RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors

on the draft Council Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors

(12221/2013 – C7‑0308/2013 – 2013/0005(NLE))

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the draft Council Decision (12221/2013),

–   having regard to the draft agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors (08178/2013),

–   having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0308/2013),

–   having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0342/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the agreement;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Russian Federation.

The proposal for an agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation seeks to improve cooperation between these two major trading partners for the purpose of monitoring trade in drug precursors.

The precursors in question are legal substances which can be used in chemical processes for the manufacture of synthetic drugs. For example, acetic acid is used in the manufacture of heroin.

They are subject to export, import and transit controls which are more or less stringent depending on the risk of them going astray. The European Commission has accordingly submitted a proposal for a regulation[1] under the ordinary legislative procedure laying down rules for the monitoring thereof, for which Mr Franck Proust has once again been designated as the European Parliament rapporteur.

Rapporteur’s position regarding the agreement

The rapporteur is particularly sensitive to the need for international measures to combat drugs abuse and for a number of reasons considers that the European Parliament should endorse the agreement.

This international agreement, signed at the EU-Russia Summit of 4 June 2013 in Yekaterinburg, is the last in a series of similar bilateral agreements concluded over a period of around 15 years by the European Union with third countries for the purpose of monitoring legal bilateral trade in products at risk of being misappropriated for illegal drugs manufacture.

It lays down the terms for cooperation between both parties in the monitoring of trade in certain chemicals and establishes a mutual administrative assistance mechanism, providing for prior notification by the exporting country, followed by a three-week period during which the recipient country may lodge a written objection to importation of the product stating its reasons.

The mutual assistance arrangements take the form of exchanges of information, some of which is confidential. In the main, the information is commercial in nature but may also include, for example, personal details regarding a company manager. The agreement covers 23 drug precursors. Under Article 9(5) of the agreement, a joint follow-up group of experts may amend the list, either on its own initiative or following a modification to the list of drug precursors contained in Tables I and II of the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

The agreement is to be concluded for a five-year period and tacitly renewed if neither party objects. A protocol regarding data processing not contained in the previous agreements is also annexed thereto. The European Data Protection Supervisor has issued an opinion containing his views regarding these data exchange arrangements.

Such an agreement forms part of a clearly defined European strategy based on a joint approach by major commercial powers, in particular those in which drugs are manufactured and consumed, with a view to containing drugs trafficking within their territory by stepping up their efforts to develop an ambitious programme for the joint surveillance of international trade in precursors from which numerous synthetic drugs can be manufactured.

The EU has accordingly concluded and signed similar agreements with the United States, China and a number of Latin American countries, the objective being to make life harder for drug dealers by monitoring more effectively the source and destination of the chemicals and medicinal products concerned without undermining legal trade therein. By concluding further bilateral agreements, the EU is compensating for the lack of sufficiently stringent international framework provisions and is taking the lead in international cooperation to combat drugs trafficking. This is a laudable strategy and the agreement therefore deserves the endorsement of the European Parliament.

Bilateral agreement between the EU and Russia regarding drug precursors

It would appear that Russia has now become a destination for drug traffickers rather than a transit or production area, resulting in an increasing west-east flow of synthetic drugs such as amphetamines between the EU and Russia. The agreement will go a long way towards stepping up cooperation between Russia and the EU to the degree necessary to combat drugs trafficking.

Concerning legal bilateral trade in the 23 drug precursors in which trafficking may occur, the current value of EU exports (of butanone[2] in particular) to Russia is EUR 4.48 million, while the value of EU acetone imports from Russia (2012) is EUR 7.54 million. Russia therefore accounts for just 4.14% of EU imports of these precursors and 1.7% of EU exports thereof. While this is undeniably a small percentage of bilateral trade between the EU and the Russian Federation, which consists mainly of Russian energy exports to the EU and exports of European manufactured goods to Russia, it is far from being negligible.

Implementation of the agreement

To work effectively, an agreement of this type requires a large degree of trust between the two parties. The Commission has established good relations with the Russian federal customs authorities regarding cooperation in the field of drugs containment. Nevertheless, criticism is frequently levelled at the Russian customs authorities for their slowness, lack of electronic resources and relatively high level of corruption.

The Commission must be extremely vigilant with regard to implementation of the agreement by Russia, all the more so given that the agreement does not contain any provisions for unilateral revocation, even in the case of serious and harmful infringement by one party of obligations relating to the protection of commercial and personal data transferred by the other. While such an infringement could be referred to the bilateral committee responsible for the implementation of the agreement, the Union would, in the absence of any provision in the agreement for unilateral redress or access to arbitration, be forced to negotiate with its Russian partner regarding countermeasures, even in the case of serious and harmful infringement. In the absence of any negotiated solution to such infringements, the Union could have recourse to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 60 of which provides for 'termination or suspension of the operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach'.

Mutual trust is all the more important when it comes to exchanging confidential corporate and personal data. As the European Data Protection Supervisor has pointed out, Russia is not considered as 'offering sufficient guarantees regarding the protection of personal data'. It has not ratified the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data or the Additional Protocol regarding supervisory authorities and transborder data flows.

The rapporteur notes that this is the first agreement of its kind to contain such a substantial data protection clause. At the same time, he notes that the opinion drawn up by the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends endorsement of the agreement and does not consider that the aforementioned fears detract from the validity thereof.

Finally, the Commission must ensure that procedures to prevent trafficking (justified objection to the import of consignments of the precursors in question) are not used improperly for protectionist purposes.

Subsequent agreements of this nature

The Commission takes the view that the agreement will not increase the risk of trade being diverted to other transit or recipient countries, given that previous agreements of this nature have not led to any increase in trade to or from any of the EU’s other trading partners. Surveillance must first of all be focused on countries at risk and it does not, on a long-term basis, seem feasible to extend this type of agreement to a large number of countries.

However, the risk of mutually agreed bilateral surveillance being circumvented must never be neglected and the effectiveness of the agreement will depend on the EU continuing its policy of concluding bilateral agreements around Russia on a regional basis.

On the one hand, conclusion of a bilateral customs agreement with Russia, which is now part of a customs union, means envisaging similar agreements in the long term with Belarus and Kazakhstan. Before such negotiations can take place with Belarus, however, the necessary political conditions must be met.

The EU could also consider the conclusion of such agreements with the Eastern Partnership[3], given that the surveillance of drugs precursors is not included on the agenda of the DCFTA[4] negotiations with Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Armenia.

It does not figure, for example, in either Chapter 5 of Title IV (DCFTA) of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, on trade facilitation, including harmonisation of customs legislation (Annex XV) or in Protocol II (annexed to the same Agreement) on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters.

The rapporteur accordingly recommends that the Commission commence bilateral negotiations with these countries once the trade provisions of the Association Agreements being negotiated or concluded with these four countries have entered into force. Priority should be given to the country or countries warranting such special surveillance in the light of their role in the drug precursor trade.

Concerning the Association Agreement with Ukraine, such a decision should be proposed as soon as possible by the Commission within the relevant organisation, i.e. the Customs Cooperation Committee set up under the DCFTA which will be responsible for the monitoring by both parties of the implementation of Chapter 5 of the DCFTA and for seeking to improve customs cooperation between the two.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the rapporteur endorses the agreement and recommends the adoption thereof. He will carefully monitor its implementation and hopes that other agreements along these lines will be concluded over the next few years.

• [1]  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 111/2005 laying down rules for the monitoring of trade between the Community and third countries in drug precursors (COM(2012)0521 final - 2012/0250 (COD)).
• [2]  A common solvent used in the plastics industry for the production of lacquers, gums, resins and household products. It has similar properties to acetone but boils at a higher temperature and has a lower evaporation rate.
• [3]  Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan
• [4]  Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area.

for the Committee on International Trade

on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors
(COM(2013)0004 – C7-0000/2013 – 2013/0005(NLE))

Rapporteur for the opinion: Zbigniew Ziobro

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Drugs are a major problem in the European Union, despite the fact that, according to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), the last five years have seen a fall in the use of certain types of drugs, especially heroin, and in some countries also cocaine. Unfortunately, this has been accompanied by increased use of marijuana and so-called synthetic drugs, including highly addictive drugs such as amphetamines and methadone. Synthetic drugs are proving to be very dangerous, owing to their popularity and the availability of ingredients, making them easy to produce.

The fight against drugs in the EU calls for a strengthening of European and international cooperation in detecting the production and preventing the distribution of banned substances. An important element in this is the issue of regulating the trade in drug precursors, and close monitoring of their entry into the Union. The EU Drug Strategy (2005-2012) provided for a reduction in the supply of drug precursors so as to restrict drug production.

Until 2012, the Russian Federation was the biggest producer of precursors used in the manufacture of drugs. In view of this, it became necessary to strengthen cooperation between the European Union and the Russian Federation in order to prevent drug precursors being diverted away from legal trade. To that end it was decided to conclude a trade agreement.

Provisions on personal data protection are an important element of the agreement. In the rapporteur's opinion, these provisions provide citizens with sufficient protection in regard to the use of their data to achieve the objectives of the agreement, while ensuring an appropriate level of monitoring of the movement of the precursors in question and impeding the activities of criminal groups in this area.

The rapporteur takes the view that the Committee on Legal Affairs should recommend to the committee responsible that it give its approval of the Council Decision on the conclusion of the agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors.

******

The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible, to propose that Parliament gives its consent.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE