jurisdiction: US

text: b'CO!v1Ivl0DITYFUTIJRES TRADING COMMISSION\n\n SEMIANNUAL REPORT\n OF THE\n\n\n\n\n OFFICE OF THE\nINSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\n\n . (\'\\\n \':\'., 0\n\n\n\n\nFOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER30,2002\n\x0c u.s. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION\n Three Lafayette Centre\n 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581\n Telephone: (202) 418-5110\n Facsimile: (202) 418-5522\n\n\n October 30, 2002\n OFFICE OF\nINSPEC10R GENERAL\n\n\n\n TO: James E. Newsome\n Chainnan\n\n FROM: A. Roy Lavik Q Q\xc2\xa3-\n Inspector General\n\n SUBJECT: Semiannual Report of the Office of the Inspector General\n\n Attached is the Semiannual Report ofthe Office of the Inspector General for the period\n from April 1, 2002 through September 30, 2002. This report is submitted to you in accordance\n with the requirements of Section 5 of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended.\n\n I appreciate your continuing support of this office.\n\n Attachment\n\x0c OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL\n COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION\n\n\n SEMIANNUAL REPORT\n FOR THE PERIOD FROM\n April!, 2002 THROUGH September 30,2002\n\n\n TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nSUM1v1ARY OF OIG ACTIVITIES [including a description of significant problems, abuses,\n and deficiencies and a description of OIG recommendations for corrective action\n (Mandated by Section 5(a)(1) and (2) of the Act)] 1\n AlJDITS 1\n IN\'VESTIGATIONS 2\n LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEWS 2\n\nOIG RESPONSIBII..ITIES 3\n\nOIG RESOURCES 4\n\nCFTC PROGRAMS AND OPERATIONS 4\n\nCOMPLETED WORK. 4\n AUDITS [including a list of each audit report issued and a summary of each particularly\n significant report (Mandated by Section 5(a)(6) and (7) ofthe Act)] .4\n IN\'VESTIGATIONS 6\n LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEWS 7\n\nAUDIT REPORTS OVER SIX MONTHS OLD 8\n\n CORRECTIVE ACTION NOT COMPLETED [including an identification of each\n significant recommendation described in previous semiannual reports on which\n corrective action has not been completed (Mandated by Section 5(a)(3) of the Act)] 8\n CORRECTIVE ACTION COMPLETED 8\n\x0c MANAGEMENT DECISION NOT MADE [including a summary of each audit\n report issued before the commencement of the reporting period for which no management\n decision has been made by the end of the reporting period (including\n the date and title of each such report), an explanation of the reasons such a\n management decision has not been made, and statement concerning the desired timetable\n for achieving a management decision on each such report (Mandated by Section 5(a)(10)\n of the Act)] 9\n\nSUMMARY OF MATTERS REFERRED TO PROSECUTIVE AUTHORITIES and\n the prosecutions and convictions which have resulted (Mandated by\n Section 5(a)(4) ofthe Act) 9\n\nSUMMARY OF EACH REPORT MADE TO THE AGENCY HEAD\n under Section 6(b)(2) concerning infonnation or assistance unreasonably\n refused or not provided (Mandated by Section 5(a)(5) of the Act) 9\n\nREVISED MANAGEMENT DECISIONS [including description and explanation of\n the reasons for any significant revised management decision made during the\n reporting period (Mandated by Section 5(a)(II) of the Act)] 9\n\nINSPECTOR GENERAL DISAGREEMENT [including infonnation concerning any\n significant management decision with which the Inspector General is in\n disagreement (Mandated by Section 5(a)(12) of the Act)] 9\n\nCtJRRENT ADDITS 10\n\nGAO LIAISON 14\n\nSTRATEGIC PLAN\' 15\n\nCONTACTING THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 20\n\nTABLE 1 -- REPORTS ISSUED WITH QUESTIONED COSTS\n (Mandated by Section 5(a)(8) of the Act) 21\n\nTABLE 2 -- REPORTS ISSUED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT FUNDS BE PUT\n TO BETTER USE (Mandated by Section 5(a)(9) ofthe Act) 22\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\x0c INDEX OF IG ACT REPORTING\n REQUIREMENTS\n\nSection 5(a)(1) 1\n\nSection 5(a)(2) 1\n\nSection 5(a)(3) 8\n\nSection 5(a)(4) 9\n\nSection 5(a)(5) 9\n\nSection 5(a)(6) 4\n\nSection 5(a)(7) 4\n\nSection 5(a)(8) 21\n\nSection 5(a)(9) 22\n\nSection 5(a)(1 0) : 9\n\nSection 5(a)(II) 9\n\nSection 5(a)(12) 9\n\n\n\n\n III\n\x0c SUMMARY OF OIG ACTIVITIES\n\n\nAUDITS\n\n The primary objectives of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Commodity\nFutures Trading Commission (Commission, CFTC) are to help promote long-term efficiency and\neffectiveness in the administration and operation ofthe Commission and to protect against fraud,\nwaste, and abuse. This reporting period\'s OIG audit activities, which are listed below, reflect\nthese objectives.\n\nCurrent Audits\n\n The following are the audits being conducted during the current reporting period and\ncontinuing into the next reporting period. (For additional details, see the section on current\naudits beginning on page 9.)\n\n Review of Enforcement Information Reguirements. The objectives of this review are to\n detemrine what the information needs of all levels in the Division ofEnforcement are,\n whether the information needs are being met, and if the required information can be\n created, stored, and retrieved in a more effective and efficient manner. (For additional\n details, see page 10.)\n\n Review of Agency Compliance with GPRA. The Government Performance and Results\n Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires federal agencies to develop strategic plans, prepare annual\n plans setting performance goals, and report annually on actual performance compared to\n goals. The first report was prepared in March 2000. The objective ofthis review is to\n detemrine how effectively the Commission is complying with GPRA\'s terms. This will\n include an examination of the performance measures devised by the Commission and the\n systems used for gathering the data to report on those performance measures. (For\n additional details, see page 12.)\n\n Review ofEmployee Usage of Govemment Issued Travel Cards. The objective ofthis\n review is to determine whether employees are complying with the agency\'s policy for use\n of the cards. An initial review ofthe agency\'s existing policy regarding travel card\n usage has been conducted, and an audit plan is being prepared. (For additional details,\n see page 13.)\n\nCompleted Audits\n\n The following audits have been completed during this reporting period. (For additional\ndetails, see the section on completed audits beginning on page 4.)-\n\n\n 1\n\x0c Evaluation of the CFTC Information Security Program and Practices, GISRA. The\n Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA) requires the Inspector General or\n his designee to perform annual independent evaluations ofthe information security\n program and practices ofthe agency. (For additional details, see page 5.)\n\n Audit of Los Angeles Lease ofReal Estate. The objectives of this audit were to\n detennine if all payments were made in accordance with the terms of the lease\n agreement, whether established payment procedures were followed, and if the agency\n complied with the Prompt Payment Act. This was the first audit conducted by the Office\n of the Inspector General of the Los Angeles, California regional office lease agreement.\n This audit covered all payments for the subject lease for the period from July 1, 1993\n through December 31, 2001 for all office space leased in the building at 10900 Wilshire\n Boulevard, Los Angeles, California. (For additional details, see page 5.)\n\n Audit ofMinneapolis Lease ofReal Estate. The objectives of this audit were to\n detennine if all payments were made in accordance with the terms of the lease\n agreement, whether established payment procedures were followed, and ifthe agency\n complied with the Prompt Payment Act. This was the first audit conducted by the Office\n of the Inspector General ofthe Minneapolis, Minnesota office lease agreement. This\n audit covered all payments for the subject lease for the period from February 1, 1991\n through August 31, 2002 for all office space leased in the building at 410 South 4th Street,\n Minneapolis Minnesota. (For additional details, see page 6.)\n\n\nINVESTIGATIONS\n\n The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the Inspector General \'may\nreceive and investigate complaints or information from the Commission\'s employees concerning\nthe possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules or regulations, or\nmismanagement, abuse of authority, or gross waste of funds, or a substantial and specific danger\nto the public health and safety.\n\n Two investigations and one informal inquiry were pending as ofthe beginning of the\nreporting period. The OIG opened one investigation during the reporting period and completed\nthree investigations and the informal inquiry. No investigations remained open at the end of the\nperiod. (See the section on investigations beginning on page 6.)\n\n\nLEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEWS\n The OIG reviews proposed and final CFTC regulations and legislation and selected\nexchange rules using the following basic criteria: whether the agency: (1) has identified\nspecifically the problem(s) to be addressed by the proposal; (2) has defined through case study or\ndata analysis a clear link between the proposed solution and the identified problem(s); (3) has\n\n\n 2\n\x0cspecified clearly the means to effectively and efficiently enforce the proposal; (4) has assessed\nthe likely efficiency and effectiveness of alternative solutions; (5) can reasonably document that\nthe proposal will yield positive net benefits over the long tenn; and (6) has met the requirements\nof the Regulatory Flexibility Act and \'the PapelWork Reduction Act.\n\n The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the agency to evaluate the impact of its\nregulations on small entities. The Paperwork Reduction Act requires the agency to manage\neffectively and efficiently its infonnation collections so that they are the least burdensome\nnecessary to achieve the stipulated objectives.\n\nLegislative Activities\n\n The Inspector General continues to be heavily involved in legislative activities.\nCongressional staff were briefed about the various IG issues.\n\n\n\n OIG RESPONSIBILITIES\n\n\n The Office ofthe Inspector General in the Commodity Futures Trading Commission was\ncreated in accordance with the Inspector General Act of 1978 (p.L. 95-452), as amended by the\nInspector General Act Amendments of 1988 (p.L. 100-504). The OIG was established to create\nan independent unit to:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of CFTC\n programs and operations and detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in such\n programs and operations;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Conduct and supervise audits and, where necessary, investigations relating to the\n administration of CFTC programs and operations;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Review existing and proposed legislation and regulations and make recommendations\n concerning their impact on the economy and efficiency of CFTC programs and\n operations or the prevention and detection of fraud and abuse; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Keep the Chainnan and Congress fully infonned about any problems or deficiencies\n in the administration of CFTC programs and operations and provide\n recommendations for correction of these problems or deficiencies.\n\n Given that the CFTC does not have extensive contracts or grant making authority, the\nOIG\'s efforts have been focused on the review of legislative and regulatory proposals and the\nmonitoring of internal CFTC operations.\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0c OIG\'RESOURCES\n\n The OIG consists ofthe Inspector General, two professional staffmembers, and a\n secretary. All positions have been filled since January 2,2000. The present Inspector General\n assumed his position on October 7, 1990.\n\n The OIG, on December 4, 1989, signed a Memorandum ofUnderstanding with the Office\n. ofthe General Counsel (OGe). This Memorandum details the procedures that are used to\n provide the OIG with OGC legal services. An OGe staffmember has been assigned to provide\n such services to the OIG on an as-needed basis.\n\n\n\n CFTC PROGRAMS AND OPERATIONS\n\n Congress created the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 1974 as an\n independent agency with the mandate to regulate commodity futures and option markets in the\n United States. The Commission\'s mandate was renewed and/or expanded in 1978, 1982, 1986,\n 1992, and 1995. In December 2000, the Commission was reauthorized\'by Congress and the\n President through fiscal year (FY) 2005 with the passage of the Commodity Futures\n Modernization Act of 2000 (CFMA).\n\n The CFMA transformed the Commission from a front-line regulatory agency to an\n oversight regulator. Although the Commission\'s approach to regulation will change, the CFTC\'s\n mission remains unchanged. The CFTC continues to be responsible for fostering the economic\n utility of futures markets by encouraging their competitiveness and efficiency, ensuring their\n integrity, and protecting market participants against manipulation, abusive trade practices, and\n fraud. Through effective oversight regulation, the CFTC enables the commodity futures markets\n better to serve their vital function in the nation\'s economy --providing a mechanism for price\n discovery and a means of offsetting price risks.\n\n\n\n COMPLETED WORK\n\n AUDITS\n\n The OIG is required to conduct, supervise and coordinate audits of CFTC programs and\n operations and to ensure that the audits are conducted in accordance with generally accepted\n government auditing standards. The OIG is also required to recommend changes to existing and\n proposed CFTC programs and operations to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and\n to prevent and detect fraud and abuse.\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\x0c The purpose of these audits is to ensure that:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Funds have been expended in a manner consistent with related laws, regulations, and\n policies;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Resources have been managed effectively and efficiently;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Stipulated program objectives have been achieved; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Resources have been safeguarded.\n\n The following audit reports have been issued during the reporting period.\n\n1. Evaluation of the eYre Information Security Program and Practices, GISRA\n\nObjectives.\n\n The Government Information Security Reform Act requires the Inspector General or his\ndesignee to perform annual independent evaluations of the information security program and\npractices of the agency.\n\nStatus.\n\n To provide a comprehensive review of the Commission\'s security program, OIRM and\nOIG jointly engaged a contractor. Using the information supplied by the contractor and the\nprogram managers, the Inspector General responded to the areas raised by the OMB Guidance.\nThe evaluation covered the following systems: the General Support System, Trade Practice\nInvestigations System, Payroll and Personnel Systems, ISS Market Surveillance System, IFR\nCompany Financial Reporting System and the Financial Management System. The Financial\nManagement System consists of three components entitled Financial Management System,\nTravel Manager System, and Electronic Certification System.\n\n In addition to the independent evaluation, the Inspector General produced an executive\nsummary characterizing the results ofthe independent evaluation of the agency\'s infonnation\nsecurity program and practices.\n\n2. Audit of Los Angeles Lease of Real Estate\n\nObjectives.\n\n The objectives ofthis audit were to determine ifa11 payments were made in accordance\nwith the terms ofthe lease agreement, whether established payment procedures were followed,\nand ifthe agency complied with the Prompt Payment Act. This was the first audit conducted by\nthe Office ofthe Inspector General ofthe Los Angeles, California regional office lease\nagreement. This audit covered all payments for the subject lease for the period from July 1, 1993\n\n\n\n 5\n\x0cthrough December 31, 2001 for all office space leased in the building at 10900 Wilshire\nBoulevard, Los Angeles, California.\n\nStatus.\n\n The final report issued on July 15, 2002 stated that, generally, lease payments were made\nin accordance with the tenns of the lease and the Prompt Payment Act.\n\n3. Audit of Minneapolis Lease of Real Estate\n\nObjectives.\n\n The objectives of this audit were to detennine if all payments were made in accordance\nwith the terms of the lease agreement, whether established payment procedures were followed,\nand if the agency complied with the Prompt Payment Act. This was the first audit conducted by\nthe Office ofthe Inspector General of the Minneapolis, Minnesota office lease agreement. This\naudit covered all payments for the subject lease for the period from February 1, 1991 through\nAugust 31, 2002 for all office space leased in the building at 410 South 4th Street, Minneapolis\nMinnesota.\n\nStatus.\n\n The final report issued on September 25, 2002 indicated that payments were generally\nmade in accordance with the terms of the lease and the Prompt Payment Act.\n\n\nINVESTIGATIONS\n\n The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the Inspector General may\nreceive and investigate complaints or information from the Commission\'s employees concerning\nthe possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules or regulations, or\nmismanagement, abuse of authority, or gross waste of funds, or a substantial and specific danger\nto the public health and safety.\n\n Two investigations and one informal inquiry were pending as ofthe beginning ofthe\nreporting period. The OIG opened one investigation during the reporting period and completed\nthree investigations and the infonnal inquiry. No investigations remained open at the end ofthe\nperiod. .\n\n The Commission asked the Inspector General to commence an investigation and report to\nthe Commission factual findings with respect to whether a CFTC official participated personally\nand substantially in particular matters in which he mew he had a financial interest, and/or\nwillfully and mowingly failed to report his financial interest in a limited partnership and\ndistributions in the limited partnership on his annual financial disclosure reports. The Inspector\nGeneral found that the official did not participate personally and substantially in particular\nmatters in which he knew he had a financial interest and that the official did not willfully fail to\n\n\n 6\n\x0c file information required on financial disclosure forms. Accordingly, this investigation was\n closed.\n\n In response to a request from regional CFTC officials that the GIG investigate a series of\n unprofessional actions that were disrupting the flow ofwork in a regional office, the GIG opened\n an investigation. Through a series of interviews and an examination of documentation ofpast\n actions, the GIG documented the observed situation and recommended corrective action to\n responsible officials. Accordingly, this investigation was closed.\n\n At the request ofthe Chairman, the GIG conducted an informal inquiry into allegations\n that a former CFTC employee may have divulged confidential or non-public information,\n participated in matters as a CFTC employee in which he had a financial interest, converted\n. government property for personal use, accepted an illegal bribe or gratuity, accepted employment\n in connection with a matter which was the same as, or substantially related to, a matter in which\n he participated personally and substantially as a public officer or employee, and/or revealed a\n confidence or secret of the CFTC. During the course of the inquiry, the GIG found no\n reasonable grounds to believe that the fonner employee had violated any federal statute or CFTC\n rule, but the GIG did find that the fonner employee may have potentially violated a District of\n Columbia Bar rule by accepting employment in connection with a matter which was ~e same as,\n or substantially related to, a matter in which he participated personally and substantially as a\n public officer or employee. The GIG reported this information to the Gffice ofthe Chairman for\n any action considered appropriate. Accordingly, this inquiry was closed.\n\n The Commission asked the Inspector General to conduct an investigation to assure that a\n CFTC official, from the time ofbeneficial acquisition ofprohibited financial interests, had not\n violated federal conflict of interest law and regulations. In response to that request, the Inspector\n General conducted an investigation. The OIG detennined that the official worked on no matters\n which concerned any entity related to the holdings of the trust in which the official has a\n beneficial interest. The GIG also determined that during this time, the official did not personally\n and substantially participate in any matters of general applicability to the futures industry which\n would have had a direct and predictable effect on the official\'s interests. Accordingly, this\n investigation was closed.\n\n\n LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEWS\n\n As specified in Section 4(a) (2) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, the GIG reviews\n the impact of existing and proposed legislation and regulations on CFTC programs and\n operations and makes recommendations regarding more effective or efficient alternatives or\n protections against fraud and abuse. The GIG also reviews exchange rule proposals and changes.\n\n The GIG has notified the responsible Division as to any concerns with draft and final\n documents for the legislation, rules or investigations listed below. Formal comments were not\n filed with the Commission.\n\n\n\n\n 7\n\x0cRULE REVIEWS INITIATED IN PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIODS\n\n\n1. Relevant Considerations for Default Judgements.\n\nSummary of Action\n\n A question has been raised about the appropriate circumstances for the entry of default\njudgements.\n\nOIGReview\n\n OIG concluded its review of the issue and made recommendations. Staffis currently\nreviewing the issue.\n\nRULE REVIEWS INITIATED THIS REPORTING PERlOD\n\n\n The OIG has reviewed the numerous rules required by the Commodity Futures\nModernization Act of 2000 ("Act"). The Act altered the relationship of the Commission to the\nfutures industry in many regards. The rules sought to reflect this change.\n\nLegislative Activities\n\n The IG continues to be involved in legislative activities and contact has been made with\ncongressional staff on various IG issues.\n\n\n AUDIT REPORTS OVER SIX MONTHS OLD\n\n\nCORRECTIVE ACTION NOT COMPLETED\n There were no instances of audit reports over six months old where corrective action had\nnot been completed.\n\nCORRECTIVE ACTION COMPLETED\n There were no instances ofreports issued before the commencement ofthe reporting\nperiod for which corrective action had been completed by the end of the reporting period.\n\n\n\n\n 8\n\x0cMANAGEMENT DECISION NOT MADE\n\n There were no instances of reports issued before the commencement of the reporting\nperiod for which a management decision had not been made by the end of the reporting period.\n\n\n SUMMARY OF MATTERS REFERRED TO\n PROSECUTIVE AUTHORITIES\n\n No matters were referred to prosecutive authorities during the reporting period\n\n\n\n SUMMARY OF EACH REPORT MADE TO\n THE AGENCY HEAD\n\n No reports were made to the agency head under section 6(b)(2) concerning information\nor assistance unreasonably refused or not provided..\n\n\n\n REVISED MANAGEMENT DECISIONS\n\n No management decisions were revised during the reporting period.\n\n\n\n INSPECTOR GENERAL DISAGREEMENT\n\n The Inspector General does not disagree with any management decisions on OIG\nrecommendations.\n\n\n\n\n 9\n\x0c CURRENT AUDITS\n\n The audit agenda and priorities for the OIG are determined based on the following\nfactors:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Statutory and regulatory requirements;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Adequacy of internal control systems as indicated by vulnerability assessments and\n internal control reviews recommended by OMB Circular A-123;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Changes in the program conditions or particular vulnerability ofthe organization,\n program, activity, or function to problems or deficiencies;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Current and potential dollar magnitude and likely benefits of a review on the\n efficiency or effectiveness of CFTC programs and operations;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Management priorities and improvements that may be possible;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Results of audits of CFTC programs and operations by other Federal agencies; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Availability of audit resources and the potential opportunity costs to the agency.\n\n The audit agenda and summary ofprogress for each audit, which has not yet been\ncompleted, is summarized below. New agenda items periodically will be added, as appropriate,\nalong with a description of the audit objective for each.\n\n1. Review of Enforcement Information Requirements\n\nObjectives.\n\n The mission of the Division of Enforcement is to investigate and prosecute fairly and\neffectively violations of the Commodity Exchange Act and the Commission\'s regulations in\norder to safeguard the integrity ofU.S. futures and options markets and to protect market\nparticipants and futures and options customers. In the course ofits activities, the Division, with\nheadquarters and regional components, plans and follows an often complex course to achieve its\nobjectives \xc2\xb7and receives and creates a huge volume of documents which must be logically stored\nand regularly accessed. To support the accomplishment of these tasks, the Division is relYing on\na collection of very old manual and automated systems to track the progress of activities and to\nstore and retrieve documents. The objectives ofthis review are to detetmine what the\ninformation needs of all levels in the Division are, whether the information needs are being met,\nand if the required information can be created, stored, and retrieved in a more effective and\nefficient manner.\n\n\n\n\n 10\n\x0cStatus.\n\n The joint OIG/Division of Enforcement team produced extensive and detailed narrative\nflow charts of the current operational and administrative functions and processes of the Division\nofEnforcement and delivered them to the Division ofEnforcement and the Office oflnfonnation\nResources Management (OIRM). These products were designed to infonn the analysts in OIRM\nof the inner workings of the Division ofEnforcement and to serve as the base on which the\ninformation requirements of the Division of Enforcement will be defined.\n\n In September 1997, in a joint meeting ofrepresentatives ofthe Division ofEnforcement,\nthe OIG, and OIRM, the principals made commitments of six staff years of effort from OIRM\nand approximately three staff years of effort from the Division ofEnforcement to define the\nsystem requirements ofthe Division.\n\n The Division ofEnforcement and OIRM agreed that the first priority was the\ndevelopment of a system to track documents in the Division of Enforcement in accordance with\nthe Division\'s Enforcement Procedure Number 3. The second phase was devoted to installing a\nsystem to track production within the Division and to report that information in the required\nformats to management ofthe Division. Phase three will concentrate on moving the functions of\nthe attorneys and investigators from paper to computer screen and using the resulting\ninformation to improve the tracking ofproductivity information and the sharing of information\nwithin the Division.\n\n The final version of the first phase of what was being called "the Enforcement\nModernization Project" was delivered to the Division of Enforcement in May 1998. This\nEnforcement Procedure Number 3 System is now being used at all locations of the Division.\nThe second phase, a system which produces the monthly status reports from ail parts of the\nDivision and maintains on screen data on the current status of all matters within the Division, has\nbeen completed. Training in the use of this system was completed during March 1999.\n\n Phase Three, designed to present the Division of Enforcement with a case management,\nlitigation support, and document management system, to tie together the first two systems with\nthis new sYstem, and to automate as many ofthe remaining Enforcement Division processes as\npossible, began with a survey of appropriate off-the-shelf systems and an investigation of\ncurrently available software and hardware which may meet the bulk of identified needs.\nDifficulties in maintaining contractor resource levels led to delays in the pursuit ofPhase 3. A\nteam consisting of staff from the Division ofEnforcement, OIRM, and contractor personnel was\nengaged in a review of available off-the-shelf case management, litigation support, and\ndocument management software from the beginning of Calendar Year 2000.\n\n As a result of this review of available off-the-shelf software, the Division ofEnforcement\nand OIRM developed a list ofrequirements. A Request for Proposals reflecting those\nrequirements was issued on July 19,2000. None of the responses received fully met the\nrequirements specified in the Request for Proposals.\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\x0c In FY 2001, the agency\'s Executive Management Council (EMC) formed an Integrated\nProject Team (IPT) to define the systems requirements of the Division of Enforcement, examine\nalternative methods for meeting the requirements and recommend a solution. The solution,\ndefined by the IPT and known as the e-law project, assumed the availability of$3.7 million to\nfund the purchase and maintenance of all elements of the proposed solution over a number of\nfiscal years.\n\n A total of$1.15 million ofFY 2001 money was set aside for the implementation ofthe e-law\nproject defined by the IPT. Congress added $2.6 million to the e-law project to insure the\navailability ofDivision of Enforcement records in the event of a repeat of the September 11,\n2001 terrorist attack. With the full $3.7 million now available for implementation, the agency\nexpects to move forward expeditiously with the purchase of all of the elements of the e-law\nsystem.\n\n2. Review of Agency Compliance with GPRA\n\nObjective.\n\n The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 requires federal agencies to\ndevelop strategic plans, prepare annual plans setting performance goals, and report annually on\nactual performance compared to goals. The first report was prepared in March 2000. The\nobjective of this review is to determine how effectively the Commission is complying with\nGPRA\'s terms. This will include an examination of the performance measures devised by the\nCommission and the systems used for gathering the data to report on those performance\nmeasures.\n\nStatus.\n\n In response to Congressional interest, the Office ofthe Inspector General consulted with\nand advised the Commission\'s operating divisions concerning GPRA requirements. The Office\nof the Inspector General reviewed the Commission\'s FY 2001, FY 2002 and FY 2003 Annual\nPerformance Plan before each was submitted to Congress. Subsequently, the OIG selectively\nreviewed the FY 1999, FY 2000 and FY 2001 Annual Performance Reports after they were\nsubmitted to Congress. The DIG concluded that the agency had made improvements in defining\nits goals and identifying measures for reaching its stated goals.\n\n The Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was enacted in fiscal year 2001,\nfundamentally changed the regulatory structure for the commodity futures markets. The\nCommission adopted new rules and procedures consistent with the regulatory reforms presented\nin that Act. This wholesale change in approach challenged each operating division to redefine its\nservice goals under GRPA. The agency implemented a reorganization that allows the \'<,\nCommission to more effectively respond to the new Act.\n\n The Office of the Inspector General participated in a number of discussions on how to\nbest reflect the agency\'s new regulatory paradigm in structuring future goals and measures under\nGPRA. In conjunction with other federal agencies\' Inspectors General, the Office ofthe\n\n\n\n 12\n\x0cInspector General is participating in the development ofbest practices for measuring compliance\nwith the requirements of GPRA. During the second quarter, the OIG will review the goals and\nobjectives prepared by the senior managers for adherence to the requirements of GPRA. After\nthis review, the OIG will verify and validate a subset of the data submitted in the GPRA report.\n\n3. Review of Employee Usage of Government Issued Travel Cards\n\nObjective.\n\n Government authorized credit cards are issued to employees for use during authorized\nGovernment travel. The objective of this review is to examine agency employees\' travel card\nusage since 1999 and to ascertain whether that usage complied with the agency\'s policy.\n\nStatus.\n\n The OIG has reviewed the agency\'s policy regarding travel card usage, and an audit plan\nis being prepared.\n\n\n\n\n 13\n\x0c GAO LIAISON\n\n\n The OIG is charged with providing policy direction for, and conducting, supervising, and\ncoordinating audits and investigations relating to CFTC programs and operations. In addition,\nthe OIG is required to recommend policies for, and conduct, supervise, and coordinate with other\nFederal agencies, state and local Governmental agencies, and nongovernmental entities, audits,\ninvestigations, and evaluations regarding the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of CFTC\nprograms and operations.\n\n GAO also conducts audits of CFTC activities, and OIG plans its audits so as not to\nduplicate GAO\'s efforts. Moreover, OIG in its audits activities identifies the goals of each audit\nand the methods ofreaching the goals so as to minimize the requirements placed on CFTC\nresources.\n\n\n\n\n 14\n\x0c STRATEGIC PLAN\n FOR THE\n OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the Commodity Futures Trading\nCommission (CFTC) was created in accordance with the Inspector General Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-\n452), as amended by the Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988 (P.L. 100-504). The OIG\nwas established to create an independent unit to:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration ofCFTC\n programs and operations and detect and prevent fraud., waste, and abuse in such\n programs and operations;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Conduct and supervise audits and investigations relating to the administration of\n CFTC programs and operations;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Review existing and proposed legislation and regulations and make recommendations\n concerning their impact on the economy and efficiency of CFTC programs and\n operations or the prevention and detection of fraud and abuse; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Keep the Chairman and Congress fully informed about any problems or deficiencies\n in the administration of CFTC programs and operations and provide\n recommendations for correction ofthese problems or deficiencies.\n\n Accordingly, the OIG has established three programs to carry out its responsibilities:\naudit, investigation, and legislative and regulatory review. A summary ofthose programs\nfollows.\n\nAUDIT\n\n The primary objectives of the OIG are to promote long-term efficiency and effectiveness\nin the administration and operation of the Commission and to protect against fraud and abuse.\n\n The key to effectively and efficiently managing the CFTC is information. Top level\nmanagers and decision makers require a steady stream of organized data on the effects oftheir\npolicy decisions and resource allocations on the operations of the Commission. Once having\nmade the decision to change resource levels or policy, managers must receive accurate and\ntimely reports of the operational effects of their decision so they can determine ifthe change is in\nthe direction and of the magnitude predicted. In the absence of such information, top level\nmanagers cannot adequately perform their jobs.\n\n\n\n\n 15\n\x0c A number of obstacles to acquiring and transmitting the desired information to decision\nmakers may exist in some programs. Principal among them is the Commission\'s apparent\ndifficulty in many instances in tracking the progress of a particular action across organizational\nlines within the Commission.\n\n A simple example is the Reparations Program prior to the installation of an OIG\nrecommended unified, Commission-wide tracking system. Complaints are received and\nprocessed and hearings are held in the Office ofProceedings; appeals of initial decisions in\nreparations cases are transmitted to the Office of the General Counsel where proposed\nCommission opinions are drafted; and appeals are decided by the Commission with the\npaperwork being handled by the Office ofthe Secretariat. Each office involved in the process\nhad a separate tracking system without ties to the tracking systems in the offices preceding them\nor following them in the process. Each office treated the case as ifit were brand new to the\nCommission when they received it. As a result, there was no provision for tracking information\nacross organizational lines. If the Chairman wanted to mow how much time was spent on the\naverage reparations case of a particular description at each stage in the process, that information\nwas unavailable without an extensive expenditure ofmanual labor.\n\n A related problem is the difficulty the Commission has in associating resources devoted\nto an activity with the results ofthat activity. The Commission does a good job oftracking\nresources expended. It can determine how much stafftime and material at what cost was spent\nin a particular activity. Some Commission organizations can even associate costs with particular\nprojects. What a program manager may have great difficulty doing, however, is telling a\ndecision maker that for a specific level or increase in resources, the program manager will\ndeliver a specific level of increased output. Without this information from all programs\ncompeting for limited resources, decision makers cannot make reasoned resource allocation\njudgements. Decision makers are forced to rely on intuition and anecdotal evidence.\n\n To increase the efficiency and the effectiveness of the management ofCFTC programs\nand operations, the OIG will, in addition to conducting mandatory audits, concentrate its audit\nresources on the identification of information voids and the lack of continuity in the flow of\ninformation across organizational lines from the beginning of a process until its conclusion. The\nOIG will recommend the implementation of any system improvements where the benefits of\nimplementing the change exceed the costs.\n\n In addition to our efforts to bring technology to bear on the information requirements of\nthe Commission, the GIG has been following the Commission\'s development ofmeasures and\nsystems ofmeasurement in response to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).\nAs the Commission implements GPRA, the OIG will devote significant resources to monitoring\nagency performance to insure that the data is accurately gathered and that the measures reported\nare the best available for demonstrating program performance.\n\nINVESTIGATIONS\n\n The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the Inspector General may\nreceive and investigate complaints or information from the Commission\'s employees concerning\n\n\n 16\n\x0cthe possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules or regulations, or\nmismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to\nthe public health and safety.\n\n The OIG has to date conducted only a reactive investigative program chiefly relying on\nunsolicited employee complaints as the source of investigative leads. This reactive program has\nresulted in only a handful of investigations per year. This strategy was followed because the\nOIG believed that an independent regulatory agency such as the CFTC without grant money or\nsubstantial contracts to award was not likely to generate a substantial investigative workload.\n\n To insure that employee complaints could easily reach the OIG, a 24-hour hotline was\nestablished in February 1993 to receive complaints. The hotline\'s existence is publicized in the\nagency-wide telephone book and in this semiannual report.\n\n Because ofthe reactive nature ofthe OIG\'s investigative program, no investigative\nagenda has been established.\n\nLEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEW\n\n Because of the importance of this activity in an economic regulatory agency, the OIG\nreviews proposed and final CFTC regulations and legislation and selected exchange rules using\nfive basic criteria: Whether the agency: (1) has identified specifically the problem(s) to be\naddressed by the proposal; (2) has defined through case study or data analysis a clear link\nbetween the proposed solution and the identified problem(s); (3) has specified clearly the means\nto effectively and efficiently enforce the proposal; (4) has assessed the likely efficiency and\neffectiveness of alternative solutions; (5) can reasonably document that the proposal will yield\npositive net benefits over the long term; and (6) has met the requirements of the Regulatory\nFlexibility Act and the PapelWork Reduction Act.\n\n The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the agency to evaluate the impact of its\nregulations on small entities. The PapelWork Reduction Act requires the agency to manage\neffectively and efficiently its infonnation collections so that they are the least burdensome\nnecessary to achieve the stipulated objectives.\n\n Because the OIG does not initiate legislation or, generally, regulations, the OIG\nlegislative and regulatory review program is reactive to the legislative and regulatory proposals\ndeveloped by others. Accordingly, no independent legislative and regulatory review agenda has\nbeen established.\n\n\n\n\n 17\n\x0c AUDIT AGENDA\n\nANNUAL AUDITS\n\n The following audit is performed on an annual basis.\n\nAudit of Compliance with the Federal Managers\' Financial Integrity Act\n\n In support of O:rvm Circular A-123 (Revised), the Inspector General will evaluate,\nprovide technical assistance, and advise the agency head as to whether the agency\'s review and\nevaluation process was conducted in accordance with the circular\'s requirements.\n\nOTHER AUDITS\n\n The OIG intends to focus the balance ofits audit resources on insuring that the Chairman,\nthe Commissioners, and program managers have timely, useful information on the progress of\nthe CFTC\'s programs in meeting their goals and objectives. For example, emphasis will be\nplaced on detennining whether all managerial levels engaged in a process can track the progress\noftheir various programs. The tracking systems required in many, though not all, programs will\ncross formal organizational lines.\n\n These audits will entail a cataloging and description of all ofthe manual and automated\nsystems used by an organization to gather information on its use ofresources, the results of the\ndevotion ofthose resources (including definitions of measurements ofaccomplishment), and the\nreporting of results and associated costs to the upper level managers in the Division and to the\nChainnan and the Commissioners. Cataloging of these decision support systems will be\nfollowed by an assessment ofwhether all concerned officials are timely receiving the\ninformation they require to efficiently allocate resources to those uses which best accomplish the\npriorities of the Commission. If any elements are lacking in the information systems, they will\nbe identified and improvements will be recommended if they can be implemented in a\ncostlbeneficial manner.\n\n If recommendations are successfully implemented, the proposed systems should allow\nthe Chairman, the Commissioners, and concerned program managers to track the progress of a\nparticular program across organizational lines and to quickly determine the effects, if any, of\nchanges in policy, procedure, or staffing.\n\n The first step in accomplishing this goal will be to concentrate on documenting, and\nrecommending the improvement and/or development of tracking systems in every program\nelement throughout the Commission.\n\n In addition to our focus on facilitating the development of an efficient flow of\ninformation throughout the agency, the OIG will devote resources to the audit of compliance\nwith the terms of agency contracts (such as, leases of space in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles,\nand Washington, D.C.), the collection of funds (such as, compliance with the terms of the Debt\nCollection Improvement Act of 1996 and the resultant Memorandum ofUnderstanding with\n\n\n 18\n\x0cTreasury), and agency compliance with Congressional mandates (such as, the Government\nPerformance and Results Act and the Government Information Security Reform Act).\n\nRESOURCESREQumED\n The DIG estimates that approximately one staff year of effort will be devoted over each\nof the next five years to the development of an efficient flow of information throughout the\nagency. Nine-tenths of a staff year of effort will be devoted over each ofthe next five years to\nthe compliance audits described above. The "Annual Audits" are expected to consume\napproximately one-tenth staff year per year.\n\n\n\n\n 19\n\x0c CONTACTING THE OFFICE OF THE\n INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\n The OIG is located at 1155 21 st Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20581. The telephone\nnumber is (202)418-5110. The facsimile number is (202)418-5522. The hotline number is\n(202)418-5510. Regular business hours are between 8:30 AM and 5:00 PM, Monday through\nFriday, except Federal holidays.\n\n\n\n\n ..,\n\n\n\n\n 20\n\x0c Table 1\n Reports Issued with Questioned Costs\n (Aprill, 2002 - September 30, 2002)\n\n\n Dollar Value\n Thousands\n NWI1ber Questioned Unsupported\n\nA. For which no management decision has\n been made by the commencement of the\n reporting period o o o\nB. Which were issued during the reporting\n period o o o\n Subtotals (A + B) o o o\nc. For which a management decision was\n made during the reporting period o o o\n (I) dollar value of\n disallowed costs o o o\n (ii) dollar value of costs not\n disallowed o o o\nD. For which no management decision\n has been made by the end of the\n reporting period o o o\n\n\n\n\n 21\n\x0c Table 2\n Reports Issued with Recommendations\n That Funds be Put to Better Use\n (Aprill, 2002 - SepteRlber 30, 2002)\n\n\n Dollar Value\n Number Thousands\n\nA. For which no management decision has\n been made by the commencement of the\n reporting period o o\nB. Which were issued during the reporting\n period o o\n Subtotals (A + B) o o\nc. For which a management decision was\n made during the reporting period o o\n (i) dollar value of\n recommendations that\n were agreed to by management\n o o\n (ii) dollar value of\n recommendations that\n were not agreed to by\n management o o\nD. For which no management decision\n has been made by the end of the\n reporting period o o\n\n\n\n\n 22\n\x0c,\n\x0c The InspectorGeneral\'\n needsyourhelpto\n assurethe integrity of\n CFTC\'s programs.\n\n\n\nReport FRAUD, WASTE\nor ABUSE to the\nINSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n OTLINE\n(202)418-551 0\n Office of the Inspector General\n Commodity Futures Trading Commi\'ssion\n 1155 21ST Street, N.W.\n Washington, D.C. 20581\n\x0c'


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 24.4.2017
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 129/30
 Rikors ippreżentat fis-6 ta’ Marzu 2017 – Kibelisa vs Il-Kunsill
 (Kawża T-139/17)
 (2017/C 129/45)
 Lingwa tal-kawża: il-Franċiż
 Partijiet
 Rikorrent: Roger Kibelisa (Kinshasa, ir-Repubblika Demokratika tal-Kongo) (rappreżentant: O. Okito, avukat)
 Konvenut: Il-Kunsill tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 Talbiet
 —
 tannulla r-Regolament (UE) 2016/2230 li jimplementa d-Deċiżjoni tal-Kunsill (PESK) 2016/2231, tat-12 ta’ Diċembru 2016, li timponi ċerti miżuri speċifiċi restrittivi diretti kontra persuni li jaġixxu bi ksur tal-embargo tal-armi impost fuq ir-Repubblika Demokratika tal-Kongo, u li temenda d-Deċiżjoni 2010/788/PESK, sa fejn dan jikkonċerna lil Roger Kibelisa;
 —
 tikkundanna lill-Kunsill ibati, minbarra l-ispejjeż tiegħu, dawk tar-rikorrent kif ukoll tal-intervenjenti kollha.
 Motivi u argumenti prinċipali
 Insostenn tar-rikors tiegħu, ir-rikorrent jinvoka żewġ motivi.
 1.
 L-ewwel motiv ibbażat fuq ksur tal-forom proċedurali sostanzjali mwettaq mill-Kunsill, u b’mod partikolari fuq ksur tad-drittijiet tad-difiża tar-rikorrent, fuq ksur tal-obbligu ta’ motivazzjoni li l-Kunsill għandu kif ukoll fuq ksur tad-dritt għal rimedju effettiv tar-rikorrent.
 2.
 It-tieni motiv ibbażat fuq ksur tal-prinċipji ġenerali tad-dritt tal-Unjoni Ewropea, inkwantu l-Kunsill kiser id-dritt għall-proprjetà tar-rikorrent.


type: wikipedia

text:
Rolands Aļukonis (, dzimis ) ir lietuviešu hokejists, aizsargs. Visu savu profesionālā spēlētāja karjeru (sākot ar 1997. gadu) viņš aizvadījis Lietuvas spēcīgākajā klubā SC Energija, kurā spēlē arī pašlaik. Vienīgi 2005.—06. gada sezonu viņš aizvadīja Latvijas klubā HK Liepājas Metalurgs. 2006.—07. gada sezonā bija Latvijas hokeja līgas rezultatīvākais aizsargs. Lietuvas izlases sastāvā piedalījies 16 Pasaules čempionātos.
 Karjeras statistika
 Spēles izlasē
 Ārējās saites
 Lietuvas hokejisti
 1981. gadā dzimušie
 SC Energija spēlētāji
 HK Liepājas Metalurga spēlētāji


type: other

text:
Fake news grosolan despre decizia CCR într-un articol din „Financial Times”
 Acum cîteva zile, în „FINANCIAL TIMES”, care era cîndva una dintre cele mai prestigioase publicaţii, sub semnătura lui Tony Barber, a apărut articolul „The tides of illiberalism are beginning to ebb in eastern Europe. Popular mobilisation in defence of the rule of law deserves western support” (Valurile iliberalismului încep să se estompeze în Europa de Est. Mobilizarea populară în apărarea statului de drept merită sprijin occidental).
 Textul acesta este o nouă dovadă că unii jurnalişti occidentali scriu după ureche despre România şi ţările din Est, mai exact după o ureche conectată la ceea ce la noi se numeşte „Sistem” sau şi mai exact, „Statul paralel”!
 Cum altfel să interpretăm articolul lui Tony Barber, din moment ce în textul apărut în „Financial Times” citim:
 „La sfârşitul lui iulie, răpirea şi uciderea unei fete românce de 15 ani a scandalizat într-aşa măsură opinia publică, încât Curtea Constituţională a respins nişte modificări controversate la Legile justiţiei, adoptate de social-democraţii (PSD) de la guvernare. Principalul obiectiv al acestor modificări era subminarea independenţei justiţiei şi protejarea mai marilor partidului şi a amicilor lor de acuzaţii de corupţie. Însă procurori şi cetăţeni deopotrivă au profitat de crimă pentru a argumenta că modificările au slăbit abilitatea statului de a combate infracţiunile grave în general” (traducere HotNews).
 Nu ştim ce efect au astfel de afirmaţii iresponsabile asupra cititorilor englezi, dar la noi ele sună exact ca dracu’ pentru că sînt complet lipsite de logică, nefiind altceva decît speculaţii ordinare, menite să reîncălzească ciorba rîncedă care a fost mestecată ani de zile de #Rezist sau procurorii Sistemului.
 Este o adevărată nebunie să legi „Cazul Caracal” de Decizia CCR, prin care au fost respinse modificările Parlamentului la Legile Justiţiei. Şi asta pentru că Decizia CCR spune exact contrariul, adică faptul că nu a inclus modificarea articolelor declarate deja neconctituţionale: „Curtea a reţinut, în esenţă, faptul că, în cadrul procesului de reexaminare a legii, Parlamentul nu a transpus în integralitate deciziile Curţii Constituţionale incidente în materie penală. Prin urmare, Curtea a constatat că legea criticată încalcă art. 147 alin. (2) din Constituţie” (Decizia CCR din 29 iulie 2019).
 Ce legătură are această constatare a CCR cu „Cazul Caracal”? Evident, absolut niciuna! Dacă autorul ar fi ştiut despre ce scrie, ar fi deschisConstituţia României pentru a afla ce scrie la art. 147. al. 2, la care se referă decizia CCR şi ar fi aflat că:
 „În cazurile de neconstituţionalitate care privesc legile, înainte de promulgarea acestora, Parlamentul este obligat să reexamineze dispoziţiile respective pentru punerea lor de acord cu decizia Curţii Constituţionale”.
 Deci, respingerea modificărilor din Parlament la Codurile penale nu are nici o legătură nici cu protestele #Rezist, nici cu alegaţiile asociaţiilor procurorilor şi nici cu „Cazul Caracal”, ci doar cu faptul că acele peste 150 de articole din Codurile penale declarate neconstituţionale nu au fost incluse, în Legea pentru modificarea şi completarea Legii nr.286/2009 privind Codul penal, integral şi în forma decisă de CCR!
 O altă iresponsabilitate a autorului articolului din „Financial Times” este aceea că presupune că această Decizie a CCR a venit în urma reacţiei publice în faţa „Cazului Alexandra”, ca şi cum CCR ar lua astfel de decizii din cauza presiunilor cuiva, deşi impactul cazului de la Caracal vizează cu totul altceva, adică tocmai felul în care organele statului, în special procurorii, au reacţionat după telefonul Alexandrei la 112!
 Este revoltător că tocmai autorul articolului nu vede redundanţa afirmaţiilor sale, ridicîndu-i în slăvi pe procurorii care au protestat ilegal, deşi tocmai procurorii sînt acuzaţi de opinia publică pentru că nu au intervenit prompt pentru a o salva pe Alexandra!
 De-a dreptul odioasă este această speculaţie a lui Tony Barber, autorul articolului din „Financial Times”, în care se foloseşte tragedia din Caracal pentru a justifica supoziţiile deja ridicole din vremea DNA-ului condus de Codruţa Kovesi, prin care, în realitate, erau aplaudate abuzurile procurorilor.
 Este suficient, poate, să reamintim că acest Tony Barber este cel care scria în Financial Times din 16 august 2018: „Romanian government ministers bitterly resent this procedure. But the chances that the EU might lift it received a blow in July when Laura Codruta Kovesi, the head of Romania’s independent anti-corruption agency, was fired after what she described as a politically motivated campaign to neutralise her efforts at prosecuting corruption in high places”.
 Dacă Tony Barner asta a înţeles din revocarea Codruţei Kovesi, că a fost dată afară pe motive politice, atunci este de înţeles şi dezinformarea pe care o face acum, legînd „Cazul Caracal” de Decizia CCR, cu care nu are absolut nici o legătură.
 One Response “Fake news grosolan despre decizia CCR într-un articol din „Financial Times””
 pt dezinform. indus. de jurnlisti externi – element constitutiv tip mind control, ce inst. ii judec., pedepseste... intreb.
 « Iulian Capsali: ”Măi fraților, țara asta geme de psihopații lui Johannis&Barna?!” || Pentru Trump nu-i decît un prostănac! »


type: contracts

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21980A1017(01)
 Regeling, in de vorm van een briefwisseling, tussen de Europese Economische Gemeenschap en de Argentijnse Republiek inzake de handel in vlees van schapen en lammeren
 Publicatieblad Nr. L 275 van 18/10/1980 blz. 0014 - 0019 Bijzondere uitgave in het Fins: Hoofdstuk 3 Deel 12 blz. 0148 Bijzondere uitgave in het Zweeds: Hoofdstuk 3 Deel 12 blz. 0148 Bijzondere uitgave in het Grieks: Hoofdstuk 11 Deel 22 blz. 0004 Bijzondere uitgave in het Spaans: Hoofdstuk 03 Deel 19 blz. 0103 Bijzondere uitgave in het Portugees: Hoofdstuk 03 Deel 19 blz. 0103
 REGELING in de vorm van een briefwisseling, tussen de Europese Economische Gemeenschap en de Argentijnse Republiek inzake de handel in vlees van schapen en lammeren Brief nr. 1 Mijnheer, Ik heb de eer te verwijzen naar de onlangs tussen onze respectieve delegaties gevoerde onderhandelingen welke ten doel hadden bepalingen uit te werken met betrekking tot de invoer in de Europese Economische Gemeenschap van schape-, lams- en geitevlees uit Argentinië, in verband met de tenuitvoerlegging door de Gemeenschap van de gemeenschappelijke ordening der markten in de sector schape- en geitevlees. In de loop van deze onderhandelingen zijn beide partijen het volgende overeengekomen: 1. Deze regeling heeft betrekking op: - vers of gekoeld vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten (02.01 A IV a)); - bevroren vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten (02.01 A IV b)). 2. In het kader van deze regeling wordt de toegestane uitvoer van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten uit Argentinië naar de Gemeenschap vastgesteld op de volgende jaarlijkse hoeveelheid : 20 000 metrieke ton, uitgedrukt in geslacht gewicht (1). Ter verzekering van een goede werking van de regeling gaat Argentinië de verplichting aan de procedures toe te passen die nodig zijn om te bewerkstelligen dat de werkelijk uitgevoerde jaarlijkse hoeveelheid de vastgestelde hoeveelheid niet overschrijdt en dat deze wordt uitgevoerd met inachtneming van de traditionele structuur van de aanbiedingsvormen (bevroren vlees of gekoeld vlees). Indien wijzigingen in de technologie en de handel het mogelijk maken de structuur van de handel wat betreft de aanbiedingsvorm te veranderen, zullen de partijen bij deze regeling alvorens enige verandering aan te brengen in het kader van het in punt 10 bedoelde comité met elkaar overleg plegen ten einde een geschikte oplossing te vinden. 3. Indien de Gemeenschap de vrijwaringsclausule inroept, draagt zij er zorg voor dat de toegang van Argentinië tot de Gemeenschap als omschreven in deze regeling, niet nadelig wordt beïnvloed. 4. Indien de invoer uit Argentinië in de loop van een jaar de overeengekomen hoeveelheid overschrijdt, behoudt de Gemeenschap zich het recht voor de invoer uit dat land voor de rest van dat jaar te schorsen. De hoeveelheid waarmee de toegestane invoer is overschreden, wordt in mindering gebracht op het Argentijnse uitvoerquotum voor het volgende jaar. 5. De Gemeenschap verbindt zich ertoe de heffing bij invoer van onder deze regeling vallende produkten te beperken tot maximum 10 % ad valorem. (1)Geslacht gewicht (equivalent van het gewicht met been). Onder deze term wordt verstaan het gewicht van met been aangeboden vlees, alsmede het gewicht van vlees zonder been omgerekend met behulp van een coëfficiënt in gewicht vlees met been. Geraamd kan worden dat 55 kg schapevlees zonder been overeenstemt met 100 kg vlees met been en dat 60 kg lamsvlees zonder been overeenstemt met 100 kg vlees met been. 6. Bij de toetreding van nieuwe Lid-Staten wijzigt de Gemeenschap na raadpleging van Argentinië de in punt 2 genoemde hoeveelheid naar gelang van de handel van Argentinië met elke nieuwe Lid-Staat. De belasting bij invoer voor deze nieuwe Lid-Staten zal worden vastgesteld overeenkomstig de voorschriften van het Toetredingsverdrag, rekening houdend met de in punt 5 van deze regeling genoemde maximumheffing. De in punt 2 bedoelde totale hoeveelheid wordt met ingang van de datum van toetreding van Griekenland tot de Gemeenschap vastgesteld op 23 000 metrieke ton geslacht gewicht. 7. De Gemeenschap zal ernaar streven elke ontwikkeling van de markt die de afzet op de markt van de Gemeenschap van vlees van schapen en lammeren afkomstig uit Argentinië binnen de grens van de overeengekomen hoeveelheid in gevaar zou kunnen brengen, te voorkomen. In het bijzonder zal de Gemeenschap maatregelen nemen ten einde erop toe te zien dat de afzet van de interventievoorraden bevroren vlees, resulterende uit de tenuitvoerlegging van de verordening, de betrokken afzet van vlees van schapen en lammeren uit Argentinië niet zal doorkruisen. 8. Gelet op de doelstellingen en bepalingen van deze regeling betuigt de Gemeenschap er haar instemming mede, dat elke effectieve toepassing van restituties of enige andere vorm van steun met betrekking tot de uitvoer van vlees van schapen en lammeren, alsmede van levende schapen of lammeren bestemd voor de slacht, slechts zal geschieden op basis van prijzen en voorwaarden die voldoen aan de bestaande internationale verplichtingen en met inachtneming van het traditionele aandeel van de Gemeenschap in de wereldhandel in deze produkten. Deze formulering moet worden geïnterpreteerd op een wijze die in overeenstemming is met artikel XVI van de Algemene Overeenkomst betreffende Tarieven en Handel (GATT) en met name met artikel 10, lid 2, sub c), van de Overeenkomst inzake de interpretatie en de toepassing van de artikelen VI, XVI en XXIII van de Algemene Overeenkomst betreffende Tarieven en Handel. 9. Argentinië ziet erop toe dat deze regeling in acht wordt genomen, met name door de afgifte van uitvoercertificaten voor de in punt 1 bedoelde produkten, binnen de grenzen van de in deze regeling genoemde hoeveelheden. Van haar kant verbindt de Gemeenschap zich ertoe alle nodige bepalingen vast te stellen ten einde de afgifte van een invoercertificaat voor de bovengenoemde produkten, van oorsprong uit Argentinië, afhankelijk te stellen van de overlegging van een uitvoercertificaat afgegeven door de bevoegde door de Argentijnse Regering aangewezen autoriteiten. De bepalingen ter uitvoering van deze regeling zullen zodanig worden vastgesteld dat het stellen van een waarborg voor de afgifte van het invoercertificaat voor de betrokken produkten niet noodzakelijk is. Deze uitvoeringsbepalingen zullen tevens inhouden dat de bevoegde Argentijnse autoriteiten de bevoegde autoriteiten van de Gemeenschap periodiek de hoeveelheden mededelen waarvoor uitvoercertificaten zijn afgegeven, eventueel onderverdeeld naar bestemming. 10. Er wordt een Raadgevend Comité ingesteld, samengesteld uit vertegenwoordigers van de Gemeenschap en van Argentinië. Het Comité ziet erop toe dat de regeling correct wordt toegepast en harmonisch functioneert. Het bestudeert regelmatig de ontwikkeling van de markten van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten van de beide partijen en die van de internationale markt, alsmede de voorwaarden voor de afzet op deze markten, met inbegrip van die welke voortvloeien uit de in punt 7 van deze regeling vastgestelde doelstelling. Het ziet erop toe dat de correcte toepassing van de regeling niet nadelig wordt beïnvloed door de uitvoer naar de Gemeenschap van produkten op basis van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten welke vallen onder niet in de regeling genoemde tariefposten. Het Comité bespreekt alle vraagstukken die zich bij de toepassing van de regeling kunnen voordoen en zal de bevoegde instanties passende oplossingen aanbevelen. 11. De bepalingen van deze regeling worden aanvaard onverminderd de rechten en verplichtingen van de partijen in het kader van de GATT. 12. De in punt 2 vastgestelde jaarlijkse hoeveelheid heeft betrekking op de periode van 1 januari tot en met 31 december. De hoeveelheid welke geldt met ingang van de inwerkingtreding van deze regeling tot 1 januari van het volgende jaar zal naar rato van de totale jaarlijkse hoeveelheid worden vastgesteld, rekening houdend met de seizoengebonden ontwikkeling van het handelsverkeer. 13. Deze regeling is van toepassing, enerzijds, op de gebieden waar het Verdrag tot oprichting van de Europese Economische Gemeenschap van toepassing is en onder de in dat Verdrag neergelegde voorwaarden en, anderzijds, op het grondgebied van de Argentijnse Republiek. 14. Deze regeling treedt in werking op 20 oktober 1980. Zij blijft van kracht tot en met 31 maart 1984, en zal nadien van kracht blijven onder voorbehoud van het recht van beide partijen haar schriftelijk op te zeggen met inachtneming van een opzegtermijn van een jaar. In elk geval zullen de bepalingen van deze regeling door beide partijen vóór 1 april 1984 aan een onderzoek worden onderworpen ten einde er zo nodig aanpassingen in aan te brengen. Ik moge U verzoeken mij te willen bevestigen dat Uw Regering met het bovenstaande instemt. Gelieve, Mijnheer, de verzekering van mijn bijzondere hoogachting te aanvaarden. Namens de Raad van de Europese Gemeenschappen Brief nr. 2 Mijnheer, Ik heb de eer U de ontvangst te bevestigen van Uw brief van heden, welke als volgt luidt: "Ik heb de eer te verwijzen naar de onlangs tussen onze respectieve delegaties gevoerde onderhandelingen welke ten doel hadden bepalingen uit te werken met betrekking tot de invoer in de Europese Economische Gemeenschap van schape-, lams- en geitevlees uit Argentinië, in verband met de tenuitvoerlegging door de Gemeenschap van de gemeenschappelijke ordening der markten in de sector schape- en geitevlees. In de loop van deze onderhandelingen zijn beide partijen het volgende overeengekomen: 1. Deze regeling heeft betrekking op: - vers of gekoeld vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten (02.01 A IV a)); - bevroren vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten (02.01 A IV b)). 2. In het kader van deze regeling wordt de toegestane uitvoer van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten uit Argentinië naar de Gemeenschap vastgesteld op de volgende jaarlijkse hoeveelheid : 20 000 metrieke ton, uitgedrukt in geslacht gewicht (1). Ter verzekering van een goede werking van de regeling gaat Argentinië de verplichting aan de procedures toe te passen die nodig zijn om te bewerkstelligen dat de werkelijk uitgevoerde jaarlijkse hoeveelheid de vastgestelde hoeveelheid niet overschrijdt en dat deze wordt uitgevoerd met inachtneming van de traditionele structuur van de aanbiedingsvormen (bevroren vlees of gekoeld vlees). Indien wijzigingen in de technologie en de handel het mogelijk maken de structuur van de handel wat betreft de aanbiedingsvorm te veranderen, zullen de partijen bij deze regeling alvorens enige verandering aan te brengen in het kader van het in punt 10 bedoelde comité met elkaar overleg plegen ten einde een geschikte oplossing te vinden. 3. Indien de Gemeenschap de vrijwaringsclausule inroept, draagt zij er zorg voor dat de toegang van Argentinië tot de Gemeenschap als omschreven in deze regeling, niet nadelig wordt beïnvloed. 4. Indien de invoer uit Argentinië in de loop van een jaar de overeengekomen hoeveelheid overschrijdt, behoudt de Gemeenschap zich het recht voor de invoer uit dat land voor de rest van dat jaar te schorsen. De hoeveelheid waarmee de toegestane invoer is overschreden, wordt in mindering gebracht op het Argentijnse uitvoerquotum voor het volgende jaar. 5. De Gemeenschap verbindt zich ertoe de heffing bij invoer van onder deze regeling vallende produkten te beperken tot maximum 10 % ad valorem. 6. Bij de toetreding van nieuwe Lid-Staten wijzigt de Gemeenschap na raadpleging van Argentinië de in punt 2 genoemde hoeveelheid naar gelang van de handel van Argentinië met elke nieuwe Lid-Staat. (1)Geslacht gewicht (equivalent van het gewicht met been). Onder deze term wordt verstaan het gewicht van met been aangeboden vlees, alsmede het gewicht van vlees zonder been omgerekend met behulp van een coëfficiënt in gewicht vlees met been. Geraamd kan worden dat 55 kg schapevlees zonder been overeenstemt met 100 kg vlees met been en dat 60 kg lamsvlees zonder been overeenstemt met 100 kg vlees met been. De belasting bij invoer voor deze nieuwe Lid-Staten zal worden vastgesteld overeenkomstig de voorschriften van het Toetredingsverdrag, rekening houdend met de in punt 5 van deze regeling genoemde maximumheffing. De in punt 2 bedoelde totale hoeveelheid wordt met ingang van de datum van toetreding van Griekenland tot de Gemeenschap vastgesteld op 23 000 metrieke ton geslacht gewicht. 7. De Gemeenschap zal ernaar streven elke ontwikkeling van de markt die de afzet op de markt van de Gemeenschap van vlees van schapen en lammeren afkomstig uit Argentinië binnen de grens van de overeengekomen hoeveelheid in gevaar zou kunnen brengen, te voorkomen. In het bijzonder zal de Gemeenschap maatregelen nemen ten einde erop toe te zien dat de afzet van de interventievoorraden bevroren vlees, resulterende uit de tenuitvoerlegging van de verordening, de betrokken afzet van schapen en lammeren uit Argentinië niet zal doorkruisen. 8. Gelet op de doelstellingen en bepalingen van deze regeling betuigt de Gemeenschap er haar instemming mede, dat elke effectieve toepassing van restituties of enige andere vorm van steun met betrekking tot de uitvoer van vlees van schapen en lammeren, alsmede van levende schapen of lammeren bestemd voor de slacht, slechts zal geschieden op basis van prijzen en voorwaarden die voldoen aan de bestaande internationale verplichtingen en met inachtneming van het traditionele aandeel van de Gemeenschap in de wereldhandel in deze produkten. Deze formulering moet worden geïnterpreteerd op een wijze die in overeenstemming is met artikel XVI van de Algemene Overeenkomst betreffende Tarieven en Handel (GATT) en met name met artikel 10, lid 2, sub c), van de Overeenkomst inzake de interpretatie en de artikelen VI, XVI en XXIII van de Algemene Overeenkomst betreffende Tarieven en Handel. 9. Argentinië ziet erop toe dat deze regeling in acht wordt genomen, met name door de afgifte van uitvoercertificaten voor de in punt 1 bedoelde produkten, binnen de grenzen van de in deze regeling genoemde hoeveelheden. Van haar kant verbindt de Gemeenschap zich ertoe alle nodige bepalingen vast te stellen ten einde de afgifte van een invoercertificaat voor de bovengenoemde produkten, van oorsprong uit Argentinië, afhankelijk te stellen van de overlegging van een uitvoercertificaat afgegeven door de bevoegde door de Argentijnse Regering aangewezen autoriteiten. De bepalingen ter uitvoering van deze regeling zullen zodanig worden vastgesteld dat het stellen van een waarborg voor de afgifte van het invoercertificaat voor de betrokken produkten niet noodzakelijk is. Deze uitvoeringsbepalingen zullen tevens inhouden dat de bevoegde Argentijnse autoriteiten de bevoegde autoriteiten van de Gemeenschap periodiek de hoeveelheden mededelen waarvoor uitvoercertificaten zijn afgegeven, eventueel onderverdeeld naar bestemming. 10. Er wordt een Raadgevend Comité ingesteld, samengesteld uit vertegenwoordigers van de Gemeenschap en van Argentinië. Het Comité ziet erop toe dat de regeling correct wordt toegepast en harmonisch functioneert. Het bestudeert regelmatig de ontwikkeling van de markten van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten van de beide partijen en die van de internationale markt, alsmede de voorwaarden voor de afzet op deze markten, met inbegrip van die welke voortvloeien uit de in punt 7 van deze regeling vastgestelde doelstelling. Het ziet erop toe dat de correcte toepassing van de regeling niet nadelig wordt beïnvloed door de uitvoer naar de Gemeenschap van produkten op basis van vlees van schapen, lammeren en geiten welke vallen onder niet in de regeling genoemde tariefposten. Het Comité bespreekt alle vraagstukken die zich bij de toepassing van de regeling kunnen voordoen en zal de bevoegde instanties passende oplossingen aanbevelen. 11. De bepalingen van deze regeling worden aanvaard onverminderd de rechten en verplichtingen van de partijen in het kader van de GATT. 12. De in punt 2 vastgestelde jaarlijkse hoeveelheid heeft betrekking op de periode van 1 januari tot en met 31 december. De hoeveelheid welke geldt met ingang van de inwerkingtreding van deze regeling tot 1 januari van het volgende jaar zal naar rato van de totale jaarlijkse hoeveelheid worden vastgesteld, rekening houdend met de seizoengebonden ontwikkeling van het handelsverkeer. 13. Deze regeling is van toepassing, enerzijds, op de gebieden waar het Verdrag tot oprichting van de Europese Economische Gemeenschap van toepassing is en onder de in dat Verdrag neergelegde voorwaarden en, anderzijds, op het grondgebied van de Argentijnse Republiek. 14. Deze regeling treedt in werking op 20 oktober 1980. Zij blijft van kracht tot en met 31 maart 1984, en zal nadien van kracht blijven onder voorbehoud van het recht van beide partijen haar schriftelijk op te zeggen met inachtneming van een opzegtermijn van een jaar. In elk geval zullen de bepalingen van deze regeling door beide partijen vóór 1 april 1984 aan een onderzoek worden onderworpen ten einde er zo nodig aanpassingen in aan te brengen.". Ik moge U verzoeken mij te willen bevestigen dat Uw Regering met het bovenstaande instemt.". Ik heb de eer U te bevestigen dat mijn Regering met de inhoud van deze brief instemt. Gelieve, Mijnheer, de verzekering van mijn bijzondere hoogachting te aanvaarden. Voor de Regering van de Argentijnse Republiek


text:
 23.1.2017
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 C 22/11
 Cerere de decizie preliminară introdusă de Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finlanda) la 4 noiembrie 2016 – Astellas Pharma GmbH
 (Cauza C-557/16)
 (2017/C 022/16)
 Limba de procedură: finlandeza
 Instanța de trimitere
 Korkein hallinto-oikeus
 Părțile din procedura principală
 Reclamantă: Astellas Pharma GmbH
 Celelalte părţi din procedură: Helm AG, Lääkealan turvallisuus- ja kehittämisvirasto (Fimea)
 Întrebările preliminare
 1)
 Articolul 28 alineatul (5) și articolul 29 alineatul (1) din Directiva 2001/83/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 6 noiembrie 2001 de instituire a unui cod comunitar cu privire la medicamentele de uz uman (1) trebuie interpretate în sensul că, la acordarea unei autorizații naționale de introducere pe piață a unui medicament generic printr-o procedură descentralizată, potrivit articolului 28 alineatul (3) din directivă, autoritatea competentă din statul membru participant nu dispune de competența autonomă de a verifica data de la care începe să curgă termenul de protecție a datelor medicamentului de referință?
 2)
 În situația în care la prima întrebare se răspunde în sensul că, la acordarea unei autorizații naționale pentru introducerea pe piață, autoritatea competentă din statul membru nu dispune de competență autonomă de a verifica data de la care începe să curgă termenul de protecție a datelor medicamentului de referință:
 —
 în cadrul contestației formulate de titularul autorizației de introducere pe piață a medicamentului de referință, o instanță din acest stat membru are totuși obligația să verifice data de la care începe să curgă termenul de protecție a datelor sau și instanța se supune aceleiași restricționări ca autoritatea statului membru respectiv?
 —
 cum se garantează în acest caz, în fața respectivei instanțe a statului membru, dreptul titularului autorizației de introducere pe piață a medicamentului de referință la o cale de atac efectivă, în conformitate cu articolul 47 din Carta drepturilor fundamentale a Uniunii Europene și cu articolul 10 din Directiva 2001/83, în ceea ce privește protecția datelor?
 —
 calea de atac referitoare la dreptul la protecție jurisdicțională efectivă include obligația instanței naționale dintr-un stat membru de a examina dacă autorizația inițială de introducere pe piață, eliberată în alte state membre, a fost acordată cu respectarea dispozițiilor Directivei 2011/83?
 (1) Directiva 2001/83/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 6 noiembrie 2001 de instituire a unui cod comunitar cu privire la medicamentele de uz uman (JO 2001, L 311, p. 67, Ediție specială, 13/vol. 33, p. 3).