HELO, Har just mailat till gröna gruppen som följer.
Ville bara dela detta för att sätta DFRIs ACTA-följetong https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/ i ett sammanhang. mvh //Erik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: How to improve the TTIP negotiations - lessons learnt from ACTA Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 19:42:37 +0200 From: JOSEFSSON Erik <erik.josefs...@europarl.europa.eu> To: Verts/ALE - Groupe Politique, Mep et Assistants <dl-verts-ale-...@europarl.europa.eu> On *31 may 2011* we decided to support EDRi's request <http://acta.mpbloggar.se/files/2011/05/ACTA_documents_release-1.pdf> to the Parliament "that all relevant documents (drafts distributed by the European Commission and associated briefing notes from the Commission) received by the Parliament be published and/or communicated directly to us as soon as possible." On *7 February 2012* Dany and Rebecca did alert the President of the European Parliament of complaints to the Ombudsman <http://lists.act-on-acta.eu/pipermail/hub/2012-February/000085.html> regarding access to ACTA-related documents (see our campaign wiki for reference http://act-on-acta.eu/). But the Parliament refused access, and EDRi consequently pursued its Ombudsman complaint further. The Ombudsman has now published it's conclusion with regards to EDRi's complaint: *There has been no maladministration by Parliament.* But the Ombudsman also added a "Further remark" which should urgently inform the current debate on transparency in the TTIP negotiations: *Given that Parliament's application of Regulation 1049/2001 is affected by commitments such as the one entered into by the Commission in this case, Parliament, as a political body, could intervene with the Commission and the Council with a view to ensuring that, in future, the very nature of Parliament, which is openly to deliberate on such issues, is not undermined.* *Link:* http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/decision.faces/en/50947/html.bookmark It is clear from the complaint itself and the Ombudsman's further remark that if the TTIP negotiation framework is not radically improved with regards to present, *and future*, public access to documents, there is a serious risk that the very nature of Parliament will be undermined. As I see it, there are few realistic alternatives than to make Predecisional/Deliberative Drafts available to the public between every negotiation round. <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/april/tradoc_146029.pdf> That's the bitter lesson learnt from EDRi's ACTA complaint. Best regards. //Erik ** ** On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, JOSEFSSON Erik wrote: > Dear all, > > Prof. Sean Flynn who wrote one of our two ACTA studies > <http://rfc.act-on-acta.eu/access-to-medicines> has a proposal for > Better Process in a submission to his Testimony Prepared for the USTR > Hearing on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership > <http://infojustice.org/archives/29755>: > > /*"On process -- a minimum standard should be to abide by the > openness norms of the EU Parliament's March 2010 resolution > > <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2010-0058+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN>, > calling for ACTA text to be shared with the public on an ongoing > basis."*/ > > As you know, the March 2010 resolution was a result of outstanding > preparatory work by our INTA staff and a major breakthrough for the EP > in standing up for its treaty right to be immediately and fully > informed at all stages of the procedure (218.10 TFEU). It was that > breakthrough that provided the basis for the Opinion of the European > Academics and for the continued engagement among civil society > organisations. This is what I am talking about: > > Consolidated Text > Prepared for Public Release > Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement > <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/april/tradoc_146029.pdf> > > *PUBLIC Predecisional/Deliberative Draft: April 2010* > <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/april/tradoc_146029.pdf> > > *This draft text does not identify participants' positions in > respect of square bracketed options.* > <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/april/tradoc_146029.pdf> > > > I believe this particular procedural achievement should be set as an > European Standard for how the TTIP negotiations should be conducted. > > We don't have a system of accredited corporate lobbyists that pay for > access to documents as they have in the US (they have the best > democracy money can buy). > > *It is impossible to do ANY serious parliamentary work in ITRE, AGRI, > ENVI, ECON, etc _based on leaks_.** > *** > We, and the EP, have already shown how it is not only legally > possible, but also politically necessary, to publish official > consolidated intermediary texts. > > That would improve radically the chances for the TTIP negotiations to > get anywhere without riots in the streets. > > Best regards. > > //Erik > > > -- > Erik Josefsson > Advisor on Internet Policies > Greens/EFA Group > <http://www.greens-efa.eu/36-details/josefsson-erik-138.html> > GSM: *+32484082063* > BXL: PHS 04C075 TEL: +3222832667 > SBG: WIC M03005 TEL: +33388173776 -- Erik Josefsson Advisor on Internet Policies Greens/EFA Group <http://www.greens-efa.eu/36-details/josefsson-erik-138.html> GSM: *+32484082063* BXL: PHS 04C075 TEL: +3222832667 SBG: WIC M03005 TEL: +33388173776
