type: legislation

text:
 AN COIMISIÚN EORPACH
 An Bhruiséil,9.9.2015
 COM(2015) 452 final
 2015/0211(COD)
 Togra le haghaidh
 RIALACHÁN Ó PHARLAIMINT NA hEORPA AGUS ÓN gCOMHAIRLE
 lena mbunaítear liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh chun críocha Threoir 2013/32/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle maidir le nósanna imeachta coiteanna chun stádas cosanta idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar, agus lena leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE
 MEABHRÁN MÍNIÚCHÁIN
 1.COMHTHÉACS AN TOGRA
 1.1.Forais agus cuspóirí an togra
 •
 Liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú
 Thíolaic an Coimisiún Eorpach Clár Oibre Eorpach cuimsitheach maidir leis an Imirce an 13 Bealtaine 2015
 1
 inar leagadh amach, sa bhreis ar na bearta práinneach a mhol an Coimisiún go luath ina dhiaidh sin chun dul i ngleic leis an ngéarchéim sa Mheánmhuir, tionscnaimh eile nach mór a chur i bhfeidhm chun réitigh struchtúracha a sholáthar chun bainistiú níos fearr a dhéanamh ar gach gné den imirce. Mar chuid de na tionscnaimh struchtúracha a measadh agus i bhfianaise an bhrú de shórt nach bhfacthas cheana atá ar chórais tearmainn Ballstát i láthair na huaire, chuir an Coimisiún béim ar an ngá le cur chuige níos éifeachtaí i ndáil le míúsáid agus chuir sé in iúl go raibh sé beartaithe aige na forálacha maidir le tíortha sábhailte tionscaimh a neartú atá i dTreoir 2013/32/AE maidir le nósanna imeachta chun stádas cosanta idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar ('Treoir 2013/32/AE' anseo feasta) chun tacú le próiseáil ghasta ar iarratais ar thearmann ó dhaoine de thionscamh tíortha a ainmníodh ina dtíortha sábháilte. Mar a d'aibhsigh an Chomhairle Eorpach ina conclúidí an 25 agus an 26 Meitheamh 2015, tá bunú liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh ar áireamh leis sin.
 Le Treoir 2013/32/AE cuireadh ar a gcumas do na Ballstáit rialacha nós imeachta sonracha a chur i bhfeidhm, go háirithe nósanna imeachta luathaithe agus nósanna imeachta teorann, i gcás inar náisiúnach tríú tír (nó duine gan stát i ndáil le tríú tír ina mbíodh gnáthchónaí air roimhe sin) é an t-iarratasóir, ar tír í an tríú tír sin a ainmníodh ina tír shábháilte tionscaimh faoin dlí náisiúnta agus, ina theannta sin, is féidir a mheas gur tír shábháilte í don iarratasóir i bhfianaise a chúinsí pearsanta féin. Níl liostaí náisiúnta de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh glactha ach ag roinnt Ballstát. Ina theannta sin, tá roinnt éagsúlachtaí idir na liostaí náisiúnta sin a d'fhéadfadh a bheith ann i ngeall ar dhifríochtaí sa chaoi a meastar sábháilteacht tríú tíortha ar leith nó ar dhifríochtaí sna sreafaí de náisiúnaigh tríú tír atá ag teacht chuig na Ballstáit.
 Leagtar amach in Iarscríbhinn I de Threoir 2013/32/AE na critéir choiteanna do na Ballstáit chun tríú tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú. Tá an fhoráil seo a leanas san Iarscríbhinn sin:
 "Meastar gur tír shábháilte tionscaimh tír i gcás inar féidir a léiriú go ginearálta agus go seasta, ar bhonn na staide dlíthiúla, chur i bhfeidhm an dlí laistigh de chóras daonlathach agus na gcúinsí polaitiúla ginearálta, nach ann do ghéarleanúint mar atá sainmhínithe in Airteagal 9 de Threoir 2011/95/AE
 2
 , do chéasadh ná d'íde ná pionós atá mídhaonna nó táireach agus nach ann d'aon bhagairt ó fhoréigean neamh-idirdhealaitheach i gcás coinbhleacht armtha idirnáisiúnta nó inmheánach.
 Cuirfear san áireamh, inter alia, nuair a dhéanfar an measúnú sin an méid cosanta a thugtar ar ghéarleanúint agus ar dhrochíde trí bhíthin an méid seo a leanas:
 (a) dlíthe ábhartha agus rialacháin ábhartha na tíre agus an bealach ina gcuirtear i bhfeidhm iad;
 (b) urramú na gceart agus na saoirsí atá leagtha síos sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach chun Cearta an Duine agus Saoirsí Bunúsacha a Chosaint agus/nó sa Chúnant Idirnáisiúnta ar Chearta Sibhialta agus Polaitiúla agus/nó i gCoinbhinsiún na Náisiún Aontaithe i gcoinne an Chéasta, go háirithe na cearta nach féidir maolú a thabhairt ina leith faoi Airteagal 15(2) den Choinbhinsiún Eorpach thuasluaite;
 (c) urramú phrionsabal an non-refoulement i gcomhréir le Coinbhinsiún na Ginéive;
 (d) foráil maidir le córas leigheasanna éifeachtacha i gcoinne sáruithe ar na cearta agus ar na saoirsí sin."
 Níl liosta coiteann de chuid an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh ar fáil i ndlí an Aontais faoi láthair. Is é aidhm an togra seo an liosta sin a bhunú, ar bhonn na gcritéar coiteann atá leagtha síos i dTreoir 2013/32/AE, ós rud é go n-éascóidh sé do na Ballstáit uile úsáid a bhaint as na nósanna imeachta a bhaineann le coincheap na tíre sábhailte tionscnaimh a chur i bhfeidhm agus, ar an dóigh sin, méadófar éifeachtúlacht iomlán a gcóras tearmainn i ndáil le hiarratais ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta is dóchúil a bheith gan bhunús. Laghdóidh liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh na héagsúlachtaí idir na liostaí atá ag na Ballstáit féin de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, agus ar an dóigh sin, éascófar nósanna imeachta a chóineasú agus cuirfear cosc ar ghluaiseachtaí tánaisteacha iarratasóirí ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta.
 •
 Na tríú tíortha atá le cur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh
 Ar bhonn na faisnéise ábhartha ar fad atá le fáil aige, go háirithe tuairisciú na Seirbhíse Eorpaí Gníomhaíochta Seachtraí (SEGS) agus an fhaisnéis ó na Ballstáit, ón Oifig Eorpach Tacaíochta do Chúrsaí Tearmainn (EASO), ó Chomhairle na hEorpa, ó Ard-Choimisinéir na Náisiún Aontaithe le haghaidh Dídeanaithe (UNHCR) agus ó eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha eile, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE iad an Albáin, an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, Poblacht IarIúgslavach na Macadóine, An Chosaiv*
 3
 , Montainéagró, an tSeirbia agus an Tuirc agus gur cheart iad a chur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábhailte tionscnaimh.
 Bhain an Coimisiún Eorpach úsáid, go háirithe, as tuarascálacha ó SEGS, lena n-áirítear na tuarascálacha speisialta a bhaineann go sonrach le tíortha ar leith dar dáta an 31 Lúnasa agus an 1 Meán Fómhair 2015, as faisnéis ó na Ballstáit, lena n-áirítear reachtaíocht náisiúnta maidir le hainmniú tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, as faisnéis ó EASO, lena n-áirítear tuarascálacha scríofa agus an toradh a bhí ar chruinniú comhordúcháin maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscaimh le saineolaithe na mBallstát an 2 Meán Fómhair 2015, agus as faisnéis de chuid Chomhairle na hEorpa, UNHCR agus eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta eile atá ar fáil go poiblí.
 Maidir leis an Albáin, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. I gcásanna ar leith, nach bhfuil forleathan, is ann i gcónaí d'fhíoch bunaidh, d'fhoréigean teaghlaigh, agus d'idirdhealú nó d'fhoréigean i gcoinne daoine ar de mhionlaigh eitneacha nó de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad, lena n-áirítear Romaigh, Éigiptigh Bhalcánacha, agus LADTI
 4
 . Fágann rannpháirtíocht na hAlbáine sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás ceithre iarratas as 150 iarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 7.8 % (1040) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Albáin. Tá an Albáin ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag ocht mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an Albáin ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an Albáin de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir leis an mBoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, is é an Bunreacht an bunús le haghaidh comhroinnt cumhachtaí idir na pobail a chomhdhéanann an tír sin. Is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. I gcásanna ar leith, is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú nó d'fhoréigean i gcoinne daoine ar chúiseanna eitneachta nó creidimh nó mar gheall ar a dtuairim pholaitiúil agus chomh maith leis sin i gcoinne grúpaí leochaileacha amhail LADTI, iriseoirí agus leanaí. Fágann rannpháirtíocht na Boisnia agus na Heirseagaivéine sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás cúig iarratas as 1 196 iarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 4.6 % (330) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Bhoisnia agus den Heirseagaivéin. Tá an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir le Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. I gcásanna ar leith, nach bhfuil forleathan, is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú nó d'fhoréigean i gcoinne daoine ar de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad, lena n-áirítear páistí, daoine faoi mhíchumas, Romaigh agus LADTI. Fágann rannpháirtíocht Phoblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás sé iarratas as 502 iarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 0.9 % (70) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh d'Phoblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine. Tá Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag seacht mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir leis an gCosaiv*, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe. Níl glactha ag an gCosaiv* leis na hionstraimí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha maidir le cearta an duine amhail an Coinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine toisc nach bhfuil comhaontú idirnáisiúnta ann maidir lena stádas mar Stát ceannasach. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. I gcásanna ar leith, is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú nó d'fhoréigean i gcoinne daoine ar de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad amhail mná, LADTI agus daoine ar de mhionlaigh eitneacha iad, lena n-áirítear daoine de bhunadh eitneach Seirbiach. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 6.3 % (830) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Chosaiv*. Tá an Chosaiv ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag sé Bhallstát ar a laghad. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an Chosaiv* de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir le Montainéagró, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a shaoránach féin. I gcásanna ar leith, is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú nó d'fhoréigean i gcoinne daoine ar de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad, lena n-áirítear daoine faoi mhíchumas, iriseoirí, Romaigh agus LADTI. Fágann rannpháirtíocht Mhontainéagró sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás iarratas amháin as 447 niarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 3.0 % (40) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh de Mhontainéagró. Tá Montainéagró ainmnithe ina thír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá Montainéagró ainmnithe ina thír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh é Montainéagró de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir leis an tSeirbia, is é an Bunreacht an bunús le haghaidh féinrialachas grúpaí mionlaigh i réimsí an oideachais, na húsáide teanga, na faisnéise agus an chultúir. Is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. Is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú i gcoinne daoine ar de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad, lena n-áirítear mionlaigh eitneacha, lena n-áirítear daoine de bhunadh eitneach Albánach, mionlaigh chreidimh – lena n-áirítear Moslamaigh – Romaigh agus LADTI. Fágann rannpháirtíocht na Seirbia sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 16 iarratas as 11 490 iarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 1.8 % (400) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den tSeirbia. Tá an tSeirbia ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an tSeirbia ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an tSeirbia de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Maidir leis an Tuirc, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. Is ann i gcónaí d'idirdhealú agus do sháruithe ar chearta an duine i gcás daoine ar de ghrúpaí leochaileacha iad amhail mionlaigh, lena n-áirítear daoine de bhunadh eitneach Coirdíneach, iriseoirí agus LADTI. Fágann rannpháirtíocht na Tuirce sa Choinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go bhfuil an deis ann leas a bhaint as an gCúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine, agus ráthaíonn an chosaint sin éifeachtacht an chórais leigheasanna i gcoinne sáruithe den sórt a luadh thuas ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 94 iarratas as 2 899 n-iarratas. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 23.1 % (310) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Tuirc. Tá an Tuirc ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an Tuirc ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Ba cheart do na Ballstáit aird ar leith a thabhairt ar na cúinsí thuasluaite nuair atá cinneadh á dhéanamh acu, maidir le tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, an measfar go bhfuil an tír sin ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás iarratasóir ar leith, agus chomh maith leis sin nuair atá scrúdú á dhéanamh acu ar iarratas ag úsáid na saoráidí nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i ndáil le hiarratasóirí ó thír shábháilte tionscnaimh. Ar an mbonn sin, is é conclúid an Choimisiúin gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an Tuirc de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Ba cheart an togra seo a thuiscint mar an gcéad chéim i dtreo na cuspóra liosta coiteann cuimsitheach de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú ar leibhéal an Aontais. Dá bhrí sin, féadfaidh an Coimisiún a mholadh tríú tíortha eile, a chomhlíonann na critéir le haghaidh tír a ainmniú ina tír shábháilte, a chur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh nuair a bheidh an liosta sin glactha ag Parlaimint na hEorpa agus ag an gComhairle. Tabharfar tosaíocht do thríú tíortha óna dtagann líon mór iarratasóirí ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta chuig an Aontas Eorpach, amhail an Bhanglaidéis, an Phacastáin agus an tSeineagáil.
 Mar atá curtha in iúl sa togra seo, tíolacfaidh an Coimisiún tuarascáil, faoi cheann tréimhse trí bliana tar éis theacht i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin má ghlacann Parlaimint na hEorpa agus an Chomhairle é, maidir leis an deis bearta eile comhchuibhithe a dhéanamh a d'fhéadfadh deireadh a chur leis an ngá le liostaí náisiúnta de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 1.2.Comhsheasmhacht le forálacha beartais atá ann cheana sa réimse beartais seo
 Tá an togra seo comhsheasmhach leis na nósanna imeachta coiteanna le haghaidh cosaint idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar a leagadh síos i dTreoir 2013/32/AE agus tá sé comhsheasmhach le hionstraimí eile an Chomhchórais Eorpaigh Tearmainn.
 1.3.Comhsheasmhacht le beartais eile an Aontais
 An togra chun liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú agus chun tríú tíortha, go háirithe, a chur ar an liosta sin a d'ainmnigh an Chomhairle Eorpach ina dtíortha is iarrthóirí, tá sé comhsheasmhach le beartas méadaithe an Aontais. Nuair a d'ainmnigh an Chomhairle Eorpach an Albáin, Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, Montainéagró, an tSeirbia agus an Tuirc ina dtíortha is iarrthóirí, measadh gur chomhlíon siad na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht na n-institiúidí lena ráthaítear an daonlathas, an smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach agus beidh orthu leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh. Déantar measúnú gach bliain ar dhul chun cinn i gcomhlíonadh na gcritéar polaitiúil agus eacnamaíoch agus ar chomhfhogasú leis an acquis i dTuarascáil Bhliantúil an Choimisiúin Eorpaigh maidir le Dul Chun Cinn. An togra seo chun an Albáin, Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, Montainéagró, an tSeirbia agus an Tuirc a chur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, tá sé gan dochar don chéad Tuarascáil eile maidir le Dul Chun Cinn atá le tíolacadh ag an gCoimisiún Eorpach i ndáil le gach ceann de na tríú tíortha sin.
 2.COMHAIRLIÚCHÁN LEIS NA PÁIRTITHE LEASMHARA
 Rinne an Chomhairle Eorpach ina conclúidí an 25 agus an 26 Meitheamh 2015, i ndáil leis an ngá próiseáil iarratas ar thearmann a luathú, tagairt don rún a bhí ag an gCoimisiún na forálacha maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh atá i dTreoir 2013/32/AE a neartú, lena náirítear an fhéidearthacht go mbunófaí liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 Ina conclúidí maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh an 20 Iúil 2015, chuir an Chomhairle um Cheartas agus um Ghnóthaí Baile fáilte roimh an fhéidearthacht go mbunófaí liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. Thug an Chomhairle dá haire "maidir le tíortha na mBalcán Thiar go bhfuil na tíortha sin ar fhormhór na liostaí náisiúnta de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, gur chuir an Chomhairle Eorpach a bpeirspictíocht Eorpach in iúl go mion minic agus gur aistríodh an Albáin, an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, Poblacht IarIúgslavach na Macadóine, Montainéagró agus an tSeirbia chuig an liosta de na tíortha a bhfuil a náisiúnaigh díolmhaithe ón gceanglas víosa amhail ón 19 Nollaig 2009 agus an 15 Nollaig 2010 faoi seach. Ina theannta sin, bhí an meánráta aitheantais maidir le tearmann ar fud an Aontais do thíortha na mBalcán Thiar íseal go leor in 2014. Tugtar le tuiscint leis sin go bhféadfadh na Ballstáit go léir a mheas gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh iad tíortha na mBalcán Thiar."
 Mar thoradh ar na conclúidí ón gComhairle um Cheartas agus um Ghnóthaí Baile, d'eagraigh EASO cruinniú do shaineolaithe ó na Ballstáit an 2 Meán Fómhair 2015 agus thángthas ar chomhaontú ginearálta gur cheart a mheas gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE iad an Albáin, an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, An Chosaiv*, Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, Montainéagró agus an tSeirbia.
 3.BUNÚS DLÍ, COIMHDEACHT, COMHRÉIREACHT, CEARTA BUNÚSACHA
 3.1.Bunús Dlí
 Tá an togra bunaithe ar Airteagal 78(2)(d) den Chonradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh (CFAE), arb é an bunús dlí é le bearta maidir le nósanna imeachta coiteanna chun stádas comhionann tearmainn agus cosanta coimhdí a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar. Is é aidhm an togra liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú chun críocha Threoir 2013/32/AE agus an Treoir chéanna a leasú. Glacadh an Treoir sin ar bhonn Airteagal 78(2)(d) CFAE.
 3.2.Coimhdeacht
 Tugann Teideal V CFAE maidir leis an Limistéar Saoirse, Slándála agus Ceartais cumhachtaí áirithe don Aontas Eorpach i dtaobh na gcúrsaí seo. Ní mór na cumhachtaí sin a fheidhmiú i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 5 den Chonradh ar an Aontas Eorpach, i.e. murar féidir, agus sa mhéid nach féidir, leis na Ballstáit cuspóirí na gníomhaíochta atá beartaithe a ghnóthú go leordhóthanach agus dá bhrí sin, gur fearr, de bharr fhairsinge nó éifeachtaí na gníomhaíochta arna beartú, is féidir leis an Aontas Eorpach iad a ghnóthú.
 Is é aidhm an togra liosta coiteann de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú ar leibhéal an Aontais ós rud é go n-éascóidh sé sin do na Ballstáit uile úsáid a bhaint as na nósanna imeachta a bhaineann le coincheap na tíre sábhailte tionscnaimh a chur i bhfeidhm. Tá sé d'aidhm ag an togra freisin aghaidh a thabhairt ar roinnt de na héagsúlachtaí atá ann idir na liostaí náisiúnta atá ag na Ballstáit de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh; faoi láthair ní i gcónaí a bhíonn iarratasóirí ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta a thagann ó na tríú tíortha céanna faoi réir na nósanna imeachta céanna sna Ballstáit éagsúla de thoradh na liostaí sin. Ní féidir leis na Ballstáit cuspóir foriomlán na gníomhaíochta atá beartaithe a ghnóthú, agus is fearr is féidir leis an Aontas Eorpach é a ghnóthú.
 3.3.Comhréireacht
 I gcomhréir le prionsabal na comhréireachta, ní théann na hathruithe atá beartaithe ar an gcreat reachtach atá ann thar a bhfuil riachtanach chun an cuspóir sin a ghnóthú. Bunófar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh i gcomhréir leis na critéir atá leagtha síos cheana i dTreoir 2013/32/AE maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú, agus déanfar athbhreithniú go tráthrialta ar na tíortha ar an liosta coiteann. Maidir leis na leasuithe atá beartaithe ar Threoir 2013/32/AE, tá siad teoranta dá bhfuil riachtanach lena áirithiú go bhfuil na forálacha de Threoir 2013/32/AE a bhaineann le coincheap na tíre sábháilte tionscnaimh a chur i bhfeidhm, go bhfuil siad infheidhme maidir leis na tríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 3.4.An rogha ionstraime
 Tá údar le Rialachán a roghnú chun liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú mar gheall ar nádúr an liosta choitinn. Liosta é a bhunaítear ar leibhéal an Aontais agus is ceart é a bheith infheidhme go díreach i ndlíchórais na mBallstát.
 3.5.Cearta bunúsacha
 Urramaítear leis an togra seo na cearta bunúsacha agus na prionsabail a aithnítear i gCairt um Chearta Bunúsacha an Aontais Eorpaigh, lena n-áirítear an ceart chun tearmainn agus cosaint i gcoinne refoulement dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 18 agus in Airteagal 19 den Chairt.
 Meabhraítear, go háirithe, i gcomhréir le Treoir 2013/32/AE nach ionann tríú tír a bheith ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh agus deimhniú go bhfuil sábháilteacht iomlán ráthaithe do náisiúnaigh na tíre sin, agus dá bhrí sin, ní fhágfaidh sé sin nach gá scrúdú leithleach iomchuí a dhéanamh ar a n-iarratas ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta. Meabhraítear freisin, i gcás ina léireoidh iarratasóir gurb ann d'fháthanna tromchúiseacha le ceapadh nach bhfuil an tír sábháilte i gcás an duine áirithe sin, nach féidir glacadh leis a thuilleadh gur ábhartha i gcás an duine sin an tír a bheith ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte.
 Comhlíonann na tríú tíortha atáthar ag moladh a chur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh na coinníollacha atá leagtha síos i dTreoir 2013/32/AE maidir le tír a ainmniú ina tír shábháilte. Tugann sé sin le tuiscint gur féidir a léiriú go ginearálta agus go seasta, ar bhonn na staide dlíthiúla, chur i bhfeidhm an dlí laistigh de chóras daonlathach agus na gcúinsí polaitiúla ginearálta, nach ann sna tíortha sin do ghéarleanúint mar atá sainmhínithe in Airteagal 9 de Threoir 2011/95/AE, do chéasadh ná d'íde ná pionós atá mídhaonna nó táireach agus nach ann d'aon bhagairt ó fhoréigean neamhidirdhealaitheach i gcás coinbhleacht armtha idirnáisiúnta nó inmheánach.
 4.IMPLEACHTAÍ BUISÉADACHA
 Níl aon impleachtaí ag an togra do bhuiséad an Aontais Eorpaigh agus ba cheart nach mbeadh aon impleachtaí buiséadacha aige do na Ballstáit.
 5.EILIMINTÍ EILE
 5.1.Socruithe faireacháin, meastóireachta agus tuairiscithe
 Foráiltear sa togra gur cheart a mheas, trí bliana tar éis theacht i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin seo, an bhféadfaí tuilleadh comhchuibhithe a dhéanamh d'fhonn fáil réidh le liostaí na mBallstát de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, ar bhonn tuarascáil a bheidh le tíolacadh ag an gCoimisiún.
 5.2.Míniú mionsonraithe ar fhorálacha sonracha an togra
 Bunaítear leis an togra le haghaidh Rialacháin liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thríú tíortha a measfar gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh iad de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE. Ina theannta sin, leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE ionas gur féidir na forálacha maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh sa Treoir seo a chur i bhfeidhm i ndáil leis na tríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 Tá liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh le leagan amach in Iarscríbhinn I a ghabhann leis an Rialachán atá beartaithe. Comhlíonfaidh tríú tíortha a chuirfear leis an Iarscríbhinn sin na coinníollacha atá leagtha síos in Iarscríbhinn I a ghabhann le Treoir 2013/32/AE maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú. Measann an Coimisiún go gcomhlíonann an Albáin, an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, An Chosaiv*, Montainéagró, an tSeirbia agus an Tuirc na coinníollacha sin agus gur cheart, mar chéad chéim, iad a chur ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 Foráiltear sa togra maidir le hoibleagáid a bheith ar an gCoimisiún athbhreithniú rialta a dhéanamh ar an staid i dtríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh, bunaithe ar fhoinsí faisnéise éagsúla, lena n-áirítear go háirithe tuairisciú rialta ó SEGS agus faisnéis ó na Ballstáit, ó EASO, ó UNHCR, ó Chomhairle na hEorpa agus ó eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha eile.
 Foráiltear sa togra gur i gcomhréir leis an ngnáthnós imeachta reachtach a ghlacfar aon leasú a dhéanfar ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. I gcás athruithe tobanna chun donais ar staid tríú tír atá ar an liosta, áfach, foráiltear sa togra go gcumhachtófar don Choimisiún gníomh tarmligthe a ghlacadh i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 290 CFAE chun an tír sin a chur ar fionraí ón liosta ar feadh tréimhse bliana, i gcás ina measfaidh sé, ar bhonn measúnú réasúnaithe, nach bhfuil na coinníollacha ar a meastar gur tír shábháilte tríú tír á gcomhlíonadh a thuilleadh. Ba cheart don Choimisiún a bheith in ann an fhionraí a fhadú go ceann tréimhse bliana ar a mhéid, i gcás ina mbeidh leasú ar an Rialachán seo beartaithe aige chun an tríú tír sin a bhaint ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. Tá forálacha mionsonraithe sa togra maidir leis na coinníollacha ar a ndéantar cumhacht a tarmligean chuig an gCoimisiún, lena n-áirítear coinníollacha maidir le fad an tarmligthe, an deis a bheith ag Parlaimint na hEorpa agus ag an gComhairle é a chúlghairm aon tráth, an oibleagáid ar an gCoimisiún fógra a thabhairt do Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus don Chomhairle i dtaobh glacadh gníomhartha tarmligthe agus nach féidir leis na gníomhartha tarmligthe teacht i bhfeidhm ach amháin mura mbeidh aon agóid curtha in iúl ag na hinstitiúidí sin laistigh de mhí tar éis dóibh an fógra sin a fháil.
 2015/0211 (COD)
 Togra le haghaidh
 RIALACHÁN Ó PHARLAIMINT NA hEORPA AGUS ÓN gCOMHAIRLE
 lena mbunaítear liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh chun críocha Threoir 2013/32/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle maidir le nósanna imeachta coiteanna chun stádas cosanta idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar, agus lena leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE
 TÁ PARLAIMINT NA hEORPA AGUS COMHAIRLE AN AONTAIS EORPAIGH,
 Ag féachaint don Chonradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, agus go háirithe Airteagal 78(2)(d) de,
 Ag féachaint don togra ón gCoimisiún Eorpach,
 Tar éis dóibh an dréachtghníomh reachtach a chur chuig na parlaimintí náisiúnta,
 Ag féachaint don tuairim ó Choiste Eacnamaíoch agus Sóisialta na hEorpa
 5
 ,
 Ag féachaint don tuairim ó Choiste na Réigiún
 6
 ,
 Ag gníomhú dóibh i gcomhréir leis an ngnáthnós imeachta reachtach,
 De bharr an méid seo a leanas:
 (1)Le Treoir 2013/32/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle
 7
 cuireadh ar a gcumas do na Ballstáit rialacha nós imeachta sonracha a chur i bhfeidhm, go háirithe nósanna imeachta luathaithe agus nósanna imeachta teorann, i gcúinsí dea-shainithe inar dóchúil iarratas ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta a bheith gan bhunús, lena n-áirítear i gcás inar náisiúnach tíre é an t-iarratasóir, ar tír í a ainmníodh ina tír shábháilte tionscaimh faoin dlí náisiúnta agus, ina theannta sin, is féidir a mheas gur tír shábháilte í don iarratasóir lena mbaineann i bhfianaise a chúinsí pearsanta féin. Is féidir na rialacha céanna a chur i bhfeidhm i gcás daoine gan stát i ndáil le tríú tíortha ina mbíodh gnáthchónaí orthu roimhe sin.
 (2)Leagtar amach i dTreoir 2013/32/AE na critéir choiteanna chun tríú tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú ar leibhéal na mBallstát. Mar sin féin, níl tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh ainmnithe ach ag Ballstáit áirithe ina ndlí náisiúnta, agus fágann sé sin nach féidir leis na Ballstáit uile tairbhe a bhaint as na saoráidí gaolmhara nós imeachta dá bhforáiltear i dTreoir 2013/32/AE. Ina theannta sin, fágann na héagsúlachtaí atá ann idir na liostaí náisiúnta de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh atá glactha ag na Ballstáit, éagsúlachtaí a d'fhéadfadh a bheith ann i ngeall ar dhifríochtaí sa chaoi a meastar sábháilteacht tríú tíortha ar leith nó ar dhifríochtaí sna sreafaí de náisiúnaigh tríú tír atá ag teacht chucu, nach i gcónaí a chuireann na Ballstáit coincheap na tíre sábháilte tionscnaimh mar atá sainmhínithe i dTreoir 2013/32/AE i bhfeidhm i ndáil leis na tríú tíortha céanna.
 (3)I bhfianaise an mhéadaithe mhóir atá tagtha ó 2014 i leith ar an líon iarratas ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta a dhéantar san Aontas, agus i bhfianaise an bhrú de shórt nach bhfacthas cheana atá ar chórais tearmainn Ballstát i ngeall air sin, d'aithin an tAontas gur gá na forálacha maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh atá i dTreoir 2013/32/AE a neartú, mar gur uirlis riachtanach iad na forálacha sin chun tacú le próiseáil ghasta ar iarratais ar thearmann is dóchúil a bheith gan bhunús. Go háirithe, rinne an Chomhairle Eorpach ina conclúidí an 25 agus an 26 Meitheamh 2015, i ndáil leis an ngá próiseáil iarratas ar thearmann a luathú, tagairt don rún a bhí ag an gCoimisiún, mar atá leagtha amach ina Theachtaireacht maidir le Clár Oibre Eorpach maidir leis an Imirce
 8
 , na forálacha sin a neartú, lena náirítear an fhéidearthacht go mbunófaí liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. Thairis sin, ina conclúidí maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh an 20 Iúil 2015, chuir an Chomhairle um Cheartas agus um Ghnóthaí Baile fáilte roimh an rún a bhí ag an gCoimisiún na forálacha maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh i dTreoir 2013/32/AE a neartú, lena n-áirítear an fhéidearthacht go mbunófaí liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 (4)Ba cheart liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a bhunú ar bhonn na gcritéar coiteann atá leagtha amach i dTreoir 2013/32/AE, ós rud é go n-éascóidh sé do na Ballstáit uile úsáid a bhaint as na nósanna imeachta a bhaineann le coincheap na tíre sábháilte tionscnaimh a chur i bhfeidhm agus, ar an dóigh sin, méadófar éifeachtúlacht iomlán a gcóras tearmainn i ndáil le hiarratais ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta is dóchúil a bheith gan bhunús. Ina theannta sin, le bunú liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh tabharfar aghaidh ar roinnt de na héagsúlachtaí atá ann idir liostaí na mBallstát de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh; faoi láthair ní i gcónaí a bhíonn iarratasóirí ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta a thagann ó na tríú tíortha céanna faoi réir na nósanna imeachta céanna sna Ballstáit éagsúla de thoradh na liostaí sin. Cé gur cheart do na Ballstát an ceart a choinneáil reachtaíocht a chur i bhfeidhm nó a thabhairt isteach lenar féidir tríú tíortha, ar tíortha iad nach bhfuil ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh cheana, a ainmniú ar an leibhéal náisiúnta ina dtíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, áiritheofar le bunú an liosta choitinn sin go ndéanfaidh na Ballstáit an choincheap a chur i bhfeidhm ar an mbealach céanna i ndáil le hiarratasóirí a bhfuil a dtíortha tionscnaimh ar an liosta sin. Dá réir sin, éascófar cóineasú ar chur i bhfeidhm na nósanna imeachta agus cuirfear cosc, ar an dóigh sin, ar ghluaiseachtaí tánaisteacha iarratasóirí ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta. Sa chomhthéacs sin, ba cheart a mheas, trí bliana tar éis theacht i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin seo, an bhféadfaí tuilleadh comhchuibhithe a dhéanamh d'fhonn fáil réidh le liostaí na mBallstát de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, ar bhonn tuarascáil a bheidh le tíolacadh ag an gCoimisiún.
 (5)Ba cheart na forálacha sin de Threoir 2013/32/AE a bhaineann le coincheap na tíre sábháilte tionscnaimh a chur i bhfeidhm, ba cheart iad a bheith infheidhme maidir le tríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh arna bhunú leis an Rialachán seo. Ciallaíonn sé sin, go háirithe, nach ionann tríú tír a bheith ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh agus deimhniú go bhfuil sábháilteacht iomlán ráthaithe do náisiúnaigh na tíre sin agus, dá bhrí sin, ní fhágfaidh sé nach gá scrúdú leithleach iomchuí a dhéanamh ar an iarratas ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta. Ina theannta sin, ba cheart a mheabhrú, i gcás ina léireoidh an t-iarratasóir gurb ann d'fháthanna tromchúiseacha le ceapadh nach bhfuil an tír shábháilte i gcás an duine áirithe sin, nach féidir glacadh leis a thuilleadh gur ábhartha i gcás an duine sin an tír a bheith ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte.
 (6)Ba cheart don Choimisiún athbhreithniú rialta a dhéanamh ar an staid sna tríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. I gcás athrú tobann chun donais ar staid tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh, ba cheart an chumhacht chun gníomhartha a ghlacadh i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 290 den Chonradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh a tharmligean chuig an gCoimisiún i dtaca leis an tríú tír sin a chur ar fionraí ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh ar feadh tréimhse bliana i gcás ina measfaidh an Coimisiún, ar bhonn measúnú réasúnaithe, nach bhfuil na coinníollacha atá leagtha amach i dTreoir 2013/32/AE ar a meastar gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh tríú tír á gcomhlíonadh a thuilleadh. Chun críche an mheasúnaithe réasúnaithe sin, ba cheart don Choimisiún na foinsí faisnéise éagsúla atá le fáil aige a chur sna áireamh lena n-áirítear, go háirithe, na Tuarascálacha Bliantúla ar Dhul Chun Cinn le haghaidh tríú tíortha arna n-ainmniú ag an gComhairle Eorpach ina dtíortha is iarrthóirí, tuarascálacha rialta ón tSeirbhís Eorpach Gníomhaíochta Seachtraí (SEGS), agus an fhaisnéis a fhaightear ó na Ballstáit, ón Oifig Tacaíochta Eorpach do Chúrsaí Tearmainn (EASO), ó Ard-Choimisinéir na Náisiún Aontaithe le haghaidh Dídeanaithe (UNHCR), ó Chomhairle na hEorpa agus ó eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha eile. Ba cheart don Choimisiún a bheith in ann fionraí tríú tír ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh a fhadú go ceann tréimhse bliana ar a mhéid, i gcás ina mbeidh leasú ar an Rialachán seo beartaithe aige chun an tríú tír sin a bhaint ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh. Tá sé tábhachtach go háirithe go rachaidh an Coimisiún i mbun comhairliúcháin iomchuí le linn an ullmhúcháin a bheidh ar bun aige, lena n-áirítear comhairliúcháin ar leibhéal na saineolaithe. Ba cheart don Choimisiún, le linn dó gníomhartha tarmligthe a ullmhú agus a tharraingt suas, a áirithiú go ndéanfar doiciméid ábhartha a chur chuig Parlaimint na hEorpa agus chuig an gComhairle ar bhealach comhuaineach, tráthúil agus iomchuí.
 (7)Mar thoradh ar na conclúidí ón gComhairle um Cheartas agus um Ghnóthaí Baile an 20 Iúil 2015 maidir le tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, inar tháinig na Ballstáit ar chomhaontú gur cheart tosaíocht a thabhairt do mheasúnú a dhéanfadh gach Ballstát ar shábháilteacht na mBalcán Thiar, d'eagraigh EASO cruinniú do shaineolaithe ó na Ballstáit an 2 Meán Fómhair 2015 agus thángthas ar chomhaontú ginearálta gur cheart a mheas gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE iad an Albáin, an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, An Chosaiv*
 9
 , Montainéagró, Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine agus an tSeirbia.
 (8)I gcomhréir le Treoir 2013/32/AE, meastar gur tír shábháilte tionscaimh tír i gcás inar féidir a léiriú go ginearálta agus go seasta, ar bhonn na staide dlíthiúla, chur i bhfeidhm an dlí laistigh de chóras daonlathach agus na gcúinsí polaitiúla ginearálta, nach ann do ghéarleanúint mar atá sainmhínithe in Airteagal 9 de Threoir 2011/95/AE
 10
 , do chéasadh ná d'íde ná pionós atá mídhaonna nó táireach agus nach ann d'aon bhagairt ó fhoréigean neamh-idirdhealaitheach i gcás coinbhleacht armtha idirnáisiúnta nó inmheánach.
 (9)Ar bhonn foinsí faisnéise éagsúla, lena n-áirítear go háirithe tuairisciú SEGS agus faisnéis ó na Ballstáit, ó EASO, ó UNHCR, ó Chomhairle na hEorpa agus ó eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta eile, tá roinnt tríú tíortha a mheastar a bheith incháilithe mar thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 (10)Maidir leis an Albáin, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 4 iarratas as 150 iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 7.8 % (1040) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Albáin. Tá an Albáin ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag ocht mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an Albáin ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach. Measadh an uair sin gur chomhlíon an Albáin na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht institiúidí lena ráthaítear daonlathas, smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach, agus beidh ar an Albáin leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh i gcomhréir leis na moltaí dá bhforáiltear sa Tuarascáil Bhliantúil ar Dhul Chun Cinn.
 (11)Maidir leis an mBoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin, is é an Bunreacht an bunús le haghaidh comhroinnt cumhachtaí idir na pobail a chomhdhéanann an tír sin. Is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 5 iarratas as 1 196 iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 4.6 % (330) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Bhoisnia agus den Heirseagaivéin. Tá an Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad.
 (12)Maidir le Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrithidirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 6 iarratas as 502 iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 0.9 % (70) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh de Phoblacht IarIúgslavach na Macadóine. Tá Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag seacht mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach. Measadh an uair sin gur chomhlíon Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht institiúidí lena ráthaítear daonlathas, smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach, agus beidh ar Phoblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh i gcomhréir leis na moltaí dá bhforáiltear sa Tuarascáil Bhliantúil ar Dhul Chun Cinn.
 (13)Maidir leis an gCosaiv* is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe. Níl glactha ag an gCosaiv* leis na hionstraimí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha maidir le cearta an duine amhail an Coinbhinsiún Eorpach um Chearta an Duine toisc nach bhfuil comhaontú idirnáisiúnta ann maidir lena stádas mar Stát ceannasach. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 6.3 % (830) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Chosaiv*. Tá an Chosaiv* ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag sé Bhallstát ar a laghad.
 (14)Maidir le Montainéagró, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás iarratas amháin as 447 n-iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a shaoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 3.0 % (40) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh de Mhontainéagró. Tá Montainéagró ainmnithe ina thír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá Montainéagró ainmnithe ina thír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Measadh an uair sin gur chomhlíon Montainéagró na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht institiúidí lena ráthaítear daonlathas, smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach, agus beidh ar Mhontainéagró leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh i gcomhréir leis na moltaí dá bhforáiltear sa Tuarascáil Bhliantúil ar Dhul Chun Cinn.
 (15)Maidir leis an tSeirbia, is é an Bunreacht an bunús le haghaidh féinrialachas grúpaí mionlaigh i réimsí an oideachais, na húsáide teanga, na faisnéise agus an chultúir. Is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 16 iarratas as 11 490 iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 1.8 % (400) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den tSeirbia. Tá an tSeirbia ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an tSeirbia ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Measadh an uair sin gur chomhlíon an tSeirbia na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht institiúidí lena ráthaítear daonlathas, smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach, agus beidh ar an tSeirbia leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh i gcomhréir leis na moltaí dá bhforáiltear sa Tuarascáil Bhliantúil ar Dhul Chun Cinn.
 (16)Maidir leis an Tuirc, is leor an bunús dlí le haghaidh cosaint i gcoinne géarleanúint agus drochíde atá i reachtaíocht shubstainteach agus i reachtaíocht nós imeachta na tíre sin i réimse chearta an duine agus an fhrith-idirdhealaithe, lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht sna príomhchonarthaí idirnáisiúnta ar fad ar chearta an duine. In 2014, chinn an Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine go raibh sárú ann i gcás 94 iarratas as 2 899 n-iarratas. Ní léir go raibh aon chás refoulement i gcás a saoránach féin. In 2014, mheas na Ballstáit go raibh bunús le 23.1 % (310) de na hiarratais ar thearmann a tháinig ó shaoránaigh den Tuirc. Tá an Tuirc ainmnithe ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh ag naoi mBallstát ar a laghad. Tá an Tuirc ainmnithe ina tír is iarrthóir ag an gComhairle Eorpach agus tá tús curtha leis an idirbheartaíocht. Measadh an uair sin gur chomhlíon an Tuirc na critéir a leagadh síos ag Comhairle Eorpach Chóbanhávan an 21 agus an 22 Meitheamh 1993 maidir le cobhsaíocht institiúidí lena ráthaítear daonlathas, smacht reachta, cearta an duine agus meas ar mhionlaigh agus cosaint mionlach, agus beidh ar an Tuirc leanúint de na critéir ballraíochta sin a chomhlíonadh i gcomhréir leis na moltaí dá bhforáiltear sa Tuarascáil Bhliantúil ar Dhul Chun Cinn.
 (17)Ós rud é nach féidir leis na Ballstáit cuspóirí an Rialacháin seo a ghnóthú go leordhóthanach ach gur féidir, de bharr fhairsinge agus éifeachtaí na gníomhaíochta, iad a ghnóthú níos fearr ar leibhéal an Aontais, féadfaidh an tAontas bearta a ghlacadh, i gcomhréir le prionsabal na coimhdeachta a leagtar amach in Airteagal 5 den Chonradh ar an Aontas Eorpach. I gcomhréir le prionsabal na comhréireachta a leagtar amach san Airteagal sin, ní théann an Rialachán seo thar a bhfuil riachtanach chun an cuspóir sin a ghnóthú.
 (18)Urramaítear leis an Rialachán seo na cearta bunúsacha agus na prionsabail a aithnítear i gCairt um Chearta Bunúsacha an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 (19)[I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 3 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, tá fógra tugtha ag an dá Bhallstát sin gur mian leo bheith rannpháirteach i nglacadh agus i gcur i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin seo]
 NÓ
 [I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 1 agus le hAirteagal 2 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, agus gan dochar d'Airteagal 4 den Phrótacal sin, níl na Ballstáit sin rannpháirteach i nglacadh an Rialacháin seo agus níl an Rialachán ina cheangal orthu ná níl siad faoi réir a chur i bhfeidhm.]
 NÓ
 I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 1 agus le hAirteagal 2 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, agus gan dochar d'Airteagal 4 den Phrótacal sin, níl an Ríocht Aontaithe rannpháirteach i nglacadh an Rialacháin seo agus níl an Rialachán ina cheangal uirthi ná níl sí faoi réir a chur i bhfeidhm.
 I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 3 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, tá fógra tugtha ag Éirinn (, le litir an ...,) gur mian léi bheith rannpháirteach i nglacadh agus i gcur i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin seo.]
 NÓ
 I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 3 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, tá fógra tugtha ag an Ríocht Aontaithe (, le litir an ...,) gur mian léi bheith rannpháirteach i nglacadh agus i gcur i bhfeidhm an Rialacháin seo.
 I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 1 agus le hAirteagal 2 de Phrótacal Uimh. 21 maidir le seasamh na Ríochta Aontaithe agus na hÉireann i dtaca leis an limistéar saoirse, slándála agus ceartais, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, agus gan dochar d'Airteagal 4 den Phrótacal sin, níl Éire rannpháirteach i nglacadh an Rialacháin seo agus níl an Rialachán ina cheangal uirthi ná níl sí faoi réir a chur i bhfeidhm.
 (20)I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 1 agus le hAirteagal 2 de Phrótacal Uimh. 22 maidir le seasamh na Danmhairge, atá i gceangal leis an gConradh ar an Aontas Eorpach agus leis an gConradh ar Fheidhmiú an Aontais Eorpaigh, níl an Danmhairg rannpháirteach i nglacadh an Rialacháin seo agus níl an Rialachán seo ina cheangal uirthi ná níl sí faoi réir a chur i bhfeidhm,
 TAR ÉIS AN RIALACHÁN SEO A GHLACADH:
 Airteagal 1
 Ábhar
 Bunaítear leis an Rialachán seo liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thríú tíortha a measfar gur tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh iad de réir bhrí Threoir 2013/32/AE.
 Airteagal 2
 Liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh
 1.
 Is tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh iad na tríú tíortha a liostaítear in Iarscríbhinn I a ghabhann leis an Rialachán seo.
 2.
 Déanfaidh an Coimisiún athbhreithniú rialta ar an staid sna tríú tíortha atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, bunaithe ar fhoinsí faisnéise éagsúla, lena n-áirítear go háirithe tuairisciú rialta ó SEGS agus faisnéis ó na Ballstáit, ó EASO, ó UNHCR, ó Chomhairle na hEorpa agus ó eagraíochtaí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha eile.
 3.
 Is i gcomhréir leis an ngnáthnós imeachta reachtach a ghlacfar aon leasú a dhéanfar ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 4.
 Cumhachtófar don Choimisiún gníomhartha tarmligthe a ghlacadh i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 3 chun tríú tír a chur ar fionraí ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh.
 Airteagal 3
 Tríú tír a bhaint ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh i gcás athrú tobann ar an staid inti
 1.
 Is faoi réir na gcoinníollacha a leagtar síos san Airteagal seo a thugtar an chumhacht don Choimisiún gníomhartha tarmligthe a ghlacadh.
 2.
 I gcás athruithe tobanna ar an staid i dtríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, déanfaidh an Coimisiún measúnú réasúnaithe féachaint an gcomhlíonann an tír sin na coinníollacha atá leagtha síos in Iarscríbhinn I de Threoir 2013/32/AE agus, mura bhfuil na coinníollacha sin á gcomhlíonadh aici a thuilleadh, glacfaidh sé, i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 290 CFAE, Cinneadh lena gcuirfear an tríú tír sin ar fionraí ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh ar feadh tréimhse bliana.
 3.
 I gcás ina mbeidh leasú ar an Rialachán seo beartaithe ag an gCoimisiún chun tríú tír a bhaint ó liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh, féadfaidh sé, ar bhonn an mheasúnaithe réasúnaithe dá dtagraítear i mír 2, tréimhse bailíochta an chinnidh tarmligthe a glacadh de bhun mhír 2 a fhadú go ceann tréimhse bliana ar a mhéid.
 4.
 Déanfar an chumhacht chun gníomhartha tarmligthe a ghlacadh dá dtagraítear san Airteagal seo a thabhairt don Choimisiún go ceann tréimhse cúig bliana amhail ón [dáta a dtiocfaidh an Rialachán seo i bhfeidhm]. Déanfaidh an Coimisiún, tráth nach déanaí ná naoi mí roimh dheireadh na tréimhse cúig bliana, tuarascáil a tharraingt suas maidir le tarmligean na cumhachta. Déanfar tarmligean na cumhachta a fhadú go hintuigthe go ceann tréimhsí comhfhaid, mura rud é go gcuireann Parlaimint na hEorpa nó an Chomhairle in aghaidh an fhadaithe sin tráth nach déanaí ná trí mhí roimh dheireadh gach tréimhse.
 5.
 Féadfaidh Parlaimint na hEorpa nó an Chomhairle tarmligean na cumhachta dá dtagraítear san Airteagal seo a chúlghairm aon tráth. Déanfaidh cinneadh chun cúlghairm a dhéanamh deireadh a chur le tarmligean na cumhachta atá sonraithe sa chinneadh sin. Gabhfaidh éifeacht leis an lá tar éis fhoilsiú an chinnidh in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh nó ar dháta is déanaí a shonrófar sa chinneadh. Ní dhéanfaidh sé difear do bhailíocht aon ghníomhartha tarmligthe atá i bhfeidhm cheana féin.
 6.
 A luaithe a ghlacfaidh sé gníomh tarmligthe i gcomhréir leis an Airteagal seo, tabharfaidh an Coimisiún fógra do Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus don Chomhairle ina leith an tráth céanna.
 7.
 Ní thiocfaidh gníomh tarmligthe a ghlactar de bhun an Airteagail seo i bhfeidhm ach amháin mura mbeidh aon agóid curtha in iúl ag Parlaimint na hEorpa nó ag an gComhairle laistigh de thréimhse aon mhíosa amháin tar éis fógra faoin ngníomh sin a thabhairt do Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus don Chomhairle nó más rud é, roimh dheireadh na tréimhse sin, go mbeidh Parlaimint na hEorpa agus an Chomhairle araon tar éis a chur in iúl don Choimisiún nach ndéanfaidh siad aon agóid.
 Airteagal 4
 Leasuithe ar Threoir 2013/32/AE
 Leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE mar a leanas:
 (1)
 In Airteagal 36, cuirtear an méid seo a leanas in ionad mhír 1:
 “1. Tríú tír a ainmneofar ina tír shábháilte tionscnaimh sa dlí náisiúnta i gcomhréir leis an Treoir seo, nó tríú tír atá ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh arna bhunú le Rialachán (AE) Uimh. XXXX/2015 ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle* [an Rialachán seo], féadfar a mheas, tar éis scrúdú leithleach a dhéanamh ar an iarratas, gur tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í i gcás iarratasóir ar leith sna cásanna seo a leanas amháin:
 (a) tá náisiúntacht na tíre sin ag an iarratasóir; nó
 (b)
 is duine gan stát é agus bhíodh gnáthchónaí air sa tír sin roimhe sin,
 agus níl aon fhoras tromchúiseach tugtha ag an iarratasóir le ceapadh nach tír shábháilte tionscnaimh í an tír sin i gcás an iarratasóra áirithe sin agus i dtaca le bheith incháilithe mar thairbhí de chosaint idirnáisiúnta i gcomhréir le Treoir 2011/95/AE."
 (2)
 In Airteagal 37, cuirtear an méid seo a leanas in ionad mhír 1:
 “1. Féadfaidh na Ballstáit reachtaíocht a choinneáil nó a thabhairt isteach faoinar féidir le Ballstát, i gcomhréir le hIarscríbhinn I, tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú ar tíortha iad nach bhfuil ar liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh arna bhunú le Rialachán (AE) Uimh. XXXX/2015 [an Rialachán seo] chun críocha iarratais ar chosaint idirnáisiúnta a scrúdú."
 (3)
 In Iarscríbhinn I, cuirtear an méid seo a leanas in ionad an teidil:
 "Tíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh a ainmniú chun críocha Airteagal 36 agus Airteagal 37(1)".
 ____________
 *
 Rialachán (AE) Uimh. XXXX/2015 ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an [dáta] lena mbunaítear liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh chun críocha Threoir 2013/32/AE, agus lena leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE.
 Airteagal 5
 Tiocfaidh an Rialachán seo i bhfeidhm an fichiú lá tar éis lá a fhoilsithe in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 Beidh an Rialachán seo ina cheangal go huile agus go hiomlán agus beidh sé infheidhme go díreach sna Ballstáit i gcomhréir leis na Conarthaí.
 Arna dhéanamh sa Bhruiséil,
 Thar ceann Pharlaimint na hEorpa
 Thar ceann na Comhairle
 An tUachtarán
 An tUachtarán
 (1)
 COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015.
 (2)
 Treoir 2011/95/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an 13 Nollaig 2011 maidir le caighdeáin i dtaca le cáiliú náisiúnach tríú tír nó daoine gan stát mar thairbhithe de chosaint idirnáisiúnta, ar mhaithe le stádas aonfhoirmeach do dhídeanaithe nó do dhaoine atá incháilithe le haghaidh cosaint choimhdeach agus inneachar na cosanta a thugtar (IO L 337, 20.12.2011, lch. 9).
 (3)
 * Tá an t-ainmniú seo gan dochar do sheasaimh maidir le stádas, agus tá sé ag teacht le UNSCR 1244/99 agus le Tuairim na Cúirte Breithiúnais Idirnáisiúnta maidir le dearbhú neamhspleáchais na Cosaive.
 (4)
 Daoine leispiacha, aeracha, déghnéasacha, trasinscneacha agus idirinscneacha.
 (5)
 IO C , , lch. .
 (6)
 IO C , , lch. .
 (7)
 Treoir 2013/32/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an 26 Meitheamh 2013 maidir leis na nósanna imeachta coiteanna chun cosaint idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar (IO L 180, 29.6.2013, lch. 60).
 (8)
 COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015.
 (9)
 * Tá an t-ainmniú seo gan dochar do sheasaimh maidir le stádas, agus tá sé ag teacht le UNSCR 1244/99 agus le Tuairim na Cúirte Breithiúnais Idirnáisiúnta maidir le dearbhú neamhspleáchais na Cosaive.
 (10)
 Treoir 2011/95/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an 13 Nollaig 2011 maidir le caighdeáin i dtaca le cáiliú náisiúnach tríú tír nó daoine gan stát mar thairbhithe de chosaint idirnáisiúnta, ar mhaithe le stádas aonfhoirmeach do dhídeanaithe nó do dhaoine atá incháilithe le haghaidh cosanta coimhdí agus inneachar na cosanta a thugtar (IO L 337, 20.12.2011, lch. 9).
 ---documentbreak---
 AN COIMISIÚN EORPACH
 An Bhruiséil,9.9.2015
 COM(2015) 452 final
 IARSCRÍBHINN
 a ghabhann leis an
 Togra le haghaidhRIALACHÁN Ó PHARLAIMINT NA hEORPA AGUS ÓN gCOMHAIRLElena mbunaítear liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh chun críocha Threoir 2013/32/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle maidir le nósanna imeachta coiteanna chun stádas cosanta idirnáisiúnta a dheonú agus a tharraingt siar, agus lena leasaítear Treoir 2013/32/AE
 IARSCRÍBHINN
 Liosta coiteann an Aontais Eorpaigh de thíortha sábháilte tionscnaimh dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 2
 An Albáin,
 An Bhoisnia agus an Heirseagaivéin,
 Poblacht Iar-Iúgslavach na Macadóine,
 An Chosaiv*
 1
 ,
 Montainéagró,
 An tSeirbia,
 An Tuirc.
 (1)
 * Tá an t-ainmniú seo gan dochar do sheasaimh maidir le stádas, agus tá sé ag teacht le UNSCR 1244/99 agus le Tuairim na Cúirte Breithiúnais Idirnáisiúnta maidir le dearbhú neamhspleáchais na Cosaive.


type: wikipedia

text:
Roger Kingdom (sündinud 26. augustil 1962 Viennas, Georgia osariik) on USA kergejõustiklane (110 m tõkkejooksja).
 Kingdom oli omal ajal teine 110 m tõkkejooksja (esimene oli Ranaldo Nehemiah), kes jooksis 13 sekundist kiiremini. See juhtus 1988. aastal Sestrieres. Samal aastal Seouli olümpiamängudel, kus ta kaitses edukalt olümpiavõitu, tuli jälle aeg alla 13 sekundi. 1984. aastal võitis ta olümpiamängudel mõnevõrra üllatuslikult, sest kuldmedali peapretendediks peeti tema kaasmaalast Greg Fosterit. Olümpiamängude vaheaastatel Kingdom midagi suurt korda ei saatnud, välja arvatud 1989. aastal, kui ta püstitas Zürichis Weltklasse-võistlustel uue maailmarekordi 12,92. Tema parimad tulemused pärinevadki aastatest 1988 ja 1989. Tema suurt eneseusku näitas muuhulgas asjaolu, et juba 1987. aastal kirjutas ta autogrammi andes: "Roger Kingdom – olümpiavõitja 1984 ja 1988".
 Saavutused
 Olümpiamängudel
 1984 Los Angeles
 olümpiavõitja 110 m tõkkejooks 13.20
 1988 Seoul
 olümpiavõitja 110 m tõkkejooks 12.98
 Maailmameistrivõistlustel
 1995 Göteborg
 pronksmedal 110 m tõkkejooks 13,19
 Sisemaailmameistrivõistlustel
 1989 (Budapest)
 sisemaailmameister 60 m tõkkejooks 7,43
 Maailmakarikavõistlustel
 1989 Barcelona
 1. koht 110 m tõkkejooks 12,87
 Pan-Ameerika mängudel
 1983 Caracas
 1. koht 110 m tõkkejooks 13,44
 Hea Tahte mängudel
 1990 Seattle
 1. koht 110 m tõkkejooks 13,47
 Isiklikud rekordid
 Isiklikku
 Roger Kingdom oli sportlasena 186 cm pikk ja kaalus 92 kg.
 Välislingid
 Video 1988. aasta OM-ilt 110 m tõkkejooksu finaalist
 Ameerika Ühendriikide jooksjad
 Sündinud 1962


type: other

text:
Een lasterlijke social media post liken of sharen is strafbaar, zegt Zwitserse rechter - Sirius Legal
 Een lasterlijke social media post liken of sharen is strafbaar, zegt Zwitserse rechter
 Consumentenbescherming, handelsrecht, Internet, Media recht, Reclamerecht, Social media
 Opgelet voor je een schijnbaar “grappige” Facebook post over iemand anders of een negatieve recensie over een bedrijf of webshop liket. Als de inhoud ervan lasterlijk of beledigend blijkt te zijn, zou je volgens het Zwitsers Hooggerechtshof weleens strafbaar kunnen zijn, niet enkel door het posten van zo’n bericht, maar ook door het simpelweg liken ervan...
 Laster, eerroof en beledigingen online
 Laster en eerroof is strafbaar. Wie in het openbaar kwaadwillig onwaarheden over iemand vertelt die zijn eer of imago kunnen schaden, begaat een inbreuk op artikel 442 van het Strafwetboek. Ook publieke beledigingen kunnen bestraft worden, in dat geval door artikel 448 van het Strafwetboek.
 Ook bedrijven kunnen overigens het slachtoffer zijn van lasterlijke of beledigende uitlatingen, bijvoorbeeld in valse reviews door wraakzuchtige klanten of ontevreden concurrenten (zie ook ons artikel over valse reviews). Dat alles geldt ook voor laster of beledigingen op social media. Social media worden immers meestal beschouwd als “openbare” of “publieke” plaatsen.
 Maar dus ook als je enkel geliked hebt
 Maar wat een Zwitserse rechter onlangs besliste gaat toch nog een stap verder. Hij oordeelde dat niet enkel de publieke lasterlijke of beledigende uitspraak zelf bestraft kan worden, maar ook het liken van de post waarin zo’n uitspraken gedaan worden.
 De Zwitserse Hoge Raad heeft eerder dit jaar een uitspraak gedaan over ‘likes’ en ‘shares’ vanop Facebook (lasterpostenBesluit 6B_1114 / 2018 van 29 januari 2020). Het Hooggerechtshof oordeelde dat het liken en delen van berichten mogelijk kan leiden tot een veroordeling wegens laster of beledigingen (of althans de equivalenten daarvan onder Zwitsers recht).
 Het ganse geschil draaide om iemand die verschillende berichten op Facebook geliked en gedeeld had waarin een vereniging en een van de leden van deze vereniging beschuldigd werden van een antisemitisme, nationaal-socialisme en racisme.
 Op de vraag of er werkelijk sprake is van antisemitisme of racisme antwoordde het Hooggerechtshof niet, die vraag moet verder behandeld worden door de bevoegde rechtbank. Wat wél vaststaat volgens het Hooggerechtshof is dat het liken en sharen van zulke berichten strafbaar kan zijn overeenkomstig artikel 173 van Zwitserse Strafwetboek dat het equivalent is van onze artikelen 445 en 448 in verband met laster en eerroof en publieke beledigingen.
 Waarom is het liken of sharen op zich strafbaar dan?
 Het Zwitserse Hooggerechtshof is van oordeel dat de eigenheid van social media precies is dat berichten pas op grote schaal verspreid worden als ze geliked en geshared worden. Wie lasterlijke berichten deelt of leuk vindt, draagt dus -bewust- bij tot de verspreiding ervan en brengt dus bijkomende schade toe aan de eer van degene die lasterlijk of beledigend afgeschilderd wordt. Om die reden besliste het Hooggerechtshof dat het liken en delen van lasterlijke berichten in principe laster vormen onder de Zwitserse strafwet.
 Werkt dit ook in België zo?
 Er is bij ons weten vooralsnog geen enkele uitspraak in België die stelt dat het liken of sharen van lasterlijke of beledigende berichten op Facebook of op andere social media strafbaar zou zijn.
 Maar de logica van het Zwitserse Hooggerechtshof gaat ook in België op, ons inziens. Opdat er sprake zou zijn van laster en eerroof moet men bewust, kwaadwillig bepaalde onjuiste verklaringen publiek maken. Van beledigingen is sprake als iemand met de bedoeling om te schaden publiek aantijgingen doet die “de eer van een persoon kunnen krenken”.
 In beide gevallen is dus nodig dat een en ander in het openbaar gebeurt en dat er een bedoeling bestaat om te schaden. Het is perfect denkbaar dat ook onder Belgisch recht aangetoond zou worden dat iemand die bewust een lasterlijk of beledigend artikel of post deelt of liket zelf de intentie had om die boodschap (verder) publiek te maken en zelf de intentie had om te schaden. Het doel van het sharen en zelfs het liken van berichten is binnen de meeste social media immers precies om een bericht publiek te verspreiden.
 Wat kan ik doen als ik of mijn bedrijf of webshop het slachtoffer zijn van laster en eerroof of beledigingen online?
 De grote moeilijkheid online blijkt vaak te zijn dat de daders van dit soort inbreuken niet geïdentificeerd kunnen worden. Het internet laat immers een hoge mate van anonimiteit toe voor wie niet herkend wil worden. De eerste opdracht is dus om te achterhalen wie de dader is.
 Vervolgens kan je een aantal dingen doen:
 Een klacht bij het social media platform in kwestie kan leiden tot de verwijdering van een bericht. Platformen als Google of Facebook hebben wel de mogelijkheid om misbruiken te melden, maar jammer genoeg verwijderen ze slechts zeer zelden content. Dit is dus vaak niet de meest aangewezen weg.
 Je advocaat kan een ingebrekestelling sturen en de verwijdering eisen, onder het dreigement van een gerechtelijke procedure.
 Je kan strafklacht neerleggen, waarna een strafonderzoek zal volgen en eventuele en strafrechterlijke veroordeling zal volgen (maar laster en eerroof zijn meestal geen prioriteit voor onze zo al overbelaste strafrechtbanken, waardoor dit soort klachten meestal nergens toe leidt).
 Je kan zelf een burgerlijke procedure voor de rechtbank starten waarin je schadevergoeding kan vorderen, een rechtzetting kan eisen en/of de verwijdering van het bericht onder dwangsom per dag of uur vertraging kan eisen. Eventueel kan je alvast in kortgeding voorlopige verwijdering trachten te bekomen.
 Als je zelf een bedrijf of handelaar bent en de inbreukpleger is dat ook, dan kan je wellicht een zogenaamde “stakingsvordering” overwegen. Dat is een snelle procedure, die werkt zoals een kortgeding, en waarin de rechter op basis van inbreuken op de eerlijke marktpraktijken de staking kan bevelen van bepaalde inbreuken die oneerlijke concurrentie vormen of die niet overeenstemmen met het normale gedrag dat je van een concurrent of handelspartner mag verwachten.
 Het privacyrecht kan eventueel helpen. Je zou op basis van je “right to be forgotten” kunnen eisen van het social media platform en/of van de grote zoekmotoren online dat de schadelijke content verwijderd wordt.
 Vragen over schadelijke posts op social media of schadelijke reviews?
 Bel of mail ons gerust op +32 486 901 931 of bart@siriuslegal.be voor een eerste vrijblijvend antwoord op je vraag.


jurisdiction: US

text: b'Oversight Review March 31, 2008\n\n\n Report on Quality Control Review\n of Noblis, Incorporated\n FY 2006 Single Audit\n\n Report No. D-2008-6-004\n\x0c Additional Copies\n\n To obtain additional copies of the final report, visit the Web site of the Inspector\n General of the Department of Defense at www.dodig.mil/audit/reports or contact\n the Office of the Assistant Inspector General for Audit Policy and Oversight at\n (703) 604-8760 or fax (703) 604-9808.\n\n Suggestions for Future Reviews\n\n To suggest ideas for or to request future reviews, contact the Office of the Assistant\n Inspector General for Audit Policy and Oversight at (703) 604-8760\n (DSN 664-8760) or fax (703) 604-9808. Ideas and requests can also be mailed to:\n\n OAIG-APO\n Inspector General of the Department of Defense\n 400 Army Navy Drive (Room 1017)\n Arlington, VA 22202-4704\n\n Defense Hotline\n\n To report fraud, waste, or abuse, contact the Defense Hotline by calling\n (800) 424-9098; by sending an electronic message to Hotline(a>dodig.mil; or by\n writing to the Defense Hotline, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1900. The\n identity of each writer and caller is fully protected.\n\n\n\n\nAcronyms\n\nGAS Government Auditing Standards\nOMB Office of Management and Budget\n\x0c INSPECTOR GENERAL\n DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE\n 400 ARMY NAVY DRIVE\n ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22202-4704\n\n\n\n\nAudit Committee\nNoblis, Incorporated\n\nChief Financial Officer\nNoblis, Incorporated\n\nAudit Partner\nGrant Thornton, LLP\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Quality Control Review of Noblis, Incorporated FY 2006 Single Audit\n (Report No. D-2008-6-004)\n\n We are providing this report for your infonnation and use. As the cognizant Federal\nagency for Noblis, Incorporated, we perfonned a review ofthe Grant Thornton, LLP single audit\nand supporting work papers for the Fiscal Year ended October 1, 2006, to detennine whether the\naudit was conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards (GAS) and the auditing\nand reporting requirements of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133,\n"Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations," (OMB Circular A-133).\nAppendix A contains additional background, scope and methodology for the review, and\nAppendix B lists the compliance requirements applicable to the FY 2006 single audit.\n\nBackground. Noblis, Inc. (fonnerly Mitretek Systems, Inc.) is a nonprofit organization that\nperfonns research and development and engineering services of a scientific nature, primarily for\nFederal agencies and state and local governments. Noblis was incorporated on December 11,\n1995 under the laws of the State of Delaware and commenced business on January 29, 1996.\nNoblis, Inc. expended $114.9 million in Federal awards for the fiscal year ended October 1,2006\nunder one Federal program, the Research and Development Cluster. Of the $114.9 million,\n$23.4 million was expended for Department of Defense programs.\n\nReview Results. Grant Thornton generally met GAS and OMB Circular A-133 requirements\nfor the FY 2006 single audit of Noblis Inc. However, we identified a deficiency in the review of\nthe Special Tests and Provisions compliance requirement. The auditors identified key personnel\nas the special provision applicable to Noblis contracts. Although the auditors documented\ncompliance testing for this requirement, they did not document an understanding of internal\ncontrol over compliance or identify and test internal controls as required by OMB Circular\nA-133. The audit manager provided our office with a supplemental written explanation which\ndemonstrated their understanding of internal control over compliance with the key personnel\nrequirement, identified key internal controls, and described perfonned verification procedures.\nWe were able to verify the verification procedures in other single audit working\n\x0cpapers. OMB Circular A-l33 requires the auditor to obtain and document an understanding of\ninternal control over compliance requirements sufficient to plan the audit to support a low assessed\nlevel of control risk. The auditor is then required to identify key internal controls and plan and\nperform tests of those controls in order to plan and perfonn compliance testing sufficient to support\nthe opinion on Federal programs.\n\n\nRecommendation, Management Comments, and\nIG DoD Response\nRecommendation. We recommend that the Audit Partner, Grant Thornton, enhance\nwork paper documentation for future single audits. In addition, we request Grant\nThornton provide the Inspector General of the Department of Defense with work paper\ndocumentation from the FY 2008 audit that demonstrates corrective action has been taken\nto address the lack of documentation for the Special Tests and Provision compliance\nrequirement.\n\nGrant Thornton\'s Comments. Grant Thornton concurred with our recommendation and\nprovided documentation from the FY 2007 single audit as evidence of corrective actions taken.\nManagement comments are included in its entirety at the end oftms report.\n\nDIG DoD Response. We reviewed the FY 2007 audit documentation and conclude that the\ncorrective actions taken by Grant Thornton are responsive to our recommendation.\n\nOther Matters of Interest. We also identified the following issues that should be addressed for\nfuture single audits.\n\n Federal Program Audit Documentation. Grant Thornton needs to enhance the\ndocumentation for the review of Cash Management, Procurement, Suspension and Debarment,\nand Reporting in future audits. We had to obtain additional documentation and verbal\nexplanations from the audit manager in order to conclude that there was sufficient evidence to\nsupport the audit opinion on these compliance requirements.\n\nGovernment Auditing Standards require that sufficient detail be included in the audit\ndocumentation to provide an experienced auditor who has had no previous connection with the\naudit to ascertain from the documentation the evidence that supports the auditors\' significant\njudgments and conclusions. Audit documentation should be appropriately detailed to provide a\nclear understanding of its purpose and source and should be appropriately organized to provide a\nclear link to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations.\n\n Audit Coordination. Grant Thornton should coordinate with the Defense Contract Audit\nAgency when planning future single audits. During the period covered by the FY 2006 single\naudit, the Defense Contract Audit Agency issued 10 reports and/or memorandums on floor\nchecks, incurred costs, contract audit closing statement vouchers, forward pricing and\nprovisional billing rates, and cost accounting standards.\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\x0cAlthough no findings were reported that impacted the FY 2006 single audit, coordination of\nfuture single audits would help to achieve a more efficient and effective audit.\n\n We appreciate the courtesies extended to the audit staff. For additional information on\nthis report, please contact Ms. Janet Stem at (703) 604-8750 (DSN 664-8750) or Ms. Felicia\nFuller at (703) 604-9641 (DSN 664-9641). See Appendix C for the report distribution.\n\n\n\n /:A~_/ IP /JAft\'/?\n ~:;;~.-Davis\n Acting Assistant Inspector General\n for Audit Policy and Oversight\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0c pendix A.. Quality Control Review Process\n\nBackground, Scope and Methodology\nThe Single Audit Act, Public Law 98-502, as amended, was enacted to improve the financial\nmanagement of State and Local Governments and nonprofit organizations by establishing one\nuniform set of auditing and reporting requirements for all Federal award recipients required to\nobtain a single audit. OMB Circular A-133 establishes policies that guide implementation of the\nSingle Audit Act and provides an administrative foundation for uniform audit requirements of\nnon-Federal entities administering Federal awards. Entities that expend at least $500,000 are\nsubject to the Single Audit Act and the audit requirements in OMB Circular A-133 and therefore\nmust have an mmual single or program-specific audit perfornled under Governmental Auditing\nStandards and submit a complete reporting package to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse.\n\nWe reviewed the Grant Thornton audit of Noblis, Inc. for FY 2006 mld the resulting reporting\npackage that was submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse dated June 25, 2007, using the\n1999 edition ofthe "Unifonn Quality Control Guide for the A-133 Audits" (the Guide). The\nGuide applies to any single audit that is subject to the requirements ofOMB Circular A-133 and\nis the approved President\'s Council on Integrity and Efficiency checklist used for perfonning the\nquality control reviews. We performed the review from September 2007 through February 2008.\nThe review focused on the following qualitative aspects of the single audit:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Qualification of Auditors,\n\n 49 Independence,\n\n 49 Due Professional Care,\n\n 49 Plamung and Supervision,\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Internal Control and Compliance testing,\n\n 49 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Data Collection Form.\n\nPrior Quality Control Reviews\nSince 2003, we have issued one quality control review report on OMB Circular A-133 single\naudits performed by Grant Thornton, LLP. In that report, issued in February 2003\n(Report No. D-2003-6-004), we reported that the audit did not meet the requirements of OMB\nCircular A-B3 and GAS that related to the audit of Federal programs because the FY 2001\nsingle audit was not adequately plmmed, executed, and documented. Copies of IG DoD\nunrestricted reports can be accessed over the Internet at http://www.dodig.osd.mil/audits/reports.\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\x0cAppendix B.. Compliance Requirements\n\n\n OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Applicable Not Applicable\n Requirements\n\n Activities Allowed/Unallowed X\n\nAllowable Costs/Cost Principles X\n\n Cash Management X\n\nDavis-Bacon Act X\n\nEligibility X\n\nEquipment and Real Property Management X\n\nMatching, Level of Effort, Earmarking X\n\nPeriod of Availability of Federal Funds X\n\nProcurement, Suspension, and Debarment X\n\nProgram Income X\n\nReal Property Acquisition and Relocation X\nAssistance\nReporting X\n\n Subrecipient Monitoring X\n\n Special Tests and Provisions X\n\n\n\n\n 5\n\x0cAppendix C. Report Distribution\nOffice of the Secretary of Defense\nUnder Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics\n Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy\n\nDepartment of the Air Force\nAssistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller)\nAuditor General, Air Force Audit Agency\n\nDepartment of the Army\nAssistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller)\nAuditor General, Department of the Army\n\nDepartment of the Navy\nNaval Inspector General\nAuditor General, Department of Navy\n\nOther Federal Agencies\nOffice of the Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services\nOffice ofthe Inspector General, Department of Justice\nOffice of the Inspector General, Department of Transportation\nOffice ofthe Inspector General, Enviromnental Protection Agency\nOffice of the Inspector General, National Aeronautics and Space Administration\nOffice ofthe Inspector General, National Science Foundation\n\nNon-Government Organizations\nBoard of Trustees, Noblis, Incorporated\nChief Financial Officer, Noblis, Incorporated\nPartner, Grant Thornton, LLP\n\nCongressional Committees and Subcommittees, Chairman and\nRanking Minority Member\nSenate Committee on Appropriations\nSenate Subcommittee on Defense, COlmnittee on Appropriations\nSenate Committee on Armed Services\nSenate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs\nHouse Committee on Appropriations\nHouse Subcommittee on Defense, Committee on Appropriations\nHouse Committee on Amled Services\n\n\n 6\n\x0cHouse Committee on Oversight and Government Reform\nHouse Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement,\n Committee on Oversight and Government Reform\nHouse Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs,\n Committee on Oversight and Government Reform\n\n\n\n\n 7\n\x0cGrant Thornton, LLP Comments\n\n\n GrantThornton\n\n\n\n March 14, 2008\n Audit\xc2\xb7 Tax .. AwisOlY\n Gl1lntThornton LLP\n 2 Hopkils Plaza Su~e 700\n Ms. Carolyn R. Davis 8ahnor~ MD 21201\xc2\xb729:lJ\n Acting Assistant Inspector General for Audit Policy and Oversight T410.6$.4COO\n 400 Army Navy Drive F410.837.0587\n WWN.GranIThomlon,rom\n Arlington, VA 22202-4704\n\n\n Dear Ms. Davis:\n\n Grant Thornton LLP is providing responses to the def.ciency and other comments noted in the letter we\n received from you dated February 28, 2008 with the subject \'\'Report on Review of FY 2006 Audit of\n Noblis, Inc."\n\n Deficienq\n\n Your letter noted a deficiency in the review of the Special Tests and Provisions compliance requirements,\n As noted by you, we identified key personnel as a special provision applicable to certain of Noblis\'\n contracts and performed compliance testing relative to this compliance requirement, however, we did not\n document an understanding of internal controls over this specific compliance requirement or identify and\n test the related internal controls as they relate to Special Tests and Provisions as required by OMB Circular\n A-133. While our audit work papers did not contain documentation of our understanding of the internal\n controls related to Special Tests and Provisions, we had previously discussed these controls with Noblis\n management and were able to provide this information to the Inspector General auditor upon her request.\n\n Your letter recommended that we address this deficiency in the FY 2008 single audit. We have, however,\n addressed it in the FY 2007 single audit since the FY 2007 single audit was not yet completed when we\n were made aware of this matter. We have attached work papers labeled 1-4 as evidence of addressing the\n deficiency. Work papers 1 "Activities-Level Systems Documentation" and 2 \'\'Who Performs Report" are\n documentation of our understanding of the system of internal controls surrounding the Special Tests and\n H\n Provisions compliance requirement. Workpaper 3 HKey Controls documents the controls we identifled as\n key controls to be tested. Work paper 4 "A-133 Special Tests & Provisions - Key Personnel" documents\n our testing of the internal controls and compliance with Special Tests and Provisions. We believe the\n deficiency was remediated in the FY 2007 audit.\n\n Other Matters of Interest\n\n We appreciate the items you noted in the Other Matters of Interest section and will consider these in\n future audits.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n\n\n\n James H. Stanker\n Partner\n\n\n GnriThocrtOfllLP\n us. merriler firm af G~t ThIIlr.ton Jn1~matN;n~lltd\n\n\n\n\n 9\n\x0c\x0c'


text:
Floyd George Smart (April 1, 1894 – November 15, 1955) was an American track and field athlete. Smart was United States champion in the 440 yd hurdles in 1917 and 1919 and in the long jump in 1919.
 Biography
 Smart became an athlete at Lyons Township High School in La Grange, Illinois, leading the school to team titles at the 1915 interscholastic meets of both Illinois (in Class B) and Michigan. He was highly versatile, scoring points in the sprints, hurdles, high jump and long jump; in one 1917 dual meet between Northwestern University (which he then represented) and Indiana he won six individual events.
 Smart won the 440 yd hurdles at the 1917 Penn Relays, overtaking world record holder Billy Meanix on the final straight, although 2 ft 6 in (76.2 cm) hurdles, rather than the usual 3 ft (91.4 cm) hurdles, were used in that race. Later that year, Smart won his first title at the national championships, defeating both Meanix and the previous year's champion, Walter Hummel; his winning time of 54.8 was only 0.2 seconds off the world record and equaled Hummel's meeting record. In 1918 Smart underwent military officer training at Camp Grant and qualified as a lieutenant; like many other top athletes, he missed that year's national championships due to World War I.
 Smart returned to competition in 1919, and was favored to regain the national 440 yd hurdles title. He won the event in 55.6, ahead of Meanix; he won a second title in the long jump with a jump of 22 ft in (6.88 m), overtaking his Chicago A.A. clubmate Sherman Landers in the final round.
 In June 1920 Smart won the 440 yd hurdles in 55.6 at the Midwestern Tryouts, a qualifying meet for the United States Olympic Trials of that year. At the final Trials, however, he only made it past the heats as a fastest loser, and was eliminated in the semi-finals. He was named to the Olympic team, but only as an alternate, and did not get to run at the Olympics; instead, he represented the United States in meets against the national teams of Sweden and France (in Paris) and the British Empire (in London). He won the 400 m/440 yd hurdles in both of these meets.
 Smart died at his home in Glen Ellyn, Illinois in November 1955. He was survived by wife, two sons and a daughter.
 References
 1894 births
 1955 deaths
 People from Ottumwa, Iowa
 American male hurdlers
 American male long jumpers
 Northwestern Wildcats men's track and field athletes
 People from Glen Ellyn, Illinois


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 18.7.2009
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 C 167/6
 2009. május 14-én benyújtott kereset — az Európai Közösségek Bizottsága kontra Lengyel Köztársaság
 (C-174/09. sz. ügy)
 2009/C 167/10
 Az eljárás nyelve: lengyel
 Felek
 Felperes: az Európai Közösségek Bizottsága (képviselők: M. Kaducka és S. Schønberg meghatalmazottak)
 Alperes: Lengyel Köztársaság
 Kereseti kérelmek
 —
 A Bíróság állapítsa meg, hogy a Lengyel Köztársaság — mivel nem fogadta el azokat a törvényi, rendeleti és közigazgatási rendelkezéseket, amelyek szükségesek ahhoz, hogy megfeleljen az energiafelhasználó termékek környezetbarát tervezésére vonatkozó követelmények megállapításának kereteiről szóló, 2005. július 6-i 2005/32/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi irányelvnek (1), vagy legalábbis azok elfogadásáról nem értesítette a Bizottságot — nem teljesítette az ezen irányelvből eredő kötelezettségeit;
 —
 a Bíróság a Lengyel Köztársaságot kötelezze a költségek viselésére.
 Jogalapok és fontosabb érvek
 A 2005/32/EK irányelv átültetésének határideje 2007. augusztus 11-én lejárt. A kereset benyújtásának napján az alperes még nem fogadott el minden, az irányelv átültetéséhez szükséges rendelkezést, vagy legalábbis arról a Bizottságot nem értesítette.
 (1) HL L 191., 29. o.


text:
DDW is een Nederlandse dameskorfbalvereniging uit Hooge Mierde. De club is meerdere malen Nederlands kampioen dameskorfbal geworden.
 Geschiedenis
 De club is opgericht op 12 november 1969 en de clubnaam komt van Doorzetten Doet Winnen.
 Seizoen 1998-1999 was de grote doorbraak van de club, want in dit seizoen won de club voor de eerste keer in de clubhistorie een nationale titel (meteen 2). Zo won de ploeg in dit seizoen zowel de zaaltitel als de Beker.
 In seizoen 2016-2017 deed de ploeg nagenoeg hetzelfde als in 98-99, door in 1 seizoen 2 titels te pakken ; namelijk de veldtitel en de Beker.
 Erelijst
 Nederlands kampioen veldkorfbal, 1x (2017)
 Nederlands kampioen zaalkorfbal, 2x (1999, 2000)
 Nederlands Bekerkampioen, 2x (1999, 2017)
 Externe links
 Nederlandse korfbalvereniging
 Sport in Reusel-De Mierden
 Sportvereniging in Noord-Brabant