Tag archive

domenico martinelli @en

New people inserted in the anti-North Korea “Black list”


Today, the Council of the European Union – which, we remember is the Union’s executive body – has added 16 persons and 12 entities to its “black list” of individuals and companies affected by restrictive measures taken by europe against the conduct of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.


The decision reflects the new requirements imposed by the 2270 resolution of the United Nations Security Council adopted on the 2nd March 2016 in response to the test launches of nuclear rockets by North Korea, which took place on January 6 and 7 February.
The formal proceedings of this diplomatic initiative will be published in the EU Official Journal tomorrow. The EU’s restrictive measures against North Korea have been introduced for the first time on 22 December 2006. Current measures comply with all the resolutions of the UN Security Council adopted after the launches and nuclear tests performed by North Korea, using ballistic missile technology, and also include additional measures taken by the EU autonomously. Such decision is to hit the North Koreans launch program policies.



The most important measures include import and export bans for weapons, and every object or technology that could contribute to such activities. Both the UN and the EU, independently, have also imposed restrictive measures for financial and commercial activities and transport services.

With this initiative, today, the European Union has strengthened its latest measures, which were decided on 22 April 2013, implementing the UN Security Council Resolution. 2094.


Domenico Martinelli



Security and privacy: the eternal dilemma

Europe/Innovation/Policy di

“Security and privacy. The eternal dilemma “. Sometimes it is so. Sometimes not. From a relative and business perspective, privacy is one of the fundamental aspects of security, meaning that a bug in the privacy system will involve considerable damage to the company and its customers.


In the enterprise field, and in almost the whole world, the issue of privacy is recognized as one of the fundamental ones, which may imply – in the larger companies, the separation of the post of privacy “officer” or “consultant” from the most generic post of “security manager”. But from an absolute point of view, privacy and security are two titans destined for confrontation. What and how you oppose? Undoubtedly in Europe there is a double need: on one hand making Europe citizens grow and progress in terms of human rights and individual rights, and perhaps privacy, at first glance it would seem one of the most important individual rights almost to rise, nowadays, in the category of natural rights.

From another point of view, it is necessary that national and European institutions literally invade the privacy of residents and foreigners who apply to reside in the old continent. This, of course, for clear reasons of public order and security, in order to counteract the sad phenomenon whom every day we hear and read: from illegal immigration to migrants smuggling, from terrorism to money laundering.

And that’s why Europe is taking on regulatory instruments to govern on the one hand the duties / rights in the field of private citizens and, secondly, the duties / rights of the institutions towards the citizens. We are talking, respectively, of the Regulation and the Directive on Data Protection. “Regulation” and “directive” are two very general words, which bear far more complex legal and long nomenclatures, but, in the data protection background, interested people can immediately understand what they refer to.

In both normative sources, upcoming promulgation – it  seems that both measures have passed the steps of the discussion in trilogue – roles, responsibilities, recipients and “actors” of the data protection system and, consequently, privacy are defined and soon they will cover Europe, the United States and Third Countries. Much importance will be obviously assumed by the national controller authorities, which are already partly coordinated by the European Data Protection Supervisor.

From an operational point of view and spare change, however, it should change little, but it will be very useful once and for all to give uniformity to the individual national laws and procedures to provide common data access and litigation systems.

In any case, to date, the European and national institutions acting in the field of security are – in extreme and deep synthesis – legitimate holders of power related to the use, collection and retention of data, to fulfill their purposes and founding their institutional purposes. The so called “Swedish Initiative”, the “Prüm Decisions” are nothing more than legal attempts, already adopted or in the process of transposition in national law, in order to provide a better use of these information and their exchange between Authorities.

And this is the knot of the question: according to the European and national case-law, the compression of the right to privacy has so far been generally considered correct, if the same interest conflicts with higher interests, such as the right to life, or the principle that it must a crime must be prevented or brought to completion. In fact these – let’s call them philosophical – principles, are underlying the legislative existence of disparate databases – even if, some of them, are not yet operational – that support justice and European police forces in their daily mission of prevention and contrasting crime.

In this specific sector there have been fundamental judgments of the European Court of Justice who have disciplined and completely redesigned the architecture of data protection, especially in the economic relations with major US giants, which are in fact the monopoly of social communication and service providers online.

For example, think about the famous sentence on the “Data Retention” (to Security-vs-Privacy-420x300which we refer integrally) that made completely skip the agreements so far perfectly and “efficient” between EU and US. Before the sentence, every non-EU state, which managed European citizens’ data was in fact free to manage by itself: or rather, despite having to ensure an adequate data protection regime, it was quite free from forms of controls and inspections by the EU institutions. The  so called principle of the “Safe Harbour” proved to be insufficient to protect the privacy of citizens who entrusted to the giants of the global telematics their data, their own interests and their own photographs. Following the judgment, the “Safe Harbour” has been completely revised and replaced by a safer agreement called “Privacy Shield “.

European institution which is tasked with signing these agreements is the Commission. The agreement has developed has developed a new legal system putting, so to speak, “the stakes” for the United States, providing clear guarantees and transparency requirements applicable to access to data from the government of the US, by imposing specific obligations on companies and a robust application, providing effective protection of the rights of EU citizens with different possibilities of litigation and devising a mechanism of annual joint review of the effectiveness of the shield.

So, to sum up, Europe is not in contrast with common sense: on the one hand provides for the guarantee of the right to privacy issues and fundamental rights, on the other manages to balance strongly her action of collecting information necessary to safeguard of its citizens, defending its interests and its autonomy from friends across the Atlantic.

On this dilemma some very strong doubts remain, especially with regard to national legislation. Consider, for example, in countries where prostitution is illegal. Many political movements or currents of thought are clamoring for the legalization and the drafting of specific rules. A writer’s opinion is that a law in matter can never be enacted, precisely for reasons of privacy, even if the “prostitution” topic is touches many others: human rights, gender-based violence, exploitation, immigration, acts of disposal of his own body and so on.

If a law to regularize and reinstitute prostitution would issued, the same would conflict – without limitation – with rules requiring the accommodation lists to be communicated to the authorities (and thus to enter into the databases). Inevitably a client and a prostitute would be identified, and a profile of the people who attend the same prostitute or who usually frequents that area could equally be traced or, worse, sexual habits (which are, for now, quite rightly, a as sensitive) could be profiled. Again, it is essential for the authorities to know hotel customer records (that can be crucial in resolving judicial and investigation cases) and hotel owners are oblige to communicate them.

Here the dilemma: to protecting the public interest or  the individual interests?

Domenico Martinelli


EU rejects 308 refugees

The EU Commission confirmed that Greece is rejecting 308 irregular migrants in Turkey. The European Union is in fact intensifying its efforts to ensure that those who did not qualify for international protection in Europe are rapidly and actually driven back to their countries of origin or sent back to the countries of transit.


The Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos, said: “Under the EU-Turkey joint action plan we agreed to accelerate return and readmission procedures with Turkey. The European Commission has reinforced its support for cooperation on return between EU Member States and Turkey and today’s transfers of returnees from Greece to Turkey show that our efforts are starting to bear fruit. If we want to address the challenges of the refugee crisis successfully we need to get back to an orderly management of the migration flows: We have to make sure that those who are in need of protection will receive it, but it has to be clear as well that those who have no right to stay in the EU will be quickly and effectively returned“.

According to the Commission, to ensure that the European Common Asylum System will work, it is essential that the return policy is fully functioning. While fully respecting fundamental rights and the principle of reception, repatriation to countries of origin or to transit countries by irregular migrants who are not entitled to remain in the EU constitutes an essential part of overall efforts of EU to address the phenomenon of migration and, in particular, to reduce the regular immigration.

It is for this reason that the strengthening of cooperation on refoulement with Turkey is considered today as one of the main priorities of the European Commission. As part of the Joint Action Plan EU-Turkey, activated on November 29, the EU and Turkey have pledged to strengthen cooperation in the field of migration management – including the prevention of irregular migration flows towards EU – and in order to speed up the procedures for denial of entry of illegal immigrants, in line with the provisions specifically designed.

So yesterday and today, the return of illegal immigrants, mostly from Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia started.

A clear and unequivocal signal to those who know in advance to be not entitled to international protection.


Domenico Martinelli


Eu: Dutch Presidency

Policy di

The Nederlands have strated their Presidency of the Council of EU. As you all may know, by 1st January the Presidency of the EU Council has changed. Luxembourg has given his witness to the Netherlands. As stated by the country of tulips and windmills, the Presidency will aim at an EU concentrated on the really important issues for citizens and businesses, being capable of delivering growth and jobs through innovation, and closely to civil society. The Presidency will promote initiatives at EU level only if considered more effective than the national policies.


Over the next six months, the Presidency will focus on four key areas:

 migration and international security

 public finances and stronger euro zone

 Europe as an innovative and job creator entity

 a forward-looking policy on climate and energy.

The Netherlands will play the role until June 30th, followed by Slovakia and Malta.

As mentioned, the Presidency of the Council shall alternate EU Member States every six months. During each semester, it chairs the meetings at all levels within the Council, helping to ensure continuity in the work of the EU in this institution.

Member States holding the Presidency cooperate closely in groups of three, and because of it are calle trio. This system was introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. The Trio sets long-term goals and prepares a joint program, which will provide the main themes and issues that will be discussed by the Council for a period of 18 months. Under this program, each of the three countries prepare its own more detailed six-month program.

The current Trio Presidency, as mentioned, consists of the Dutch Presidency, followed by the Slovak and Maltese one and, for example, Slovakia is already sending its general understandings about …

Every Presidency has the duty to carry on the work of the Regulation for the Council of the European Union, ensuring the continuity of the EU, the proper conduct of the legislative processes and cooperation between Member States. For this purpose, the presidency must act as an honest and neutral broker.

The Presidency has also the burden of planning and conducting Council meetings and the meetings of its preparatory bodies, coordinating the the various Council configurations for each level (except for the “Foreign Affairs” Council), which include the permanent committees, such as the Committee of Permanent Representatives (better known as COREPER), and the groups and committees that deal with specific issues(such as the JHA Council).

All just be done ensuring the smooth running of the debates and the correct application of the rules of procedure and working methods of the Council, and spacing out meetings with formal and informal ones, that can be kept in Brussels and in the country holding the rotating presidency.

Another task of the presidency is to represent the Council in relations with other EU institutions, in particular with the Commission and the European Parliament. Its role is to work towards an agreement on legislative files through the so-called “trilogue”, namely informal negotiation meetings and meetings of the Conciliation Committee, where the three main EU institutions agree on the legal texts and agree compromises on the several instances represented .

The Presidency is working in close coordination with the President of the European and with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy , a position currently held by Miss Mogherini.

In respect of that institution, the presidency is called to support its work and to carry out certain duties on behalf of the High Representative, as representing the “Foreign Affairs” Council in the European Parliament or the “Foreign Affairs” Council when this last discusses trade policy issues.

The Dutch presidency is obviously beginning to take its first steps since these days. So much clicked are its reference websites.

Among all the initiatives disclosed, in addition to the publication of the calendar of the semester, the first cultural program stands out: the opening of a visitors center in Amsterdam. Just on January 4th, in fact, the Dutch Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bert Koenders has officially opened “The wall of life” in Amsterdam. This interactive art installation, located near the building that will be dedicated to EU events, is a place where citizens and artists can exchange ideas on Europe in a free and creativeway, in order to better involve citizens and public about the work of Europe and, more specifically, the Dutch Presidency in the various policy areas.

We will follow the work of the presidency step by step, specially as part of our area of interests, with the hope to see resolved as soon as possible the problems relating to internal security and migration.

Domenico Martinelli


The ENS launches his new report

The ENS – European Network on statelessness (European Network for the Statelessness) is launching in these last hours its new report “No child should be stateless”, which is an integral part of its campaign to put an end to childhood statelessness in Europe.



The entity is a charity under english law,  London based, and  is obviously a non-governmental body, which is always looking for partnerships with universities, international organizations, and experts in the asylum and immigration issues.

The report provides a summary of research studies conducted by membersof the ENS, in eight European countries, as well as analysis of national laws in all 47 states of the Council of Europe (which as we can remember, is neither the European Council nor the Council of the European Union, as we have explained on, but an international organization which also includes non-EU countries, whose main objective is the preservation of human rights). The document explains why many of children continue to grow without citizenship, because of gaps in European laws or because of bureaucratic obstacles that sometimes prevent the regular birth registration. The report reveals that even if a lot of countries acceded to the international conventions, more than a half have not yet given proper effect to its obligations, to ensure that children acquire a nationality. The ENS’ reasearch also sheds light on new and emerging cases of statelessness child and focuses just on the risk run by those who are adopted or recognized by same-sex couples or children who are born from refugees and migrants or through surrogacy.

According to the speakers, whose work quo be downloaded here , statelessness childhood – which inevitably generates considerable difficulties in access to rights and services – can be a problem completely solved: the report concludes with a series of recommendations to guide action to face in a more effectively way the phenomenon in Europe.

We point also out that the topic is the subject of a hashtag on Twitter, #StetelessKids, and that a discussion on this social campaign was launched between 16.00 and 18.00 (CET) on Monday 21st September. This matter was also focused by Nils Muižnieks, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, with a statement which we will return on. The UNHCR also participated in the event and the discussions, with a campaign called #IBelong, which aims at eradicating  statelessness within a decade.

The ENS motto? “Everyone has the right to a nationality”


Domenico Martinelli




Migration and asylum: very soon a summit in Malta

Europe/Policy/Politics di

By now, of course, Europe actually has taken  aware of the problem of migration. This is from a political and strategic point of view, and from a humanitarian point of view.



The reflections that are produced by this phenomenon, however, has written an unimaginable amount of texts and articles and even more will be written.

What is surprising is finally just a widespread and concrete interest  by all European institutions, which eventually rely more action than in words and that, with different methods, are continually facing the problem. One of the European institutions that deals with asylum and immigration is the EASO, the European Asylum Support Office, whose motto is, precisely, “Support is our mission.” This European Agency, which operates in the Justice and Home Affairs branch has been already mentioned, here on European Affairs.

The role of the Agency, and the critical and constructive approach to the problems facing the Mediterranean and the Old Continent these days, will be subject to an official conference, to be held in Valletta, on 23 September. The event will be attended, of course, by politicians and technicians, as well as the Key Leaders of the migration system. Probably bMattias Reute, head of the General Directorate “Migration & Home Affairs” of the European Commission, and, very probably some qualified representative of ‘ UNHCR will participate.

Some authoritative representatives of several different national institutions of the Member States who deal with asylum, migration and refugees as well as the European Agencies dealing with immigration or continuous materials, such as FRONTEX, will attend.

In addition to analyzing the current situation and the proposed study of new European strategies shared, delegates will try to identify practical ways to encourage and increase cooperation and mutual aid and technical support between the Member States in the delicate area of ‘asylum and to reflect on possible synergies to be established with institutions from third countries, outside the EU, where the migration often take off. Not least, it will be studied what could be the future of the Agency, as the same may widen its expertise and its prerogatives and what could be the upcoming prospects and opportunities.

European Affairs will follow the work of this summit,that is important at this time, in the hope that the “support” provided by the EASO and Europe, should also become a means of resolving problems and, above all, providing solidarity.


Domenico Martinelli


Data Protection in EU

Europe/Innovation/Policy/Social di

Data Protectione in Europe travels on two main channels: the juridical-legislative one and more operational one, which normally takes effects in Internal Affairs.



In facts, Brussels has been looking for a long time to regulate the delicate topic, which clearly founds large difficulties, due to the large differences between the  legal systems of the Members States. As we already mentioned on, Europe legislates under a procedure known as co-decision,  jointly divided, although with different tasks, between the EU Council and the European Parliament.

Two legisltative instruments are being studied in the Council: a Directive and a Regulation. As known, one commits Member States to a result and, at most, within specified timelines, leaving some margin of discretion to the countries concerned on how to achieve the goal. The other tool, however, binds in detail  all EU states.

At the table of the Council Group dealing with the matter, called DAPIX (Data Protection Information Exchange) and its subgroups, sit – for almost all member states – representatives of the judiciary and the Privacy Authorities, that interface from time by time on the various chapters and articles of the texts in question, and that relate to their Countries on ongoing proceedings.  In certain subgroups, also representatives frome the Police Forces of the Member States, who are directly involved in the use of databases for purposes of investigation and prosecution, have the task to intervene and to converse on the effectively outcomes produced by specific legislation of the sector, such as the c. d. Prüm Decisions.

Recent rumors portend that the approval of the the two pieces of legislation – the one with general characteristics and the other laying down more stringent ones – it’s pretty close and that the current Presidency, currently assigned to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, wants to remove all possible obstacles. On the sidelines of the legislative process in place, we must mention the presence of a major European institution: the EDPS, the European Data Protection Supervisor.

Since the European institutions deal with collection, recording, store or use of the information related to the data of EU citizens, one of the main tasks of the European Institution is, of course, to act as a checker on compliance with current privacy laws. But this form of control is also reflected in the handling of complaints from citizens who call upon its intervention and the management of related disputes, or in the surveillance of new technologies that in any way may affect data protection. Last but not least, an advisory function to the institutions and bodies on all aspects related to the processing of personal data and related policies and legislation is ensured. The Role of European Supervisor is currently governed by the Italian magistrate Giovanni Buttarelli.

The adoption of common rules on  protection of personal data, which deserves a lot of volumes of discussion, is a complex and sensitive area that will produce inevitable effects even in enterprise security and the economic system of the Member States. Consider, for example, the establishment of the post of Privacy Officer, who will become a key figure in the decision making of enterprises and that will assist the Security Manager in the management of the  security  of logic and digital information.


Domenico Martinelli


Asilo e accoglienza ecco come si muove l’Europa

Europe di

Le Agenzie Europee impegnate nel miglioramento del sistema dell’asilo e dell’accoglienza ai rifugiati: il caso della Grecia.

Un paese europeo a noi molto vicino, la Grecia, ci sta dando una lezione importante: come sfruttare al meglio l’operato e l’efficienza della Agenzie Europee nel settore Justice and Home Affairs.

Non tutti sanno che, infatti, nella capitale maltese de La Valletta, esiste un’Agenzia Europea che fornisce assistenza qualificata nel settore dell’asilo e dell’accoglienza di chi l’asilo lo richiede: si tratta dell’EASO, ossia dell’European Asylum Support Office. L’Ente – che tra i sui compiti annovera proprio quello di fornire expertise ed addestramento nel settore dell’asilo e dell’immigrazione e, maggiormente, in favore degli Stati Membri i cui confini sono più duramente messi alla prova – ha firmato un accordo particolare con la Grecia pochi giorni fa.

L’accordo in questione, denominato “Special Support Plan to Greece”, prevede, in maniera molto particolareggiata, che l’Agenzia fornisca ad Atene il massimo supporto in determinate aree identificate quali prioritarie nei settori asilo ed accoglienza. Tra queste, la pianificazione ed il sostegno ai progetti già in itinere, l’addestramento del personale e, soprattutto, il corretto reperimento di fondi Europei ad hoc devoluti. Il tutto fino a maggio 2016.

La richiesta di tale supporto è stata ufficialmente formulata dai nostri vicini di casa nei primi mesi del 2015, e nasce su input del consolante quadro di risultati più che soddisfacenti ottenuti dal paese ellenico negli anni precedenti e sempre dalla stessa agenzia europea “maltese”. E già, perché il supporto alla Grecia aveva avuto inizio nel 2011, con un “Operating Plan to Greece”, messo in essere proprio in virtù dei pressanti flussi di immigrazione irregolare che nascevano fuori dai confini esterni all’Unione. In quella circostanza fu stabilita un’efficiente e sostenibile struttura di asilo e di accoglienza mediante l’impiego di squadre di esperti sul territorio greco, che contribuirono anche a codifcare un sistema di richieste e modulari da presentarsi a cura dei richiedenti asilo alle Autorità elleniche, le cui strutture di ricezione furono anche logisticamente migliorate rispetto a quelle già esistenti.

Ma non è tutto: un altro “Operating Plan to Greece” è stato reiterato nel 2013 ed è stato principalmente finalizzato all’addestamento del personale ed alla corretta gestione dei fondi dell’Unione stanziati per il settore.

Stavolta questo piano di supporto è, come dice il nome stesso, realmente “speciale”: le squadre dell’EASO stanno lavorando a stretto contatto con le Autorità greche, usufruendo però anche del supporto di FRONTEX, altra più (tristemente?) nota agenzia europea e con l’UNHCR dell’ONU.

Gli obiettivi: oltre alla già citata e consueta necessità di addestramento in favore degli addetti ai lavori ed alla consulenza in una sana gestione dei fondi europei reperiti a sostegno del budget nazionale, gli esperti aiuteranno a sviluppare una corretta policy di gestione dell’asilo e delle strutture di accoglienza dei minori non accompagnati, la cui gestione nei centri di accoglienza richiede particolari cautele da parte degli operanti, ed altrettanto particolari tutele nei confronti delle vittime più innocenti dei fenomeni che dell’immigrazione irregolare stanno alla base.

Sembra lecito domandarsi quando il nostro Paese – che è il secondo contributore al bilancio dell’UE – svilupperà e concepirà strumenti giuridici simili, beneficiadi dell’aiuto delle stesse istituzioni europee che contribuisce a mantenere.


Domenico Martinelli




Domenico Martinelli
0 £0.00
Vai a Inizio