29.9.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 253/22 COUNCIL DECISION 2005/671/JHA of 20 September 2005 on the exchange of information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 29, 30(1), 31 and 34(2)(c) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (1), Whereas: (1) At its extraordinary meeting on 21 September 2001, the European Council stated that terrorism was a real challenge to the world and to Europe and that the fight against terrorism would be a priority objective of the European Union. (2) On 19 October 2001 the European Council stated that it was determined to combat terrorism in every form throughout the world and that it would continue its efforts to strengthen the coalition of the international community to combat terrorism in every shape and form, for example by increased cooperation between the operational services responsible for combating terrorism: Europol, Eurojust, the intelligence services, police forces and judicial authorities. (3) It is essential in the fight against terrorism for the relevant services to have the fullest and most up-to-date information possible in their respective fields. The Member States’ specialised national services, the judicial authorities and relevant bodies of the European Union such as Europol and Eurojust absolutely need information if they are to perform their tasks. (4) Council Decision 2003/48/JHA of 19 December 2002 on the implementation of specific measures for police and judicial cooperation to combat terrorism in accordance with Article 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP (2) is a major step forward. The persistence of the terrorist threat and the complexity of the phenomenon raise the need for ever greater exchanges of information. The scope of information exchanges must be extended to all stages of criminal proceedings, including convictions, and to all persons, groups or entities investigated, prosecuted or convicted for terrorist offences. (5) Since the objectives of this decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting alone and can therefore, given the need for reciprocity, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures, act in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives. (6) In the execution of the exchange of information, this Decision is without prejudice to essential national security interests, and it should not jeopardise the safety of individuals or the success of a current investigation or specific intelligence activities in the field of State security. (7) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 Definitions For the purposes of this Decision, the following definitions shall apply: (a) ‘terrorist offences’: the offences specified in Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (3); (b) ‘Europol Convention’: the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the establishment of a European Police Office (4); (c) ‘Eurojust Decision’: Council Decision 2002/187/JHA of 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime (5); (d) ‘group or entity’: ‘terrorist groups’ within the meaning of Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and the groups and entities listed in the Annex to Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism (6). Article 2 Provision of information concerning terrorist offences to Eurojust, Europol and the Member States 1. Each Member State shall designate a specialised service within its police services or other law enforcement authorities, which, in accordance with national law, will have access to and collect all relevant information concerning and resulting from criminal investigations conducted by its law enforcement authorities with respect to terrorist offences and send it to Europol in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4. 2. Each Member State shall designate one, or where its legal system so provides more than one authority, as Eurojust national correspondent for terrorism matters or an appropriate judicial or other competent authority which, in accordance with national law, shall have access to and can collect all relevant information concerning prosecutions and convictions for terrorist offences and send it to Eurojust in accordance with paragraph 5. 3. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that at least the information referred to in paragraph 4 concerning criminal investigations and the information referred to in paragraph 5 concerning prosecutions and convictions for terrorist offences which affect or may affect two or more Member States, gathered by the relevant authority, is transmitted to: (a) Europol, in accordance with national law and with the provisions of the Europol Convention, for processing; and (b) Eurojust, in accordance with national law and where the provisions of the Eurojust Decision so allow. 4. The information to be transmitted in accordance with paragraph 3 to Europol shall be the following: (a) data which identify the person, group or entity; (b) acts under investigation and their specific circumstances; (c) the offence concerned; (d) links with other relevant cases; (e) the use of communication technologies; (f) the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction. 5. The information to be transmitted in accordance with paragraph 3 to Eurojust shall be the following: (a) data which identify the person, group or entity that is the object of a criminal investigation or prosecution; (b) the offence concerned and its specific circumstances; (c) information about final convictions for terrorist offences and the specific circumstances surrounding those offences; (d) links with other relevant cases; (e) requests for judicial assistance, including letters rogatory, addressed to or by another Member State and the response. 6. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that any relevant information included in documents, files, items of information, objects or other means of evidence, seized or confiscated in the course of criminal investigations or criminal proceedings in connection with terrorist offences can be made accessible as soon as possible, taking account of the need not to jeopardise current investigations, to the authorities of other interested Member States in accordance with national law and relevant international legal instruments where investigations are being carried out or might be initiated or where prosecutions are in progress in connection with terrorist offences. Article 3 Joint investigation teams In appropriate cases Member States shall take the necessary measures to set up joint investigation teams to conduct criminal investigations into terrorist offences. Article 4 Requests for judicial assistance and enforcement of judgments Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that requests from other Member States for mutual legal assistance and recognition and enforcement of judgments in connection with terrorist offences are dealt with as a matter of urgency and are given priority. Article 5 Repeal of existing provisions Decision 2003/48/JHA is hereby repealed. Article 6 Implementation Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Decision at the latest by 30 June 2006. Article 7 Territorial Application This Decision shall apply to Gibraltar. Article 8 Entry into force This Decision shall take effect on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 20 September 2005. For the Council The President M. BECKETT (1) Opinion given on 7 June 2005 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (2) OJ L 16, 22.1.2003, p. 68. (3) OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3. (4) OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 2. Convention as last amended by the Protocol of 27.11.2003 (OJ C 2, 6.1.2004, p. 3). (5) OJ L 63, 6.3.2002, p. 1. Decision as amended by Council Decision 2003/659/JHA (OJ L 245, 29.9.2003, p. 44). (6) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 93. Common Position as last amended by Common Position 2005/220/CFSP (OJ L 69, 16.3.2005, p. 59).

Summary: Information exchange and cooperation regarding terrorist offences Information exchange and cooperation regarding terrorist offences SUMMARY OF: Council Decision 2005/671/JHA on the exchange of information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences WHAT DOES THIS DECISION DO? The fight against terrorism is one of the priority objectives of the European Union (EU). This decision sets out a procedure for the sharing of information on criminal investigations, prosecutions and convictions for terrorist offences among EU countries. KEY POINTS To fight against terrorism, it is essential for the relevant services to have the fullest and most up-to-date information possible. EU countries should gather information concerning criminal investigations, prosecutions and convictions for terrorist offences, which affect 2 or more EU countries, and transmit it to Europol or Eurojust, as appropriate. A designated specialised service from within a country’s law enforcement authorities is responsible for sending all relevant information arising from criminal investigations for terrorist offences to Europol, including: the identity of the person or group; the acts under investigation and the circumstances; the offence; links with other relevant cases; the use of communication technologies; the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction. At least one authority in each country is designated as Eurojust’s national correspondent for terrorism matters, and is responsible for sending all relevant information concerning terrorist prosecutions and convictions to Eurojust, including: the identity of the person or group under criminal investigation or subject to prosecution; the offence concerned and its specific circumstances; information about final convictions for terrorist offences and the specific circumstances surrounding those offences; links with other relevant cases; requests for judicial assistance to or from an EU country, and any response. Each EU country ensures that relevant information from documents or other evidence obtained during investigations or terrorist proceedings is made available as soon as possible to other EU countries. Where appropriate, countries should set up joint investigation teams to conduct investigations. Requests from other EU countries for legal assistance and enforcement of judgments should be given top priority. The decision should not jeopardise the safety of individuals or the success of an ongoing investigation or specific intelligence operation, and does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve its objectives. Council Recommendation 2007/562/EC concerns the sharing of information on terrorist kidnappings among EU countries. FROM WHEN DOES THE DECISION APPLY? It applies from 30 September 2005. BACKGROUND For more information, see ‘Crisis & Terrorism’ on the European Commission's website ‘Fight against terrorism’ on the website of the Council of the European Union. MAIN DOCUMENT Council Decision 2005/671/JHA of 20 September 2005 on the exchange of information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences (OJ L 253, 29.9.2005, pp. 22–24) RELATED DOCUMENTS Council Recommendation of 12 June 2007 concerning sharing of information on terrorist kidnappings (OJ L 214, 17.8.2007, pp. 9–12) last update 18.08.2016


16.7.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 185/35 COUNCIL DECISION 2005/511/JHA of 12 July 2005 on protecting the euro against counterfeiting, by designating Europol as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 30(1)(b) and 34(2)(c) thereof, Having regard to the initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2), Whereas: (1) As the legal currency of 12 Member States, the euro has increasingly become a global currency and has therefore become a high-priority target of international counterfeiting organisations in the European Union and third countries. (2) A further increase in the number of counterfeit euro, which would jeopardise the free circulation of euro banknotes and coins, is to be prevented. (3) Cooperation among the Member States themselves and between the Member States and Europol needs to be stepped up in order to strengthen the system for the protection of the euro outside the European Union territory. (4) The International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency agreed on 20 April 1929 in Geneva (hereinafter referred to as the Geneva Convention), should be applied more effectively under the conditions of European integration. (5) Third countries need a central contact for information on counterfeit euro and all information on counterfeit euro should be brought together at Europol for purposes of analysis. (6) In view of Council Framework Decision 2000/383/JHA of 29 May 2000 on increasing protection by criminal penalties and other sanctions against counterfeiting in connection with the introduction of the euro (3), the Council considers it appropriate for all Member States to become contracting parties to the Geneva Convention and to set up central offices within the meaning of Article 12 of that Convention. (7) The Council considers it appropriate to designate Europol as the central office for combating euro counterfeiting within the meaning of Article 12 of the Geneva Convention, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 1. For the Member States which are Contracting Parties to the Geneva Convention, Europol shall, in accordance with the Declaration in the Annex (hereinafter referred to as the Declaration), act as the central office for combating euro counterfeiting within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 12 of the Geneva Convention. For counterfeiting of all other currencies and for central office functions not delegated to Europol pursuant to the Declaration, the existing competencies of the national central offices shall remain in effect. 2. The governments of the Member States which are Contracting Parties to the Geneva Convention shall issue the Declaration and commission the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to forward the Declarations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 2 This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 12 July 2005. For the Council The President G. BROWN (1) OJ C 317, 22.12.2004, p. 10. (2) Opinion delivered on 12 April 2005 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (3) OJ L 140, 14.6.2000, p. 1. Framework Decision as amended by Framework Decision 2001/888/JHA (OJ L 329, 14.12.2001, p. 3). ANNEX Declaration of … to designate Europol as the central office for combating euro counterfeiting …, a Member State of the European Union, has given the European Police Office (hereinafter referred to as Europol) a mandate to combat euro counterfeiting. In order for the Geneva Convention of 1929 to function more effectively,… shall in future fulfil its obligations as follows: 1. With regard to euro counterfeiting, Europol shall perform — in the framework of its objective according to the Council Act of 26 July 1995 on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) (1) — the following central office functions within the meaning of Articles 12 to 15 of the Geneva Convention of 1929. 1.1. Europol shall centralise and process, in accordance with the Europol Convention, all information of a nature to facilitate the investigation, prevention and combating of euro counterfeiting and shall forward this information without delay to the national central offices of the Member States. 1.2. In accordance with the Europol Convention, in particular in accordance with Article 18 thereof and the Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by Europol to third States and third bodies (2), Europol shall correspond directly with the central offices of third countries to fulfil the tasks set down in points 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 of this Declaration. 1.3. Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, forward to the central offices of third countries a set of specimens of actual euro. 1.4. Europol shall regularly notify the central offices of third countries, giving all necessary particulars, of new currency issued and the withdrawal of currency from circulation. 1.5. Except in cases of purely local interest, Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, notify the central offices of third countries of: — any discovery of counterfeit or falsified Euro currency. Notification of the counterfeit or falsification shall be accompanied by a technical description of the counterfeit, to be provided solely by the institution whose notes have been counterfeited. A photographic reproduction or, if possible, a specimen counterfeited note should be transmitted. In urgent cases, a notification and a brief description made by the police authorities may be discreetly communicated to the central offices interested, without prejudice to the notification and technical description mentioned above; — details of discoveries of counterfeiting, stating whether it has been possible to seize all the counterfeit currency put into circulation. 1.6. As central office for the Member States, Europol shall participate in conferences dealing with euro counterfeiting within the meaning of Article 15 of the Geneva Convention. 1.7. Where Europol is unable to carry out the tasks specified in points 1.1. to 1.6. in accordance with the Europol Convention, the national central offices of the Member States shall retain competence. 2. With regard to the counterfeiting of all other currencies and for central office functions not delegated to Europol in accordance with point 1, the existing competencies of the national central offices shall remain in effect. Name of Representative…, this… day of… (1) OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 1. (2) OJ C 88, 30.3.1999 p. 1. Council Act as amended by Council Act of 28 February 2002 (OJ C 76, 27.3.2002, p. 1).

Summary: Protecting the euro against counterfeiting – Europol Protecting the euro against counterfeiting – Europol SUMMARY OF: Decision 2005/511/JHA designating Europol as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting WHAT IS THE AIM OF THE DECISION? It designates Europol as the central office for combating euro counterfeiting in order to apply effectively the 1929 Geneva International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency (Geneva Convention) and to step up cooperation among European Union (EU) countries themselves, and between the EU countries, Europol and non-EU countries. KEY POINTS The EU is stepping up cooperation among EU countries and between EU countries and Europol with a view to protecting the euro against counterfeiting at international level. Non-EU countries need a central contact for information on counterfeit euros. All such information is to be brought together for purposes of analysis at Europol, which acts as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting pursuant to the Geneva Convention. Role of Europol Europol acts as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting within the meaning of Article 12 of the Geneva Convention, which states ‘in every country, within the framework of its domestic law, investigations on the subject of counterfeiting should be organised by a central office.’ Within the context of its mandate, Europol: centralises and processes all information of a nature to facilitate the investigation, prevention and combating of euro counterfeiting and forwards this information to the national central offices of the EU countries; corresponds directly with the central offices of non-EU countries in accordance with the rules on the transmission of personal data; forwards, in so far as it considers it expedient, to the central offices of non-EU countries a set of specimens of actual euros; regularly notifies the central offices of non-EU countries of new currency issued, the withdrawal of currency from circulation, any discovery of counterfeit or falsified euro currency, details of discoveries of counterfeiting, etc. Where counterfeiting of all other currencies is concerned, the national central offices retain competence. Applying the 1929 Geneva Convention effectively The Geneva Convention should be applied more effectively. It lays down effective rules for preventing and combating counterfeiting infringements. The word ‘currency’ refers to banknotes and coins having legal tender. The Council considers it expedient that all EU countries should become contracting parties to the Convention. FROM WHEN DOES THE DECISION APPLY? It has applied since 16 July 2005. MAIN DOCUMENT Council Decision 2005/511/JHA of 12 July 2005 on protecting the euro against counterfeiting, by designating Europol as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting (OJ L 185, 16.7.2005, pp. 35–36) last update 23.03.2017


22.3.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 76/16 COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 31(a) and 34(2)(b) thereof, Having regard to the initiative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the French Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2), Whereas: (1) The European Council meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999 endorsed the principle of mutual recognition, which should become the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the Union. (2) The principle of mutual recognition should apply to financial penalties imposed by judicial or administrative authorities for the purpose of facilitating the enforcement of such penalties in a Member State other than the State in which the penalties are imposed. (3) On 29 November 2000 the Council, in accordance with the Tampere conclusions, adopted a programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters (3), giving priority to the adoption of an instrument applying the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties (measure 18). (4) This Framework Decision should also cover financial penalties imposed in respect of road traffic offences. (5) This Framework Decision respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Article 6 of the Treaty and reflected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (4), in particular Chapter VI thereof. Nothing in this Framework Decision may be interpreted as prohibiting refusal to execute a decision when there are reasons to believe, on the basis of objective elements, that the financial penalty has the purpose of punishing a person on the grounds of his or her sex, race, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, language, political opinions or sexual orientation, or that that person's position may be prejudiced for any of these reasons. (6) This Framework Decision does not prevent a Member State from applying its constitutional rules relating to due process, freedom of association, freedom of the press and freedom of expression in other media, HAS ADOPTED THIS FRAMEWORK DECISION: Article 1 Definitions For the purposes of this Framework Decision: (a) ‘decision’ shall mean a final decision requiring a financial penalty to be paid by a natural or legal person where the decision was made by: (i) a court of the issuing State in respect of a criminal offence under the law of the issuing State; (ii) an authority of the issuing State other than a court in respect of a criminal offence under the law of the issuing State, provided that the person concerned has had an opportunity to have the case tried by a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters; (iii) an authority of the issuing State other than a court in respect of acts which are punishable under the national law of the issuing State by virtue of being infringements of the rules of law, provided that the person concerned has had an opportunity to have the case tried by a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters; (iv) a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters, where the decision was made regarding a decision as referred to in point (iii); (b) ‘financial penalty’ shall mean the obligation to pay: (i) a sum of money on conviction of an offence imposed in a decision; (ii) compensation imposed in the same decision for the benefit of victims, where the victim may not be a civil party to the proceedings and the court is acting in the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction; (iii) a sum of money in respect of the costs of court or administrative proceedings leading to the decision; (iv) a sum of money to a public fund or a victim support organisation, imposed in the same decision. A financial penalty shall not include: — orders for the confiscation of instrumentalities or proceeds of crime, — orders that have a civil nature and arise out of a claim for damages and restitution and which are enforceable in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (5); (c) ‘issuing State’ shall mean the Member State in which a decision within the meaning of this Framework Decision was delivered; (d) ‘executing State’ shall mean the Member State to which a decision has been transmitted for the purpose of enforcement. Article 2 Determination of the competent authorities 1. Each Member State shall inform the General Secretariat of the Council which authority or authorities, under its national law, are competent according to this Framework Decision, when that Member State is the issuing State or the executing State. 2. Notwithstanding Article 4, each Member State may designate, if it is necessary as a result of the organisation of its internal system, one or more central authorities responsible for the administrative transmission and reception of the decisions and to assist the competent authorities. 3. The General Secretariat of the Council shall make the information received available to all Member States and the Commission. Article 3 Fundamental rights This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of amending the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty. Article 4 Transmission of decisions and recourse to the central authority 1. A decision, together with a certificate as provided for in this Article, may be transmitted to the competent authorities of a Member State in which the natural or legal person against whom a decision has been passed has property or income, is normally resident or, in the case of a legal person, has its registered seat. 2. The certificate, the standard form for which is given in the Annex, must be signed, and its contents certified as accurate, by the competent authority in the issuing State. 3. The decision or a certified copy of it, together with the certificate, shall be transmitted by the competent authority in the issuing State directly to the competent authority in the executing State by any means which leaves a written record under conditions allowing the executing State to establish its authenticity. The original of the decision, or a certified copy of it, and the original of the certificate, shall be sent to the executing State if it so requires. All official communications shall also be made directly between the said competent authorities. 4. The issuing State shall only transmit a decision to one executing State at any one time. 5. If the competent authority in the executing State is not known to the competent authority in the issuing State, the latter shall make all necessary inquiries, including via the contact points of the European Judicial Network (6) in order to obtain the information from the executing State. 6. When an authority in the executing State which receives a decision has no jurisdiction to recognise it and take the necessary measures for its execution, it shall, ex officio, transmit the decision to the competent authority and shall inform the competent authority in the issuing State accordingly. 7. The United Kingdom and Ireland, respectively, may state in a declaration that the decision together with the certificate must be sent via its central authority or authorities specified by it in the declaration. These Member States may at any time by a further declaration limit the scope of such a declaration for the purpose of giving greater effect to paragraph 3. They shall do so when the provisions on mutual assistance of the Schengen Implementation Convention are put into effect for them. Any declaration shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Council and notified to the Commission. Article 5 Scope 1. The following offences, if they are punishable in the issuing State and as they are defined by the law of the issuing State, shall, under the terms of this Framework Decision and without verification of the double criminality of the act, give rise to recognition and enforcement of decisions: — participation in a criminal organisation, — terrorism, — trafficking in human beings, — sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, — illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, — illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives, — corruption, — fraud, including that affecting the financial interests of the European Communities within the meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, — laundering of the proceeds of crime, — counterfeiting currency, including of the euro, — computer-related crime, — environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties, — facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence, — murder, grievous bodily injury, — illicit trade in human organs and tissue, — kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking, — racism and xenophobia, — organised or armed robbery, — illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art, — swindling, — racketeering and extortion, — counterfeiting and piracy of products, — forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein, — forgery of means of payment, — illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters, — illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials, — trafficking in stolen vehicles, — rape, — arson, — crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, — unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships, — sabotage, — conduct which infringes road traffic regulations, including breaches of regulations pertaining to driving hours and rest periods and regulations on hazardous goods, — smuggling of goods, — infringements of intellectual property rights, — threats and acts of violence against persons, including violence during sport events, — criminal damage, — theft, — offences established by the issuing State and serving the purpose of implementing obligations arising from instruments adopted under the EC Treaty or under Title VI of the EU Treaty. 2. The Council may decide to add other categories of offences to the lists in paragraph 1 at any time, acting unanimously after consultation of the European Parliament under the conditions laid down in Article 39(1) of the EU Treaty. The Council shall consider, in the light of the report submitted to it pursuant to Article 20(5), whether the list should be extended or amended. The Council shall consider the issue further at a later stage on the basis of a report on the practical application of the Framework Decision established by the Commission within 5 years after the date mentioned in Article 20(1). 3. For offences other than those covered by paragraph 1, the executing State may make the recognition and execution of a decision subject to the condition that the decision is related to conduct which would constitute an offence under the law of the executing State, whatever the constituent elements or however it is described. Article 6 Recognition and execution of decisions The competent authorities in the executing State shall recognise a decision which has been transmitted in accordance with Article 4 without any further formality being required and shall forthwith take all the necessary measures for its execution, unless the competent authority decides to invoke one of the grounds for non-recognition or non-execution provided for in Article 7. Article 7 Grounds for non-recognition and non-execution 1. The competent authorities in the executing State may refuse to recognise and execute the decision if the certificate provided for in Article 4 is not produced, is incomplete or manifestly does not correspond to the decision. 2. The competent authority in the executing State may also refuse to recognise and execute the decision if it is established that: (a) decision against the sentenced person in respect of the same acts has been delivered in the executing State or in any State other than the issuing or the executing State, and, in the latter case, that decision has been executed; (b) in one of the cases referred to in Article 5(3), the decision relates to acts which would not constitute an offence under the law of the executing State; (c) the execution of the decision is statute-barred according to the law of the executing State and the decision relates to acts which fall within the jurisdiction of that State under its own law. (d) the decision relates to acts which: (i) are regarded by the law of the executing State as having been committed in whole or in part in the territory of the executing State or in a place treated as such, or (ii) have been committed outside the territory of the issuing State and the law of the executing State does not allow prosecution for the same offences when committed outside its territory; (e) there is immunity under the law of the executing State, which makes it impossible to execute the decision; (f) the decision has been imposed on a natural person who under the law of the executing State due to his or her age could not yet have been held criminally liable for the acts in respect of which the decision was passed; (g) according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the person concerned (i) in case of a written procedure was not, in accordance with the law of the issuing State, informed personally or via a representative, competent according to national law, of his right to contest the case and of time limits of such a legal remedy, or (ii) did not appear personally, unless the certificate states: — that the person was informed personally, or via a representative, competent according to national law, of the proceedings in accordance with the law of the issuing State, or — that the person has indicated that he or she does not contest the case; (h) the financial penalty is below EUR 70 or the equivalent to that amount. 3. In cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2(c) and (g), before deciding not to recognise and to execute a decision, either totally or in part, the competent authority in the executing State shall consult the competent authority in the issuing State, by any appropriate means, and shall, where appropriate, ask it to supply any necessary information without delay. Article 8 Determination of the amount to be paid 1. Where it is established that the decision is related to acts which were not carried out within the territory of the issuing State, the executing State may decide to reduce the amount of the penalty enforced to the maximum amount provided for acts of the same kind under the national law of the executing State, when the acts fall within the jurisdiction of that State. 2. The competent authority of the executing State shall, if necessary, convert the penalty into the currency of the executing State at the rate of exchange obtaining at the time when the penalty was imposed. Article 9 Law governing enforcement 1. Without prejudice to paragraph 3 of this Article, and to Article 10, the enforcement of the decision shall be governed by the law of the executing State in the same way as a financial penalty of the executing State. The authorities of the executing State alone shall be competent to decide on the procedures for enforcement and to determine all the measures relating thereto, including the grounds for termination of enforcement. 2. In the case where the sentenced person is able to furnish proof of a payment, totally or in part, in any State, the competent authority of the executing State shall consult the competent authority of the Issuing State in the way provided for in Article 7(3). Any part of the penalty recovered in whatever manner in any State shall be deducted in full from the amount, which is to be enforced in the executing State. 3. A financial penalty imposed on a legal person shall be enforced even if the executing State does not recognise the principle of criminal liability of legal persons. Article 10 Imprisonment or other alternative sanction by way of substitution for non-recovery of the financial penalty Where it is not possible to enforce a decision, either totally or in part, alternative sanctions, including custodial sanctions, may be applied by the executing State if its laws so provide in such cases and the issuing State has allowed for the application of such alternative sanctions in the certificate referred to in Article 4. The severity of the alternative sanction shall be determined in accordance with the law of the executing State, but shall not exceed any maximum level stated in the certificate transmitted by the issuing State. Article 11 Amnesty, pardon, review of sentence 1. Amnesty and pardon may be granted by the issuing State and also by the executing State. 2. Without prejudice to the Article 10, only the issuing State may determine any application for review of the decision. Article 12 Termination of enforcement 1. The competent authority of the issuing State shall forthwith inform the competent authority of the executing State of any decision or measure as a result of which the decision ceases to be enforceable or is withdrawn from the executing State for any other reason. 2. The executing State shall terminate enforcement of the decision as soon as it is informed by the competent authority of the issuing State of that decision or measure. Article 13 Accrual of monies obtained from enforcement of decisions Monies obtained from the enforcement of decisions shall accrue to the executing State unless otherwise agreed between the issuing and the executing State, in particular in the cases referred to in Article 1(b)(ii). Article 14 Information from the executing State The competent authority of the executing State shall without delay inform the competent authority of the issuing State by any means which leaves a written record: (a) of the transmission of the decision to the competent authority, according to Article 4(6); (b) of any decision not to recognise and execute a decision, according to Articles 7 or 20(3), together with the reasons for the decision; (c) of the total or partial non-execution of the decision for the reasons referred to in Article 8, Article 9(1) and (2), and Article 11(1); (d) of the execution of the decision as soon as the execution has been completed; (e) of the application of alternative sanction, according to Article 10. Article 15 Consequences of transmission of a decision 1. Subject to paragraph 2, the issuing State may not proceed with the execution of a decision transmitted pursuant to Article 4. 2. The right of execution of the decision shall revert to the issuing State: (a) upon it being informed by the executing State of the total or partial non-execution or the non-recognition or the non-enforcement of the decision in the case of Article 7, with the exception of Article 7(2)(a), in the case of Article 11(1), and in the case of Article 20(3); or (b) when the executing State has been informed by the issuing State that the decision has been withdrawn from the executing State pursuant to Article 12. 3. If, after transmission of a decision in accordance with Article 4, an authority of the issuing State receives any sum of money which the sentenced person has paid voluntarily in respect of the decision, that authority shall inform the competent authority in the executing State without delay. Article 9(2) shall apply. Article 16 Languages 1. The certificate, the standard form for which is given in the Annex, must be translated into the official language or one of the official languages of the executing State. Any Member State may, either when this Framework Decision is adopted or at a later date, state in a declaration deposited with the General Secretariat of the Council that it will accept a translation in one or more other official languages of the Institutions of the Union. 2. The execution of the decision may be suspended for the time necessary to obtain its translation at the expense of the executing State. Article 17 Costs Member States shall not claim from each other the refund of costs resulting from application of this Framework Decision. Article 18 Relationship with other agreements and arrangements This Framework Decision shall not preclude the application of bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements between Member States in so far as such agreements or arrangements allow the prescriptions of this Framework Decision to be exceeded and help to simplify or facilitate further the procedures for the enforcement of financial penalties. Article 19 Territorial application This Framework Decision shall apply to Gibraltar. Article 20 Implementation 1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 22 March 2007. 2. Each Member State may for a period of up to five years from the date of entry into force of this Framework Decision limit its application to: (a) decisions mentioned in Article 1 (a)(i) and (iv); and/or (b) with regard to legal persons, decisions related to conduct for which a European instrument provides for the application of the principle of liability of legal persons. Any Member State that wants to make use of this paragraph, shall notify a declaration to that effect to the Secretary General of the Council upon the adoption of this Framework Decision. The declaration shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. 3. Each Member State may, where the certificate referred to in Article 4 gives rise to an issue that fundamental rights or fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty may have been infringed, oppose the recognition and the execution of decisions. The procedure referred to in Article 7(3) shall apply. 4. Any Member State may apply the principle of reciprocity in relation to any Member State making use of paragraph 2. 5. Member States shall transmit to the General Secretariat of the Council and to the Commission the text of the provisions transposing into their national law the obligations imposed on them under this Framework Decision. On the basis of a report established on the basis of this information by the Commission, the Council shall, no later than 22 March 2008, assess the extent to which Member States have complied with this Framework Decision. 6. The General Secretariat of the Council shall notify the Member States and the Commission of the declarations made pursuant to Articles 4(7) and 16. 7. Without prejudice to Article 35(7) of the Treaty, a Member State which has experienced repeated difficulties or lack of activity by another Member State in the mutual recognition and execution of decisions, which have not been solved through bilateral consultations, may inform the Council with a view to evaluating the implementation of this Framework Decision at Member State level. 8. Any Member State which during a calendar year has applied paragraph 3, shall in the beginning of the following calendar year inform the Council and the Commission of cases in which the grounds referred to in that provision for non-recognition or non-execution of a decision have been applied. 9. Within seven years after the entry into force of this Framework Decision, the Commission shall establish a report on the basis of the information received, accompanied by any initiatives it may deem appropriate. The Council shall on the basis of the report review this Article with a view to considering whether paragraph 3 shall be retained or replaced by a more specific provision. Article 21 Entry into force This Framework Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 24 February 2005. For the Council The President N. SCHMIT (1) OJ C 278, 2.10.2001, p. 4. (2) OJ C 271 E, 7.11.2002, p. 423. (3) OJ C 12, 15.1.2001, p. 10. (4) OJ C 364, 18.12.2000, p. 1. (5) OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2245/2004 (OJ L 381, 28.12.2004, p. 10). (6) Council Joint Action 98/428/JHA of 29 June 1998 on the creation of a European Judicial Network (OJ L 191, 7.7.1998, p. 4). ANNEX CERTIFICATE referred to in Article 4 of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties (a) * Issuing State: * Executing State: (b) The authority which issued the decision imposing the financial penalty: Official name: Address: File reference (…) Tel. No: (country code) (area/city code) Fax No (country code) (area/city code) E-mail (when available) Languages in which it is possible to communicate with the issuing authority Contact details for person(s) to contact to obtain additional information for the purpose of the enforcement of the decision or, where applicable, for the purpose of the transfer to the issuing State of monies obtained from the enforcement (name, title/grade, tel. No., fax No., and, when available, E-mail) (c) The authority competent for the enforcement of the decision imposing the financial penalty in the issuing State (if the authority is different from the authority under point (b)): Official name: Address: Tel. No: (country code) (area/city code) Fax No (country code) (area/city code) E-mail (when available) Languages in which it is possible to communicate with the authority competent for the enforcement Contact details for person(s) to contact to obtain additional information for the purpose of the enforcement of the decision or, where applicable, for the purpose of the transfer to the issuing State of monies obtained from the enforcement (name, title/grade, tel. No., fax No., and, when available, E-mail): (d) Where a central authority has been made responsible for the administrative transmission of decisions imposing financial penalties in the issuing State: Name of the central authority: Contact person, if applicable (title/grade and name): Address: File reference Tel. No: (country code) (area/city code) Fax No: (country code) (area/city code) E-mail (when available): (e) The authority or authorities which may be contacted (in the case where point (c) and/or (d) has been filled):  Authority mentioned under point (b) Can be contacted for questions concerning:  Authority mentioned under point (c) Can be contacted for questions concerning:  Authority mentioned under point (d) Can be contacted for questions concerning: (f) Information regarding the natural or legal person on which the financial penalty has been imposed: 1. In case of a natural person Name: Forename(s): Maiden name, where applicable: Aliases, where applicable: Sex: Nationality: Identity number or social security number (when available): Date of birth: Place of birth: Last known address: Language(s) which the person understands (if known): (a) If the decision is transmitted to the executing State because the person against whom the decision has been passed is normally resident, add the following information: Normal residence in the executing State: (b) If the decision is transmitted to the executing State because the person against whom the decision has been passed has property in the executing State, add the following information: Description of the property of the person: Location of the property of the person: (c) If the decision is transmitted to the executing State because the person against whom the decision has been passed has income in the executing State, add the following information: Description of the source(s) of income of the person: Location of the source(s) of income of the person: 2. In case of a legal person: Name: Form of legal person: Registration number (if available) (1): Registered seat (if available) (1): Address of the legal person: (a) If the decision is transmitted to the executing State because the legal person against whom the decision has been passed has property in the executing State, add the following information: Description of the property of the legal person: Location of the property of the legal person: (b) If the decision is transmitted to the executing State because the legal person against whom the decision has been passed has income in the executing State, add the following information: Description of the source(s) of income of the legal person: Location of the source(s) of income of the legal person: (g) The decision imposing a financial penalty: 1. The nature of the decision imposing the financial penalty (tick the relevant box):  (i) Decision of a court of the issuing State in respect of a criminal offence under the law of the issuing State  (ii) Decision of an authority of the issuing State other than a court in respect of a criminal offence under the law of the issuing State. It is confirmed that the person concerned has had an opportunity to have the case tried by a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters.  (iii) Decision of an authority of the issuing State other than a court in respect of acts which are punishable under the national law of the issuing State by virtue of being infringements of the rules of law. It is confirmed that the person concerned has had an opportunity to have the case tried by a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters.  (iv) Decision of a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters regarding a decision as referred to in point iii. The decision was made on (date) The decision became final on (date) Reference number of the decision (if available): The financial penalty constitutes an obligation to pay (tick the relevant box(es) and indicate the amount(s) with indication of currency):  (i) A sum of money on conviction of an offence imposed in a decision. Amount:  (ii) Compensation imposed in the same decision for the benefit of victims, where the victim may not be a civil party to the proceedings and the court is acting in its exercise of its criminal jurisdiction. Amount:  (iii) A sum of money in respect of the costs of court or administrative proceedings leading to the decision. Amount:  (iv) A sum of money to a public fund or a victim support organisation, imposed in the same decision. Amount: The total amount of the financial penalty with indication of currency: 2. A summary of facts and a description of the circumstances in which the offence(s) has(have) been committed, including time and place: Nature and legal classification of the offence(s) and the applicable statutory provision/code on basis of which the decision was made: 3. To the extent that the offence(s) identified under point 2 above constitute(s) one or more of the following offences, confirm that by ticking the relevant box(es):  participation in a criminal organisation;  terrorism;  trafficking in human beings;  sexual exploitation of children and child pornography;  illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances;  illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives;  corruption;  fraud, including that affecting the financial interests of the European Communities within the meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests;  laundering of the proceeds of crime;  counterfeiting currency, including of the euro;  computer-related crime;  environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties;  facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence;  murder, grievous bodily injury;  illicit trade in human organs and tissue;  kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking;  racism and xenophobia;  organised or armed robbery;  illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art;  swindling;  racketeering and extortion;  counterfeiting and piracy of products;  forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein;  forgery of means of payment;  illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters;  illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials;  trafficking in stolen vehicles;  rape;  arson;  crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court;  unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships;  sabotage;  conduct which infringes road traffic regulations, including breaches of regulations pertaining to driving hours and rest periods and regulations on hazardous goods;  smuggling of goods;  infringements of intellectual property rights;  threats and acts of violence against persons, including violence during sport events;  criminal damage;  theft;  offences established by the issuing State and serving the purpose of implementing obligations arising from instruments adopted under the EC Treaty or under Title VI of the EU Treaty. If this box is ticked, indicate the exact provisions of the instrument adopted on the basis of the EC Treaty or the EU Treaty that the offence relates to: 4. To the extent that the offence(s) identified under point 2 above are not covered by point 3, give a full description of the offence(s) concerned: (h) Status of the decision imposing the financial penalty 1. Confirm that (tick the boxes):  (a) the decision is a final decision  (b) to the knowledge of the authority issuing the Certificate, a decision against the same person in respect of the same acts has not been delivered in the executing State and that no such decision delivered in any State other than the issuing State or the executing State has been executed. 2. Indicate if the case been subject to a written procedure:  (a) No, it has not.  (b) Yes, it has. It is confirmed that the person concerned was, in accordance with the law of the issuing State, informed personally or via a representative competent according to national law of his right to contest the case and of time limits of such a legal remedy 3. Indicate if the person concerned appeared personally in the proceedings:  (a) Yes, he or she did.  (b) No, he or she did not. It is confirmed:  that the person was informed personally, or via a representative competent according to national law, of the proceedings in accordance with the law of the issuing State, or  that the person has indicated that he or she does not contest the case 4. Partial payment of the penalty If any part of the penalty has already been paid to the issuing State, or, to the knowledge of the authority issuing the Certificate, to any other State, indicate the amount which has been paid: (i) Alternative sanctions, including custodial sanctions 1. State whether the issuing State allows for the application by the executing State of alternative sanctions in case it is not possible to enforce the decision imposing a penalty, either totally or in part:  yes  no 2. If yes, state which sanctions may be applied (nature of the sanctions, maximum level of the sanctions):  Custody. Maximum period:  Community service (or equivalent). Maximum period  Other sanctions. Description: (j) Other circumstances relevant to the case (optional information): (k) The text of the decision imposing the financial penalty is attached to the certificate. Signature of the authority issuing the certificate and/or its representative certifying the content of the certificate as accurate: Name: Post held (title/grade): Date: Official stamp (if available) (1) Where a decision is transmitted to the executing State because the legal person against whom the decision has been passed has its registered seat in that State, Registration number and Registered seat must be completed.

Summary: Mutual recognition of financial penalties, such as certain speeding fines Mutual recognition of financial penalties, such as certain speeding fines Facilitating the enforcement of financial penalties in cross-border cases, wherever in the EU they may have been imposed, helps to ensure equal treatment of EU citizens. ACT Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties. SUMMARY WHAT DOES THE FRAMEWORK DECISION DO? The framework decision introduces specific measures, under the principle of mutual recognition, allowing a judicial or administrative authority to transmit a financial penalty directly to an authority in another EU country and to have that fine recognised and executed without any further formality. KEY POINTS The framework decision applies to all offences in relation to which financial penalties can be imposed and dual criminality (i.e. when an offence exists under the law of both issuing and enforcing country) checks are abolished in relation to 39 listed offences, such as: participation in a criminal organisation; terrorism; trafficking in human beings, in arms and in stolen vehicles; swindling (obtaining money or possessions fraudulently); rape; road traffic offences. The penalties must be imposed by the judicial or administrative authority of an EU country and result from a final decision, i.e. there is no longer any possibility to appeal the decision. When transmitting the decision imposing the financial penalty, the EU country imposing the penalty must transmit a certificate in the language of the EU country executing the decision. The decision is transmitted to the competent authorities of the EU country where the natural or legal person (a company) has property or income, is normally resident or, in the case of a legal person, has its registered seat. The EU country to which the decision is transmitted may refuse to execute it if the certificate is not produced, is incomplete or clearly does not correspond to the decision. They may also refuse to execute in a limited number of cases, including if: the decision has been delivered in respect of the same acts in the executing state or in any state other than the issuing or executing state and, in the latter case, has been executed; the decision relates to an act that is neither listed as an offence in the framework decision nor constitutes an offence under the national law of the executing state; the execution of the decision is statute barred (i.e. the time limit for its execution has passed) according to the law of the executing state and relates to acts that fall within the jurisdiction of that state under its own law; the decision has been imposed on a person who could not have been held criminally liable under the law of the executing state due to his/her age; the decision provides that the financial penalty will be below €70 or the equivalent. The execution of the decision is governed by the law of the executing state. The executing state can also: decide to reduce the amount of the financial penalty in accordance with the amount provided for by national law, on condition that the acts had not been committed in the territory of the issuing state; impose imprisonment or other penalties provided for by national law in the event of non-recovery of the financial penalty. Amnesty, pardon and review of sentence can be granted by both the issuing state and the executing state. For more information, see: ‘Financial penalties’ on the European Commission's website; ‘Mutual recognition of financial penalties’ on the e-Justice portal. REFERENCES Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA 22.3.2005 22.3.2007 OJ L 76, 22.3.2005, pp. 16-30 Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA 28.3.2009 28.3.2011 OJ L 81, 27.3.2009, pp. 24-36 last update 19.06.2015


28.7.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 252/10 COUNCIL JOINT ACTION 2004/570/CFSP of 12 July 2004 on the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and, in particular, Article 14, Article 25, third paragraph, Article 26 and Article 28(3) thereof, Whereas: (1) The European Council has announced the readiness of the European Union for an ESDP mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), including a military component. (2) The General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFAP) in BiH foresees, inter alia, arrangements for establishing a multinational military implementation force. (3) The Council adopted on 12 July 2004 Joint Action 2004/569/CFSP (1) on the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The EU Special Representative (EUSR) in BiH will promote overall EU political coordination in BiH. (4) The Council adopted on 11 March 2002 Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP (2) on the European Union Police Mission (EUPM), to build and strengthen local policing capacity, especially at State level and in the fight against organised crime. (5) On 26 April 2004 the Council approved the general concept for an ESDP mission in BiH, including a military component. (6) On 17 to 18 June 2004 the European Council adopted a comprehensive policy towards BiH. (7) The NATO Summit Meeting of Heads of State and Government in Istanbul on 28 to 29 June 2004 decided to conclude NATO's SFOR operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina by the end of 2004. (8) United Nations Security Council Resolution 1551 (2004), adopted on 9 July 2004, welcomed the European Union's intention to launch an EU mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina, including a military component, from December 2004, under the terms set out in the letter of 29 June 2004 from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ireland and President of the Council of the European Union to the Presidency of the Security Council. The United Nations Security Council further decided that the status of forces agreements currently contained in Appendix B to Annex 1.A of the Peace Agreement shall apply provisionally in respect to the proposed EU mission and its forces, including from the point of their build-up in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in anticipation of the concurrence of the parties to those agreements to that effect. (9) The Council has agreed that the EU military operation should provide deterrence, continued compliance with the responsibility to fulfil the role specified in Annexes 1.A and 2 of the GFAP in BiH and contribute to the safe and secure environment, in line with its mandate, required to achieve core tasks in the Office of the High Representative's Mission Implementation Plan and the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). (10) The operation should reinforce the EU's comprehensive approach towards BiH, and support BiH's progress towards EU integration by its own efforts, with the objective of the signing of a Stabilisation and Association Agreement as a medium-term objective. (11) The EU military operation should have full authority, exercised through its force commander, in order to fulfil the role specified in Annexes 1.A and 2 of the GFAP in BiH to monitor implementation of military aspects of the GFAP, and to assess and address non-compliance by the Parties. (12) In addition to contacts already established in relation to EU's activities in BiH, the European Union should maintain close consultations with the BiH authorities, in particular with the Minister of Defence, regarding the conduct of the EU military operation. (13) Consultations with NATO will proceed in accordance with the relevant provisions laid down in the 17 March 2003 Exchange of Letters between the Secretary-General/High Representative (SG/HR) and NATO Secretary-General. In a subsequent Exchange of Letters on 30 June and 8 July 2004 respectively, the North Atlantic Council has agreed to make available DSACEUR as EU Operation Commander and has agreed that the EU Operation Headquarters should be located at SHAPE. (14) The Political and Security Committee (PSC) should exercise political control of and provide strategic direction to the EU military operation in BiH and take the relevant decisions in accordance with Article 25, third paragraph of the Treaty on European Union. (15) In conformity with the guidelines of the European Council meeting at Nice on 7 to 9 December 2000, this Joint Action should determine the role of the SG/HR in accordance with Articles 18 and 26 of the Treaty on European Union in the implementation of measures falling within the political control and strategic direction exercised by the PSC, in accordance with Article 25 of the Treaty on European Union. (16) Third States should participate in the EU military operation in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the European Council. (17) In accordance with Article 28(3) of the Treaty on European Union, the operational expenditure arising from this Joint Action, having military or defence implications, should be charged to the Member States in accordance with Council Decision 2004/197/CFSP of 23 February 2004 establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (3) (hereafter referred to as ‘ATHENA’). (18) Article 14(1) of the Treaty on European Union calls for the indication in joint actions of the means to be made available to the Union. The financial reference amount for the common costs of the EU military operation constitutes the best current estimate and is without prejudice to the final figures that shall be included in a budget to be approved in accordance with the principles laid down in ATHENA. (19) In conformity with Article 6 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and implementation of decisions and actions of the European Union which have defence implications. Denmark does not participate in the implementation of this Joint Action and therefore does not participate in the financing of the operation, HAS ADOPTED THIS JOINT ACTION: Article 1 Mission 1. Subject to a further decision by the Council to launch the operation, once all relevant decisions have been made, the European Union shall conduct a military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) named ‘ALTHEA’ in order to provide deterrence, continued compliance with the responsibility to fulfil the role specified in Annexes 1.A and 2 of the General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFAP) in BiH and to contribute to a safe and secure environment in BiH, in line with its mandate, required to achieve core tasks in the OHR's Mission Implementation Plan and the SAP. This operation shall be part of the overall ESDP mission in BiH. 2. The forces deployed to this effect shall operate in accordance with the general concept approved by the Council. 3. The EU military operation shall be carried out with recourse to NATO common assets and capabilities, on the basis agreed with NATO. Article 2 Appointment of the EU Operation Commander Admiral Rainer FEIST, Deputy Supreme Allied Commander for Europe (D-SACEUR), is hereby appointed EU Operation Commander. Article 3 Designation of the EU Operational Headquarters EU Operational Headquarters shall be located at the Supreme Headquarters of Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE). Article 4 Designation of the EU Force Commander Major General A. David LEAKEY is hereby appointed EU Force Commander. Article 5 Planning and launching of the Operation The Council shall decide on the launching of the EU military operation following the approval of the Operation Plan and the Rules of Engagement and any necessary further decisions. Article 6 Political control and strategic direction 1. Under the responsibility of the Council, the PSC shall exercise the political control and strategic direction of the EU military operation. The Council hereby authorises the PSC to take the relevant decisions in accordance with Article 25 of the Treaty on European Union. This authorisation shall include the powers to amend the planning documents, including the Operation Plan, the Chain of Command and the Rules of Engagement. This authorisation shall also include the powers to take further decisions on the appointment of the EU Operation Commander and/or EU Force Commander. The powers of decision with respect to the objectives and termination of the EU military operation shall remain vested in the Council, assisted by the SG/HR. 2. The PSC shall report to the Council at regular intervals. 3. The PSC shall receive reports from the Chairman of the European Union Military Committee (CEUMC) regarding the conduct of the EU military operation, at regular intervals. The PSC may invite the EU Operation Commander and/or EU Force Commander to its meetings, as appropriate. Article 7 Coherence of EU response 1. The operation shall be part of a closely coordinated EU presence in BiH. The Council shall ensure the maximum coherence and effectiveness for the EU effort in BiH. Without prejudice to Community competence, the EUSR shall promote overall EU political coordination in BiH. The EUSR shall chair a coordination group composed of all EU actors present in the field, including the EU Force Commander, with a view to coordinating the implementation aspects of the EU's action. 2. The EU Force Commander shall, without prejudice to the chain of command, take EUSR local political advice into account, especially with regard to matters for which the EUSR has a particular or stated role, and shall, within his/her mandate, endeavour to take into account any request from the EUSR. 3. The EU Force Commander shall liaise, as appropriate, with the EUPM. Article 8 Military direction 1. The EU Military Committee (EUMC) shall monitor the proper execution of the EU military operation conducted under the responsibility of the EU Operation Commander. 2. The EUMC shall receive reports from the EU Operation Commander at regular intervals. It may invite the EU Operation Commander and/or EU Force Commander to its meetings as necessary. 3. The CEUMC shall act as the primary point of contact with the EU Operation Commander. Article 9 Relations with BiH The SG/HR and the EUSR in BiH, within their respective mandates, shall act as primary points of contact with the authorities of BiH for matters relating to the implementation of this Joint Action. The Presidency shall be kept regularly and promptly informed on these contacts. The EU Force Commander shall maintain contact with local authorities, in close coordination with the EUSR, on issues relevant to his mission. Article 10 Coordination and liaison Without prejudice to the chain of command, the EU Commanders shall coordinate closely with the EUSR in BiH with a view to ensure consistency of the EU military operation with the broader context of the EU activities in BiH. Within that framework, the EU Commanders shall liaise with other international actors in the area as appropriate. Article 11 Participation of third States 1. Without prejudice to the decision-making autonomy of the European Union and to the Single Institutional Framework, and in accordance with the relevant guidelines of the European Council: — the non-EU European NATO members and Canada shall participate in the EU military operation if they so wish, — countries which are candidates for accession to the European Union may be invited to participate in the EU military operation in accordance with the agreed modalities, — potential partners and other third states may also be invited to participate in the operation. 2. The Council hereby authorises the PSC to take, upon the recommendation of the EU Operation Commander and the EUMC, the relevant decisions on acceptance of the proposed contributions. 3. Detailed arrangements regarding the participation of third states shall be the subject of an agreement, in conformity with Article 24 of the Treaty on European Union. The SG/HR, assisting the Presidency, may negotiate such arrangements on its behalf. Where the EU and a third state have concluded an agreement establishing a framework for the participation of this third state in the EU crisis management operations, the provisions of such an agreement shall apply in the context of this operation. 4. Third States making significant military contributions to the EU military operation shall have the same rights and obligations in terms of day-to-day management of the operation, as EU Member States taking part in the operation. 5. The Council hereby authorises the PSC to take relevant decisions on the setting-up of a Committee of Contributors, should third states provide significant military contributions. Article 12 Financial arrangements 1. The common costs of the EU military operation shall be administered by ATHENA. 2. For the purposes for this EU military operation: — barracks and lodging for the forces as a whole shall not be eligible for payment as common costs, — expenditure related to transportation for the forces as a whole shall not be eligible for payment as common costs. 3. Without prejudice to the financing of any future operation and in view of the specific requirements of the establishment of this operation, the Council may, in the light of the Force Generation Process, consider the issue of the financing of Multinational Task Force North. 4. The financial reference amount for the common costs of the EU military operation shall be 71 700 000 EUR. 5. Procurement procedures for the EU military operation shall be open to tenderers from the EU Member States contributing to the financing of the operation. Article 13 Relations with NATO 1. Relations with NATO shall be conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions laid down in the 17 March 2003 Exchange of Letters between the Secretary-General/High Representative and the NATO Secretary-General. 2. The entire chain of command of the EU Force shall remain under the political control and strategic direction of the EU throughout the EU military operation, after consultation between the EU and NATO. Within this framework, the EU Operation Commander shall report on the conduct of the operation to EU bodies only. NATO shall be informed of developments in the situation by the appropriate bodies, in particular the PSC and CEUMC. Article 14 Release of information to NATO and to third States 1. The SG/HR is hereby authorised to release to NATO and to third parties, associated with this Joint Action, EU classified information and documents generated for the purposes of the EU military operation, in accordance with the Council Security Regulations. 2. The SG/HR is hereby authorised to release to third parties, associated with this Joint Action, EU non-classified documents related to the deliberations of the Council with regard to the operation, covered by the obligation of professional secrecy pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 1 of the Council Rules of Procedure. Article 15 Community action The Council notes the intention of the Commission to direct, where appropriate, its action towards achieving the objectives of this Joint Action. Article 16 Review process 1. As part of the EU mission review process, a six-monthly review shall be held — to enable the PSC to determine, taking account of the security situation and of advice from HR/EUSR and from the EU Force Commander through the Chain of Command, and following EUMC military advice, any changes to be made to the size, mandate and tasks of the EU military operation, and when it should be terminated, — to enable the PSC to determine, taking account of the security situation and advice from HR/EUSR, the EU Force Commander, and the Head of Mission EUPM, and following EUMC and CIVCOM advice, whether all or part of the Integrated Police Unit style capability should be repositioned within EUSR domain, for duties in support of the Rule of Law, including in support of State Information and Protection Agency (SIPA). In this case, the composition of the police and military missions shall be reviewed. 2. The Council shall, not later than 31 December 2005, evaluate the continuation of the operation. Article 17 Entry into force and termination 1. This Joint Action shall enter into force on the date of its adoption. 2. The EU military operation shall end on a date to be decided by the Council. 3. This Joint Action shall be repealed following the redeployment of all EU forces, in accordance with approved termination planning of the EU military operation. Article 18 Publication This Joint Action shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 12 July 2004. For the Council The President B. BOT (1) See page 7 of this Official Journal. (2) OJ L 70, 13.3.2002, p. 1. (3) OJ L 63, 28.2.2004, p. 68.

Summary: European Union missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina European Union missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina The European Union is leading a police mission and military operation in Bosnia-Herzegovina under the framework of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) and is thus contributing to the implementation of the peace process in this country and the stabilisation of the Balkans. ACTS Council Joint Action2002/210/CFSP of 11 March 2002 on the European Union Police Mission [See modifying acts]. Council Joint Action 2004/570/CFSP of 12 July 2004 on the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina [See modifying acts]. SUMMARY The European Union is leading two missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, a police mission called "EUPM" and a military operation called "EUFOR ALTHEA". European Union Police Mission (EUPM) The aim of the European Union police mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina is to establish sustainable policing arrangements in this country under Bosnian ownership and in accordance with best European and international practice in this area. The Mission will lead monitoring, mentoring and inspection actions in order to ensure that police officers act in a professional, independent and impartial manner in accordance with legislation and agreements made under the Stabilisation and Association Process with the European Union. The Mission will also ensure that police services are based on a transparent structure that takes into consideration the multiple ethnic composition of Bosnian society and that all the police forces in the country cooperate with each other. Furthermore, the Mission will ensure that police carry out investigations of corruption and that they are capable of working on all types of criminal activity, including organised crime and terrorism. The EUPM consists of 192 international members and 220 local members (October 2008). The main headquarters are located in Sarajevo and monitoring units are deployed in the same location as various Bosnia and Herzegovina police structures at medium and high levels. The 27 European Union Member States contribute to the Mission alongside Canada, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine. EUFOR ALTHEA The aim of the European Union military operation in Bosnia-Herzegovina is to provide deterrence, to contribute to a safe and secure environment and to ensure compliance with Annexes 1.A and 2 of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina, relating to military matters and internal borders. EUFOR ALTHEA comprises around 2200 military personnel from 24 Member States, Albania, Chile, Macedonia, Switzerland and Turkey. The operation includes a multinational battalion and an integrated police unit based in Sarajevo, monitoring and liaison teams spread out across the whole country and five regional coordination centres in Sarajevo Tuzla, Banja Luka, Mostar and Zenica. Context On 1 January 2003 the EUPM took over from the United Nations International Police Task Force (IPTF) in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the deployment of which was provided for in the General Agreement Framework for Peace (or the Dayton Peace Agreement) signed in 1995. This was the very first mission organised under the framework of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). EUFOR ALTHEA succeeded the NATO stabilisation force (SFOR) on 2 December 2004. Initially comprising 7 000 personnel, the Mission was restructured at the beginning of 2007 and its numbers were reduced to around 2200 personnel. References UEPM: Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal 2002/210/CFSP 11.3.2002 - OJ L 73 of 13.3.2002 Modifying acts Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal 2003/141/CFSP 27.2.2003 - OJ L 53 of 28.2.2003 2005/824/CFSP 24.11.2005 - OJ L 307 of 25.11.2005 Successive amendments and corrections to Joint Action 2002/210/ESDP have been incorporated into the original text. The consolidated version (pdf) is intended purely as a documentation tool EUFOR ALTHEA: Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal 2004/570/CFSP 12.7.2004 - OJ L 252 of 28.7.2004 Modifying acts Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal 2007/720/CFSP 8.11.2007 - OJ L 291 of 9.11.2007 Successive amendments and corrections to Joint Action 2004/570/ESDP have been incorporated into the original text. The consolidated version (pdf) is intended purely as a documentation tool. See also For further information on the EUPM, please visit the dedicated Council webpage (EN) and the Mission website (EN). For further information on EUFOR ALTHEA, please visit the dedicated Council page (EN) and the Operation website (EN). Last updated: 25.09.2008