decisions across the EU?
The new proposal obliges the Member States to take into account common analysis and guidance on the situation in the country of origin, provided at Union level by the European Union Agency for Asylum and the European Country of Origin Information networks in accordance with new provisions of the proposed Regulation, when deciding on an asylum application. Protection should only be granted to those who need it and for as long as it continues to be needed.
Will the situation of each asylum seeker be reviewed regularly?
Yes. The granting international protection has in practice almost invariably led to permanent settlement in the EU, while its purpose was to grant protection only for so long as the risk of persecution or serious harm persists.  The new provisions therefore introduce the obligation for Member States to carry out systematic and regular status reviews in case of significant changes in the situation in the country of origin based on analysis and guidance provided by the EU Agency for Asylum as well as when they intend to renew the residence permits, for the first time for refugees and for the first and second time for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection.
Despite the existing obligation to withdraw the status when the risk of persecution or serious harm ceases, there are currently only few systematic status reviews by the Member States.
Will the regular reviews be an obstacle to integration?
To avoid negative impacts on the prospects of integration which could result from an unsecure status, as well as unnecessary administrative burden, obligatory reviews (other than the ones triggered by a change in the country of origin) would only be required in the early stages after status has been granted (after three years for refugees and after years one and two for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection). If status is to be withdrawn, a 3-month grace period is proposed, to give the beneficiary the opportunity to apply for another legal migration status (for example for a Blue Card or on the basis of family reasons).
Can Member States limit the social assistance provided to beneficiaries?
Member States may continue to limit the provision of social assistance to core benefits in respect of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. In addition they can make access to certain types of social assistances conditional on effective participation in integration measures in line with the Action Plan on Integration presented by the Commission on 7 June.
How will the proposal address the issue of secondary movements?
The harmonisation of recognition rates and type of protection status granted should contribute to a decrease in secondary movements.
Additionally, the 5-year waiting period for beneficiaries of international protection to become eligible for long term resident status will be restarted each time a person is found in a Member State where he/she does not have the right to stay or reside. This will provide a strong disincentive against secondary movements.
How does the proposal impact on the right to family reunification?
Family reunification – the right for a family member to reunite with the refugee and to be admitted to an EU Member State for that purpose – is regulated by the Family Reunification Directive. The proposed Qualification Regulation does not impact on the Family Reunification Directive.
The proposed Qualification Regulation contains rules for family members who are already on the territory of a Member State together with the refugee or the beneficiary of subsidiary protection, in order to provide for a residence permit to be able to stay with him/her. The definition of ‘family members’ has been adjusted to include families formed before the applicant arrived in the territory of the Member States (rather than restricting it to families formed in the country-of-origin, as was previously the case). This change is made to reflect the realities of migration today, where persons displaced from their country of origin often spend prolonged periods of time outside of their country of origin before arriving to the EU, for example in refugee camps in neighbouring countries.
 
3. A proposal to reform the Reception Conditions Directive.
The Reception Conditions Directive establishes minimum common standards of living conditions for asylum applicants; ensures that applicants have access to housing, food, employment and health care.

What provisions are included in the Reception Conditions Directive?
The Reception Conditions Directive provides for minimum harmonisation of standards for the reception of applicants for international protection in the EU. It defines what type of reception conditions Member States should provide to asylum seekers (for example housing, food, and schooling) and the way in which they can be provided. The Directive also defines the rights and obligations of asylum seekers regarding reception conditions (for example regarding applicants with special needs or in terms of access to the labour market and situations and conditions in which an applicant may be detained).
What are the objectives of the reform?
The objective is to ensure that, throughout the Union, all asylum seekers fully benefit from the reception conditions set out in this Directive in the Member State in which they are supposed to stay. At the same time, enhancing self-sufficiency and discouraging secondary movements are other important objectives of the proposal.
Who will decide the standards on reception conditions?
To support the convergence between the asylum systems of all Member States, Member States should take into account the standards and indicators on reception conditions developed by the European Asylum Support Office. Member States will also be requested to constantly update contingency plans to ensure sufficient and adequate reception capacity in case of disproportionate pressure.
Will applicants have easier access to labour market?
Yes. Access to labour market must be given at the latest 6 months after an application is lodged. Member States are also encouraged to grant even earlier access, no later than three months from the lodging of an application, where the application is likely to be well-founded. Once granted access to the labour market, applicants shall be entitled to a common set of rights based on equal treatment with nationals of the Member State in question. On the other hand, access shall not be given to those applicants whose application is likely to be unfounded and treated in an accelerated procedure.
What else will change?
Reinforced guarantees are provided for persons with special reception needs and unaccompanied minors, similarly to what it is provided in relation to the procedural-related needs (for example on assessment of special needs, on necessary staff training). The proposal will also require Member States to provide standardised information to all applicants, using a common template, on all reception-related benefits and obligations, including cases where material reception conditions may be restricted.
How will the reform prevent applicants from absconding?
In line with the proposal for Dublin reform, the proposal clarified that reception conditions will be provided only in the Member State responsible for the applicants. The proposal also introduces prescriptive rules for deciding on the residence of an applicant, such as where this is necessary to effectively prevent the applicant from absconding. In those cases, the provision of material reception conditions shall also be subject to the actual residence of the applicant in that specific place. Member States should also require applicants to regularly report to authorities where necessary for preventing the applicants from absconding. New grounds for the detention of applicants have been added to ensure the fulfilment of the obligation to reside in a specific place where this is necessary to prevent the applicant from absconding.
Will detention be a measure that can be used by Member State?
Applicants may already be detained where necessary under the current Reception Conditions Directive, on the basis of an individual assessment and as a measure of last resort. The proposal adds new grounds for detention and provides that Member States may detain an applicant who has not complied with the obligation to reside in a specific place and where there is a continued risk that the applicant may abscond.
How will the proposal prevent abuses?
All the guarantees already provided for in the current Reception Conditions Directive regarding detention remain unchanged: for example detention is only justified when it proves necessary and on the basis of an individual assessment of each case and if other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, and the length of the detention should be proportionate. Moreover, applicants will continue to enjoy specific legal and procedural guarantees such as the right to a swift judicial review of the lawfulness of detention.
Can the material entitlements be scaled down?
Clearer rules have been laid down on when entitlement to material reception conditions can be scaled back and when financial allowances may be replaced with material reception conditions provided in kind.
Can the UK, Ireland, Denmark and the Schengen Associated States opt-in or out of these proposal?
The UK and Ireland are not required to participate in the proposed measures, but will instead determine themselves the extent to which they want to participate, in accordance with the relevant Protocols attached to the Treaties.
Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of the proposals and is not bound by them or subject to their application.
The Schengen Associated States (Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein) do not take part in the adoption of the proposals and are not bound by the measures adopted.
For more information
Press release: Completing the reform of the Common European Asylum System: Towards an efficient, fair and humane asylum policy
FACTSHEET – Asylum procedures: reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTHSEET – Qualification: Reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTSHEET – Reception Conditions: reforming the Common European Asylum System
FACTSHEET – The Common European Asylum System

Daily News 13 / 07 / 2016

MIL OSI – Source: European Union – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Daily News 13 / 07 / 2016

Commission completes reform of the Common European Asylum System and proposes EU Resettlement Framework
Today, the Commission is presenting proposals to complete the reform of the Common European Asylum System, in order to move towards a fully efficient, fair and humane asylum policy – one which can function effectively both in times of normal and in times of high migratory pressure. The proposals include the creation of a common procedure for international protection, uniform standards for protection and rights granted to beneficiaries of international protection and the further harmonisation of reception conditions in the EU. First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said: “The EU needs an asylum system which is both effective and protective, based on common rules, solidarity and a fair sharing of responsibilities. The proposed reforms will make sure that persons in genuine need of international protection get it quickly, but also that those who do not have the right to receive protection in the EU can be returned swiftly. With today’s proposals, all the elements for the reform of the Common European Asylum Policy are on the table of the European Parliament and the Council.”The Commission is also today proposing an EU Resettlement Framework to establish a common European policy on resettlement to ensure orderly and safe pathways to Europe for persons in need of international protection. Today’s proposal will provide for a permanent framework with a unified procedure for resettlement across the EU. While the Member States will remain the ones deciding on how many people will be resettled each year, collectively the EU will achieve a greater impact by coordinating national efforts and acting as a whole. Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos said: “Today’s proposal is a major step in our efforts to offer legal avenues to allow persons in need to enter the EU safely and receive protection. It is an integral part of the larger objective of ensuring that protection is offered to those who need it, reducing the incentives for irregular migration and protecting migrants from exploitation by smuggling networks and dangerous journeys to reach Europe. By establishing a permanent framework with harmonised practices we can ensure faster procedures, allowing us to gradually scale up our joint resettlement commitments. This is the EU opening a genuine legal window in our efforts to close the irregular backdoor.” A press release and Q&A on the Common European Asylum System, a press release and Q&A on the Resettlement Framework proposal and factsheets on Asylum Procedures, the Qualification Regulation and the Reception Conditions Directive are available. (For more information: Natasha Bertaud – Tel.: +32 229 67456; Tove Ernst – Tel.: +32 229 86764; Markus Lammert – Tel.: +32 229 80423)
 
Relocation and Resettlement: Positive trend continues, but more efforts needed
Today, the Commission adopted its latest progress report on the EU’s emergency relocation and resettlement schemes, assessing actions taken over the past month. The positive trend observed in the last report has continued with Member States stepping up their efforts on both relocation and resettlement. Relocation has continued at the increased rate reached in the previous month with an additional 776 persons relocated since 14 June. Further important achievements have also been made as regards resettlement, with 8,268 people resettled so far of the agreed 22,504 under the July 2015 scheme and a total of 802 Syrian refugees resettled from Turkey under the EU-Turkey Statement. Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos said: “I welcome the increased efforts made by Member States over the past months on relocation and resettlement. This is a true expression of European solidarity in action, which comes in addition to the enormous efforts made by Member States to receive and host over 1,2 million asylum seekers in 2015 alone. With tens of thousands of refugees in Greece waiting to be relocated and arrivals remaining at a high level in Italy, this positive trend now needs to be continued and strengthened. The Commission will continue to support Member States by all available means to further accelerate the implementation of the relocation and resettlement schemes.” A press release on the Resettlement and Relocation Report and a factsheet are available. (For more information: Natasha Bertaud – Tel.: +32 229 67456; Tove Ernst – Tel.: +32 229 86764; Markus Lammert – Tel.: +32 229 80423)
 
Visa reciprocity with US and Canada: Commission takes stock of latest developments
The European Commission has today adopted a Communication regarding the visa reciprocity situation with Canada and the United States, evaluating the progress achieved in discussions with both countries and setting out the next steps. Today’s stock-taking follows the Communication adopted on 12 April where the Commission noted that full visa waiver reciprocity with Canada and the United States had not been achieved for citizens of some EU Member States. Migration, Home Affairs, and Citizenship Commissioner, Dimitris Avramopoulos, said: “Achieving full visa waiver reciprocity for citizens of all Member States is the objective for the European Commission and a fundamental principle of our common visa policy. In the past three months, we have intensified contacts with the US and Canada to push for full visa waiver reciprocity. However, despite the constructive engagement in particular of the Canadian government, citizens from some EU Member States still need visas to travel to the US and Canada. We will continue to work towards full visa reciprocity and we will coordinate our activities with the Member States concerned, the European Parliament and the Council to accelerate the delivery of results.” In recent months, contacts with the US and Canada have been intensified, including at the highest political level, to achieve full visa waiver reciprocity. With the Communication adopted today, the Commission commits to continue to push for full visa reciprocity and will coordinate its activities with the relevant Member States to accelerate the delivery of results. A press release and Q&A are available. (For more information: Natasha Bertaud – Tel.: +32 229 67456; Tove Ernst – Tel.: +32 229 86764; Markus Lammert – Tel.: +32 229 80423)
 
President Juncker speaks at the press conference with President Tusk, following the 18th EU-China Summit, and delivers speech at the EU-China Business Summit
This morning in the press conference following the 18th EU-China Summit, President Juncker said that with his Chinese counterparts he expressed the EU’s serious concerns over the overcapacity in steel production. “This is a very serious problem for Europe and for the Europeans, that has led to extensive job losses in Europe in the past”, he said, stressing that market rules must apply to address this current problem in China. As a concrete result of his discussions with his Chinese counterparts, President Juncker announced that the two sides agreed to create a bilateral working group on steel to monitor overcapacity and verify steps taken by China to address it – “a kind of steel platform between China and the European Union to keep alive the debates and the discussions we have and monitor decisions related to the steel overproduction” he said. On the issue of market economy status, President Juncker underlined that the EU will stick to its international obligations and is producing an impact assessment looking at the consequences for each EU Member State and only following this process, will the Commission take a decision. The College will have a debate on this on 20 July, President Juncker announced.  President Juncker also spoke at the EU-China Business Summit where he underlined the EU’s commitment to protecting its steel industry and the use of trade defence measures it has at its disposal, warning against the spill over effect of overcapacity in the steel sector to other sectors. The President also stressed that the ongoing reforms in both China and Europe create mutual opportunities including with regards to investment. He concluded by calling for the deepening of the EU-China partnership – “it is on this condition,” he said, “that it will become the engine of prosperity and stability for both sets but also for the world economy”. High Representative/Vice-President, Federica Mogherini, Vice-President for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness, Jyrki Katainen, and the Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström,also participated in events held in the margins of the Summit. The EU-China Summit comes just a few weeks after the European Commission and the High Representative adopted a Joint Communication on elements for a new EU strategy on China. President Juncker’s remarks at the press conference and at the EU-China Business Summit are available online. (For more information: Mina Andreeva – Tel.: +32 229 91382)

First European list adopted to stop the spread of invasive species threatening biodiversity and economic activities
Invasive alien species are plants or animals alien to their natural environment, crowding out indigenous species and thereby representing one of the most rapidly growing threats to biodiversity in the EU. Today the Commission took an important step which requires action across the EU to contain the spread of the 37 species identified as invasive in the first EU list adopted. Invasive alien species have major economic consequences in areas such as health care and agriculture, causing damage to crops, infrastructure and protected species. The list was built following consultations with Member States and stakeholders determining those species that cause environmental and economic damage, on a scale that justifies dedicated measures across the EU. Member States are asked to contain these species by preventing them from being intentionally kept, sold, transported, reproduced or released. Karmenu Vella, EU Commissioner for Environment, Fisheries and Maritime Affairs said: “Some species of plants and animals can damage property, crops and livelihoods so they need to be kept out if possible and under control if not. This needs to be done at EU level as invasive species don’t stop at borders. We are acting on a problem that cannot be ignored as it costs us over €12 billion every year. This first list, generated with the help of Member States, will be kept under review and work is already ongoing currently to update the list to consider other strong cases.” The restrictions will start applying 20 days after publication of the list in the Official Journal of the European Union. The list and more information on DG Environment website. (For more information: Enrico Brivio – Tel.: +32 229 56172; Iris Petsa – Tel.: +32 229 93321)

EU lifts the ‘red card’ after Republic of Guinea steps up fight against illegal fishing
Today the Commission lifted the ‘red card’ and the associated trade measures for fisheries products from the Republic of Guinea, following significant improvements in its national fisheries governance to fight illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The EU’s IUU Regulation is a key instrument in the fight against illegal fishing that ensures only fisheries products that have been certified as legal can access the EU market. The EU is the world’s biggest importer of fisheries products. The Republic of Guinea was warned by the Commission in November 2012 as being considered as non-cooperating and listed by the Council (‘red card’) for inadequate action against IUU in November 2013. Today’s good news follows years of dialogue with Guinea, which has now successfully revised its legal framework, strengthened its sanctioning system, improved monitoring and control of its fleet and waters, and is now complying with international law. Guinea joins the growing list of countries (Sri Lanka, Ghana, Papua New Guinea, Korea, the Philippines, Fiji, Belize, Panama, Togo and Vanuatu) that have reformed their fisheries governance systems, following a warning by the EU. EU Commissioner for Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Karmenu Vella, said: “This is an important decision for the Republic of Guinea, and good news for sustainable fisheries around the globe. After a long dialogue process Guinea has shown real commitment to fighting illegal fishing. We encourage them to join us in our ongoing work to promote improved ocean governance, including legal and sustainable fisheries worldwide.” The global value of IUU fishing is estimated at approximately 10 billion euros per year. More information is on the DG MARE website. (For more information: Enrico Brivio – Tel.:+32 229 56172; Iris Petsa – Tel.: +32 229 93321)
 
New framework for cross-border cooperation on audit supervision
The newly created Committee of European Auditing Oversight Bodies (CEAOB) held its inaugural meeting yesterday, 12 July 2016, in Brussels. Established by the Audit Regulation, the CEAOB is the new framework for cooperation between national audit oversight bodies at EU level.  The CEAOB will help strengthen EU-wide audit oversight, a key objective of the new EU legislation on statutory audit that took effect on 17 June 2016. By facilitating supervisory convergence, the CEAOB will contribute to achieving the effective and consistent application of the new EU audit legislation throughout the EU. This will help promote high-quality audits and bolster investors’ confidence in the financial sector. Auditors and audit firms also have an essential role to deliver this important challenge. Members of the CEAOB include representatives of the national audit oversight bodies of the EU and of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). Representatives of the national audit authorities of the European Economic Area also participate. The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) are observers. During its inaugural meeting, the Committee appointed Ralf Bose, Chief Executive Director of Germany’s Auditor Oversight Body (AOB), as Chair of the CEAOB for a four-year mandate by consensus. Ralf Bose commented: ‘I am delighted and thankful to have been entrusted with the mandate of Chair of the CEAOB. In the early days, I will focus my mandate on getting the CEAOB up and running, with the support and input of all the CEAOB members and observers and the European Commission. These are exciting and challenging times for statutory audit in Europe as the new EU audit legislation takes effect. I look forward to the CEAOB playing its full role in improving both audit quality and investor confidence in audits through effective communication’. On 11 July, the European Commission also appointed a representative as Vice-Chair of the CEAOB. The Director responsible for audit policy in the Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union (DG FISMA) will fulfil this role. Further information on the CEAOB will soon be available here. (For more information: Vanessa Mock – Tel.: +32 229 56194; Letizia Lupini – Tel.: +32 229 51958)  
 
Mergers: Commission clears acquisition of the payment card business of Banco Popular Portugal by Bancopopular-e
The European Commission has approved under the EU Merger Regulation the proposed acquisition of the payment card business of Banco Popular Portugal by Bancopopular-e of Spain. Banco Popular Portugal is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Banco Popular of Spain. Bancopopular-e is a joint venture controlled by Banco Popular Español of Spain and private funds managed by VärdePartners of the United States. It provides services related to the issuing of payment cards within the Spanish market. The Commission concluded that the proposed transaction would raise no competition concerns given the companies’ moderate combined market positions resulting from the transaction and the presence of a number of strong players that will remain active in the market. The transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure. More information is available on the Commission’s competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.8077. (For more information: Ricardo Cardoso – Tel.: +32 229 80100; Giulia Komel – Tel.: +32 229 61175)

Mergers: Commission clears joint acquisition of Norafin by Maxburg II and VR Equitypartner
The European Commission has approved under the EU Merger Regulation the acquisition of joint control over Norafin Verwaltungs GmbH by Maxburg Beteiligungen II GmbH & Co. KG and VR Equitypartner GmbH, all of Germany. Norafin develops, produces and distributes composites for special textiles, in particular special nonwovens. Maxburg II and VR Equitypartner are private equity firms investing primarily in medium-sized companies in German-speaking countries. Maxburg II belongs to the RAG-Stiftung group, which is essentially active in coal mining, chemistry and real estate businesses. VR Equitypartner belongs to the DZ BANK AG group which serves as a central bank for its shareholders (co-operative banks) but is also active as a corporate bank. The Commission concluded that the proposed transaction would raise no competition concerns given Noarafin’s limited activities in the European Economic Area. The operation was examined under the simplified merger review procedure. More information will be available on the Commission’s competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.8080. (For more information: Ricardo Cardoso – Tel.: +32 229 80100; Giulia Komel – Tel.: +32 229 61175)

Mergers: Commission clears joint acquisition of a number of assets held by the National Bank of Greece by DAAM and GSAM
The European Commission has approved under the EU Merger Regulation the acquisition of interests held by the National Bank of Greece S.A. (“NBG”) in eleven UK and Guernsey private equity funds by DAAM (Deutsche Alternative Asset Management) of Germany and GSAM (Goldman Sachs Asset Management) of the US. The target funds hold controlling interests in various portfolio companies, primarily active in healthcare, food/beverages, industrials, services and real estate in Western, South Eastern and Central Europe as well as Turkey. Both DAAM and GSAM are, among other things, active in asset management. The Commission concluded that the proposed transaction would raise no competition concerns, given that the overlaps between the activities of the companies controlled by the acquirers on the one hand, and the companies controlled by the target funds on the other hand, are very limited. The transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure. More information is available on the Commission’s competition website, in the public case register under the case numbers M.7971 and SA.34824. (For more information: Ricardo Cardoso – Tel.: +32 229 80100; Giulia Komel – Tel.: +32 229 61175)

Concentrations: la Commission autorise l’acquisition de Saft par TOTAL
La Commission européenne a approuvé, en vertu du règlement européen sur les concentrations, l’acquisition de l’entreprise Saft Groupe S.A. par l’entreprise TOTAL S.A., toutes les deux françaises. TOTAL est une entreprise pétrolière dont les activités couvrent l’ensemble de la chaîne de production, de l’extraction du pétrole brut et du gaz naturel à son exploitation commerciale. Saft est une entreprise spécialisée dans la conception et la fabrication d’accumulateurs électriques destinés à un usage industriel. La Commission a conclu que la concentration envisagée n’était pas susceptible de poser de problème de concurrence car les entreprises ne sont pas présentes sur les mêmes marchés et leurs liens commerciaux ne sont pas significatifs. L’opération a été examinée dans le cadre de la procédure simplifiée du contrôle des concentrations. De plus amples informations sont disponibles sur le site internet concurrence de la Commission, dans le registre public des affaires sous le numéro d’affaire M.8072. (Pour plus d’informations: Ricardo Cardoso – Tel.: +32 229 80100; Giulia Komel – Tel.: +32 229 61175)

Mergers: Commission clears joint venture by KH and STRABAG for heavy maintenance works on public roads and motorways
The European Commission has approved under the EU Merger Regulation the creation of a joint venture named A2 Route Sp. z o.o, by Kulczyk Holding S.A. (“KH”) of Poland, a wholly owned subsidiary of Kulczyk Investments S.A. (“KI”) of Luxembourg, and Strabag Sp. z o.o. of Poland, a company belonging to STRABAG SE Capital Group of Austria. KH is responsible for the operations of the group in Poland. KI invests in a broad range of sectors, including mining, energy, infrastructure, and chemicals. In particular, KI also holds investment participations in motorway infrastructure and concession projects in Poland. STRABAG is active in building constructions, civil engineering and tunnelling. The joint venture will be active in Poland in the field of heavy maintenance services on public roads and motorways, including repairs, modifications, renovation of used or damaged road infrastructure, renovation and replacement of road surface, modernisation of road infrastructure, as well as construction works necessary to upgrade the motorway and road infrastructure. The Commission concluded that the proposed acquisition would raise no competition concerns, because of its very limited impact on the market structure. The transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure. More information is available on the Commission’s competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.7860. (For more information: Ricardo Cardoso – Tel.: +32 229 80100; Giulia Komel – Tel.: +32 229 61175)

EUROSTAT: La production industrielle en baisse de 1,2% dans la zone euro – En baisse de 1,1% dans l’UE28
En mai 2016 par rapport à avril 2016, la production industrielle corrigée des variations saisonnières a diminué de 1,2% dans la zone euro (ZE19) et de 1,1% dans l’UE28, selon les estimations d’Eurostat, l’office statistique de l’Union européenne. En avril 2016, la production industrielle avait augmenté de 1,4% dans la zone euro et de 1,5% dans l’UE28. En mai 2016 par rapport à mai 2015, la production industrielle a progressé de 0,5% dans la zone euro et de 1,1% dans l’UE28. Un communiqué EUROSTAT est disponible en ligne. (Pour plus d’information: Lucia Caudet – Tel.: +32 229 56182; Maria Sarantopoulou – Tel.: +32 229 13740)

European Commission appoints new Deputy Director-Generals for Human Resources & Security and for Mobility & Transport
Today, the European Commission appointed Mr Bernard Magenhann as Deputy Director-General in its department for Human Resources and Security and Mr Matthew Baldwin as Deputy Director-General in its department for Mobility and Transport. Mr Magenhann, a French national, is currently Director in the Commission’s department for Informatics, a post he has held since 2013. Between 2007 and 2013, he served as Head of Unit, first in the Commission’s Internal Audit Service and then in its Human Resources and Security department. Mr Magenhann joined the Commission from the private sector in 2002. He takes up his new role on 1 September. Mr Baldwin, a British national, is currently Head of Cabinet of Commissioner Jonathan Hill. He has worked in Brussels for nearly 20 years, first in the Permanent Representation of the United Kingdom to the EU and then, from 1999, in the European Commission. Mr Baldwin has held a variety of posts, including as Deputy Head of the Cabinet of Commissioner Pascal Lamy (1999-2004) and as Advisor in the Cabinet of President Barroso (2007-10). He has also held senior management positions in the Commission, first as Director for Market Access (Trade department) and between 2011 and 2014 as Director for Aviation and International Affairs (Transport department).  In 2014 he was appointed as Deputy Director-General (Trade). (For more information: Alexander Winterstein – Tel.: +32 229 93265; Andreana Stankova – Tel.: +32 229 57857)
 
Commission appoints new Directors to its departments for Climate, Education & Culture, and Regional & Urban Policy
Today, the Commission appointed three Directors: Ms Yvon Slingenberg in the department for Climate Action, Ms Antoaneta Angelova-Krasteva in Education & Culture, and Mr Eric Von Breska in Regional & Urban Policy. Ms Slingenberg, a Dutch national, joined the Commission in 1993 and has worked on environment and climate issues throughout her career. In 2002 and 2003 she served in the Cabinet of Environment Commissioner, Margot Wallström. In 2005, she became Head of Unit. She is currently an expert in the Cabinet of Climate Action and Energy Commissioner, Miguel Arias Cañete. She will take up her new role on 1 September. Ms Angelova-Krasteva, a Bulgarian national, joined the Commission from the Permanent Representation of Bulgaria to the EU in 2008. In 2011, she became Head of Unit. She is currently managing the unit in charge of stakeholder relations in the department for Telecommunications. Mr Von Breska, a German national, joined the Commission in 1999. Between 2004 and 2007, he worked in the Cabinet of Ms Danuta Hübner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. In 2007, he became deputy Head of Unit in the Commission’s department for Regional Policy. He has been managed the department’s economic analysis unit since 2010. (For more information: Alexander Winterstein – Tel.: +32 229 93265; Andreana Stankova – Tel.: +32 229 57857)

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Vice-President Ansip in Rome to discuss the Digital Single Market strategy and digital progress in Italy
Travelling to Rome, Vice-President for the Digital Single Market Andrus Ansip will have bilateral meetings, tomorrow morning, with Carlo Calenda, Minister of Economic Development and Antonello Giacomelli, Italian Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Economy. Among other issues, they will discuss digitising manufacturing, Italy’s broadband strategy, the ongoing EU proposals on the 700 MHz band and on portability, the recent e-commerce package or the up-coming review of the EU telecoms rules expected in the autumn. Later tomorrow, the Vice-President will attend a joint parliamentary hearing with the Transport, Post and Telecommunications, Economic Activities, Trade and Tourism and European Affairs Committees of the Chamber of Deputies and the Italian Senate, where he will underline the key role of national parliaments in the Digital Single Market strategy (DSM). Vice-President Ansip will finally deliver a keynote speech in a conference entitled “Digital Single Market: Challenges and Opportunities” organised by AREL (Centre for Studies, Research & Legislation), upon the invitation of former Prime Minister of Italy Enrico Letta. (For more information: Nathalie Vandystadt – Tel.: +32 229 67083; Joseph Waldstein – Tel.: +32 229 56184)

Commissioner Johannes Hahn visits Georgia
Johannes Hahn, Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations, will travel to Georgia on Thursday, 14 July to participate at the 13th Batumi International Conference “Georgia’s European Way”, where he will deliver a key note speech. In Batumi, Commissioner Hahn will meet key interlocutors of the country including President Giorgi Margvelashvili, Prime Minister George Kvirikashvili, Minister of Foreign Affairs Mikheil Janelidze, State Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration David Bakradze, members of the opposition parties as well as representatives of civil society. Commissioner Hahn will also visit EU-funded projects aiming at modernising the agricultural sector. Ahead of the visit Commissioner Hahn said: “My visit to Georgia is very timely following the full entry into force of the Association Agreement (AA) between the European Union and Georgia on 1 July. The Agreement commits Georgia to an ambitious reform agenda in key areas such as security policy, trade, economic recovery and growth and governance”. Videos and photos of the visit will be available on EbS. (For more information: Maja Kocijancic – Tel.: +32 229 86570; Alceo Smerilli – Tel.: +32 229 64887)

Upcoming events of the European Commission (ex-Top News)

В Мордовии предстанет перед судом заведующий кафедрой медицинского института, обвиняемый в мошенничестве и покушении на взятку

MIL OSI – Source: Russia – Prosecutor Generals Office –

Headline: В Мордовии предстанет перед судом заведующий кафедрой медицинского института, обвиняемый в мошенничестве и покушении на взятку

Первый заместитель прокурора Республики Мордовия Александр Максимов утвердил обвинительное заключение по уголовному делу в отношении заведующего кафедрой «Общественное здоровье, организации здравоохранения и фармации с курсом гигиены» медицинского института ФГБОУ ВПО «МГУ им. Н.П. Огарёва» Дмитрия Блинова. Он обвиняется в совершении преступлений, предусмотренных ч. 3 ст. 159 УК РФ (мошенничество), ч. 1 ст. 292 УК РФ (служебный подлог), ч. 3 ст. 30, ч. 3 ст. 290 УК РФ (покушение на получение взятки).

По версии следствия, с сентября 2013 по апрель 2015 года Блинов оформил на должности преподавателей возглавляемой им кафедры своих знакомых. При этом он знал, что данные лица не будут заниматься преподавательской деятельностью. Начисляемую им зарплату злоумышленник получал и похищал. Общая сумма полученных им средств превысила 255 тыс. рублей.

Кроме того, в июне 2015 года по указанию Блинова одним из преподавателей указанной кафедры, действовавшим в качестве посредника, были получены от 5 студентов взятки на сумму не менее 39 тыс. рублей. За эти деньги мужчина незаконно выставлял молодым людям положительные оценки за экзамен без проверки их знаний.

Действия Блинова были пресечены сотрудниками полиции при проведении оперативно-розыскных мероприятий.

В ходе следствия наложен арест на имущество обвиняемого (дом, гараж, земельные участки, автомобиль).

После утверждения обвинительного заключения уголовное дело направлено в Ленинский районный суд г. Саранска для рассмотрения по существу.

Ранее уголовное дело в отношении посредника было прекращено в соответствии с примечанием к ст. 291.1 УК РФ (посредничество во вяточничестве) в связи с деятельным раскаянием.

© Multimedia Investments Ltd Terms of Use/Disclaimer.

Mentoring-Projekt des DOSB mit ehemaligen Spitzenathletinnen

MIL OSI – Source: DOSB – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Mentoring-Projekt des DOSB mit ehemaligen Spitzenathletinnen

13.07.2016
Mit beeindruckendem Elan, vielfältigen Erfahrungen und einer großen Portion Veränderungswillen sind dreizehn ehemalige Spitzenathletinnen in das aktuelle Mentoring-Programm des DOSB gestartet.

Zwölf der insgesamt dreizehn Mentees des Programms 2016/2017. Foto: DOSB/Jahn

„Nach dem Sport – bloß kein Sport!“, diese Formulierung überrascht sicher nicht, führt man sich die zeitintensiven, entbehrungsreichen, von Höhen und Tiefen geprägten Sportkarrieren erfolgreicher Spitzenathletinnen und -athleten vor Augen.
Umso schöner ist es, dass ein Teil dieser Spitzensportlerinnen ihre Meinung im Laufe der Zeit geändert und die „Liebe zum Sport“ wiederentdeckt haben. Am vorigen Wochenende starteten dreizehn ehemalige, erfolgreiche Sportlerinnen in das DOSB-Mentoring-Programm mit dem Ziel, im Verlauf eines Jahres erste Schritte des Karriereweges – ob als potenzielle Führungskraft oder Trainerin – im verbandlichen Sport oder Sportumfeld zu planen bzw. diesen Weg bereits straffen Schrittes weiterzugehen.
Stark getrieben werden diese Mentees vor allem von dem Wunsch, dem Sport etwas zurückzu-geben – denn das Wissen um die jahrelange verbandliche Unterstützung der Sportkarriere ist nach wie vor präsent. Vor allem aber sollen die in diesem Rahmen erworbenen Kompetenzen und Erfahrungen, sowie die Erkenntnisse, in welchen Bereichen in puncto Athlet/innenförderung Verbesserungen wünschenswert wären, nicht ungenutzt und ungehört bleiben. So formulierte eine der Mentees im Rahmen des Auftaktes: „Unsere Karrieren und Erfahrungen müssen doch mal jemanden interessieren!“
Genau hier setzt das Mentoring-Programm des DOSB an, das nach 2012 bis 2013 sowie 2014 bis 2015  zum dritten Mal unter dem Motto „Mit dem gemischten Doppel an die Spitze!“ startete. Es schenkt Gehör und hat Interesse an genau diesen Erfahrungen und Talenten. Es stellt den Mentees je eine kompetente Person, d.h. eine Mentorin oder einen Mentor aus dem Sportbereich zur Seite, die sie innerhalb eines Jahres begleitet. „Damit wollen wir ihre Talente fördern, ihre Führungskompetenzen erweitern, von ihren Erfahrungen profitieren, ihnen zugleich Einblicke in die Spielregeln und Verhaltensweisen von Führungsgremien geben und sie mit zahlreichen Veranstaltungen in beruflich oder ehrenamtlich relevante Netzwerke einführen“, erklärte Petra Tzschoppe, Vizepräsidentin des DOSB, im Rahmen der Eröffnung.
Claudia Bokel gibt Einblick in ihren Karriereweg
Eine, die weiß, wie eine sogenannte nachaktive Karriere funktioniert, ist Claudia Bokel, Vorsitzende der IOC-Athletenkommission, und ehemalige erfolgreiche Fechterin. Mit einem ermutigenden und inspirierenden Beitrag gab sie den Teilnehmenden der Auftaktveranstaltung einen persönlichen Einblick in ihren Karriereweg – von der Sportlerin zur Funktionärin. Eine Erfahrung war ihr besonders wichtig, den Mentees mit auf den Weg zu geben – sich und seinen Werten treu, kurz-um authentisch zu bleiben!   
Wie bereits die vergangenen beiden Programmdurchläufe wird auch das aktuelle Programm von Kirsten Witte-Abe, stellvertretende Ressortleiterin Chancengleichheit und Diversity, geleitet sowie durch die EAF Berlin, in persona Kathrin Mahler Walther, Vorstandsmitglied und Geschäftsführerin der EAF Berlin, Diversity in Leadership, fachlich begleitet. „Die positiven Feedbacks der Mentees, Mentorinnen und Mentoren der ersten beiden Programme haben uns darin bestärkt, das Programm fortzusetzen. Bereits die Bewerbungsphase, im Rahmen derer wir Interviews mit den Mentees geführt haben, um sie und ihre Erwartungen besser kennen zu lernen, hat deutlich gemacht, dass hier hochmotivierte Talente á la couleur darauf warten, auch nach der sportlichen Laufbahn durchstarten zu können.“, so Kirsten Witte-Abe.
Damit diese Talente nicht nur für den DOSB, sondern auch in der Verbändelandschaft sichtbar werden, hat der DOSB im aktuellen Programm ein sogenanntes Patenschafts-Modell entwickelt. Patenschaften entstehen mit Vertreter/innen der Verbände, die zugleich die Heimatverbände der Mentees sind. Ziel ist es, die ausgewählten Paten regelmäßig über den Fortgang des Programms zu informieren und ggf. zu involvieren, um das Instrument des Mentorings in den (Spitzen)Verbänden bekannter zu machen und für den Mehrwert einer frühzeitigen nachaktiven Talentförderung zu sensibilisieren.
Gewinnen können alle am Programm Beteiligten – vor allem aber die Mentees erhalten jede Menge Know-how für die berufliche oder ehrenamtliche Karriereleiter – denn wer, wenn nicht sie, wann, wenn nicht jetzt!
Die dreizehn Mentees sind:
Claudia Behnke (Ju-Jutsu), Alicia Brückner (Ju-Jutsu), Katharina Fischer (Schwimmen), Franziska Goltz (Segeln), Elisabeth Kirschbaum (Hockey), Amelie Kober (Snowboard), Stefanie Kubissa (Fechten), Carolin Reinert (Rollhockey), Anja Rücker (Leichtathletik), Birte Steven-Vitense (Schwimmen), Mandy Sonnemann (Ju-Jutsu), Jenny Wolf (Eisschnelllauf), Zuzana Porvazniková (Handball)
Unter anderem folgende Mentorinnen und Mentoren wirken im aktuellen Programm:
Jörg Brokamp (Geschäftsführer des Deutschen Schützenbundes), Dafni Bouzikou (1. Vorsitzende des Berufsverbandes der Trainerinnen und Trainer), Christian Breuer (Vorstandsvorsitzender der Deutschen Schulsportstiftung, ehemaliger Athletensprecher im DOSB, persönliches Mitglied des DOSB), Dr. Karin Fehres (Vorstand Sportentwicklung des DOSB), Steffi Klein (Senior Manager, Olympic & Paralympic Sports, SPONSORPLAN GmbH, Anke Nöcker (Abteilungsleitung Sportentwicklung des Landessportbundes Berlin), Inka Müller-Schmäh (Geschäftsführerin, Vereinigung Sportsponsoring-Anbieter e.V.), Michaela Röhrbein (Generalsekretärin des Deutschen Turner-Bundes).
Weitere Informationen
(Quelle: DOSB)

Быть выпускником СПбГУ не только почетно, но и ответственно

MIL OSI – Source: Saint Petersburg State University in Russian – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Быть выпускником СПбГУ не только почетно, но и ответственно

В этом году более 70 выпускников-востоковедов получили дипломы об окончании Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета. Из них 12 человек — с отличием. С напутственным словом к вчерашним студентам обратился декан восточного факультета СПбГУ, директор Государственного Эрмитажа Михаил Пиотровский.


Опубликовано 13.07.2016«Вы стали представителями почетной профессии, не только сохранившей традиции, но и самой современной», — отметил Михаил Борисович. Он поздравил бакалавров с приобретением глубоких академических знаний и подчеркнул, что универсанты — специалисты по странам Африки и Востока могут реализовать себя не только на научном поприще, но и в самых разных областях.

Действительно, выпускники СПбГУ уже на практике доказали универсальность полученного образования. В этом году впервые свои дипломные работы они защищали перед потенциальными работодателями.

«Даже в этом нововведении чувствуется некоторая преемственность, — уверен доктор филологических наук, доцент СПбГУ Александр Желтов. — Ведь многие приглашенные специалисты также являются выпускниками нашего университета».

О важности университетских традиций говорили и члены Ассоциации выпускников СПбГУ. В своем видеообращении известные выпускники прошлых лет поздравили бакалавров и напомнили об ответственности, которая является частью статуса универсанта. Словом, выпускник СПбГУ сегодня — это специалист широкого профиля, чтущий традиции своей alma mater.

Ian Hutchinson claims dominant win with his BMW S 1000 RR – Successful outings for the BMW racers in the BSB and the Superbike IDM.

MIL OSI – Source: BMW Group – English – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Ian Hutchinson claims dominant win with his BMW S 1000 RR – Successful outings for the BMW racers in the BSB and the Superbike IDM.

Munich (DE), 13th July 2016. Ian Hutchinson (GB) once more proved
that he is not only a brilliant road racer: last weekend, the Tyco BMW
rider continued his streak of success in the Superstock class of the
British Superbike Championship (BSB STK) and rode his BMW S 1000 RR to
his first win of the season in the series. Snetterton (GB) was also a
successful hunting ground for his fellow BMW riders in the BSB, with
Michael Laverty (GB) and Michael Rutter (GB) stepping onto the podium,
too. In Zolder (BE), Mathieu Gines (FR), Bastien Mackels (BE), Jan
Bühn (DE) and Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL) claimed podium finishes in the
Superbike IDM / International German Championship (IDM). The BMW
Motorrrad Motorsport racers were also in action in Laguna Seca (US),
where the MOTUL FIM Superbike World Championship (WorldSBK) and the
MotoAmerica FIM/AMA North American Road Racing Series (AMA) held their
races. The riders and teams were supported by the experts from BMW
Motorrad Motorsport, who were on site at all the races in Europe and
North America. With their results, the BMW racers collected further
points for the 2016 BMW Motorrad Race Trophy (see full standings below).

 

 

MOTUL FIM Superbike World Championship in Laguna Seca, USA.

 
Iconic Laguna Seca (US) hosted the ninth round of the 2016 MOTUL FIM
Superbike World Championship (WorldSBK) last weekend. The best placed
BMW S 1000 RR rider was once more Jordi Torres (ES) from the Althea
BMW Racing Team. He finished the two races on the Californian track in
eighth and sixth. The team’s other RR was ridden by Raffaele De Rosa
(IT), who stood in for the injured Markus Reiterberger (DE). For De
Rosa, who successfully races with the Althea BMW S 1000 RR in the FIM
Superstock Cup (STK1000), it was the first outing on the WorldSBK
version of the bike. He failed to finish race one but was 11th in race two.

Milwaukee BMW rider Karel Abraham (CZ) brought his RR home in 14th
and 12th. His team-mate, Joshua Brookes (AU), who like De Rosa raced
the challenging Laguna Seca circuit for the first time, was 13th in
race one but retired in race two.

 

British Superbike Championship in Snetterton, Great Britain.

 
The BMW Motorrad Motorsport racers in the British Superbike
Championship (BSB) collected more trophies at Snetterton (GB) last
weekend. In the Superbike class (BSB SBK), Michael Laverty (GB / Tyco
BMW) finished third on the podium in race two. In the first encounter
Laverty retired, while Jake Dixon (GB / Briggs Equipment BMW) was the
highest placed BMW rider in sixth.

In the Superstock class (BSB STK), Ian Hutchinson (GB / Tyco BMW)
celebrated a dominant win. After 12 laps he crossed the line with an
advantage of over seven seconds. It was Hutchinson’s first win of the
season in the series, after he had also finished all the other races
held so far this season on the podium. He was joined on the podium by
Michael Rutter (GB / Briggs Equipment BMW) in third. The championship
standings in the BSB STK are still led by BMW racer Taylor MacKenzie
(GB / Buildbase BMW Motorrad), while Hutchinson improved to second overall.

 

Superbike IDM / International German Championship in Zolder, Belgium.

 
The Superbike IDM / International German Championship (IDM) made a
guest appearance in Zolder in Belgium last weekend. It was the home
round both for the Van Zon-Remeha-BMW team and for Bastien Mackels (BE
/ Wilbers-BMW-Racing) – and both had plenty of reasons to celebrate.

In the Superbike class (IDM SBK), Mathieu Gines (FR) rode his Van
Zon-Remeha-BMW S 1000 RR to second place on the podium in race one. A
fall in race two meant he had to start a catch-up, which led to fourth
place in the SBK class. Local hero Mackels stepped onto the podium on
both occasions, finishing both races in third. In the championship
classification, Gines is currently second, two points behind the leader.

The Superstock class (IDM STK) also saw three podium finishes for the
BMW S 1000 RR. Jan Bühn (DE / Van Zon-Remeha-BMW) was second in race
one and third in race two. His team-mate Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL)
joined him on the podium after the first encounter, which he had
finished in third. The fourth Van Zon-Remeha-BMW team rider, Marco
Nekvasil (AT), was not able to take part in the races after he
suffered fractures to both legs when crashing in the second free
practice. We wish Marco a speed recovery.

 

 

MotoAmerica AMA/FIM North American Road Racing Series in
Laguna Seca, USA
.

 
At the WorldSBK round in Laguna Seca (US), the eighth and penultimate
meeting of the 2016 MotoAmerica AMA/FIM North American Road Racing
Series (AMA) was held. BMW rider Steve Rapp (US / Scheibe Racing) was
12th, while Cory Call (US / San Jose BMW/Keigwins@theTrack) finished
in 16th.

 

 

2016 BMW Motorrad Race Trophy – Current Standings.

Status: 13th July 2016

Pos.
Name (Nat.)
Series / Class
Points1Michal Prášek
(CZ)AARR STK262.002Maximilian Scheib
(CL)CEV198.803Ian Hutchinson
(GB)BMW RRC198.504Pekka Päivärinta /
Kirsi Kainulainen (FI)SWC189.195Raffaele De Rosa
(IT)STK1000189.046Taylor MacKenzie
(GB)BSB STK185.457Kenny Foray
(FR)FSBK SBK180.968Jordan Szoke
(CA)CSBK176.259Stefan Kerschbaumer
(AT)EWC STK173.129Bastien Mackels
(BE)EWC STK173.129Dominik Vincon
(DE)EWC STK173.1212Benjamin Colliaux
(FR)FR EU170.1913Vincent Lonbois
(BE)IRRC161.3614Lukáš Pešek
(CZ)AARR SBK155.6015Danilo Lewis
(BR)BRSBK153.75
16. Michael Dunlop (GB/BMW RRC/153.35), 17. Jordi Torres
(ES/WorldSBK/151.00), 18. Florian Brunet-Lugardon (FR/FR EU/147.69),
19. Mathieu Gines (FR/IDM SBK/133.03), 20. Martin Choy (BG/AARR
SBK/123.60), 21. Joshua Elliott (GB/BSB STK/122.55), 22. Jan Bühn
(DE/IDM STK/118.46), 23. Sébastien Le Grelle (BE/IRRC/117.09), 24.
Lance Isaacs (ZA/RSA SBK/116.57), 25. Michael Rutter (GB/BSB
STK/115.36), 26. Michel Amalric (FR/FR EU/110.77), 27. Didier Grams
(DE/IRRC/109.00), 28. Cyril Brunet-Lugardon (FR/FR EU/99.69), 29.
Santiago Barragán (ES/CEV/99.49), 30. Christian Iddon (GB/BSB
SBK/99.00), 31. Ben Young (GB/CSBK/97.50), 32. Hernani Teixeira (FR/FR
EU/96.00), 33. Marco Nekvasil (AT/IDM STK/94.00), 34. Richard Cooper
(GB/BSB SBK/93.40), 35. Matteo Ferrari (IT/CIV/92.00), 36. Martin
Tritscher (AT/AARR STK/90.00), 37. Hudson Kennaugh (ZA/BSB STK/88.00),
38. Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL/IDM STK/87.85), 39. Michael Laverty
(GB/BSB SBK/87.80), 40. Miloš Cihak (CZ/AARR SBK/85.20), 41. Mike
Roscher/Anna Burkard (DE/SWC/84.30), 42. Markus Reiterberger
(DE/WorldSBK/80.00), 43. Madjid Idres (FR/FR EU/77.54), 44. Michael
Leon (CA/CSBK/77.25), 45. Steve Rapp (US/AMA SBK/74.93), 46. Joshua
Brookes (AU/WorldSBK/74.20), 47. Lee Johnston (GB/BMW RRC/71.00), 48.
Julien Brun (FR/FR EU/69.38), 49. Luca Vitali (IT/STK1000/69.25), 50.
David Bouvier (FR/FR EU/68.96), 51. Bertrand Boyer (FR/FR EU/64.00),
52. Camille Hedelin (FR/EWC SBK/54.53), 52. Clive Rambure (FR/EWC
SBK/54.53), 54. Marek Hartl (CZ/AARR STK/54.40), 55. Karel Abraham
(CZ/WorldSBK/51.90), 55. Alastair Seeley (GB/BMW RRC/51.90), 57.
Roberto Blazquez (ES/CEV/50.00), 58. Daisaku Sakai (JP/MFJ/49.67), 59.
Jeremy Cook (US/AMA STK/49.33), 60. Denni Schiavoni (IT/CIV/47.20),
61. Lee Jackson (GB/BSB SBK/45.40), 62. Leon Jeacock (GB/BSB
STK/43.64), 63. Petr Bičiště (CZ/IRRC/43.64), 64. Marc Neumann (DE/IDM
STK/42.62), 65. Garrick Vlok (ZA/RSA SBK/42.57), 66. Nasarudin Mat
Yusop (MY/MSC STK/41.20), 67. Rob McNealy (GB/BSB STK/34.73), 68. Sam
West (GB/BMW RRC/34.20), 69. Yuta Kodama (JP/MFJ/33.67), 70. David
Datzer (DE/IRRC/32.73), 71. Colin Butler (CA/MSC SBK/32.00), 71. Manu
Dagault (FR/FR EU/32.00), 73. Ronald Slamet (ZA/RSA SBK/31.14), 74.
Davo Johnson (AU/BMW RRC/29.80), 75. Nicolas Senechal (FR/EWC
SBK/29.77), 76. Alex Olsen (GB/BSB STK/29.09), 77. Arnaud Friedrich
(DE/IDM STK/28.77), 78. Eric Vionnet (CH/STK1000/28.75), 79. Maxime
Bonnot (FR/FSBK SBK/27.08), 80. Rene Skalicky (CZ/AARR STK/26.60), 81.
Michal Bidas (CZ/AARR STK/26.00), 82. Dominique Platet (FR/EWC
SBK/24.77), 83. Léon Benichou (FR/FR EU/24.31), 84. Björn Stuppi
(DE/IDM STK/23.54), 85. Ricky Lee Weare (ZA/RSA SBK/23.43), 86. Lim Ho
Gon (KR/MFJ/23.00), 86. Shinya Takeishi (JP/MFJ/23.00), 88. Chrissy
Rouse (GB/BSB STK/22.91), 89. Michal Šembera (CZ/AARR SBK/22.00), 90.
Adrián Bonastre (ES/CEV/19.00), 90. Howie Mainwaring Smart (GB/BSB
SBK/19.00), 92. Barry Teasdale (GB/BSB STK/18.91), 93. Justin Gillesen
(ZA/RSA SBK/18.86), 94. Michal Fojtik (CZ/AARR STK/18.40), 95.
Gauthier Duwelz (BE/STK1000/17.25), 96. Martin Jessopp (GB/BMW
RRC/16.80), 97. Adam Jenkinson (GB/BSB STK/16.00), 98. Janez Prosenik
(SI/EWC SBK/15.65), 99. Michal Filla (CZ/IDM STK/15.54), 100. Etienne
Nelson (ZA/RSA SBK/15.43), 101. Dominic Herbertson (GB/BMW RRC/13.80),
102. Evert Stoffberg (ZA/RSA SBK/13.14), 103. Ben Godfrey (GB/BSB
STK/12.91), 104. Pedro Rodriguez (ES/CEV/12.60), 105. Matthieu
Lussiana (FR/WorldSBK/12.20), 106. Dominic Chang (SG/MSC STK/11.20),
107. Jakub Smrz (CZ/BSB SBK/8.00), 108. Sabine Holbrook (DE/AARR
SBK/7.60), 109. Federico D’Annunzio (IT/STK1000/7.50), 110. Pierre
Bezuidenhout (ZA/RSA SBK/6.57), 111. Thomas Toffel (CH/STK1000/5.75),
112. Pascal Meslet (FR/FR EU/4.92), 113. Valter Patronen
(FI/CEV/4.80), 114. Matej Smrz (BSB SBK/ 4.60), 115. John Krieger
(ZA/RSA SBK/4.57), 116. Eric Dagault (FR/FR EU/3.69), 117. Heinrich
Rheeder (ZA/RSA SBK/3.29), 118. Derek McGee (IE/BMW RRC/1.60), 119.
Elwyn Steenkamp (ZA/RSA SBK/1.14), 120. Daniel Cooper (GB/BMW
RRC/0.00), 120. Christophe Costes (FR/FR EU/0.00), 120. Stefan
Dolipski (DE/AMA STK/0.00), 120. Ryan Farquhar (GB/BMW RRC/0.00), 120.
Marcel Irnie (CA/CSBK/0.00), 120. Aaron League (US/BSB STK/0.00), 120.
Ales Nechvatal (CZ/IRRC/0.00), 120. Joan Sardanyons (ES/CEV/0.00),
120. Tomas Svitok (SK/AARR STK/0.00), 120. Jacques van Wyngaardt
(ZA/RSA SBK/0.00)

Ian Hutchinson holt dominanten Sieg mit seiner BMW S 1000 RR – Erfolgreiche Auftritte der BMW Piloten in der BSB und der Superbike IDM.

MIL OSI – Source: BMW Group – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Ian Hutchinson holt dominanten Sieg mit seiner BMW S 1000 RR – Erfolgreiche Auftritte der BMW Piloten in der BSB und der Superbike IDM.

München (DE), 13. Juli 2016. Ian Hutchinson (GB) hat einmal mehr
unter Beweis gestellt, dass er nicht nur ein herausragender Road Racer
ist: Am vergangenen Wochenende setzte der Tyco BMW Pilot seine
Erfolgsserie in der Superstock-Klasse der Britischen
Superbike-Meisterschaft (BSB STK) fort und holte mit seiner BMW S 1000
RR seinen ersten Saisonsieg in der Serie. Snetterton (GB) war auch ein
gutes Pflaster für seine BMW Kollegen in der BSB, denn Michael Laverty
(GB) und Michael Rutter (GB) fuhren ebenfalls auf das Treppchen. In
Zolder (BE) sicherten sich Mathieu Gines (FR), Bastien Mackels (BE),
Jan Bühn (DE) und Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL) Podiumsplatzierungen in der
Superbike IDM / Internationalen Deutschen Motorradmeisterschaft (IDM).
Die BMW Motorrrad Motorsport Racer waren auch in Laguna Seca (US) im
Einsatz, wo die MOTUL FIM Superbike-Weltmeisterschaft (WorldSBK) und
die MotoAmerica FIM/AMA North American Road Racing Series (AMA) ihre
Rennen austrugen. Die Fahrer und Teams wurden von den Experten von BMW
Motorrad Motorsport unterstützt, die bei allen Veranstaltungen in
Europa und Nordamerika vor Ort waren. Mit ihren Ergebnissen sammelten
die BMW Piloten weitere Punkte für die BMW Motorrad Race Trophy 2016
(vollständige Rangliste: siehe unten).

 

 

MOTUL FIM Superbike-Weltmeisterschaft in Laguna Seca, USA.

 
Im berühmten Laguna Seca (US) wurde am vergangenen Wochenende die
neunte Runde der MOTUL FIM Superbike-Weltmeisterschaft 2016 (WorldSBK)
ausgetragen. Bestplatzierter BMW S 1000 RR Fahrer war einmal mehr
Jordi Torres (ES) aus dem Althea BMW Racing Team. Er beendete die
beiden Läufe auf der kalifornischen Strecke auf den Positionen acht
und sechs. Die andere RR des Teams wurde von Raffaele De Rosa (IT)
pilotiert, der den verletzten Markus Reiterberger (DE) vertrat. Für De
Rosa, der mit der Althea BMW S 1000 RR erfolgreich im FIM Superstock
Cup (STK1000) antritt, war es der erste Einsatz auf der
WorldSBK-Version des Motorrads. Er schied im ersten Rennen aus,
sicherte sich aber im zweiten Lauf Rang elf.

Milwaukee BMW Pilot Karel Abraham (CZ) brachte seine RR auf den
Positionen 14 und zwölf ins Ziel. Sein Teamkollege Joshua Brookes
(AU), der wie De Rosa zum ersten Mal auf dem anspruchsvollen Kurs von
Laguna Seca antrat, belegte im ersten Rennen den 13. Rang. Im zweiten
Lauf schied er aus.

 

Britische Superbike-Meisterschaft in Snetterton, Großbritannien.

 
Die BMW Motorrad Motorsport Racer in der Britischen
Superbike-Meisterschaft (BSB) haben am vergangenen Wochenende in
Snetterton (GB) weitere Pokale gesammelt. In der Superbike-Klasse (BSB
SBK) fuhr Michael Laverty (GB / Tyco BMW) im zweiten der beiden Rennen
als Dritter auf das Podium. Im ersten Lauf war Laverty ausgeschieden.
Bestplatzierter BMW Pilot in Rennen eins war Jake Dixon (GB / Briggs
Equipment BMW) als Sechster.

In der Superstock-Klasse (BSB STK) feierte Ian Hutchinson (GB / Tyco
BMW) einen dominanten Sieg. Nach zwölf Runden kam er mit einem
Vorsprung von über sieben Sekunden ins Ziel. Es war Hutchinsons erster
Saisonsieg in der Serie, nachdem er in den vier vorherigen Läufen
bereits immer auf das Podium gefahren war. Mit ihm stieg Michael
Rutter (GB / Briggs Equipment BMW) als Dritter auf das Treppchen. In
der Meisterschaftswertung der BSB STK führt weiter BMW Pilot Taylor
MacKenzie (GB / Buildbase BMW Motorrad), Hutchinson hat sich auf den
zweiten Gesamtrang verbessert.

 

Superbike IDM / Internationale Deutsche Motorradmeisterschaft
in Zolder, Belgien.

 
Die Superbike IDM / Internationale Deutsche Motorradmeisterschaft
(IDM) war am Wochenende im belgischen Zolder zu Gast. Es war sowohl
für das Van Zon-Remeha-BMW Team als auch für Bastien Mackels (BE /
Wilbers-BMW-Racing) das Heimspiel – und beide hatten Grund zum Feiern.

Im ersten Rennen der Superbike-Klasse (IDM SBK) fuhr Mathieu Gines
(FR) mit seiner Van Zon-Remeha-BMW S 1000 RR als Zweiter auf das
Podium. In Lauf zwei musste er nach einem Sturz eine Aufholjagd
starten, die er auf dem vierten Rang der Superbike-Klasse beendete.
Lokalmatador Mackels fuhr in beiden Rennen auf das Podium: Er wurde
jeweils Dritter. In der Meisterschaftswertung ist Gines aktuell mit
zwei Punkten Rückstand Zweiter.

In der Superstock-Klasse (IDM STK) gab es ebenfalls drei
Podiumsplätze für die BMW S 1000 RR. Jan Bühn (DE / Van
Zon-Remeha-BMW) holte im ersten Rennen Rang zwei und beendete den
zweiten Lauf als Dritter. In Lauf eins stieg auch sein Teamkollege
Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL) als Dritter auf das Treppchen. Der vierte
Fahrer des Van Zon-Remeha-BMW Teams, Marco Nekvasil (AT), konnte in
den Rennen nicht an den Start gehen: Er zog sich bei einem Sturz im
zweiten freien Training Brüche an beiden Beinen zu. Wir wünschen Marco
eine schnelle Genesung.

 

 

MotoAmerica AMA/FIM North American Road Racing Series in
Laguna Seca, USA
.

 
Im Rahmen des WorldSBK-Wochenendes in Laguna Seca (US) wurde die
achte und vorletzte Runde der MotoAmerica AMA/FIM North American Road
Racing Series 2016 (AMA) ausgetragen. BMW Pilot Steve Rapp (US /
Scheibe Racing) wurde Zwölfter, und Cory Call (US / San Jose
BMW/Keigwins@theTrack) belegte Rang 16.

BMW Motorrad Race Trophy 2016 – Aktueller Stand.

Stand: 13. Juli 2016

Pos.
Name (Nat.)
Rennserie/Klasse
Punkte1Michal Prášek
(CZ)AARR STK262,002Maximilian Scheib
(CL)CEV198,803Ian Hutchinson
(GB)BMW RRC198,504Pekka Päivärinta /
Kirsi Kainulainen (FI)SWC189,195Raffaele De Rosa
(IT)STK1000189,046Taylor MacKenzie
(GB)BSB STK185,457Kenny Foray
(FR)FSBK SBK180,968Jordan Szoke
(CA)CSBK176,259Stefan Kerschbaumer
(AT)EWC STK173,129Bastien Mackels
(BE)EWC STK173,129Dominik Vincon
(DE)EWC STK173,1212Benjamin Colliaux
(FR)FR EU170,1913Vincent Lonbois
(BE)IRRC161,3614Lukáš Pešek
(CZ)AARR SBK155,6015Danilo Lewis
(BR)BRSBK153,75
16. Michael Dunlop (GB/BMW RRC/153,35), 17. Jordi Torres
(ES/WorldSBK/151,00), 18. Florian Brunet-Lugardon (FR/FR EU/147,69),
19. Mathieu Gines (FR/IDM SBK/133,03), 20. Martin Choy (BG/AARR
SBK/123,60), 21. Joshua Elliott (GB/BSB STK/122,55), 22. Jan Bühn
(DE/IDM STK/118,46), 23. Sébastien Le Grelle (BE/IRRC/117,09), 24.
Lance Isaacs (ZA/RSA SBK/116,57), 25. Michael Rutter (GB/BSB
STK/115,36), 26. Michel Amalric (FR/FR EU/110,77), 27. Didier Grams
(DE/IRRC/109,00), 28. Cyril Brunet-Lugardon (FR/FR EU/99,69), 29.
Santiago Barragán (ES/CEV/99,49), 30. Christian Iddon (GB/BSB
SBK/99,00), 31. Ben Young (GB/CSBK/97,50), 32. Hernani Teixeira (FR/FR
EU/96,00), 33. Marco Nekvasil (AT/IDM STK/94,00), 34. Richard Cooper
(GB/BSB SBK/93,40), 35. Matteo Ferrari (IT/CIV/92,00), 36. Martin
Tritscher (AT/AARR STK/90,00), 37. Hudson Kennaugh (ZA/BSB STK/88,00),
38. Pepijn Bijsterbosch (NL/IDM STK/87,85), 39. Michael Laverty
(GB/BSB SBK/87,80), 40. Miloš Cihak (CZ/AARR SBK/85,20), 41. Mike
Roscher/Anna Burkard (DE/SWC/84,30), 42. Markus Reiterberger
(DE/WorldSBK/80,00), 43. Madjid Idres (FR/FR EU/77,54), 44. Michael
Leon (CA/CSBK/77,25), 45. Steve Rapp (US/AMA SBK/74,93), 46. Joshua
Brookes (AU/WorldSBK/74,20), 47. Lee Johnston (GB/BMW RRC/71,00), 48.
Julien Brun (FR/FR EU/69,38), 49. Luca Vitali (IT/STK1000/69,25), 50.
David Bouvier (FR/FR EU/68,96), 51. Bertrand Boyer (FR/FR EU/64,00),
52. Camille Hedelin (FR/EWC SBK/54,53), 52. Clive Rambure (FR/EWC
SBK/54,53), 54. Marek Hartl (CZ/AARR STK/54,40), 55. Karel Abraham
(CZ/WorldSBK/51,90), 55. Alastair Seeley (GB/BMW RRC/51,90), 57.
Roberto Blazquez (ES/CEV/50,00), 58. Daisaku Sakai (JP/MFJ/49,67), 59.
Jeremy Cook (US/AMA STK/49,33), 60. Denni Schiavoni (IT/CIV/47,20),
61. Lee Jackson (GB/BSB SBK/45,40), 62. Leon Jeacock (GB/BSB
STK/43,64), 63. Petr Bičiště (CZ/IRRC/43,64), 64. Marc Neumann (DE/IDM
STK/42,62), 65. Garrick Vlok (ZA/RSA SBK/42,57), 66. Nasarudin Mat
Yusop (MY/MSC STK/41,20), 67. Rob McNealy (GB/BSB STK/34,73), 68. Sam
West (GB/BMW RRC/34,20), 69. Yuta Kodama (JP/MFJ/33,67), 70. David
Datzer (DE/IRRC/32,73), 71. Colin Butler (CA/MSC SBK/32,00), 71. Manu
Dagault (FR/FR EU/32,00), 73. Ronald Slamet (ZA/RSA SBK/31,14), 74.
Davo Johnson (AU/BMW RRC/29,80), 75. Nicolas Senechal (FR/EWC
SBK/29,77), 76. Alex Olsen (GB/BSB STK/29,09), 77. Arnaud Friedrich
(DE/IDM STK/28,77), 78. Eric Vionnet (CH/STK1000/28,75), 79. Maxime
Bonnot (FR/FSBK SBK/27,08), 80. Rene Skalicky (CZ/AARR STK/26,60), 81.
Michal Bidas (CZ/AARR STK/26,00), 82. Dominique Platet (FR/EWC
SBK/24,77), 83. Léon Benichou (FR/FR EU/24,31), 84. Björn Stuppi
(DE/IDM STK/23,54), 85. Ricky Lee Weare (ZA/RSA SBK/23,43), 86. Lim Ho
Gon (KR/MFJ/23,00), 86. Shinya Takeishi (JP/MFJ/23,00), 88. Chrissy
Rouse (GB/BSB STK/22,91), 89. Michal Šembera (CZ/AARR SBK/22,00), 90.
Adrián Bonastre (ES/CEV/19,00), 90. Howie Mainwaring Smart (GB/BSB
SBK/19,00), 92. Barry Teasdale (GB/BSB STK/18,91), 93. Justin Gillesen
(ZA/RSA SBK/18,86), 94. Michal Fojtik (CZ/AARR STK/18,40), 95.
Gauthier Duwelz (BE/STK1000/17,25), 96. Martin Jessopp (GB/BMW
RRC/16,80), 97. Adam Jenkinson (GB/BSB STK/16,00), 98. Janez Prosenik
(SI/EWC SBK/15,65), 99. Michal Filla (CZ/IDM STK/15,54), 100. Etienne
Nelson (ZA/RSA SBK/15,43), 101. Dominic Herbertson (GB/BMW RRC/13,80),
102. Evert Stoffberg (ZA/RSA SBK/13,14), 103. Ben Godfrey (GB/BSB
STK/12,91), 104. Pedro Rodriguez (ES/CEV/12,60), 105. Matthieu
Lussiana (FR/WorldSBK/12,20), 106. Dominic Chang (SG/MSC STK/11,20),
107. Jakub Smrz (CZ/BSB SBK/8,00), 108. Sabine Holbrook (DE/AARR
SBK/7,60), 109. Federico D’Annunzio (IT/STK1000/7,50), 110. Pierre
Bezuidenhout (ZA/RSA SBK/6,57), 111. Thomas Toffel (CH/STK1000/5,75),
112. Pascal Meslet (FR/FR EU/4,92), 113. Valter Patronen
(FI/CEV/4,80), 114. Matej Smrz (BSB SBK/ 4,60), 115. John Krieger
(ZA/RSA SBK/4,57), 116. Eric Dagault (FR/FR EU/3,69), 117. Heinrich
Rheeder (ZA/RSA SBK/3,29), 118. Derek McGee (IE/BMW RRC/1,60), 119.
Elwyn Steenkamp (ZA/RSA SBK/1,14), 120. Daniel Cooper (GB/BMW
RRC/0,00), 120. Christophe Costes (FR/FR EU/0,00), 120. Stefan
Dolipski (DE/AMA STK/0,00), 120. Ryan Farquhar (GB/BMW RRC/0,00), 120.
Marcel Irnie (CA/CSBK/0,00), 120. Aaron League (US/BSB STK/0,00), 120.
Ales Nechvatal (CZ/IRRC/0,00), 120. Joan Sardanyons (ES/CEV/0,00),
120. Tomas Svitok (SK/AARR STK/0,00), 120. Jacques van Wyngaardt
(ZA/RSA SBK/0,00)

Industrial production down by 1.2% in euro area

MIL OSI – Source: EuroStat – European Statistics – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Industrial production down by 1.2% in euro area

In May 2016 compared with April 2016, seasonally adjusted industrial production fell by 1.2% in the euro area (EA19) and by 1.1% in the EU28, according to estimates from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. In April 2016 industrial production rose by 1.4% in the euro area and by 1.5% in the EU28.

Interest rates on the credit and deposit market, June 2016.

MIL OSI – Source: National Bank of the Republic of Belarus in English – Press Release/Statement

Headline: Interest rates on the credit and deposit market, June 2016.

 2015 January–December20152016
JanuaryJuneJanuaryMarchAprilMayJune
A. Average interest rates in Belarusian rubles
1. On newly attracted bank deposits
legal persons*
demand26.819.623.225.324.73.03.02.8
up to 1 year37.521.527.826.624.017.415.112.0
over 1 year37.427.730.127.525.622.116.615.6
natural persons
demand5.91.72.51.30.61.51.41.3
up to 1 year43.425.634.023.825.116.817.718.4
over 1 year46.329.534.025.627.023.821.322.0
2. On banks’ newly extended credits
legal persons
up to 1 year40.438.336.933.732.430.527.426.1
over 1 year35.923.826.332.629.624.621.824.7
natural persons
up to 1 year36.331.130.828.129.330.028.825.6
over 1 year20.923.822.224.324.923.423.022.6
B. Average interest rates in foreign exchange
3. On newly attracted bank deposits
legal persons*
demand1.04.64.0–3.20.20.2–
up to 1 year5.15.34.64.22.43.63.94.8
over 1 year6.25.65.95.55.65.24.34.8
natural persons
demand0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1
up to 1 year5.55.74.83.63.62.72.92.8
over 1 year6.15.45.24.14.13.33.23.3
4. On banks’ newly extended credits
legal persons
up to 1 year9.710.09.69.48.79.09.08.8
over 1 year9.310.49.910.18.49.59.18.7
natural persons
up to 1 year––––––––
over 1 year––––––––

* By 2015 – legal persons and government agencies; from 2015 – legal persons.