Sittings · Compare

What changed

From · opinion parliamentary committee draft · 2021-11-25 DEVE-PA-700592 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on applying a generalised scheme of tariff preferences and repealing Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

→

To · opinion parliamentary committee draft · 2021-12-07 AFET-PA-700536 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on applying a generalised scheme of tariff preferences and repealing Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

+237 added · −18 removed · 1 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

~~The GSP is one of the EU’s key trade instruments for supporting developing countries in their efforts to promote sustainable development, reduce poverty and ensure respect for human rights.~~

The European Union (EU) has granted trade preferences to developing countries through the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) since 1971, as part of its common commercial policy and in accordance with the general provisions governing the EU's external action. The GSP assists developing countries with integrating in the world economy, reducing poverty, and supporting sustainable development through the promotion of core human and labour rights, environmental protection, and good governance.

The rapporteur points out that GSP is primarily a development tool, and that any proposals to extend the Positive Conditionality, currently applied exclusively to GSP+ beneficiaries as part of the special incentive arrangements, would be counterproductive to this fundamental principle.

The GSP consists of three arrangements:

~~Plans of Action~~

• Standard GSP: for low and lower-middle income countries, providing for a reduction or full removal of customs duties on two thirds of EU tariff lines.

The new GSP provides for GSP+ beneficiaries to submit an accompanying Plan of Action as part of their binding undertakings to maintain ratification of the relevant conventions and to ensure their effective implementation.

• GSP+: the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance, which reduces tariffs to 0% for broadly the same tariff lines as Standard GSP. It is granted to vulnerable low and lower-middle income countries that implement 27 international conventions related to human rights, labour rights, protection of the environment and good governance.

The Plans of Action will help to ensure timely and effective implementation of the relevant conventions, a process that can be aided by the input of third-party stakeholders. This will only be possible if the concluded Plans of Action are publicly available.

• EBA (Everything But Arms): the special arrangement for least developed countries (LDCs), providing them with duty-free, quota-free access to the EU market for all products except arms and ammunition.

It is therefore necessary to include a specific requirement for the publication of finalised Plans of Actions. This will aid their enforcement, and can contribute to the wider aims of improving transparency surrounding the monitoring and evaluation procedures associated with the special incentive arrangements provided to GSP+ beneficiaries.

The current scheme will apply until 31 December 2023.

~~Rapid Response Mechanism~~

The Commission’s mid-term evaluation and the supporting expert study concluded that the current framework has been largely effective and delivering on its objectives. The GSP has had a positive economic impact - the imports to the EU from the beneficiary countries have increased. However, the GSP does not achieve its full potential when it comes to improving living standards, environmental standards or incentivising the beneficiary countries to improve the respect for human rights and other core rights and obligations related to sustainable development.

~~The new GSP provides for a Rapid Response Mechanism that can be activated in cases of exceptionally grave violations, for which a reaction is deemed urgent.~~

The Commission published the proposal for a new regulation for the period 2024 -2034 on 22 September 2021. The proposal retains broadly the features of the current GSP regulation. It strengthens the current GSP in aspects that are of particular relevance for DROI, such as extending the list of conventions that need to be complied with additional human rights and good governance instruments, introduces improvements in the monitoring of compliance with GSP+ requirements and boosts involvement of civil society in the implementation of the GSP. It further introduces a new urgent withdrawal procedure in cases of grave violations of international human rights standards.

~~The introduction of this mechanism takes note of the fact that all previous withdrawal of preferences under GSP have taken up to two years to conclude.~~

However, there are areas where the DROI rapporteur would like to further strengthen the proposal and make it more effective, including:

Given the exceptional circumstances and degree of urgency under which this mechanism is intended to be used, the current seven- month timeframe is insufficiently rapid and should therefore be further reduced.

- an ex-ante human rights impact assessment before the granting of standard GSP and GSP+ in order to identify risks of human rights violations and abuses by sector in the country.

- Extending positive conditionality to standard GSP.

- Reinforcing the Annex VI on core conventions.

- Reinforcing transparency and effectiveness of the monitoring process and strengthening the involvement of both international and domestic civil society.

- Promoting, through this instrument, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human rights and OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct and the compliance of beneficiary countries’ legislation with the EU due diligence toolbox, in particular with the EU regulation no 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds, the EU regulation 2017/821 of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas as well as the regulation 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market.

- Reinforcing complaints mechanism by formalising the Single Entry Point in the proposal and making it open to Human Rights Defenders and civil society organisations.

- Clarifying the possibility of sectoral withdrawal of preferences in function of occurrence of serious and systematic human rights violations in a particular sector.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on ~~Development~~Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

~~Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d~~

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) it gives a binding undertaking to maintain ratification of the relevant conventions and to ensure the effective implementation thereof, accompanied by a plan of action for the effective implementation of the relevant conventions;

(8a) Before granting a preferential arrangement to a country, an ex-ante human rights impact assessment should be carried out by the Commission in order to assess the risks in terms of human rights violations in that country.

(d) it gives a binding undertaking to maintain ratification of the relevant conventions and to ensure the effective implementation thereof, accompanied by a plan of action, which shall include clear roadmaps for the effective implementation of the relevant conventions, including any necessary legislative changes;

Or. en

Justification

Article 21 TEU sets out the EU’s obligation to ensure consistency between the different areas of its external action, including the EU’s trade policy. The EU trade policy must help to promote the values for which the Union stands and contribute to the pursuit of these values and principles such as the consolidation of democracy, the rule of law and the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

~~Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)~~

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~1a. The plan of action referred to in paragraph 1, point (d) shall be made publicly available after having been jointly agreed between the Union and the GSP beneficiary;~~

(9) The standard GSP arrangement should be granted to all those developing countries which share a common development need and are in a similar stage of economic development. There is no definition of ‘developing country’ at the level of the WTO, and it is left to preference granting countries to determine the list of GSP-eligible developing countries. Countries which have successfully completed their transition from centralised to market economies, and are today powerful economies with a strong position in international trade, such as China, Hong Kong, Macao and Russia, should not be considered as developing countries in the context of the GSP, and should, therefore, be removed from the list of eligible countries. Countries which are classified by the World Bank as high-income or upper-middle income countries have per capita income levels allowing them to attain higher levels of diversification without the scheme's tariff preferences. They are at a different stage of economic development and do not, therefore, share the same development, trade and financial needs as lower income or more vulnerable developing countries. In order to prevent unjustified discrimination, they need to be treated differently; therefore, they do not benefit from the standard GSP arrangement. Furthermore, the use of tariff preferences provided under the scheme by high-income or upper-middle income countries would increase the competitive pressure on exports from poorer, more vulnerable countries and, therefore, could impose unjustifiable burdens on those more vulnerable developing countries. The standard GSP arrangement should take account of the fact that the development, trade and financial needs are subject to change and ensure that the arrangement remains open if the situation of a country changes.

(9) The standard GSP arrangement should be granted to all those developing countries, which share a common development need, are in a similar stage of economic development and have signed and ratified all the international conventions listed in Annex VI. There is no definition of ‘developing country’ at the level of the WTO, and it is left to preference granting countries to determine the list of GSP-eligible developing countries. Countries which have successfully completed their transition from centralised to market economies, and are today powerful economies with a strong position in international trade, such as China, Hong Kong, Macao and Russia, should not be considered as developing countries in the context of the GSP, and should, therefore, be removed from the list of eligible countries. Countries which are classified by the World Bank as high-income or upper-middle income countries have per capita income levels allowing them to attain higher levels of diversification without the scheme's tariff preferences. They are at a different stage of economic development and do not, therefore, share the same development, trade and financial needs as lower income or more vulnerable developing countries. In order to prevent unjustified discrimination, they need to be treated differently; therefore, they do not benefit from the standard GSP arrangement. Furthermore, the use of tariff preferences provided under the scheme by high-income or upper-middle income countries would increase the competitive pressure on exports from poorer, more vulnerable countries and, therefore, could impose unjustifiable burdens on those more vulnerable developing countries. The standard GSP arrangement should take account of the fact that the development, trade and financial needs are subject to change and ensure that the arrangement remains open if the situation of a country changes.

Or. en

Justification

Positive conditionality should be extended to the standard GSP scheme to fully exploit the potential of the instrument to incentivise the beneficiary countries to improve the respect for human rights and other core rights and obligations related to sustainable development.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

~~Article 19 – paragraph 16~~

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

16. Where the Commission considers that there is sufficient evidence to justify temporary withdrawal for the reason set out in paragraph 1, point (a) and the exceptional gravity of the violations calls for a rapid response in view of the specific circumstances in the beneficiary country, it shall initiate the procedure for temporary withdrawal in accordance with paragraphs (3) to (15). However, the period referred to in paragraph 4, point (b) is reduced to 2 months and the deadline referred to in paragraph 8 is reduced to 5 months.

(11) The special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance (GSP+) is based on the integral concept of sustainable development, as recognised by international conventions and instruments such as the 1986 UN Declaration on the Right to Development, the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the 1998 International Labour Organisation (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the 2000 UN Millennium Declaration, the 2002 Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, the ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work of 2019, the Outcome Document of the UN Summit on Sustainable Development of 2015 "Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development", the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Consequently, the additional tariff preferences provided for under the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance should be granted to those developing countries which, due to a lack of diversification, are economically vulnerable, have ratified core international conventions on human and labour rights, climate and environmental protection and good governance, and commit to ensuring the effective implementation thereof. The special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance should help those countries to assume the additional responsibilities resulting from the ratification and effective implementation of these conventions. The list of conventions relevant for GSP should be updated to better reflect the evolution of core international instruments and standards and take a proactive approach to sustainable development in keeping with the Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 203018. In this regard, the following conventions are added: the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (2015) – replacing the Kyoto Protocol; the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD); the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OP-CRC-AC); ILO Convention No 81 on Labour Inspection; ILO Convention No 144 on Tripartite Consultation; and the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.

16. Where the Commission considers that there is sufficient evidence to justify temporary withdrawal for the reason set out in paragraph 1, point (a) and the exceptional gravity of the violations calls for a rapid response in view of the specific circumstances in the beneficiary country, it shall initiate the procedure for temporary withdrawal in accordance with paragraphs (3) to (15). However, the period referred to in paragraph 4, point (b) is reduced to 1 month and the deadline referred to in paragraph 8 is reduced to 3 months.

(11) The special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance (GSP+) is based on the integral concept of sustainable development, as recognised by international conventions and instruments such as the 1986 UN Declaration on the Right to Development, the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the 1998 International Labour Organisation (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the 2000 UN Millennium Declaration, the 2002 Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, the ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work of 2019, the Outcome Document of the UN Summit on Sustainable Development of 2015 "Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development", the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Consequently, the additional tariff preferences provided for under the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance should be granted to those developing countries which, due to a lack of diversification, are economically vulnerable, have ratified and started implementing core international conventions on human and labour rights, climate and environmental protection and good governance, and commit to pursuing the effective implementation thereof, including through a public, ambitious and time-bound plan of action, approved in accordance with this Regulation. The special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance should help those countries to assume the additional responsibilities resulting from the ratification and effective implementation of these conventions. The list of conventions relevant for GSP should be updated to better reflect the evolution of core international instruments and standards and take a proactive approach to sustainable development in keeping with the Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 203018. In this regard, the following conventions are added: the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (2015) – replacing the Kyoto Protocol; the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD); the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OP-CRC-AC); ILO Convention No 81 on Labour Inspection; ILO Convention No 144 on Tripartite Consultation; and the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court.

_________________

18 United Nations (2015). Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, Transforming our World: the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1), available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16a) The Commission should, for reasons of consistency of Union policies, encourage beneficiary countries to adhere to higher social and environmental standards and to promote a strong sustainable development dimension in global value chains, in line with the due diligence obligations set out in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Or. en

Justification

The GSP regulation needs to be coherent with the EU’s human rights and environmental due diligence tools as recalled in the European Parliament resolution of 5 July 2016 on implementation of the 2010 recommendations on social and environmental standards, human rights and corporate responsibility (2015/2038(INI).

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) In July 2020, the Commission appointed the Chief Trade Enforcement Officer with the role of enforcing trade rules. In this connection, in November 2020, the Commission launched a new complaints mechanism, the Single Entry Point (‘SEP’), as part of its increased efforts to strengthen the enforcement and implementation of trade commitments. Through the SEP, the Commission receives complaints on various matters related to trade policy, including breaches of the GSP commitments. Such new system of complaints should be integrated within the framework of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 26

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(26) Orderly international migration can bring important benefits to the countries of origin and destination of migrants and contribute to their sustainable development needs. Increasing coherence between trade, development and migration policies is key to ensure that the benefits of migration accrue mutually to both the origin and destination countries. In this respect, it is essential for both origin and destination countries to address common challenges, such as, stepping up cooperation on readmission of own nationals and their sustainable reintegration in the country of origin, in particular in order to avoid a constant drain in active population in the countries of origin, with the ensuing long-term consequences on development, and to ensure that migrants are treated with dignity.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(27) Return, readmission and reintegration are a common challenge for the Union and its partners. In particular, every State has the obligation to readmit its own nationals under international customary law, and multilateral international conventions such as the Convention on International Civil Aviation signed in Chicago on 7 December 1944. Improving sustainable reintegration and capacity building would significantly strengthen the local development in the partner countries.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11a) ‘serious and systematic violation’ means widespread and systematic violation or abuse of human rights that is of serious concern as regards the objectives of the common foreign and security policy set out in Article 21 TEU, which includes but is not limited to the following:

(i) genocide;

(ii) crimes against humanity;

(iii) torture and other cruel, in human or degrading treatment or punishment;

(iv) slavery;

(v) extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and killings;

(vi) enforced disappearance of persons;

(vii) arbitrary arrests or detentions;

(viii) trafficking in human beings, including people-smuggling;

(ix) sexual and gender-based violence;

(x) violations of the laws and customs of war;

(xi) violations or abuses of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association;

(xii) violations or abuses of freedom of opinion and expression;

(xii) violations or abuses of freedom of religion or belief.

Or. en

Justification

Reference to the Council Regulation EU 2020/1998 of 7 December 2020 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11b) ‘civil society organisation’ means a wide range of actors with multiple roles and mandates, which may vary over time and across institutions and countries, and includes all non-State, not-for-profit independent and non-violent structures, through which people organise the pursuit of shared objectives and ideals, including political, cultural, religious, environmental, social or economic, and which operate at local, national, regional or international levels, and which comprise urban and rural, formal and informal organisations;

Or. en

Justification

Definition of CSO as defined in the Global Europe/NDICI regulation.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ba) it has not signed and ratified any of the conventions listed in Annex VI ;

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(bb) it has adopted measures that are not in compliance with the due diligence requirements under Union law, and in particular Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, Regulation (EU) 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council1b and Council Regulation (EC) 2368/20021c.

_________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (OJ L 130, 19.5.2017, p. 1).

1b Regulation (EU) 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market (OJ L 295, 12.11.2010, p.23).

1c Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds (OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 28).

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

When reviewing Annex I pursuant to the first subparagraph, the Commission shall carry out a human rights impact assessment in order to identify the risks of human rights violations by the standard GSP beneficiary countries and their economic operators. That assessment shall be made publically available.

Or. en

Justification

A human rights impact assessment, carried out by the Commission before the beneficiary accedes to the GSP scheme would help early identification of risks both in the country and by economic sector. The results should be made available to all stakeholders (beneficiary country, EEAS, European Parliament, civil society).

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) it has ratified all the conventions listed in Annex VI (the 'relevant conventions') and the Commission has not identified, based on available information, in particular the most recent available conclusions of the monitoring bodies under those conventions, a serious failure to effectively implement any of those conventions;

(b) it has ratified and started to implement all the conventions listed in Annex VI (the 'relevant conventions') and the Commission has not identified, based on available information, in particular the most recent available conclusions of the monitoring bodies under those conventions, a serious failure to effectively implement any of those conventions;

Or. en

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) it gives a binding undertaking to pursue and ensure effective implementation of the relevant conventions, accompanied by a plan of action for the effective implementation of the relevant conventions;

Or. en

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(da) it accepts that the plan of action referred to in point (d) is time-bound and public;

Or. en

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(db) it has not adopted measures that are not in compliance with the due diligence requirements under Union law, and in particular Regulations (EU) 2017/821, (EU) 995/2010 and (EC) 2368/2002;

r. en

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the Commission considers, based on examination of the request, that the requesting country fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 9.

(b) the Commission considers, based on examination of the request and on the results of the human rights impact assessment referred to in Article 5(2), second subparagraph, that the requesting country fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 9.

Or. en

Justification

In view of better preparing the monitoring process, a human rights impact should be carried out by the Commission before it accedes to GSP. This would help early identification of risks both in the country and economic sector. The results should be made available to all stakeholders (beneficiary country, the EEAS, the European Parliament, the civil society).

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The requesting country shall submit its request to the Commission in writing. The request shall provide comprehensive information concerning the ratification of the relevant conventions and shall include the binding undertakings referred to in Article 9, pointes (d), (e), and (f).

2. The requesting country shall submit its request to the Commission in writing. The request shall provide comprehensive information concerning the implementation of the relevant conventions and shall include the binding undertakings referred to in Article 9, pointes (d), (e), and (f).

Or. en

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Commission shall also examine duly substantiated information submitted by individual citizens, private sector actors, civil society organisations, representatives of trade unions and other relevant stakeholders. The information shall be submitted via the Single Entry Point, which shall be accessible to stakeholders from both the Union and GSP+ beneficiary countries.

Or. en

Justification

In view of reinforcing the legitimacy and transparency of the monitoring process, a clear procedure must be provided for the civil society actors, trade unions and private sector actors to provide relevant information on the implementation of relevant conventions, similarly to what is foreseen in the EU Fisheries Control System regulation. Single Entry Point, which is open to EU and beneficiary country stakeholders must be formalised in the regulation.

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1b. Monitoring shall also take into account compliance of GSP+ beneficiary countries’ legislation with the due diligence requirements under Union law, and in particular Regulations (EU) 2017/821, (EU) 995/2010 and (EC) 2368/2002.

Or. en

Justification

Due diligence tools should be interlinked into human rights monitoring under the GSP scheme.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. Where the Commission considers that the findings justify temporary withdrawal for the reasons referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, it is empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 36, to amend Annex I and Annex II in order to temporarily withdraw the tariff preferences provided under the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance referred to in Article 1(2), point (b). In adopting the delegated act the Commission may, when appropriate, consider the socio-economic effect of the temporary withdrawal of tariff preferences in the beneficiary country.

Or. en

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. The Commission shall encourage beneficiary countries to adopt measures in line with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. It shall be possible to finance assistance programs under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a.

______________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009 (OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1).

Or. en

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The preferential arrangements referred to in Article 1(2) may be withdrawn temporarily, in respect of all or of certain products originating in a beneficiary country, for any of the following reasons:

1. The preferential arrangements referred to in Article 1(2) may be withdrawn temporarily, in respect of all or of certain products originating in a beneficiary country or in respect of all or some economic sectors of the beneficiary country, for any of the following reasons:

Or. en

Justification

The Commission should be able to target also economic sectors, in function of the human rights violations or abuses in a particular sector.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) serious shortcomings in customs controls on the export or transit of drugs (illicit substances or precursors), or related to the obligation to readmit the beneficiary country’s own nationals or serious failure to comply with international conventions on antiterrorism or anti-money laundering;

(c) serious shortcomings in customs controls on the export or transit of drugs (illicit substances or precursors), or serious failure to comply with international conventions on antiterrorism or anti-money laundering;

Or. en

Justification

The objectives of the GSP regulation are poverty reduction and sustainable development - migration control does not form part of these objectives.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Annex VI – point 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998)

Or. en

Justification

The EU and its Member States have committed to the objective of contributing to the widest possible participation in the Rome Statute.