type: caselaw

text:
 18.9.2017
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 C 309/10
 Hotărârea Curții (Camera a patra) din 26 iulie 2017 (cerere de decizie preliminară formulată de Korkein oikeus – Finlanda) – Hannele Hälvä, Sari Naukkarinen, Pirjo Paajanen, Satu Piik/SOS-Lapsikylä ry
 (Cauza C-175/16) (1)
 ((Trimitere preliminară - Directiva 2003/88/CE - Articolul 17 - Protecția securității și a sănătății lucrătorilor - Organizarea timpului de lucru - Indemnizații suplimentare - Asociație de protecție a copiilor - „Părinți din satul copiilor” - Absență temporară a „părinților” titulari - Lucrătoare angajate în calitate de „părinți” suplinitori - Noțiune))
 (2017/C 309/12)
 Limba de procedură: finlandeza
 Instanța de trimitere
 Korkein oikeus
 Părțile din procedura principală
 Recurente: Hannele Hälvä, Sari Naukkarinen, Pirjo Paajanen, Satu Piik
 Intimată: SOS-Lapsikylä ry
 Dispozitivul
 Articolul 17 alineatul (1) din Directiva 2003/88/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 4 noiembrie 2003 privind anumite aspecte ale organizării timpului de lucru trebuie interpretat în sensul că nu se poate aplica unei activități salariate precum cea în discuție în litigiul principal, care constă în luarea în îngrijire a unor copii în condițiile unui mediu familial, prin suplinirea persoanei însărcinate în principal cu această misiune, atunci când nu este stabilit că durata timpului de lucru, privită în integralitate, nu este măsurată sau predeterminată ori că ea poate fi determinată de însuși lucrătorul respectiv, aspect a cărui verificare este de competența instanței de trimitere.
 (1) JO C 191, 30.5.2016.


type: wikipedia

text:
Way Back Home é um filme filipino, dirigido por Jerry Lopez Sineneng. Estrelado por Kathryn Bernardo e Julia Montes, foi produzido e distribuído pela Star Cinema.
 Elenco
 Kathryn Bernardo como Joanna Santiago/Ana Bartolome
 Julia Montes como Jessica" Jessie" Lorraine S. Santiago
 Enrique Gil como Michael Estacio
 Sam Concepcion como AJ Delgado
 Agot Isidro como Amelia "Amy" Santiago
 Tonton Gutierrez como Ariel Santiago
 Lotlot De Leon como Lerma Bartolome
 Clarence Delgado como Buboy Bartolome
 Bella Flores como Lola Nita
 Ahron Villena como Jeffrey Santiago
 Jairus Aquino como Junior Bartolome
 Josh Ivan Morales como Uncle Dado
 Gilleth Sandico como Tida (tia)
 Mickey Ferriols como Girly
 Kyle Danielle Ocampo como Jessica Santiago (jovem)
 Veyda Inoval como Pochay
 Brenna Penaflor como Joanna Santiago (jovem)
 Veronica Louise Bernardo como Ana Bartolome (jovem)
 Cecil Paz como Yaya Minda
 Aerol Hernandez como ???
 Ligações externas
 Filmes das Filipinas de 2011
 Filmes em língua filipina
 Filmes da Star Cinema


jurisdiction: US

text:
 765 A.2d 653 (2001)
 362 Md. 483
 ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND
 v.
 Mark M. TOMAINO.
 Misc. Docket AG No. 7, Sept. Term, 1999.
 Court of Appeals of Maryland.
 January 17, 2001.
 *654 Melvin Hirshman, Bar Counsel and John C. Broderick, Asst. Bar Counsel for the Atty. Grievance Com'n of MD, for petitioner.
 Gerard P. Martin, Baltimore, for respondent.
 Argued before BELL, C.J., and ELDRIDGE, RODOWSKY[*], RAKER, WILNER, CATHELL and HARRELL, JJ.
 RODOWSKY, Judge.
 The respondent, Mark M. Tomaino (Tomaino), has been found to have violated Rule 8.4(c) of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC) by engaging "in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." He has also been found to have violated a medley of rules and statutes concerned with protecting trust funds. Specifically these are MRPC 1.15, dealing with the safekeeping of clients' property, and Maryland Code (1989, 2000 Repl.Vol.), § 10-306 of the Business Occupations and Professions Article (BOP) ("A lawyer may not use trust money for any purpose other than the purpose for which the trust money is entrusted to the lawyer."). MRPC 1.15 incorporates the requirements for maintaining trust accounts and the prohibitions against commingling found in Chapter 600, "Attorney Trust Accounts," of Title 16 of the Maryland Rules of Procedure. Further, Tomaino has been found to have engaged in a conflict of interests which resulted in very substantial liability against the law firm which employed Tomaino as an associate attorney. There are no exceptions of any consequence. We shall disbar.
 With approximately five years of experience as an associate in the corporate departments of two other large Baltimore law firms, Tomaino was hired as a lateral with portables by Weinberg & Green (W & G) in August 1990. His arrangement was a salary plus fifteen percent of the fees collected for services by W & G for clients produced by Tomaino. He left W & G in late 1991 to work in the legal department of Bausch & Lomb in Rochester, New York. The professional carnage that Tomaino left behind in Baltimore began to be uncovered when W & G was sued in 1993 as an outgrowth of the transaction involving the conflict of interests violation (hereinafter, the GeneSys transaction). W & G's preparation of discovery responses in that litigation revealed, or lead to the revelation of, improprieties in Tomaino's handling of funds in four other transactions unrelated to GeneSys.
 The GeneSys litigation involved at least four proceedings in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, namely, a temporary restraining order hearing before Judge Thomas A. Bollinger, an interlocutory injunction hearing before Judge Dana M. Levitz, a trial on certain issues before Judge Joseph F. Murphy, Jr., and a jury trial in a protracted case before Judge Lawrence R. Daniels that concluded about December 1996. Although Bar Counsel had been aware of this litigation, Bar Counsel understandably did not undertake a full investigation until those proceedings had concluded.
 When Bar Counsel completed his investigation, Tomaino waived hearing before an Inquiry Panel. We referred the petition for disciplinary action to Judge Edward *655 J. Angeletti of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City for hearing and findings of fact. The only witnesses at this hearing were the managing partner of W & G, an investigator for Bar Counsel, and respondent. Judge Angeletti found violations in five transactions which we shall call IRM-Insurance Funds, IRM-Signet Funds, Harrogate, GeneSys, and National Head & Neck.
 Tomaino admitted most of the material facts at the hearing before Judge Angeletti. In this Court Tomaino acknowledged that "the facts that make up this conduct by and large have not been questioned below." In our description of the transactions, set forth below, we have attempted to give effect to many of Tomaino's exceptions. These, however, relate to matters of detail and do not challenge matters of substance.[1] Tomaino acknowledges that the basic facts in the GeneSys transaction support the finding of a MRPC 8.4(c) violation. With respect to the other four transactions, Judge Angeletti found that "[t]hese other acts of misconduct constitute misappropriation of funds and misuse of trust money entrusted to [Tomaino]." Judge Angeletti further said that "[t]hese violations were knowing and willful on the part of [Tomaino] and further deceitful in his not disclosing receipt of these funds to the appropriate parties...."
 Tomaino's review of the transactions, in connection with his discussion of an appropriate sanction, presents as facts his characterization of the transactions. We shall treat Tomaino's version of the facts as presenting exceptions. Our presentation of Tomaino's position with respect to sanctions is deferred to the section of this opinion so headed.
 IRM-Insurance Funds
 One of the clients that Tomaino brought to W & G was Institute of Resource Management, Inc. (IRM). IRM was a beneficiary of a life insurance policy on one of its employees. When that employee died in October 1990 there were competing claims to the proceeds. IRM received $100,000 of the proceeds which Tomaino placed in his personal account at Legg Mason, a stock brokerage and mutual funds firm. Tomaino testified that he did this at the instruction of the then owner of IRM, Jerry W. Donahoe (Donahoe), who said he did not want the money tied up in the W & G trust account because he intended to wire the money. The money was wired in two $50,000 transmissions to a law firm in New Orleans which later transferred $50,000 back to Tomaino's personal account. Tomaino testified that the $50,000 transferred to his personal account was supposed to have been directed to W & G. Nevertheless Tomaino transferred only $40,000 to W & G and retained $10,000 for himself. He testified that Donahoe told him to keep the $10,000 out of appreciation for Tomaino's having been with Donahoe "`through thick and thin.'" Tomaino admitted that he made a "very, very significant, to put it mildly, mistake."
 In addition to his general finding of misappropriation, Judge Angeletti specifically stated that this conduct "constituted a misappropriation of funds which [Tomaino], impliedly, held as a fiduciary to his employer," W & G. In his exceptions Tomaino admits that "retention of the $10,000 was improper," but he argues that, "rather than a misappropriation from [W & G] who was paid in full, the funds should have gone to the client." Somewhat contradictorily, in his presentation of the facts, Tomaino submits that his testimony that the client consented is unrebutted and implicitly argues that there was no misappropriation.
 Clearly, Tomaino violated the trust account requirements. The funds were not his. The funds were held for Donahoe, and it is immaterial whether they were a *656 retainer for future professional services by W & G or were to be applied by Donahoe for some other legitimate purpose. In either event, the funds should have been placed in the W & G Clients' Fund Account or returned to the client. When Tomaino placed the funds in his personal account, he ran the risk that the trier of fact would reject his testimony concerning client consent. Judge Angeletti's finding that there was a knowing, willful, and deceitful misappropriation of funds is a rejection of Tomaino's attempted justification.
 At the conclusion of his report to us, Judge Angeletti states that "the Donahoe and Wortley gifts, all constitute violation of" BOP § 10-306. We read this reference to "gifts" as utilizing Tomaino's characterization to identify the funds, and not as a finding of fact. This is clear from the reference to BOP § 10-306 by which Judge Angeletti concludes that, contrary to that prohibition, Tomaino did "use trust money for [a] purpose other than the purpose for which the trust money [was] entrusted to the lawyer."
 IRM-Signet Funds
 IRM became hard pressed for cash while owned by Donahoe, largely because it was in default on a secured loan to MNC Credit Corp. Donahoe was willing to make an assignment in lieu of foreclosure if he could arrange for a sale of IRM by MNC Credit Corp. to a buyer under terms that would protect Donahoe from personal liability. He turned to Joseph C. Wortley, Jr. (Wortley) of Liberty Corner, New Jersey. In connection with Wortley's effort to buy IRM, an escrow account, held by Tomaino and a partner at Piper & Marbury, was established at a financial institution. W & G's Ethics and Conflicts Committee approved having the escrow held outside of the W & G Clients' Fund Account because another law firm was also serving as escrow agent. Wortley was ultimately able to purchase IRM from MNC Credit Corp. under circumstances whereby $100,000 from the joint agents' escrow fund was released. The entity in which Wortley took the assets of IRM was Liberty Engineering, Inc., a corporation formed for Wortley by Tomaino. The $100,000 from the escrow fund thereby became an asset of Liberty Engineering. In late November 1990 these funds were wired to W & G which disbursed $25,000 each to Donahoe and Wortley. The balance of $50,000 was transferred by W & G to a new escrow account at Signet Bank. That account was titled, "Marc M. Tomaino, IRM Escrow Account." In February 1991 Tomaino closed the account at Signet and transferred the funds, then totaling $50,641.18 to his personal account at Legg Mason. In March Tomaino caused $35,641.18 to be disbursed from that account on the check of Legg Mason to W & G where it was credited in the Clients' Fund Account as a retainer from Liberty Engineering. Of the $15,000 balance, $5,000 was disbursed by Legg Mason in June 1991 for purposes that do not appear in the record. The remaining $10,000 was disbursed by Legg Mason in December 1991, after Tomaino had moved to Rochester, where it apparently was deposited in Tomaino's account at Chase Bank in Rochester.
 Tomaino testified that Wortley told him not to put the $50,000 into the W & G trust account and told him that he could give the $15,000 balance of that $50,000 to his mother-in-law as far as Wortley was concerned. In his exceptions Tomaino points out that Wortley made no claim to the funds when notified of their existence by Tomaino's present counsel.
 This is one of the group of transactions in which Judge Angeletti found a misappropriation by Tomaino. As explained in the IRM-Insurance Funds transaction, Judge Angeletti's finding of violation of MRPC 1.15 and of BOP § 10-306 is supported by the record.
 Harrogate
 IRM owned computer equipment, the purchase of which had been financed by *657 Harrogate Corporation (Harrogate). IRM leased the equipment back to Harrogate which, in turn, subleased the equipment to the Ministry of Defense of the Netherlands. When IRM fell on hard times, it agreed that Harrogate should resell the equipment. The latter did so, producing net proceeds on the resale of $58,405. In April 1991 Tomaino deposited these funds in an investment account at PaineWebber in his own name and under his own social security number. The funds remained in that account after Tomaino moved to Rochester. By January 1992 the account had grown to $60,600. In that month Tomaino withdrew accumulated earnings of $2,257.38. In March 1992 he withdrew $8,780.12, leaving a balance of $50,165.29, well below the original $58,405. Thereafter, and no later than January 1993, he transferred the funds, then $51,807.58, to another account held in his own name at Merrill Lynch where it was invested in stocks. The funds remained in Tomaino's account until April 1995 when they totaled $65,494 and were delivered to Tomaino's present attorney who gave notice to potential claimants. Harrogate and MNC Credit Corp. claimed the funds based on respective security interests in the equipment. The funds were ultimately divided seventy-two percent to Harrogate and twenty-eight percent to MNC Credit Corp.
 Tomaino testified that the principal of Harrogate, James Carrier (Carrier), asked Tomaino to hold the funds in Tomaino's name. Carrier was said to be concerned over the effect of a European insolvency on Harrogate's claim. Tomaino denied that he assisted Carrier in hiding assets from creditors. Tomaino said that Carrier knew that the funds were invested in stocks and that Carrier had never made a demand for the money from April 1991 when the account was initially opened until April 1995 when the account was closed.
 Judge Angeletti found Tomaino had violated MRPC 1.15 and BOP § 10-306 by the misappropriation of trust money of Harrogate, and Judge Angeletti specifically found that Tomaino had "kept the interest." For the reasons stated as to the IRM-Insurance Funds transaction, these findings are supported by the record.
 GeneSys
 Wortley, the purchaser of IRM, came to play a prominent role in the conflicts violation involved in the GeneSys transaction. Essentially the conflict was generated by a bearer stock option, the background for which is somewhat complex.
 John J. Meindl, Jr. (Meindl), a client of Tomaino, had owned approximately ninety-five percent of the outstanding capital stock of GeneSys Data Technologies, Inc. (GeneSys), a Maryland corporation. In November 1988 Meindl sold this stock to Vest, Inc., a Delaware corporation, that was part of a Swiss conglomerate, Omni Finance (Omni). Meindl took a security interest in the stock that he had sold, in order to secure the performance of certain promises made by Vest. After the sale Meindl continued as chief executive officer of GeneSys. During the period of Vest's ownership of GeneSys, the latter acquired the stock of B & B Record Center, Inc. (B & B), one of the owners of which was Charles J. Bauer, Jr. (Bauer). He became the chief operating officer of GeneSys. Payment of part of the purchase price due from Vest for Bauer's stock in B & B had been deferred, and Bauer held a security interest in the B & B stock to secure that promise to pay. Also during this period Marc Mathys (Mathys) became chief financial officer of GeneSys. Mathys was an attorney who had been employed in the Omni conglomerate and who knew some of the officers of Omni in Switzerland.
 By the fall of 1990 Meindl wanted to reacquire "his" company and had formed the intent, known to Tomaino, to bring Bauer and Mathys into the ownership of GeneSys if Meindl were successful in reacquiring it. Meindl took the position that Vest owed him $730,500 in "deferred purchase price," under a formula in the GeneSys *658 incentive bonus plan. Vest took the position that it owed nothing because GeneSys had no profits.
 Tomaino then conceived, or participated in conceiving, a strategy under which Meindl would foreclose on the GeneSys stock and sell the stock at private sale to Wortley, thereby hoping to establish the credit to vest on Meindl's claim against Vest. Wortley would then give Meindl an option to reacquire the stock.
 Tomaino anticipated objection from Vest on the ground that the private sale to Wortley did not satisfy the requirement of § 9-504 of the Uniform Commercial Code that the sale be commercially reasonable. In an attempt to meet that objection Tomaino provided as the purchase price the book value of GeneSys, payable by the assumption by Wortley of the obligations of Vest to Meindl and to Bauer. To the extent that the book value of GeneSys exceeded the obligations of Vest to Meindl and Bauer, Wortley would cause GeneSys to issue preferred stock which Meindl would hold as trustee for Vest.
 Meindl's right to repurchase the stock of GeneSys from Wortley was to be evidenced by a bearer stock option agreement at an option price of $100,000. A bearer form of option was elected in order to conceal from Omni/Vest that Meindl was the optionee, inasmuch as Meindl hoped to negotiate the acceptance by those parties of the preferred stock proposal and thereby avoid any challenge to the private sale. If Meindl's negotiations with Vest were successful, Meindl would exercise the option and Wortley would be paid $100,000.
 Vest attempted to block the foreclosure by a temporary restraining order which was granted on March 21, 1991, by Judge Bollinger on condition that Vest post a $100,000 bond. It was unable to do so, itself having fallen on hard times financially.[2] Meindl proceeded to foreclose and, on March 23, 1991, Wortley, as nominee for Thornbush Investment Limited (Thornbush), purchased at a private sale pursuant to a "Foreclosure Sale Agreement" prepared by Tomaino. On April 1, 1991, Thornbush executed the Bearer Stock Option Agreement prepared by Tomaino.
 From April through July 1991 Tomaino spent almost all of his working hours on GeneSys matters. Unknown to him, but generally consistent with Tomaino's knowledge of the plan for GeneSys, Meindl, Bauer, and Mathys on May 21, 1991, had signed an agreement pooling all of their interests in GeneSys, B & B, and certain other corporations. Tomaino now acknowledges that Mathys, individually, became his client during this period. In June 1991 there was a falling out between Meindl, Mathys, and Wortley which left Meindl and Wortley aligned against Mathys, with both interests seeking control of GeneSys. Tomaino recognizes that, at that time, he should have withdrawn from representation of any of the parties, but he sided with Meindl.
 Events began to unfold rapidly, but not necessarily in the order in which we present them. Mathys, using his contacts in Switzerland and for a nominal consideration, had acquired the assets of the Dutch corporation which was the immediate parent of Vest, and Mathys had placed those assets in a corporation chartered by him in the Cayman Islands. Thus, if the foreclosure sale of the GeneSys stock could be set aside, Mathys would indirectly own GeneSys through his indirect ownership of Vest. Tomaino also testified, on information received from Meindl, that Mathys had obtained the bearer stock option from Meindl's possession and without Meindl's consent. Wortley and Meindl agreed that they no longer wanted Mathys in GeneSys.
 Tomaino, to convince Mathys that the bearer option was valueless, conceived a ploy whereby Thornbush sent Meindl a *659 letter terminating the option agreement. Mathys, however, was unimpressed when Meindl showed him the letter of purported termination. Mathys told Meindl to have Tomaino respond. Caught in his own web, Tomaino, on behalf of Meindl, then wrote to Thornbush denying that Thornbush was legally entitled to do that which he knew Thornbush did not intend to do. Tomaino argued in this reply that the stock options were part of the consideration for the Foreclosure Sale Agreement. At the same time, Tomaino prepared a letter for Thornbush to copy on its stationery in which Thornbush countered by saying that the consideration was limited to that stated in the Foreclosure Sale Agreement, so that there was no consideration for the bearer option. It is not disputed that all of this was done for the purpose of deceiving, at least, Mathys.
 On July 24 Wortley, through Thornbush, called a special meeting of stockholders of GeneSys at which all then serving directors, other than Meindl, were removed, and Wortley and one of his colleagues at Thornbush were elected as the other directors. The new directors also removed Mathys as chief financial officer of GeneSys.
 Mathys responded by suing Wortley, Thornbush, GeneSys, and Meindl in an action in which Judge Levitz issued a preliminary injunction. Among other things, the injunction suspended the effect of the directors and shareholders meetings of July 24, designated Mathys a member of the board of GeneSys, ordered the GeneSys stock placed in escrow with the circuit court, and froze any disposition of GeneSys assets, other than in the ordinary course of business.
 Tomaino testified at the hearing before Judge Levitz on behalf of the defendants. Wortley's position in that hearing was that the bearer option had been validly terminated. Tomaino acknowledged before Judge Angeletti that "I gave testimony to that effect," i.e., that the option had been validly terminated. At that hearing exhibits were introduced including the correspondence that constituted the charade intended to deceive Mathys. Tomaino acknowledged before Judge Angeletti that he did nothing to disabuse Judge Levitz of the impression that the letters were genuine communications, intended to convey what the words said. Tomaino's justification for his silence was that he was never directly asked if the correspondence was intended to effect a termination.
 Tomaino also acknowledged before Judge Angeletti that, when testifying before Judge Levitz, he had denied "drafting" the bearer option, but that, before Judge Daniels, he had acknowledged that he "was responsible for it." The following exchange then took place between Judge Angeletti and Tomaino.
 "[TOMAINO]: And I believe in front of Judge Daniels, I explained the fact that much to my embarrassment and very much consistent with who I was in 1991 versus who I was in 1996 is that I was attempting to be cute. Did I draft it? Did I word process it. Was this drafted. It was init was not concise and accurate and it was attempting to play the what [does `is'] mean game and that was unfortunate.
 ....
 "THE COURT: A deliberate falsehood under oath?
 "[TOMAINO]: It wasn't intended to be a falsehood.
 "THE COURT: It was a deliberate falsehood under oath, wasn't it, Mr. Tomaino?
 "[TOMAINO]: No, Your Honor, it was not intended.
 "THE COURT: Well, then what would you characterize being cute under oath meaning?
 "[TOMAINO]: It meant
 "THE COURT: When you didn't tell the truth, sir?
 *660 "[TOMAINO]: The word drafting, I didn't conceive of the Bearer Option. I just word processed it. It was conceived initially by Marc Mathys.
 "THE COURT: So you want the Court to find that you have changed, even though you're still making excuses for what you're saying?
 "[TOMAINO]: I'm not making any excuses. I admitted that was wrong. The only thing I didn't admit to was what called for a conclusion as to whether it was perjurious or not and it wasn't false.
 "THE COURT: I didn't mention that word. I simply asked you
 "[TOMAINO]: It was a falsehood yes, Your Honor.
 "THE COURT: And it was a falsehood under oath, wasn't it?
 "[TOMAINO]: Yes, it was.
 "THE COURT: Which means it's a lie under oath?
 "[TOMAINO]: At the time I didn't appreciate it as a lie under oath.
 "THE COURT: Just like you didn't appreciate putting this money in all of your personal accounts when you were given it, is that what you're telling me?
 "[TOMAINO]: The same character flaw that led to that led to the other things, yes."
 Tomaino acknowledges that this record of the GeneSys transaction supports the MRPC 1.15 and 8.4(c) violations.
 The sequel to the GeneSys story is only sketchily presented in the record before us. In June 1992 Judge Joseph Murphy entered a judgment rescinding the foreclosure transaction, Foreclosure Sale Agreement, and the Bearer Stock Option Agreement. He found that Vest was in default as of March 15, 1991, on its stock purchase agreement with Meindl, and Judge Murphy restored Meindl to any rights that he had as of that date to the GeneSys stock as a secured creditor. That judgment also determined that the Combination Agreement between Meindl, Mathys, and Bauer was valid and enforceable and that any damage claims be resolved at a jury trial.
 The jury trial was held before Judge Daniels in 1996 and resulted in a verdict in favor of GeneSys against W & G and Tomaino of $24 million as damages for the loss of the fair market value of GeneSys. On a variety of theories, including a finding on clear and convincing evidence of fraud by Tomaino and a finding of negligent supervision by W & G, Meindl was awarded $400,500, GeneSys an additional $343,950, Mathys $160,000, and Vest $90,600. We were advised at oral argument that, at that point, the litigation was settled.
 National Head & Neck
 National Head & Neck (NHN), a partnership, was another of Tomaino's clients. His friend, Dennis Buchman (Buchman), was one of the partners. A dispute arose between the partners which was ultimately settled in early 1991. Part of the settlement agreement was that Buchman would pay up to $10,000 of outstanding legal bills from W & G for services rendered to NHN in connection with the dispute. In February Buchman issued his check for $5,000 payable to the order of "Mark Tomaino, Esq. (for Nat'l Head, Neck & Lowell Weiner, DDS)." Tomaino endorsed this check over to Legg Mason for credit to his personal account. In March Buchman issued a second check in the amount of $5,000 payable to the order of "Mark Tomaino, Esq. (National Head/Neck)." Tomaino either cashed this check or deposited it to his personal account. Judge Angeletti found that there were no outstanding bills from W & G to NHN.
 Tomaino testified that he intended to determine the fees owed by NHN to W & G at the end of March and that he failed to do so, characterizing his failure as gross negligence. Judge Angeletti's finding of violation of BOP § 10-306 is supported, for the same reasons previously assigned.
 *661 The NHN transaction is distinguishable from the other violations in one respect. W & G did not discover this violation as part of its investigation prompted by the GeneSys suit. Tomaino disclosed it in connection with his responses to the investigation.
 Conclusion
 Tomaino excepts to Judge Angeletti's conclusion in his report to us in which he views the violations collectively, and not individually. Judge Angeletti said:
 "[Tomaino] engaged in deceitful conduct in those letters calculated to mislead Mathys and deprive him of the bearer stock option. He was less than candid in testimony before Judge Levitz in 1991.... He has demonstrated an alarming propensity for deceit and dishonesty that infests a large part of his dealings spanning a short period of time in 1991 and into 1996. He never disclosed his financial misdealings until discovered by opposing counsel. Only then was [W & G] able to investigate and discover the full extent of [Tomaino's] misdeeds. It is this pervasive dishonesty which inevitably leads this Court to conclude [Tomaino] has violated Rules 8.4(b) and (c) as charged."
 We have set forth the record in some detail above. It fully supports Judge Angeletti's conclusion of ultimate fact.
 Sanction
 Tomaino's principal argument in mitigation of his misconduct is that he is now a different person, in the psychological or personality sense, from the young attorney who committed the above-described violations. Today he sees that young attorney of 1990-91 as having been driven by an excessive ambition to succeed in private practice. Tomaino points to his present environment as "in house" counsel in the legal department of a major corporation where he has earned the respect of his professional peers. In addition, he has taken and passed the bar examinations in New York and California where he disclosed the pending disciplinary proceedings in Maryland. His hope for admission to the bars of those states will be affected by the sanction in the instant matter. Further, Tomaino notes that the initial notice letter from Bar Counsel was dated in October 1992. While disclaiming that laches is a defense in a bar disciplinary proceeding, he urges that it be given great weight as a mitigating factor because of his having maintained professional standards since his departure from W & G.
 This Court has said on numerous occasions, and recently in Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Sheridan, 357 Md. 1, 741 A.2d 1143 (1999), that "`[m]isappropriation of funds by an attorney is an act infested with deceit and dishonesty and ordinarily will result in disbarment in the absence of compelling extenuating circumstances justifying a lesser sanction.'" Id. at 27, 741 A.2d at 1157 (quoting Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. White, 328 Md. 412, 417, 614 A.2d 955, 958 (1992)). See also Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Sabghir, 350 Md. 67, 84, 710 A.2d 926, 934 (1998); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Hollis, 347 Md. 547, 560, 702 A.2d 223, 230 (1997); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Kenney, 339 Md. 578, 587, 664 A.2d 854, 858 (1995); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Williams, 335 Md. 458, 474, 644 A.2d 490, 497 (1994); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Bakas, 323 Md. 395, 403, 593 A.2d 1087, 1091 (1991); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Ezrin, 312 Md. 603, 608-09, 541 A.2d 966, 969 (1988).
 In Sheridan, supra, the attorney who had misappropriated client funds was indefinitely suspended with the right to apply for reinstatement no earlier than one year thereafter. This was because the state of mind of the attorney at the time of the violation "[was] important in the context of mitigation." 357 Md. at 29, 741 A.2d at 1158. In that case the circuit judge, acting as a master for this Court, found as a fact that Sheridan's actions were not intentionally fraudulent, an assessment that we were "constrained to *662 accept." Id. In the instant matter Judge Angeletti has found that Tomaino's violations were knowing, willful, and deceitful and evidenced "pervasive dishonesty."
 In the NHN transaction involved in this proceeding Tomaino does not even contend that the client in any way consented to Tomaino's taking the client's $10,000. In Williams, 335 Md. 458, 644 A.2d 490, we said:
 "Although mindful that Respondent has been adjudged guilty of incompetence, neglect, misrepresentation, failure to communicate with his client and commingling of funds, we emphasize the sanction that will be imposed for the misappropriation of client funds, as this is the most egregious of his violations."
 Id. at 474, 644 A.2d at 497. We disbarred Williams. His attorney's escrow account, by some unspecified amount, had dipped below a required balance of $4,996.40. Id. at 470, 644 A.2d at 495.
 In Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Harper, 300 Md. 193, 477 A.2d 756 (1984), the attorney misappropriated $2,815.50 from escrow. Although there were other violations, we concurred in Bar Counsel's recommendation of disbarment "in view of the misappropriation of funds from the firm's escrow account." Id. at 199, 477 A.2d at 758. This was because, "[t]he Respondent has failed to set forth any mitigating or extenuating circumstances and where, as here, the misconduct involves misappropriation of funds disbarment follows as a matter of course." Id. None of the mitigating factors urged by Tomaino constitutes an extenuating mitigating circumstance at the time of the violation.
 There have been cases in which this Court has "given a less severe sanction to attorneys found guilty of commingling or misappropriating client funds where there has been a finding that alcoholism was the cause of the attorney's misconduct." Kenney, 339 Md. at 589, 664 A.2d at 859 (citing, inter alia, Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Miller, 301 Md. 592, 483 A.2d 1281 (1984); Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Willemain, 297 Md. 386, 466 A.2d 1271 (1983)). Although we followed precedent and ordered an indefinite suspension of Kenney, we issued the following
 "caution [to] members of the bar that in the future, we believe that, absent truly compelling circumstances, alcoholism should not provide mitigation where an attorney has been found to have committed a violation which would ordinarily warrant disbarment."
 Kenney, 339 Md. at 591, 664 A.2d at 860. Unlike alcoholism at the time of the violations, none of the mitigating factors urged by Tomaino was a cause of the misconduct. Tomaino's argument based on reformation of his character is more appropriate for consideration on an application for reinstatement some time in the future.
 For the above-stated reasons Mark M. Tomaino will be disbarred.
 IT IS SO ORDERED; RESPONDENT SHALL PAY ALL COSTS AS TAXED BY THE CLERK OF THIS COURT INCLUDING COSTS OF ALL TRANSCRIPTS, PURSUANT TO MARYLAND RULE 16-715(c), FOR WHICH SUM JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF THE ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND AGAINST MARK M. TOMAINO.
 NOTES
 [*] Rodowsky, J., now retired, participated in the hearing and conference of this case while an active member of this Court; after being recalled pursuant to the Constitution, Article IV, Section 3A, he also participated in the decision and adoption of this opinion.
 [1] Judge Angeletti found that Tomaino "was less than candid in testimony before Judge Levitz in 1991 and Judge Daniels in 1996." The parties agree that this finding should be limited to the testimony before Judge Levitz.
 [2] Tomaino testified that the principal of Omni in Switzerland had absconded with many millions of dollars of funds of the conglomerate.


type: legislation

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 |
 52013PC0747
 Návrh PROVÁDĚCÍ ROZHODNUTÍ RADY, kterým se mění prováděcí rozhodnutí 2011/344/EU o poskytnutí finanční pomoci Unie Portugalsku /* COM/2013/0747 final - 2013/0362 (NLE) */
 DŮVODOVÁ ZPRÁVA
 Dne 17.
 května 2011 poskytla Rada Portugalsku na jeho žádost finanční pomoc
 (prováděcí rozhodnutí Rady 2011/344/EU) na podporu programu rozsáhlých
 hospodářských reforem s cílem obnovit důvěru, umožnit
 návrat ekonomiky k udržitelnému růstu a zachovat finanční stabilitu v
 Portugalsku, eurozóně i celé EU.
 V souladu s čl. 3 odst. 10
 rozhodnutí 2011/344/EU provedla Komise společně s Mezinárodním
 měnovým fondem a ve spolupráci s Evropskou centrální bankou
 (ECB) osmý a devátý přezkum za účelem posouzení pokroku, jehož bylo
 dosaženo při provádění dohodnutých opatření, jakož i jejich
 účinnosti a hospodářského a sociálního dopadu.
 S ohledem na nejnovější ekonomický,
 fiskální a finanční vývoj a opatření politik je Komise toho
 názoru, že k zajištění cílů programu jsou nezbytné některé
 změny podmínek hospodářské politiky pro poskytování pomoci, jak je
 uvedeno v bodech odůvodnění navrhovaných změn
 prováděcího rozhodnutí Rady.
 2013/0362 (NLE)
 Návrh
 PROVÁDĚCÍ ROZHODNUTÍ RADY,
 kterým se mění prováděcí rozhodnutí
 2011/344/EU o poskytnutí finanční pomoci Unie Portugalsku
 RADA EVROPSKÉ UNIE,
 s ohledem na Smlouvu o fungování Evropské
 unie,
 s ohledem na nařízení Rady (EU) č.
 407/2010 ze dne 11. května 2010 o zavedení evropského mechanismu
 finanční stabilizace[1],
 a zejména na čl. 3 odst. 2 uvedeného nařízení,
 s ohledem na návrh Evropské komise,
 vzhledem k těmto důvodům:
 (1) V souladu s čl. 3
 odst. 10 prováděcího rozhodnutí Rady 2011/344/EU provedla Komise
 společně s Mezinárodním měnovým fondem (MMF) a ve
 spolupráci s Evropskou centrální bankou (ECB) v době od 16.
 září do 3. října 2013 kombinovaný osmý a devátý přezkum pokroku,
 jehož bylo dosaženo příslušnými orgány při provádění dohodnutých
 opatření.
 (2) Čtvrtletní růst
 reálného HDP dosahoval ve druhém čtvrtletí tohoto roku opět kladných
 hodnot a rovněž z krátkodobých ukazatelů lze usuzovat, že recese
 postupně odeznívá. Očekává se, že reálný HDP se letos sníží o
 1,8 % a v letech 2014 a 2015 vzroste o 0,8 %, resp.
 o 1,5 %. Rovněž se očekává, že napětí na trhu
 práce se poněkud zmírní. Nicméně míra nezaměstnanosti dosáhne
 příští rok podle očekávání vrcholu (17,7 %) a poté začne
 postupně klesat. Nejistoty spojené s makroekonomickým výhledem jsou
 vysoké, neboť udržitelnost předpokládané hospodářské obnovy
 v letech 2014 a 2015 závisí na kladném vývoji obchodu
 a finančního trhu, které jsou i nadále křehké.
 (3) Ve srovnání se stejným
 obdobím předchozího roku se schodek veřejných financí do srpna 2013
 snížil o 0,6 procentního bodu HDP (bez započítání mimořádných
 faktorů). K čerpání rozpočtu přispívají solidní daňové
 příjmy a striktní čerpání většiny výdajových položek. V rámci
 daňové prognózy sedmého přezkumu však byly zjištěny určité
 odchylky. K nim patří nedostatky týkající se změn plánování
 finančních prostředků EU a odložení prodeje koncese na
 provozování přístavů (jednorázová opatření), jakož i další
 faktory, například oproti očekávání vyšší příspěvky
 do rozpočtu EU, nedostatečný objem některých nedaňových
 příjmů, převod dividend plynoucích z podílu Řecka na
 investičním portfoliu Banco de Portugal do Řecka, oproti
 očekávání nižší sociální příspěvky do systému důchodového
 zabezpečení státních zaměstnanců a překročení mzdových
 nákladů a mezispotřeby. V důsledku čistého vlivu
 odchylek se schodek v roce 2013 po využití prozatímních rozpočtových
 prostředků (0,3 % HDP) podle odhadu zvýší o 0,5 % HDP.
 Vedle toho se rozpočtový schodek zvýšil i v důsledku kapitálové
 injekce do subjektu BANIF ve výši 0,4 % HDP, i když tento
 krok se pro účely programu nezohledňuje.
 (4) Vláda přijímá nápravné
 opatření, jehož cílem je zajistit dosažení schodku stanoveného v programu
 ve výši 5,5 % HDP, především omezením dostupných prostředků pro
 investice a přísnější kontrolou mezispotřeby resortních
 ministerstev (0,1 % HDP). Kromě toho vláda oznámila jednorázový režim
 vymáhání pohledávek v oblasti daňových odvodů a
 příspěvků na sociální zabezpečení, který by měl podle
 očekávání přinést příjmy ve výši zhruba 0,4 % HDP,
 a společně s ním jsou rovněž zpřísněny postihy za
 trestné činy neplacení daní.
 (5) Z aktualizovaných
 daňových prognóz na rok 2013 je patrné fiskální úsilí ve výši
 0,5 % HDP – měřeno zlepšením strukturálního salda – což je ve
 srovnání se sedmým přezkumem (0,6 % HDP) o něco méně.
 Předpokládané horší výsledky lze zdůvodnit zejména zpožděními
 v provádění původně plánovaného konsolidačního
 balíčku a jeho částečné náhrady v podobě jednorázových
 opatření, jakož i neočekávanými tlaky na rozpočtové rezervy.
 Zpoždění v provádění lze přičíst několika
 překážkám, jako například politické krizi v červnu a následné
 reorganizaci vlády, nesnadné reakci na stanovisko ústavního soudu z 29. srpna,
 podle nějž jsou některá ustanovení navrhovaného zákona o novém
 rekvalifikačním systému v rozporu s ústavou, a technickým obtížím při
 provádění některých opatření v návaznosti na rozhodnutí
 ústavního soudu z 5. dubna, zejména nově upravených
 příspěvků na sociální zabezpečení, které je třeba od
 určité minimální hranice hradit z dávek na nezaměstnanost a dávek
 v nemoci.
 (6) Vláda znovu potvrdila
 svůj závazek dosáhnout v roce 2014 cílového schodku ve výši 4 % HDP.
 V této souvislosti přijala vláda konsolidační opatření
 ve výši přibližně 2,3 % HDP, která mimo jiné
 částečně vyrovnají odchylky za rok 2013, jež budou
 převedeny do roku 2014. Konsolidační opatření jsou
 do značné míry zahrnuta do předlohy zákona
 o rozpočtu, zatímco některá opatření jsou prováděna
 prostřednictvím zvláštních právních předpisů. Opatření jsou
 převážně trvalé povahy a spočívají zejména v úsporách
 výdajů. Kumulativní hodnota souboru konsolidačních opatření
 potřebných pro dosažení předpokládané daňové úpravy se v
 souvislosti se sedmým přezkumem nezměnila a obnáší zhruba 4,7
 miliardy EUR ve formě trvalých úsporných opatření za období 2013–2014
 či 2,8 % HDP. Nicméně část konsolidačního úsilí je
 nyní převedena do roku 2014 v důsledku výše uvedených zpoždění
 při provádění v roce 2013.
 (7) Většina
 konsolidačních prostředků (zhruba 1,8 % HDP) by v roce 2014
 měla pocházet z přehledu veřejných výdajů, který byl
 vypracován v průběhu loňského roku s cílem zvýšit rovnost
 a účinnost při zajišťování sociálních transferů
 a veřejných služeb. Opatření přijatá na základě
 přehledu veřejných výdajů budou mít hlavní dopad ve třech
 směrech: 1) omezení mzdových nákladů ve veřejném sektoru, a to
 snížením početních stavů jeho pracovníků
 a současně změnou jeho skladby ve prospěch
 zaměstnanců s vyšší kvalifikací, sjednocením pravidel práce ve
 veřejném sektoru s pravidly práce v soukromém sektoru
 a transparentnější mzdovou politikou, která větší měrou
 zohledňuje pracovní zásluhy; 2) důchodová reforma a 3) zkrácení
 výdajů v jednotlivých odvětvích u všech resortních
 ministerstev a programů.
 (8) Aby byl kompenzován negativní
 převod z čerpání rozpočtu na rok 2013 a dosaženo
 cílového schodku ve výši 4 % HDP, doplňují balíček
 přijatý v rámci přehledu veřejných výdajů další trvalá
 opatření, jejichž cílem je dále zlepšit účinnost a rovnost
 současné struktury daní a dávek (v hodnotě 0,4 % HDP).
 Vedle toho bude provedena řada jednorázových opatření ve výši
 0,2 % HDP, která více než dostatečně vyrovnají náklady na
 jednorázové předem vyplacené platby související s propouštěním
 zaměstnanců ve veřejném sektoru, u nichž byl pracovní
 poměr ukončen vzájemnou dohodou.
 (9) Poměr veřejného
 dluhu k HDP dosáhne v roce 2013 podle očekávání svého vrcholu (127,8 %)
 a poté bude klesat. Tato úprava údajů oproti sedmému přezkumu
 směrem nahoru je zdůvodněna opravou údajů o dluhu za
 rok 2012, které jsou nyní o něco vyšší, a neprovedením některých
 krátkodobých kroků ke snížení dluhu. Zejména stabilizační fond
 sociálního zabezpečení postupně zvýší podle očekávání svůj
 podíl na portugalských státních dluhopisech a příjmy
 z privatizace z velké části zůstanou
 ve společnost Parpublica, dokud nevstoupí v platnost nový systém ESA
 2010, čímž bude definován status uvedené společnosti. Vedle toho se
 odhaduje, že zůstatek hotovosti ve státní pokladně bude ke konci roku
 vyšší, než se předpokládalo (přibližně o 2 miliardy EUR).
 (10) Proces fiskální korekce je
 provázen řadou fiskálních strukturálních opatření, jejichž
 účelem je posílit kontrolu nad vládními výdaji a zlepšit vybírání
 příjmů. Dosáhnout toho umožňuje zejména komplexní reforma
 rozpočtového rámce, a to jak na centrální, tak i na regionální a místní
 úrovni státní správy, prováděná v souladu s osvědčenými modely
 správy veřejných financí. Nový systém kontroly závazků již
 přináší výsledky, provádění je však třeba pečlivě
 sledovat, aby bylo zajištěno, že závazky jsou hrazeny z dostupných
 finančních prostředků. I nadále se provádějí reformy
 ve veřejné správě s cílem modernizovat a racionalizovat
 zaměstnanost ve veřejném sektoru a veřejných
 subjektech. Pokrok při plnění cílů reformy správy
 příjmů posiluje sledování a dodržování daňových povinností.
 Značného pokroku bylo dosaženo při jednání o nových podmínkách
 partnerství veřejného a soukromého sektoru a počínaje rokem
 2013 se očekávají významné úspory. Státní podniky dosáhly provozní
 rovnováhy v průměru do konce roku 2012 a chystají se další
 reformy, jejichž cílem je zabránit opětovnému zhoršení jejich
 výsledků. Reformy ve zdravotnictví přinášejí významné úspory a jejich
 provádění v zásadě pokračuje v souladu s vytyčenými cíli.
 (11) V minulém roce byly
 značně navýšeny kapitálové poměry bank, což
 zúčastněným bankám umožnilo splnit regulatorní kapitálové rezervy
 stanovené Evropským orgánem pro bankovnictví i dosáhnout do konce roku
 poměru kapitálu core tier 1 ve výši 10 %. I když se pro posouzení
 vlastních finančních prostředků bank budou používat pravidla
 nové směrnice o kapitálových požadavcích CRD IV, budou tyto
 kapitálové rezervy všeobecně i nadále přiměřené. Tato nová
 kapitálová pravidla budou platit od ledna 2014. Banco de Portugal
 v současné době připravuje přechodná ustanovení
 k zavedení směrnice o kapitálových požadavcích CRD IV.
 Orientační cíl pro poměr úvěrů ke vkladům ve výši
 120 % do roku 2014 některé banky, které jsou již v současné
 fázi pod uvedeným limitem, pravděpodobně splní. Bylo zesíleno úsilí o
 diverzifikaci zdrojů financování pro podnikatelský sektor.
 V návaznosti na nedávný externí audit stávajících vládou dotovaných
 úvěrových linek a soubor politických doporučení předložily
 příslušné orgány plán obsahující opatření zaměřená
 na zlepšení výkonnosti a řízení těchto nástrojů. Dokončuje se
 soubor nástrojů pro řešení krize, včetně fondu pro
 řešení problémů bank, pravomocí k včasnému zásahu
 a právních předpisů o rekapitalizaci.
 (12) Byl učiněn další
 pokrok při provádění strukturálních reforem na posílení růstu a konkurenceschopnosti.
 Dne 1. října vstoupil v platnosti nový předpis o snížení odstupného
 a za účelem částečného financování odstupného byly
 zřízeny dva kompenzační fondy. Byly podniknuty další kroky
 s cílem posílit aktivní politiky trhu práce. Další opatření byla
 přijata v oblasti vzdělávání, kde je pokrok celkově
 uspokojivý.
 (13) Provedení směrnice
 o službách, jejímž cílem je odstranit překážky pro vstup na trh
 a posílit konkurenci a hospodářskou činnost tím, že bude
 usnadněn vstup na trh novým subjektům v různých
 hospodářských režimech, postupuje uspokojivým tempem a provedení do
 vnitrostátních předpisů je nyní téměř dokončeno. Byl
 přijat rámcový zákon pro lepší fungování regulovaných povolání s profesní
 organizací a dalším krokem k dokončení této reformy je revize
 stanov osmnácti dotyčných povolání. V platnost již vstoupil rámcový zákon,
 který má stanovit hlavní zásady fungování nejdůležitějších
 vnitrostátních regulačních orgánů, včetně jejich
 značné nezávislosti a samostatnosti, a brzy budou přijaty
 vyhlášky různých odvětvových regulačních orgánů. Provádění
 opatření ke snížení dluhu spojeného s tarifními sazbami cen
 elektřiny se zpozdilo, ačkoli vláda pro částečné
 vyřešení tohoto problému nedávno navrhla novou daň. Byly přijaty
 některé právní předpisy, jejichž cílem je usnadnit postupy pro
 udělování licencí a snížit jiné administrativní zátěže, jako
 například nový základní zákon o půdě, územním plánování
 a urbanizaci.
 (14) V zájmu větší
 udržitelnosti a konkurenceschopnosti v odvětví dopravy je zapotřebí
 dalšího pokroku. Jisté zlepšení zaznamenala finanční situace provozovatele
 železniční infrastruktury, ale pro dosažení provozní rovnováhy do roku
 2015 je třeba vynaložit značné další úsilí. Reformy týkající
 se přístavů je třeba zintenzivnit.
 (15) Bylo přijato několik
 dodatečných opatření ke zlepšení podmínek likvidity
 podniků, zejména malých a středních podniků.
 Reformy soudnictví jsou téměř provedeny. Bylo dosaženo pokroku
 při snižování počtu nevyřízených případů
 a zásadní reformy, jako jsou například územní reorganizace soudních
 okrsků a reforma občanského soudního řádu, jsou
 téměř dokončeny či dokonce plně provedeny.
 Nicméně je zapotřebí dále zlepšit fungování soudnictví, což je
 nezbytné pro řádné a náležité fungování hospodářství, a to:
 i) zajištěním účinného a včasného plnění smluv a dodržování
 pravidel hospodářské soutěže; ii) zvýšením účinnosti v
 důsledku restrukturalizace soudů a zavedením nových modelů
 řízení soudů a iii) rychlejším projednáváním soudních
 případů (včetně případů týkajících se daní),
 PŘIJALA TOTO ROZHODNUTÍ:
 Článek 1
 V článku 3 prováděcího
 rozhodnutí 2011/344/EU se odstavce 7 až 9 nahrazují tímto:
 „7. Portugalsko v průběhu roku 2013
 přijme tato opatření v souladu s podrobnostmi uvedenými v memorandu
 o porozumění:
 a) schodek veřejných financí
 v roce 2013 nepřekročí 5,5 % HDP. Při výpočtu
 tohoto schodku se neberou v úvahu případné rozpočtové náklady na
 opatření na podporu bank v souvislosti se strategií vlády pro
 finanční sektor. Konsolidační opatření zahrnutá
 do rozpočtu na rok 2013 a dodatečný rozpočet musí
 být během zbývající části roku důsledně prováděny.
 Vedle toho přijme vláda dodatečná nápravná opatření, budou-li
 při čerpání rozpočtu zjištěny další odchylky;
 b) Portugalsko bude pokračovat v
 provádění privatizačního programu;
 c) Portugalsko dokončí provádění
 strategie společných služeb ve veřejné správě;
 d) Portugalsko bude pokračovat
 v reorganizaci a racionalizaci sítě nemocnic
 prostřednictvím specializace, koncentrace a racionalizace
 nemocničních služeb a společného řízení a provozování
 nemocnic. Portugalsko zajistí provádění víceletého akčního plánu pro
 nemocniční reorganizaci;
 e) po přijetí změn nového zákona
 o pronájmech nemovitostí č. 6/2006 a vyhlášky, která
 zjednodušuje správní postup pro provádění renovací, provede Portugalsko
 komplexní přezkum fungování trhu s bydlením;
 f) Portugalsko vypracuje celostátní systém
 evidence pozemků, který umožní spravedlivější dělení
 přínosů a nákladů v rámci územního plánování;
 g) Portugalsko navrhne a provede alternativy
 k reformám trhu práce, které by měly stejný účinek jako reformy, jež
 ústavní soud dne 26. září 2013 prohlásil za protiústavní;
 h) Portugalsko podpoří vývoj mezd
 slučitelný s cíli, kterými jsou podpora vytváření pracovních
 míst a zlepšování konkurenceschopnosti podniků, aby se tak napravila
 makroekonomická nerovnováha. Minimální mzda bude v době trvání programu
 navýšena pouze tehdy, pokud to bude možné zdůvodnit ekonomickým vývojem a vývojem
 na trhu práce;
 i) Portugalsko bude pokračovat ve
 snaze zlepšit účinnost svých opatření aktivní politiky
 zaměstnanosti v souladu s výsledky hodnotící zprávy a akčním plánem,
 jehož cílem je zlepšit fungování veřejných služeb zaměstnanosti;
 j) Portugalsko bude pokračovat v
 zavádění opatření stanovených v akčních plánech ke zlepšení
 kvality středního a odborného školství a vzdělávání; vláda
 zejména předloží plány pro zefektivnění rámce pro financování
 školství a budou zřízeny referenční odborné školy;
 k) Portugalsko učiní zbývající
 odvětvové změny nezbytné k úplnému provedení směrnice
 o službách;
 l) Portugalsko předloží Parlamentu
 pozměněné stanovy profesních organizací;
 m) Portugalsko schválí odpovídající
 změny vyhlášek vnitrostátních regulačních orgánů;
 n) Portugalsko bude zveřejňovat
 čtvrtletní zprávy o míře splácení dluhů, trvání a nákladech
 soudních případů platební neschopnosti podniků, trvání a
 nákladech soudních případů týkajících se daní a míře
 vyřešených soudních případů týkajících se prosazování právních
 předpisů;
 o) Portugalsko zlepší podnikatelské
 prostředí tím, že dokončí probíhající reformy v oblasti
 snižování administrativní zátěže [úplné zprovoznění jednotných
 kontaktních míst a dokončení projektů „bez nutnosti povolení“]
 a dále zjednoduší stávající postupy udělování licencí, regulaci
 a další administrativní zátěž, která je pro podniky významnou
 překážkou v rozvoji hospodářských činností;
 p) Portugalsko dokončí reformu systému
 správy přístavů, včetně revize koncesí na provozování
 přístavů;
 q) Portugalsko zavede opatření na lepší
 fungování odvětví pošt a telekomunikací;
 r) Portugalsko zavede opatření na
 posílení fungování dopravního systému;
 s) Portugalsko provede opatření k
 odstranění dluhu spojeného s tarifními sazbami cen elektřiny;
 t) za účelem dosažení významných
 fiskálních výnosů, a to zejména v roce 2013, Portugalsko
 zajistí, aby byl uplatňován nový právní a institucionální rámec
 partnerství veřejného a soukromého sektoru a aby byly sjednány
 nové podmínky smluv o silniční přepravě uzavřených
 v rámci partnerství veřejného a soukromého sektoru, které budou
 v souladu se strategickým plánem představeným vládou
 a s revizí regulačního rámce;
 u) Portugalsko se i nadále soustředí na
 opatření proti daňovým podvodům a únikům a na
 dodržování daňových povinností.“
 „8. Portugalsko v průběhu roku 2014
 přijme tato opatření v souladu s podrobnostmi uvedenými v memorandu
 o porozumění:
 a) schodek veřejných financí
 v roce 2014 nepřekročí 4 % HDP. Při výpočtu
 tohoto schodku se neberou v úvahu případné rozpočtové náklady na opatření
 na podporu bank v souvislosti se strategií vlády pro finanční sektor.
 K dosažení tohoto cíle provede Portugalsko konsolidační opatření
 ve výši 2,3 % HDP, a to především prostřednictvím
 zákona o rozpočtu na rok 2014. Opatření jsou
 převážně trvalé povahy a jsou zaměřeny na úsporu
 výdajů;
 b) soubor konsolidačních opatření
 bude vycházet z opatření pro snižování výdajů, která byla
 připravena v rámci přehledu veřejných výdajů. Celková
 výše těchto opatření dosáhne v roce 2014 1,8 % HDP a bude zahrnovat
 1) omezení mzdových nákladů ve veřejném sektoru, a to snížením
 početních stavů jeho pracovníků a současně
 změnou jeho skladby ve prospěch zaměstnanců s vyšší
 kvalifikací – zejména rekvalifikací a realizací režimu dobrovolného
 odchodu ze zaměstnání – dalším sjednocováním pravidel práce ve
 veřejném sektoru s pravidly práce v soukromém sektoru
 (včetně prodloužení pracovní doby a omezení nároku na dovolenou) a
 zavedením jednotné tabulky mezd a zefektivněním doplňkových
 odměn. Příspěvky na zvláštní režimy zdravotního pojištění
 se zvýší, a přispějí tak k rovnosti a účinnosti veřejných
 výdajů; 2) reformy systému důchodového zabezpečení , a to
 zvýšením zákonem stanoveného věku pro odchod do důchodu
 prostřednictvím změny faktoru udržitelnosti; sjednocením pravidel
 výpočtu důchodu mezi systémem sociálního zabezpečení
 zaměstnanců ve veřejném sektoru (CGA) a všeobecným systémem
 sociálního zabezpečení, přičemž však bude zajištěna
 minimální hranice dávek, a zefektivněním pozůstalostních
 důchodů v systému CGA i všeobecném systému sociálního
 zabezpečení, zejména v případech kdy jsou pozůstalostní
 důchody kombinovány s jinými druhy důchodů; 3) úspory v
 mezispotřebě a u programů výdajů u všech rezortních
 ministerstev. S ohledem na politická a právní rizika lze některá
 z těchto opatření částečně či plně
 nahradit jinými opatřeními odpovídajícího rozsahu a kvality;
 c) balíček přijatý v rámci
 přehledu veřejných výdajů doplní další trvalá příjmová
 opatření, jejichž cílem je dále zlepšit účinnost a rovnost
 současné struktury daní a dávek (v hodnotě 0,4 % HDP).
 Zejména se zvýší daňová sazba pro právnické osoby u nákladů
 na služební automobily a díky změně ve zdanění
 automobilů s naftovým motorem a zvýšením daní z tabáku a
 alkoholických nápojů se zlepší zdanění v oblasti životního
 prostředí a zdraví. Zruší se daňové výjimky ve zdanění
 nemovitostí pro penzijní a nemovitostní investiční fondy. Budou
 zrušeny stropy u příspěvků na sociální
 zabezpečení členů statutárních orgánů. Bude uložena
 zvláštní daň v energetice, která omezí nadměrné zisky v tomto
 odvětví. Část příjmů pocházejících z této daně se
 použije ke snížení dluhu spojeného s tarifními sazbami cen elektřiny.
 Licence na on-line hazardní hry se budou prodávat s cílem regulovat tento
 trh a tato činnost bude rovněž zdaněna. Zavede se zvláštní
 poplatek za mediální spektrum a zvýší se zdanění finančních
 institucí. Vedle toho bude provedena řada jednorázových opatření,
 která více než dostatečně vyrovnají náklady na jednorázové
 předem vyplacené platby související s propouštěním
 zaměstnanců ve veřejném sektoru, u nichž byl pracovní
 poměr ukončen vzájemnou dohodou. Mezi ně patří převod
 zdravotního fondu CTT na vládní instituce, prodej koncese na provozování
 přístavu a sil, jakož i zvláštní dividendy z prodeje
 nadměrných zásob ropy veřejné společnosti;
 d) Portugalsko předloží zprávu, jejímž
 účelem je i) odhalit překrývání služeb a pravomocí a jiné
 nesrovnalosti mezi orgány státní správy na státní a místní úrovni a i)
 reorganizovat síť decentralizovaných služeb na ministerstvech, a to
 zejména prostřednictvím sítě tzv. středisek pro občany a
 jiných přístupů tak, aby zeměpisné členění bylo
 účinnější a aby bylo posíleno využívání společných služeb a
 digitálních úřadů;
 e) Portugalsko bude pokračovat
 v reorganizaci a racionalizaci sítě nemocnic prostřednictvím
 specializace, koncentrace a racionalizace nemocničních služeb
 a společného řízení a provozování nemocnic. Portugalsko
 zajistí provádění víceletého akčního plánu pro nemocniční
 reorganizaci;
 f) Portugalsko provede plán na
 vytvoření nezávislého provozovatele logistických služeb v odvětví
 plynu a elektřiny;
 g) Portugalsko zavede opatření na
 posílení fungování dopravního systému;
 h) Portugalsko posoudí dopad volitelného
 režimu hotovostního účetnictví DPH;
 i) Portugalsko provede soupis
 a analýzu nákladů předpisů, které budou mít zjevně
 větší dopad na hospodářskou činnost.“
 „9. S cílem obnovit důvěru ve
 finanční sektor bude Portugalsko usilovat o udržení náležitého objemu
 kapitálu ve svém bankovním sektoru a zajistí plynulé snižování zadluženosti v
 souladu s lhůtami stanovenými v memorandu o porozumění. V této
 souvislosti Portugalsko provede strategii pro portugalský bankovní sektor
 dohodnutou s Komisí, ECB a MMF s cílem zachovat finanční stabilitu.
 Portugalsko zejména:
 a) bude sledovat přechod bank
 na nová kapitálová pravidla stanovená ve směrnici
 o kapitálových požadavcích (CRD IV) a zajistí, že v
 náročných podmínkách budou kapitálové rezervy i nadále úměrné;
 b) doporučí bankám, aby udržitelným
 způsobem posílily své rezervy v oblasti zajištění;
 c) zajistí vyvážené a plynulé snižování páky
 v bankovním sektoru, jež má rozhodující význam pro trvalé odstraňování
 nerovnováhy a snížení závislosti na financování z prostředků
 Eurosystému ve střednědobém horizontu. Plány bank týkající se
 financování a kapitálu se přezkoumávají čtvrtletně;
 d) bude podporovat diverzifikaci možností
 financování pro podnikatelský sektor, a zejména pro malé a střední
 podniky, prostřednictvím řady opatření zaměřených na
 zlepšení jejich přístupu na kapitálové trhy;
 e) bude nadále pracovat na zefektivnění
 fungování státem vlastněné skupiny CGD;
 f) svěří správu úvěrů
 BPN, jež jsou v současné době v držení subjektu Parvalor,
 podnikům vybraným v nabídkovém řízení, které budou pověřeny
 postupným zpětným získáváním aktiv. Portugalská vláda zajistí včasný
 prodej dceřiných společností a aktiv v dalších dvou státních
 jednotkách pro speciální účel;
 g) na základě souboru předložených
 návrhů na podporu diverzifikace možností financování podniků
 vypracuje a zavede alternativy k tradičním bankovním úvěrům
 pro podnikatelský sektor. V návaznosti na výsledky nedávného externího auditu a předložený
 plán portugalská vláda posoudí možnosti pro zlepšení výkonnosti
 a řízení stávajících vládou dotovaných úvěrových linek;
 h) provede analýzu plánů obnovy bank,
 vydá pokyny pro systém týkající se plánů obnovy a na základě
 zpráv, které jí banky předloží, připraví plány řešení
 problémů. Parlamentu předloží nezbytné změny
 rekapitalizačních právních předpisů, v nichž zohlední nedávné
 sdělení Evropské komise o použití pravidel pro poskytování státní
 podpory ve prospěch bank v souvislosti s finanční
 krizí;
 i) zavede rámec, který finančním
 institucím umožní zapojit se do mimosoudní restrukturalizace dluhů
 domácností, zjednoduší restrukturalizaci dluhů podniků a provede
 akční plán ke zvýšení povědomí veřejnosti o nástrojích
 restrukturalizace;
 j) vypracuje čtvrtletní zprávy
 o provádění nových nástrojů restrukturalizace.
 Na základě nedávného průzkumu prošetří alternativy, které
 by umožňovaly dosažení větší úspěšnosti při obnově
 společností fungujících v režimu PER (zvláštní revitalizační režim
 pro společnosti ve vážných finančních potížích) a SIREVE (systém
 obnovy společností prostřednictvím mimosoudních dohod určený
 společnostem, které se nacházejí v obtížné ekonomické situaci nebo v riziku
 či stavu platební neschopnosti).“
 Článek 2
 Toto rozhodnutí je určeno Portugalsku.
 Článek 3
 Toto rozhodnutí
 se vyhlašuje v Úředním věstníku Evropské unie.
 V Bruselu dne
 Za
 Radu
 předseda
 [1] Úř. věst. L 118, 12.5.2010, s. 1.


text:
Kommunismi (latinan sanasta communis, ”jaettu”, ”yhteinen”) tarkoittaa yhteiskuntajärjestelmää, jossa vallitsee tuotantovälineiden ja hyödykkeiden yhteisomistus, sekä poliittista ideologiaa, joka pyrkii tällaisen yhteiskunnan luomiseen. Poliittisia ja uskonnollisia liikkeitä ja ajatuksia, jotka ovat kannattaneet yhteisomistusta ja tasajakoa, on esiintynyt antiikin Kreikasta (Platonin Valtio), keskiajalle (esimerkiksi kristilliset luostariliikkeet, Thomas Moren Utopia) ja uudelle ajalle (esimerkiksi ”diggers” Englannissa 1600-luvulla).
 Nykyaikaan liittyvät kommunistiset näkemykset syntyivät vastavaikutuksena teollisen vallankumouksen epäkohtiin, joihin kuului etenkin tulo- ja varallisuuserojen voimakas ja pitkäaikainen kasvu. Näiden näkemysten ensimmäisiä edustajia olivat 1800-luvulla ranskalaiset utopistisosialistit. Heidän jälkeensä Karl Marx ja Friedrich Engels halusivat kohottaa sosialismin ”utopiasta tieteeksi”. Marx ja Engels katsoivat, että uusi ja tasa-arvoinen kommunistinen yhteiskunta ei ollut pelkästään utopistinen toive, vaan historiallinen välttämättömyys, joka oli seurausta yhteiskunnan aineellisista lainalaisuuksista. Engelsin sanojen mukaan Marx ja hän käänsivät Hegelin teorian maailmanhengen kehityksestä ylösalaisin tai oikeammin jaloilleen, jolloin historian liike vaihtui hengen kehityksestä aineelliseen yhteiskuntaan. Sen oli väistämättä suuntauduttava kommunismiin, sillä tuotantovoimien kehitys tulisi vaatimaan, että kehitystä rajoittavat kapitalistiset tuotantosuhteet murretaan. Marxilaiselle kommunismille ominainen piirre on poliittisten tavoitteiden edistäminen aseellisen vallankumouksen keinoin, mikä erottaa sen rauhanomaisemmista sosialismin suuntauksista.
 Ajatukset yksityisomistuksen lakkauttamisesta ja omaisuuden tasajaosta ovat herättäneet sekä kiinnostusta että vastarintaa. Ennen marxismin syntyä ne saivat vain vähän kannattajia. 1900-luvulla syntyneen sosialistisen maailmanjärjestelmän myötä kommunismin ihanteista tuli satojen miljoonien ihmisten elämään vaikuttanut ideologia. Kehitys ei kuitenkaan monestakaan syystä johtanut Marxin ja Engelsin ennustamaan suuntaan. Kapitalistiset tuotantosuhteet eivät muuttuneet sellaisiksi kehityksen jarruiksi kuin he ennustivat. Sosialistisen vallankumouksen kokeneiden maiden talouskehitys ei ylittänyt kapitalististen maiden kehitystä. Sosialistiset tuotantosuhteet pikemminkin rajoittivat talouden kehitystä. Lisäksi teollisen vallankumouksen tuomat varallisuuserot alkoivat 1900-luvulla tasoittua muun muassa progressiivisen verotuksen ansiosta.
 Sosialismi ja kommunismi
 Tutkimuskirjallisuuden määritelmiä
 Kielitoimiston sanakirjan mukaan kommunismi on ”poliittinen aatesuunta, joka tähtää tuotantovälineiden ja hyödykkeiden yhteisomistukseen” sekä vastaava yhteiskuntajärjestelmä. Sosialismi määritellään samansisältöisesti mutta sillä erolla, että yhteisomistukseen pyritään ottamaan vain tuotannontekijät, ei hyödykkeitä. Encyclopædia Britannican mukaan kommunismin ja sosialismin rajanvedosta on jo pitkään vallinnut erimielisyyttä, mutta keskeisin ero on kommunismin sitoutuminen Karl Marxin (1818–1883) vallankumouksellisiin oppeihin. Kommunismin kannattajat pitävät sitä sosialismin korkeampana ja kehittyneempänä muotona. Kommunismin oppien mukaisesti järjestetyssä poliittisessa ja taloudellisessa järjestelmässä voittoa tavoittelevat yksityisyritykset on korvattu suurten tuotantolaitosten (tehtaat, kaivokset ja niin edelleen) ja luonnonvarojen yhteisellä omistuksella. Osa kommunisteista katsoo, että yhteisomistus pitäisi viedä tätäkin pidemmälle.
 Oxfordin yliopiston Dictionary of the Social Sciences huomauttaa, että kommunismi oli esiteollisissa maatalousyhteiskunnissa ”suhteellisen yleinen” yhteiskuntajärjestelmä. Nykyään sanalla viitataan kuitenkin lähinnä Karl Marxin ja hänen seuraajiensa ajatteluun. Marx ei kuvaillut tulevaisuuden kommunistista yhteiskuntaa kovinkaan tarkasti. Keskeisiä piirteitä olivat kaikkiin ihmisiin ulottuva tasa-arvo ja vapaus, joka saavutettaisiin tuotantovälineiden yhteisomistuksella. Tulevaisuuteen suuntautunut marxilaisuus erosi aiemmista kommunismin muodoista, joille ominaista oli nostalginen kaipuu yksinkertaiseen maalaiselämään. Myös Dictionary of the Social Sciences pitää sosialismin ja kommunismin tärkeimpänä erona marxilais-leninististen puolueiden pyrkimystä edistää tavoitteitaan aseellisen vallankumouksen keinoin. Käytännössä tämä on johtanut diktatuurien syntyyn, eikä tosimaailmassa toteutunut kommunismi ole juurikaan muistuttanut Marxin ja muiden yhteiskuntafilosofien ihanteita. Myöhemmin tosin syntyi niin kutsuttu eurokommunismi, joka pyrki toimimaan liberaalin demokratian instituutioiden puitteissa.
 Marxilaisia määritelmiä
 Vuonna 1848 Karl Marx ja Friedrich Engels tiivistivät Kommunistisessa manifestissa kommunistien poliittisen ohjelman kahteen sanaan: ”yksityisomistuksen lakkauttaminen”. Tavoite oli saavutettavissa ainoastaan väkivaltaisella vallankumouksella, jossa proletariaatti ottaa haltuunsa poliittisen vallan. Engels totesi vuonna 1878, että tuotantovälineiden pakkoluovuttaminen olisi samalla valtiovallan viimeinen itsenäinen teko, Valtiovalta oli luokkasorron väline ja näivettyi tarpeettomana, kun porvariston ja proletariaatin luokkavastakohtaisuudet katoavat yhteisomistuksen myötä.
 Käsitteet sosialismi ja kommunismi olivat pitkään vakiintumattomia. Vuonna 1875 Gothan ohjelman kritiikissä Marx jakoi tulevaisuuden yhteiskunnan kahteen peräkkäiseen vaiheeseen. Ensimmäinen vaihe oli merkitsi jo tuotantovälineiden yhteisomistusta, mutta kantoi joitakin vielä porvarillisen yhteiskunnan tuntomerkkejä. Siinä periaatteena olisi ”kukin kykyjensä mukaan, kullekin työnsä mukaan”. Tällöin tuloksena ei vielä ole täydellinen työn tuotteiden tasajako. Toiseen vaiheeseen eli kommunismiin siirrytään, kun tuotantovoimien kehitys on johtanut taloudelliseen yltäkylläisyyteen. Kommunismissa periaatteena on ”kukin kykyjensä mukaan, kullekin tarpeidensa mukaan.” Vladimir Lenin esitteli tätä Marxin jaottelua teoksessa Valtio ja vallankumous vuonna 1917 juuri ennen Venäjän lokakuun vallankumousta. Hän totesi, että valtion täydellinen kuoleentuminen tapahtuisi vasta tässä korkeammassa vaiheessa. Valtion kuoleentumista odottivat myös venäläiset anarkistit. Marxin hahmottelema kommunismin ensimmäinen vaihe sai Neuvostoliitossa nimekseen ’sosialismi’.
 Stalinin kuoleman jälkeen Neuvostoliitossa julkaistiin vuonna 1960 teos Marxismin-leninismin perusteet, joka esitteli NKP:n uudistunutta ideologiaa. Viimeisenä lukunaan kirja visioi näkymiä kommunistisesta yhteiskunnasta. Teos luonnehti Marxin sanoin kommunismissa vallitsevaa jakoperiaatetta lauseella ”kukin kykyjensä mukaan, kullekin tarpeidensa mukaan.” Teoksen mukaan kommunismi on ”yhteiskunta, joka tekee kerta kaikkiaan ja ikiajoiksi lopun puutteesta ja köyhyydestä”. Kommunismin vallitessa kaikki tekevät työtä yksinomaan moraalisten virikkeiden ja korkean tietoisuuden kannustamina, sillä työ itsessään on palkatonta. Työtä tehdään 20–25 tuntia viikossa, ja kukin valitsee työn omien taipumustensa ja kykyjensä mukaisesti. Rahaa ei tarvita, sillä työntekijöiden kaikki tarpeet tyydytetään ilmaiseksi. Yltäkylläisyys tervehdyttää ihmisen koko psyyken, jota huoli huomisesta lakkaa painamasta. Kaikille on myös tarjolla vaurautta tarpeeksi, sillä kommunismin oloissa ihmiset ovat riittävän valistuneita ollakseen esittämättä ilmeisen järjettömiä vaatimuksia. Marxismin-leninismin perusteet päättelee, että ”kommunismi on kaikkein oikeudenmukaisin yhteiskuntajärjestelmä, joka toteuttaa täydellisesti tasa-arvoisuuden ja vapauden periaatteet, turvaa ihmisen persoonallisuuden kukoistuksen ja tekee yhteiskunnasta työtätekevien ihmisten ystävyysliiton.
 Suomi–Neuvostoliitto -Seura julkaisi vuonna 1973 kirjan Neuvostoliitto. Vastauksia suomalaisten kysymyksiin. Siinä kerrottiin, että NKP:n koko toiminta palvelee kommunismin rakennustyötä. Kommunismi tarkoitti tasa-arvoisten ja vapaiden ihmisten oikeudenmukaista yhteiskuntaa. Se on luokaton yhteiskunta, jossa tuotantovälineet ovat koko kansan omaisuutta ja yhteiskunnan jäsenet sosiaalisesti täysin tasa-arvoisia. Sosialismin jakoperiaatteesta (kullekin työnsä mukaan) on siirrytty kommunistiseen jakoperiaatteeseen (kullekin tarpeittensa mukaan).
 Suomen kommunistinen puolue julkaisi vuonna 1957 puolueohjelman, jossa se näki sosialismin askeleena kommunistiseen yhteiskuntaan. Sitä luonnehtisi kulttuurin kukoistus, yksilöiden vapaa kehitys ja kansakunnan eheys, kun jako riistettäviin ja riistäjiin oli kadonnut. Siirtyminen täyteen tasa-arvoon kuitenkin edellytti välivaiheena proletariaatin diktatuuria.
 Historia
 Antiikki ja keskiaika
 Ihmiskunnan historian alkuvaiheessa ihmiset elivät pienikokoisissa ryhmissä, joiden selviytyminen perustui hankitun ruoan yhteisomistukseen, joten esimerkiksi eläimen kaatanut yksilö ei saanut yksinoikeutta lihaan, vaan jakoi sen koko ryhmän kesken. Yhteisomistus oli tehokkain tapa selviytyä teknisesti kehittymättömissä oloissa. Tätä elintapaa ei kuitenkaan voi pitää nykyaikaisen kommunismin edeltäjänä. Ensimmäisenä yhteisomistusta filosofiselta kannalta tutki Ateenassa vaikuttanut Platon. Hän loi Valtiossaan ihanneyhteiskunnan, jossa ihmiset jaoteltiin hierarkkisesti eri luokkiin kykyjensä mukaisesti. Hän näki yksityisomistuksen poistamisen tarpeelliseksi siirryttäessä laatimaansa tasapainoon perustuvaan yhteiskuntaan.
 Noin 100-luvulla eaa. Lähi-idässä vaikutti juutalaisuudesta eristäytynyt essealaisten uskonlahko, jonka toiminta perustui vapaaehtoiseen köyhyyteen, askeettisuuteen ja tasa-arvoisuuteen. He kielsivät kaupanteon, koska katsoivat sen edustavan ahneutta ja toisten petkuttamista. Essealaiset eivät omistaneet mitään yksityistä, vaan kaikki heidän keskuudessaan oli yhteistä. Varhaiskristillinen kirkko omaksui nopeasti kommunalistisia piirteitä, kuten yhteinen maanomistus. Varhaiskristityt halusivat luoda uuden kansakunnan, jonka toiminta perustuisi epäitsekkyyteen ja varakkuuden jakamiseen köyhyyden ja kurjuuden poistamiseksi. He näkivät itsensä vain maallisen omaisuuden hoitajina, minkä todellinen omistaja oli Jumala. Tämä kehitys johti erilaisten yhteisöjen perustamiseen ja siitä edelleen luostarijärjestelmän kehittymiseen Rooman valtakunnassa. Luostarit olivat monesti hyvinkin suljettuja yhteisöjä, joiden jäsenillä ei ollut omaa omaisuutta.
 Kristillinen yhteisöajattelu eli elinvoimaisena koko keskiajan. Keskiajalla muovautui agraarikommunismin muoto, kun maanviljelijät nousivat laajamittaisesti kapinaan eri puolilla Eurooppaa 1300-luvulta lähtien. Taustalla oli ilmaston lämpeneminen, rutto ja tyytymättömyys feodaaliseen maanomistuspolitiikkaan. Kapinat alkoivat Italiasta (1304–1307) ja jatkuivat Flanderissa (1323–1328), Ranskassa (1356), Englannissa (1381), Pohjois-Espanjassa (1437), Böömissä (1419–1434), Unkarissa (1514) ja Saksassa (1525). Yhteiskunnallisen muutoksen ja kristinuskon reformaation puolesta kamppailevia liikkeitä syntyi runsaasti. Saksassa talonpoikaiskapinan keskeisin johtohahmo oli reformaattori Thomas Müntzer. Hän uskoi vankasti yhteisomistuksen hyötyihin ja tasa-arvoisen yhteiskunnan olevan mahdollista perustaa kristittyjen kesken. Hän oli vakuuttunut siitä, että papit ja aateliset olivat pääsyyllisiä tavallisen kansan huonoihin elinoloihin, kansan riistoon ja omien etujen ajamiseen. Müntzeriä on usein pidetty radikaalisosialistien ja marxilaisten edelläkävijänä.
 Renessanssi ja uuden ajan alku
 Ensimmäiset varhaiskommunistiset kirjalliset teokset ovat Thomas Moren Utopia ja Tommaso Campanellan Aurinkokaupunki. Molemmat teokset ovat myös renessanssin utopiakirjallisuuden klassikoita ja esikuvinaan ne käyttävät Platonin Valtiota. More kuvaa teoksessaan omaisuuden omistamisen ja jatkuvan haluamisen pahuuden alkulähteinä. Hän perustelee näkemystään sillä, että jatkuva vaurastuminen tekee ihmisistä entistä itsekkäämpiä ja ylimielisempiä, jotka lopulta nousevat esteiksi ihmisten toimeentulemisen välille. Ratkaisuna More pitää omaisuuden täysjakoa ja rikastumisen kieltämisen, jottei yhteiskuntaan muodostuisi liian korkeita varallisuuseroja. Camapanella sen sijaan kuvaa Ceylonin saarella sijaitsevaan Aurinkokaupunkiin päätyvän genovalaisen merimiehen kokemuksia. Kaupungissa ihmiset tekevät yhdessä töitä ja syövät yhdessä, mutta miehet ja naiset erikseen. Yksityinen omaisuus on kielletty. Kaupunkia johtavat kaikkein viisaimmat, jotka hallitsevat tiukasti muiden kansalaisten tekemisiä. Teoksessa tasa-arvoisuus on saavutettu, kun jokaisella on tarvitsemansa. Molempien kirjoittajien taustalla vaikutti voimakkaasti kristillinen arvopohja.
 Englannin sisällissotaan viitataan monesti yhtenä tärkeimmistä esikommunistisen ajattelun kehitystapahtumana. Sisällissotaan kuului monia liikkeitä ja osapuolia, mutta kommunismin historian kannalta tärkein oli Diggers-radikaaliryhmä. Sen kokosi Gerrard Winstanley, jonka elinkeino oli tuhoutunut sisällissodassa. Windstanley väitti saaneensa näyn, jossa häntä käskettiin keräämään kannattajia ja hankkimaan itselleen maa-alan, jonka satoa he yhteisomistuksen hengessä yhdessä nauttivat. Hän sai kerättyä muutamassa kuukaudessa 20–30-henkisen tukijajoukon, joka lähti toteuttamaan näyn käskyä St George’s Hilliin Surreyhin. Maanomistajat eivät pitäneet joukkiosta, sillä he olivat perustaneen kommuunin maanomistuslakien vastaisesti. Kokeilu jäi lopulta vain noin vuoden mittaiseksi. Epäonnistuminen ei saanut Winstanleytä luopumaan ajatuksistaan, vaan hän julkaisi useita maanyhteisomistusta puoltavia pamfletteja, joista löytyi myös mainintoja kaupankäynnin täyskiellosta kuolemanrangaistuksen uhalla.
 Viimeiset utopistisosialistit
 Englannin sisällissodan jälkeen Euroopassa vaikutti joukko filosofeja, jotka pitivät yhteisomistusta parempana kuin yksityisomistusta. Näin ajattelivat Guillaume Thomas Raynal, Gabriel Bonnot de Mably, Simon-Nicholas Henri Linguet, Morelly ja ennen kaikkea Etrepignyn pappi Jean Meslier, joka omisti elämänsä taisteluun talonpoikien oikeuksien puolesta. Hän uskoi aiempien kommunalistien tapaan egalitaristiseen yhteiskuntaan, mutta katsoi, että vallankumous ja vallitsevan yhteiskuntajärjestyksen kumoaminen olivat ainoa tapa päästä tähän päämäärään. Ranskalaiset François Babeuf ja Jean-Jacques Rousseau edustivat siirtymävaihetta varhaiskommunismista moderniin kommunistiseen ajatteluun. Immanuel Kant ja Rousseau jatkoivat valistusajan yksityisomaisuuden arvostelua. Rousseaun mielestä suuret varallisuuserot ovat pahasta. Siksi varallisuutta tuli säädellä siten, että erot olisivat kohtuullisia. Teoksen tarkoituksena ei kuitenkaan ollut pohtia tasa-arvoisuutta ja yksityisomaisuutta, vaan hyvän yhteiskunnan yleisiä periaatteita.
 Rousseaun Yhteiskuntasopimuksesta kuului François Babeufin lukemistoon muiden vapautta ja järkeä ihannoineen valistusfilosofin ohella. Hän tunsi myös muun muassa Meslierin, Morellyn ja Mablyn utopistisosialistiset kirjoitukset. Babeuf oli jyrkkä tasa-arvon kannattaja ja paheksui ranskalaisten porvarillista politiikkaa. Hän levitti kommunistisia kiistakirjoituksia ympäri Ranskaa päästyään vankilasta vallankumouksen ollessa vielä käynnissä. Babeufin ajama politiikka on nimetty babouvismiksi. Hän halusi, että vallankumoushallitus luovuttaa rikkaiden omaisuuden köyhille ja antaa köyhien velat anteeksi. Babeufin yhteiskunnassa kaikilla olisi työvelvollisuus, ja laiskoja rangaistaisiin. Lisäksi maa jaettaisiin kaikille kansalaisille yhtä suuriin osiin, eikä maata voisi siirtää perintönä kenellekään. Jokaisen kansalaisen oli käytävä koulua tarvittavan sivistyksen hankkimiseksi. Babeufista teki modernin kommunismin kehittäjän se, että hän pohti paitsi kommunistista yhteiskuntaa, myös sitä kuinka se saavuttamaan. Babeuf ei koskaan päässyt toteuttamaan ajatuksiaan, sillä hänet mestattiin Yhdenvertaisten salaliiton jäsenenä valtion vastaisesta juonittelusta vuonna 1797.
 Kommunististen puolueiden johtamat maat 1900-luvulla
 Pääartikkeli Luettelo sosialistisista valtioista
 Pääartikkeli Luettelo kommunistisista valtioista
 Venäjällä Leninin johtamat bolševikit nousivat valtaan lokakuun vallankumouksessa vuonna 1917. Vuonna 1922 Venäjä ja muutamat siitä eronneet valtiot yhdistettiin Neuvostoliitoksi. Bolševikkien perustama Neuvostoliiton kommunistinen puolue oli hallitsevassa asemassa vuoteen 1991 saakka, jolloin Neuvostoliitto hajosi. Vuonna 1925 syntynyt Mongolian kansantasavalta ei liittynyt Neuvostoliittoon.
 Toisen maailmansodan jälkeen kommunistiset puolueet nousivat Neuvostoliiton tuella valtaan monissa Itä- ja Keski-Euroopan maissa, joita sanottiin kansandemokratioiksi tai itäblokin maiksi. Näissä maissa kommunistit syrjäytettiin vallasta vuosina 1989–1990.
 Kommunistiset puolueet nousivat 1940-luvun lopulla valtaan myös muutamissa Itä-Aasian maissa kuten Pohjois-Koreassa ja Kiinassa. Pohjois-Vietnamissa kommunistit tulivat valtaan vuonna 1955 ja pitkän Vietnamin sodan jälkeen 1970-luvulla koko Vietnamissa. Näissä maissa kuten myös Kuubassa kommunistinen puolue on vallassa edelleen. Kommunististen puolueiden valtaa sementoi yksipuoluejärjestelmä ja vapaiden vaalien kieltäminen.
 Kritiikkiä
 Kommunistien tai sosialistien johtamia maita on syytetty poliittisen demokratian ja oikeusvaltion tuhoamisesta sekä ihmisoikeuksien rikkomisesta. Markkinamekanismista luopuminen, äärimmäinen keskusjohtoisuus ja demokratiasta luopuminen veivät Neuvostoliiton 1980-luvulle tultaessa talouskriisiin, jota järjestelmä ei enää kestänyt.
 Ranskalaisen professori Stéphane Courtois’n toimittama Kommunismin musta kirja (Le Livre noir du communisme – Crimes, terreur, répression) on vasemmistolaisiksi leimattujen eri alojen lähinnä ranskalaisten tutkijoiden kirjoittama kommunistivaltioiden ja kommunistien rikoksia raportoiva 863-sivuinen kirja (1997, suom. 2001). Kirjassa arvioidaan kommunismin toteuttaman väkivallan ja kommunistimaiden nälänhätien aiheuttaneen sata miljoonaa uhria.
 Suomalaisen taloustieteilijän ja Sirola-opiston rehtorin Matti Antero Peltosen vuonna 1966 esittämän näkemyksen mukaan ”lopullista” kommunismia ei koskaan saavuteta, vaan sitä on pidettävä eräänlaisena ääriarvona, jota ainoastaan lähestytään. Ihmisten perustarpeet voidaan kyllä tyydyttää, mutta aina syntyy uusia tarpeita. Tulevaisuudessa maaseudun ja kaupungin välinen ero henkisen ja ruumiillisen työn välillä katoaa, työ muuttuu luovaksi ja automatisoiduksi ja perustuu vapaaehtoisuuteen. Ihmisten kulttuurinen sivistystaso kasvaa.
 Kommunismin suuntaukset
 Marxismi
 Marxilaisuus eli marxismi on Karl Marxin kirjoituksiin pohjautuva sosialistinen oppijärjestelmä sekä siihen perustuva yhteiskunnallinen aatesuuntaus. Marxilaisuudessa on monta toisistaan selvästi poikkeavaa suuntausta. Keskeinen jako kulki aiemmin länsimaisen akateemisen marxilaisuuden ja Neuvostoliitossa kehitetyn marxismi-leninismin välillä. Länsimaiden akateeminen marxilaisuus sanoutui suurelta osin irti jälkimmäisestä.
 Poliittisena aatejärjestelmänä marxismi tarjosi vaihtoehdon liberalismille ja konservatismille, jotka olivat hallinneet länsimaista kulttuuria modernilla aikakaudella. Marxilaisuus kansainvälisen kommunistisen liikkeen teoreettisena perustana on myös ollut länsimaisen kapitalismin päävastustaja 1900-luvulla.
 Arvostelua
 Marxin ennusteita kapitalismin tulevasta kehityksestä on pidetty osin virheellisinä. Marx ennusti, että pääoman keskittymisen johtaa työväenluokan järjestäytymiseen ja sosialistiseen vallankumoukseen. Näin ei länsimaissa tapahtunut, vaan työväenluokan palkkoja ja etuja valvomaan syntyi ammattiyhdistyksiä. Euroopassa varallisuuserot alkoivat tasoittua ilman tuotantovälineiden takavarikointia jo 1800-luvulla, kun reaalitulot nousivat ja siirryttiin progressiiviseen verotukseen. Ihmisten varallisuuserot ovat tasoittuneet myös maailman mitassa. Marx oletti myös kapitalismin pysyvän luonteeltaan vapaana laissez-faire-kapitalismina. Osakeyhtiöiden perustamisen jälkeen keskiluokka, jonka Marx uskoi katoavan, pääsi yhtiöiden osa-omistajiksi ja alkoi vaurastua.
 Karl Popper väitti teoksessa The Poverty of Historicism, ettei kaikkia Marxin väitteitä ole periaatteessa mahdollista falsifioida. Periaatteellinen falsifiontimahdollisuus oli Popperin mukaan yksi tieteellisen teorian tunnusmerkeistä.
 Marxismi-leninismi
 Leninismi tarkoittaa venäläisen Vladimir Leninin (1870–1924) poliittista ajattelua, joka pohjautui Marxin ja Engelsin ajatuksille. Lenin vaati, että oli heitettävä pois "likapyykki" ja lakattava kutsumasta itseään sosialidemokraateiksi, mitä nimitystä käyttivät myös II Internationaalin puolueet ja menševikit, jotka pettureina olivat tahrineet ja häväisseet tämän nimen. Marxin ja Engelsin "Kommunistien liiton" esimerkin pohjalta bolševikkien tuli kutsua itseään kommunisteiksi.
 Neuvostoliiton kommunistisen puolueen viralliseksi ideologiaksi tuli ”leniniläinen marxismi”, joka monissa kielissä käännettiin muotoon ”marxismi-leninismi”. Marx ja Engels eivät kirjoittaneet paljoa sosialismiin siirtymisestä, mutta olettivat, että se tapahtuisi kehittyneen kapitalismin oloissa. Lenin suhtautui asiaan pragmaattisesti ja loi teorian etujoukkopuolueesta, jonka johdolla sosialistinen vallankumous suoritettaisiin Venäjällä, missä työväenluokkaa ei juuri edes ollut. Myös Leninin oppi-isät olivat satunnaisesti puhuneet proletariaatin diktatuurista, mutta Lenin teki kovista otteista keskeisen menetelmän kommunistisen puolueen yksinvallan saavuttamiseksi. Marxismi-leninismistä alettiin puhua muissakin kommunistipuolueiden hallitsemissa valtioissa.
 Stalinismi
 Stalinismi tarkoittaa Josif Stalinin politiikkaa ja näkemyksiä marxilaisuudesta. Stalinin kuoltua vuonna 1953 Stalinin politiikkaa arvioitiin uudelleen NKP:n XX:ssa puoluekokouksessa 1956. Puoluekokouksen päätöksiä selostettiin vuonna 1959 julkaistussa laajassa Neuvostoliiton kommunistisen puolueen historiassa. Arvostelu ei niinkään kohdistunut Staliniin kuin hänen palvontaansa, joka ”aiheutti erittäin suurta vahinkoa puolueen ja valtion johtamiselle.” Palvonta taas johtui Stalinin suurista ansioista. Stalinin rikoksista huolimatta Stalinin suosio on Venäjällä nykyisin korkea.
 Maolaisuus
 Maolaisuus on Kiinan kansantasavallan perustajan, Mao Zedongin luoma marxismi-leninismin suuntaus. Maolainen liike sai kansainvälistä suosiota 1960-luvun alussa, kun Mao katkaisi välit Neuvostoliittoon. Vuonna 1976 Maon kuoltua Kiinan kommunistinen puolue alkoi toteuttamaan taloudellisia reformeja Deng Xiaopingin johdolla, ja maolaisuus jäi sivuun. Nykyään osa maolaisista on avoimesti Kiinaa tukevia, kun taas osa syyttää Kiinaa revisionismista ja kapitalismista.
 Anarkokommunismi
 Anarkokommunismia (tai useimmiten vain anarkismia) voidaan pitää yhtenä sosialismin haarana. Anarkismia voidaan kutsua myös valtiottomaksi sosialismiksi. Siinä missä Marxin teorian mukaan työväki ottaa valtion hallintaan ja tuotantovälineet siirretään valtion omistukseen, anarkistisen teorian mukaan valtio hävitetään ja tuotantovälineet siirretään työväen yhteisomistukseen. Varsinkin anarkosyndikalismissa ammattiliitoilla on suuri rooli ja yleislakkoa pidetään yhtenä työkaluna anarkistiselle vallankumoukselle.
 Katso myös
 Antikommunismi
 Kommunismi Suomessa
 Kommunistinen vallankumous
 Social credit
 Lähteet
 Viitteet
 Kirjallisuutta
 Aiheesta muualla
 Päätöslauselma eurooppalaisesta tietoisuudesta ja totalitarismista. Euroopan parlamentti 2.4.2009.
 Kommunismista Ylen Elävässä arkistossa .
 Encyclopedia Marxism. Marxilaisuuden käsitteisiin keskittynyt verkkotietosanakirja.
 Global Museum on Communism
 Seulonnan keskeiset artikkelit