ACADEMIC PREPARATION BOOKLET

 

LJUBLJANA 2015 1st NATIONAL SESSION OF EYP SLOVENIA

 

 

» LJUBLJANA 2015

DEAR EYPers You are reading the topic preparation kit for the 1st National Session of EYP Slovenia – LJUBLJANA 2015 taking place in Ljubljana, Slovenia from the 27th to the 29th of March 2015. Under the theme “Leading the Way Towards Global Solutions” participants will take a look over the rim of a tea cup and discuss European leadership in global governance. The topics will address current environmental, social and economic challenges in various regions of the world and link them to European issues. Participants should be prepared to take a more holistic, interdependent and interconnected approach in their resolutions. The Chair team will consist of ten chairpersons: Patrick Brushek (AT), Hana Ivana Breitenfield (HR), Andrzej Daniluk (PL), Danilo Laban (RS), Dimitris Krokos (GR), Gosia Osypiuk (PL), Petra Radić (HR), Milica Simeunović (RS), Inna Shcherbyna (UA); Two Vice-Presidents: Alexander Proctor (FI) and David Rauch (AT) and the President of the session Teresa Stadler (AT).    

2

 

» TABLE OF CONTENTS EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT…………………………………………………………………………..…4 HOW TO USE THIS BOOKLET?................................................................................................................5

WHAT ARE TOPIC OVERVIEWS? HOW CAN I PREPARE BEST?

HOW DOES A SESSION WORK?..............................................................................................................6 OPENING CEREMONY TEAMBUILDING COMMITTEE WORK GENERAL ASSEMBLY EUROVILLAGE

COMMITTEE TOPICS……………………………………………………………………………………..………9 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I (AFET I)…………………………………………………………….10 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II (AFET II)…………………………………………………………...15 COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (INTA)…………………………………………………………20 COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT (DEVE)…………………………………………………………...………25 COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS (LIBE)…………………………...30 COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE (SEDE)………………………………………………….…..35 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY………………………………………………40 OFFICIALS, WHO ARE THEY?................................................................................................................43 CONTACT DETAILS……………………………………………………………………………………………...44

3

 

» THE EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT The EYP is a non-partisan and independent educational programme for young European citizens. Our mission is to support the development of young people into politically aware and responsible citizens by involving them in European political thinking and promoting intercultural understanding.

The EYP encourages independent thinking and initiative in young people and facilitates the learning of crucial social and professional skills. Since it was conceived in 1987, hundreds of thousands of young people have taken part in regional, national and international sessions, formed friendships and made international contacts across and beyond borders. The EYP has thus made a vital contribution towards European unity and bridging gaps between cultures.

Today the EYP is one of the largest European platforms for political debate, intercultural encounters, European civic education and the exchange of ideas among young people in Europe. The EYP network is present in 41 European countries, where thousands of young people are active as volunteers. The entire network organises almost 500 events every year.

The Berlin-based Schwarzkopf Foundation is the international umbrella organisation of the EYP.

EYP is a programme for young people, run by young people. We are proud to have over 2.400 active volunteers all over Europe, running EYP’s National Committees, organising events, chairing committees, acting as Session journalists, in short, being the heart and soul of EYP and the reason for its existence.

4

 

» HOW TO USE THIS BOOKLET? This topic preparation kit will give you an insight into the way the session works. It provides you with all the academic information you will need when you come to the session. You will find topic overviews, short introductions to all topics and useful information on how you can also individually best prepare for the session. Brief explanations of each part of the sessions are also in the booklet. You will find information on how the General Assembly (GA), Committee Work (CW) and other parts of the session work. You already received the Welcome Booklet which includes information about the preliminary programme, the dress-code and other non-academic matters, so be sure to have another look at that booklet as well. Good luck with the preparations for the session and see you soon!

» WHAT ARE TOPIC OVERVIEWS? Each committee at the session will be covering a certain topic. The committee is run by two Committee Chairpersons, who composed the topic overview for their committee which you can find in this booklet. The topic overview is made to give you a glance at the topic your committee is going to try to write a resolution on. The relevance of the problem, an explanation of key terms and a brief explanation of the central challenges are all included in the topic overview. The topic overview is made to give you an idea what the problem that your committee will be facing looks like and should give you a basis for further research.

» HOW CAN I PREPARE BEST? At the end of each topic overview there is a part named “Links for further research”. In order to be best prepared for the session, we recommend you research the topic by yourself. Your research of the topic is not limited to the links in the topic overview! Considering the Session’s theme is “Leading the way towards global solutions”, which means we will be debating current global problems, be sure to check international news on your, and other topics daily before the session.

5

 

» HOW DOES A SESSION WORK? The National Committees and the International Office organise almost 500 events annually, all run by young volunteers.

For the duration of the session, the participants are divided into international working groups (committees) that draft resolutions on their respective topics. In these groups, the task of the young people is to come up with their own suggestions and ideas for Europe’s most pressing challenges. The results are then presented and debated in a simulated parliamentary assembly at the end of the session.

Through its sessions, the EYP aims at promoting active European citizenship, intercultural dialogue and European values. Sessions increase the participants’ knowledge about Europe’s cultural diversity, prepare them for active participation in society, contribute to the development of their personal skills and provide a forum for debate and reflection on current topics of European politics.

A session usually consists of three main parts: Teambuilding, Committee Work and General Assembly. An important part of the session is also the Opening Ceremony, not to forget Eurovillage.

» OPENING CEREMONY The Opening Ceremony is the official opening of the session. During the Opening Ceremony all participants are welcomed and speeches are given by invited guests. Invited guests are usually politicians that are somehow linked to European politics.

Opening Ceremony will happen on the first day of the session after Teambuilding and the first part of Committee Work.

6

 

» TEAMBUILDING Before the Opening Ceremony, on the same day teambuilding will be organised. Delegates will split into Committees and have a chance to get to know their team members.

Teambuilding is an established and recognised method to form trust, friendship and most importantly a well functioning group. One of the most important goals of teambuilding is to “break the ice” between participants and create a relaxed environment for the whole team.

Teambuilding is composed of various communication exercises, as well as physical ones in which everyone should actively participate. Each Committee’s teambuilding will be led by its Committee Chairpersons.

» COMMITTEE WORK Participants will discuss their topics in committees run by Committee Chairpersons. The Committee Chairpersons are responsible for facilitating and organising the discussions in the committee.

During the discussions, delegates will present their opinions and ideas to each other, seek support and compromise to reach a common solution supported by all. The emphasis is on reaching consensus and that solutions are created together, through well supported arguments. During the discussions, notes are taken on what is agreed upon and in the final stage of committee work these are summed up and put together in the form of a resolution of the committee, on the topic the committee has been assigned.

Chairpersons are also expected to make sure the committee is making progress, solving problems, mediate when needed, create a good atmosphere, prevent discussions from taking too long, break deadlocks, etc. The Chairperson should make sure that the resolution will reflect the opinions and ideas of all the delegates in the committee; he should however remain neutral and objective.

7

 

» GENERAL ASSEMBLY The General Assembly also known as GA is the final part of the session. It brings together all participants of the session. All resolutions from the committees are dealt with following the order set by the session’s board.

The General Assembly follows the parliamentary procedure of the European Parliament. A briefing on how exactly the procedure works will be given before the GA by the Chairpersons. During the GA Chairpersons will be present with their committees to assist their delegates in the process.

» EUROVILLAGE Every Session is accompanied by an extensive cultural programme, celebrating the cultural and culinary diversity of Europe.

Eurovillage is an example of such cultural programme. In the first evening, after the Opening Ceremony each delegation will present its country with its national cuisine. Participants will have a chance to experience different cuisines and get to know a certain country firsthand.

8

 

» COMMITTEE TOPICS The following committee topics were selected for the 1st National Session of EYP Slovenia – Ljubljana 2015. All together there will be six committees addressing the issues presented bellow. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I (AFET I)   With the European Council calling for a comprehensive strategy in tackling the humanitarian crisis brought upon by the actions of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL): What approach should the EU take to help third countries dealing with a great influx of refugees? COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II (AFET II) With Serbia and Kosovo presenting the greatest challenge to EU enlargement yet: How should the EU contribute to the rule of law and good governance on the countries’ path towards EU membership? COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (INTA) In light of recent protests and rising public concern: How should the EU position itself in the next round of TTIP negotiations with regards to consumer protection and food safety standards? COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT (DEVE) Establishing a post-2015 development agenda: How should the EU revise its strategy to guarantee a sustainable global partnership with the poorest regions of the world? COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS (LIBE) Between the recent annulment of the European Data Retention Directive and the proposal for a European Internet: How can the EU help protect its citizens’ online data whilst ensuring their safety and security? COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE (SEDE) Ukraine in crisis: In light of continued violence despite all parties signing the new Minsk agreement how far should the EU push diplomacy before considering arming Ukraine?

9

 

» COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I (AFET I)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on Foreign Affairs I (AFET I) Chairpersons: Dimitris Krokos (GR) & Sanja Šterk (HR) Topic: With the European Council calling for a comprehensive strategy in tackling the humanitarian crisis brought upon by the actions of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL): What approach should the EU take to help third countries dealing with a great influx of refugees?

1. KEY TERMS • Refugee - A person that has been forced to leave his or her home country because of war

or for religious or political reasons. • Internally Displaced Person (IDP) – Someone who is forced to flee his or her home but

who remains within his or her country’s borders. • Third country – Any country of the world that is not one of the 28 EU Member States and

European Economic Area - European Free Trade Association (EEA-EFTA) states.1 • Receiving country – A country that receives a number of refugees or migrants. • Humanitarian aid - The aid and action designed to save lives, alleviate suffering and

maintain and protect human dignity during and in the aftermath of man-made crises and natural disasters.

• Development aid - Financial aid given by governments and other agencies to support the economic, environmental and social development of countries. It is distinguished from humanitarian aid by its focus on alleviating poverty in the long term, rather than in the short term.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “There can be no protection for refugees unless they can be self-reliant.” – Andris Piebalgs, Former European Commissioner for Development The Middle-East has always been an area of conflict and with the emergence of ISIL the region has plunged into deeper instability. Following the strong offensive of ISIL in Iraq and Syria during the summer of 20142, the already volatile region erupted causing a spiral of sectarian violence, terrorist acts and oppression of the civilian population. ISIL presents a threat for the civilian

                                                                                                               1 Those are Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. 2 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/ 2 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/  

10

 

population in the area not only directly, through killings and persecution, but also indirectly through the looting of goods and natural resources. Moreover, the total indifference for basic social goods such as healthcare and sanitation in the regions under their influence further endanger people's’ lives. This has led to a staggering 13.6 million refugees and IDPs3 4 seeking protection and shelter. People have fled to other countries, such as Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. The receiving countries had originally maintained an open-border policy and have opted for different hosting methods. Lebanon, for example, has gone for a ”no camp” policy and has largely absorbed the refugees into local communities. However, the receiving countries’ ability and capacity to absorb and shelter the increasing stream of refugees is being stretched to the limit and tensions have risen between their population and the refugees. On top of that, the governments of Jordan and Lebanon have lately imposed serious restrictions on the border passage of refugees and have become more hostile towards them, excluding them from social goods, such as healthcare and education, and even forcibly evicting them from their settlements.5 6 On the other hand many of the victims of ISIL have relocated inside their own countries (IDPs), as it is the case of Iraq’s autonomous region of Kurdistan. The area has some two million internally displaced Iraqis as well as thousands of Syrian refugees, thus heavily stretching the resources and capacity of what is only but a regional government, within Iraq.7 Iraq’s situation is more complex, since it used to be just a receiving country for the Syrian refugees, but is now a conflict zone of its own.

3. KEY QUESTIONS

• What are the refugees' long-term needs and how is the EU addressing them? • How can the EU ensure that humanitarian aid reaches people in need, especially in hard to

reach areas? • How can cooperation with third countries’ governments and local NGOs be improved to

prevent the misuse of aid? • What are sources of tension between local and refugee populations and what can be done

to diminish them? • How do limited work opportunities affect the refugee population? • How can measures regarding child protection in refugee camps be further improved?

                                                                                                               3  http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/syria_en.pdf 4  http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/iraq_en.pdf#view=fit 5  http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/jordan_syrian_crisis_en.pdf 6  http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/lebanon_syrian_crisis_en.pdf 7  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/06/winter-threat-iraq-refugees-kurdish-region-camps-isis    

11

 

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES By January 2015, 3.8 million people had fled Syria and the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) predicts that the number will rise to 4.3 million by the end of 2015. In Syria, 4.8 million people live in hard to reach or besieged areas. 8

• The European Union (EU) mobilised more than €3.35 billion9 for relief and recovery assistance to Syrians in their country and to refugees and their host communities in neighbouring Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt.

• As of January 2015 there are 5.2 million people in need of urgent humanitarian assistance in Iraq, including 2.1 IDPs and 233 000 Syrian refugees. 10

• Syrian refugees accounted for nearly a quarter (23%) of all refugees under UNHCR’s mandate by the middle of 2014. 11

• Syrian refugees outside their country represented about 14% of the country’s resident population at the beginning of the conflict. 12

5. KEY ACTORS Firstly, European institutions play a significant role in assisting affected countries in dealing with the great influx of refugees as well as with efforts to stabilise the region. In more specific terms, the European External Action Service (EEAS)13, apart from coordinating EU foreign policy, also implements the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)14, which aims for stronger regional cooperation between the EU and its close neighbours. The European Commission is also a key actor through its Directorate-Generals (DG). Firstly, the DG on Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection15 which provides humanitarian aid specifically designed for the needs of the affected regions and is in some cases distributed by NGOs and UN institutions. Secondly, the DG on International Cooperation and Development16 which operates the EuropeAid programme that provides more than 50% of assistance worldwide. Member States also take all forms of initiatives either individually or in cooperation with European institutions. In addition, there are the affected third countries in the region, which are often under unrest, such as Syria and Iraq, or they are receiving countries for refugees fleeing from the conflict zones, such as Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt. Iraq, in particular, was formerly just a receiving country that now faces a direct threat from ISIL. Finally, ISIL (also ISIS or Da’esh), is a militant group that the EU has designated a terrorist

                                                                                                               8 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/syria_en.pdf 9 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/syria_en.pdf 10 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/iraq_en.pdf#view=fit 11 http://unhcr.org/54aa91d89.html#_ga=1.78461076.165037800.1417644352 12 United Nations, Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, New York, 2013. 13 http://eeas.europa.eu/what_we_do/index_en.htm 14 http://eeas.europa.eu/enp/about-us/index_en.htm 15 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/en 16 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/regions/eu-neighbourhood-region-and-russia_en  

12

 

organisation. It is especially notorious for its brutal practices and acts of terror, with a declared goal to create a fundamentalist Islamic caliphate in the Middle East. It currently controls significant segments of Syria, Iraq and even Libya. 17

6. KEY CONFLICTS The civilian population in the affected regions is taking a great toll due to the ongoing conflict. Although there is an indisputable need for humanitarian and development aid in the combat afflicted areas, there is great danger of aid resulting in the hands of ISIL militants. This would lead to strengthening ISIL’s position while failing to alleviate the stress on the people. Another closely connected issue is that of prioritisation of aid – geographical and in terms of the form of aid, meaning whether it will come in the form of goods or money. In the end, should aid be given directly in the field as goods – a practice which entails significant side costs and risks, due to the fact that there is an ongoing conflict – or should it be given to the governments of the affected countries and its distribution left up to them? Finally, human rights situations in refugee camps are known to be critical with many refugees lacking access to basic goods and no legal status in the host country. The EU, as a big promoter of fundamental rights, views this critically and cannot ignore it in plans to further assist third countries.

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE The European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) is the main EU financial instrument during the financial period of 2014-2020. It replaces the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) of 2007-2013. Support through the ENI will continue to provide direct development assistance to support the affected population inside and outside Syria to complement humanitarian aid in sectors such as education and early recovery. 18 The first ever European Union Regional Trust Fund19 launched by the European Commission and Italy is a new strategic financing tool to mobilise more aid which provides a regional scope responding to a regional crisis. The start-up funding provided amounts to €20 million from the EU budget and €3 million from Italy as the first founding donor. Additional funding is foreseen for 2015. It will initially focus on giving support to refugees and host communities in Syria's neighbouring countries and address the massive and increasing resilience and stabilisation needs in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, Egypt and Syria itself. This funding comes in addition to the special 2014 aid package of €180 million for Syria, Lebanon and Jordan adopted by the Commission on 4 December 2014. The EU Trust Fund will be able to reinforce ongoing programmes with additional funds, in particular with regards to the urgent schooling needs of millions of Syrian refugee children. 20                                                                                                                17 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27838034 18 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/node/451 19 The Madad Fund in Arabic. 20 http://www.enpi-info.eu/mainmed.php?lang_id=450&searchtype=simple&id=39428&id_type=1  

13

 

The Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP) is supported by the UN and NGOs and draws together the Jordan Response Plan, the Lebanon Crisis Response Plan and country chapters in Turkey, Egypt and Iraq – including support to existing UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) strategies – into a coherent regional strategy. 21 The Regional Development and Protection Programme (RPP)22 is a long-term development response to the Syrian refugee crisis which started in December 2013. It wishes to compensate the current lack of studies on the impact of refugees on host communities and propose opportunities for development for both refugees and their hosts. The main activities include market-based support for creating employment opportunities, skills development training as well as appropriate social infrastructure development, including education, water and sanitation and improved energy supply. RPP also aims to strengthen the protection of refugees in the region through promoting improved access to basic rights and appropriate legal assistance.

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH EU Regional Strategy

• Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council by the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/news/20150206_JOIN_en.pdf (For shorter version visit the press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-4222_en.htm)

• European Commission's Press release on the EU Regional Trust Fund: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-2664_en.htm

• Fact sheet on €180 million aid to Syrian population in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-2365_en.htm

Syria: • UNHCR's interactive map:

http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php • ECHO fact sheet:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/syria_en.pdf • ECHO info-graphic:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/infographics/infographic_syriancrisis_en.pdf#view=fit

Iraq: • ECHO on the needs of refugees:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/en/where/middle-east-north-africa/iraq • ECHO fact sheet:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/iraq_en.pdf#view=fit

Receiving countries: • ECHO fact sheet on Lebanon:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/lebanon_syrian_crisis_en.pdf • ECHO fact sheet on Jordan:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/jordan_syrian_crisis_en.pdf

                                                                                                               21 http://www.3rpsyriacrisis.org/the-3rp/ 22 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1253_en.htm  

14

 

» COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II (AFET II)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on Foreign Affairs II (AFET II) Chairpersons: Patrik Bruschek (AT) & Petra Radic (HR) Topic: With Serbia and Kosovo presenting the greatest challenge to EU enlargement yet: How should the EU contribute to the rule of law and good governance on the countries’ path towards EU membership?

1. KEY TERMS • Good governance - Means that decision making is participatory, consensus oriented,

accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard.

• Independent state - An independent state must consist of a state territory, constitutive people, state authority and has to be established on a long-term basis in order to be recognised under international law.

• Sovereignty – The right for a state to independent control over itself without any interference from outside sources.

• Candidate state - A state that expressed its wish to become a Member of the European Union. In order to become a candidate state this status must be accepted by all current Member States of the EU.

• Nationalism - An ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “Regional cooperation is the essence of European integration: we cannot imagine European unity without cooperating with our neighbours and partners to find common solutions to common problems.” – Štefan Füle, Former Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy The period of turbulent history has ended for South-Eastern Europe, but the period of major political change has taken its course. Roughly 25 years after the downfall of Yugoslavia, former Member States are on their way to the European Union and with that on their way to full reconciliation and radical changes in governance.

15

 

With Slovenia and Croatia already entering the Union, the next in line are Serbia and Kosovo – two countries deeply intertwined in social, economic and political issues. 23 These issues can be divided into two categories – those shared due to the fact that Kosovo proclaimed independence from Serbia only seven years ago and those caused by the said proclamation of independence. While the second category will be solved over time, the first requires a third, unbiased party to support reconciliation. Whereas the countries have shown a certain degree of interest in mutual communication and settling the current situation24, the real pitfall is mutual recognition. Seven years after the proclamation of independence, Serbia still does not recognize Kosovo’s sovereignty, nor does it wish to withdraw its authorities from the area of North Kosovo - the area most affected by conflicts.25In its history, North Kosovo was marked by conflicts and riots, but most importantly by the referendum of 2012 in which 97% of its citizens proclaimed that they do not recognize the government of Kosovo.26 This is mostly due to the fact that North Kosovo consists of 4 municipalities with Serbian majorities. Due to its demographics, North Kosovo had been functioning independently from Kosovo’s institutions until the Brussels Agreement of 2013. Serbia’s refusal to recognise the independence of Kosovo is not only an issue on their path towards EU membership, the lack of recognition is also a barrier for the entire region with regards to solving the overwhelming issues of corruption and organised crime. The EU has been working hard to put Kosovo on the right path as an independent, developing country. Most of the assistance has been given in form of grants for education, private sector, economy development etc. 2728. Besides the grants, it is important to take note of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo29 (EULEX) - a deployment of police and civilian resources by the EU to Kosovo. The most important action taken by the EU has been the facilitation of dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia. Even though these dialogues do not always result in concrete actions, the basic act of communication between countries is a show of good will and supports the further development of the region. Provided that the two countries continue on their path towards Union membership, issues of corruption, organised crime, outbursts of extreme nationalism (especially in Northern Kosovo) and the question of mutual recognition will be the first ones on the line. Even with guidance and assistance, the big question that arises is how these countries can both fulfil their wishes in regards to the EU and keep their national ideals and sovereignty.

                                                                                                               23 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18331273 24 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/30/serbia-kosovo-historic-agreement-brussels 25 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/dec/01/eu-north-kosovo 26 http://www.dw.de/north-kosovan-serbs-stage-controversial-referendum/a-15741269 27 http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/kosovo/projects/overview/index_en.htm 28 http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/kosovo/eu_kosovo/political_relations/index_en.htm 29 http://www.eulex-kosovo.eu/  

16

 

3. KEY QUESTIONS

• How can the fight against radical nationalism be sustained in a region where sovereignty itself is questioned?

• How can the EU contribute to solving the difficult situation in North Kosovo? • How can the EU support a bilateral approach between Serbia and Kosovo towards solving

issues such as corruption and organised crime? • How can the dialogue in Serbia (with regards to the recognition of Kosovo) be facilitated

without a direct obstruction of state sovereignty? • What parts of the Kosovo-Serbia issues should the EU leave to the states themselves and

participate only in the role of an advisor? • How can economic sustainability be reached in countries so deeply influenced by corruption

and organized crime?

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES

• An opinion poll in 2014 showed that 64 % of the Serbian people support government changes and closer EU integration. 30

• While 88% of the Kosovar population are Kosovar Albanians, only 7 % are Serbians. • The majority of citizens in North Kosovo are Serbian. • 109 of 193 Member States of the United Nation recognise Kosovar independence, 23 of the

28 Member States of the EU do the same.

5. KEY ACTORS The national governments of Kosovo and of Serbia are setting the basic agenda, rules and boundaries within which the EU can act. The European Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, Johannes Hahn, is in charge of overseeing the accession process of prospective new Member States and relations with countries bordering the European Union. The European External Action Service is the EU’s diplomatic service and helps the EU’s foreign affairs chief to carry out the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy. It aims to maintain solid and friendly relations with countries at the European Union's borders through guidelines established in the European Neighbourhood Policy. Furthermore, the Regional Coordination Council, a regional cooperative framework for countries in South Eastern Europe play a key role. It promotes mutual cooperation and European and Euro-Atlantic integration of South Eastern Europe in order to inspire development in the region to benefit its people.                                                                                                                30 https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/serbia-faces-tough-reforms-remains-track-eu-membership  

17

 

6. KEY CONFLICTS Accession talks between Serbia and the EU started in 2012 but Serbia still has a long way ahead. The main issue that has to be solved in order for Serbia to become a member of the Union is the improvement of the relations with Kosovo that declared its independence in 2008. Serbia still sees Kosovo as a region within its borders and financially supports the region of North Kosovo. While Kosovo’s independence is questioned in Serbia, there is also no common stance within the EU on the recognition of Kosovo. The former High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton, appreciated the International Court of Justice decision in 2010 stating that Kosovo’s declaration of independence does not contradict international law. Therefore the European Parliament asked its Member States to recognise Kosovo as an independent state, which all except for Spain, Romania, Slovakia, Greece and Cyprus have done. In March 2015 the European Parliament requested the remaining Member States again to recognise Kosovar independence. However, independence is not the only issue to be solved. Serbia and Kosovo are currently facing big economic problems. Serbia has an unemployment rate of around 17%31, Kosovo around 35%32 which is very high compared to an average of 10% across the EU. In combination with the low average income33 this poor economic situation causes a lot of other problems in the societies such as a high level of crime. Furthermore, money laundering and child labour are issues that still exist in both states. A lack of judicial independence additionally increases the difficulty of tackling these problems. Furthermore corruption is a big problem in both countries. Serbia already implemented the National Anti-Corruption Strategy, which aims for a considerable reduction of corruption by 2018, but 70%34 of Serbs still believe that corruption is a very serious problem in the public sector. Additionally, ethical conflicts and nationalism make it more difficult for both states to improve their relations to each other. Especially people in North Kosovo feel that they are disadvantaged and do not feel at home in Kosovo. This caused protests in this region and has also led to the Kosovar government being criticised for not integrating minorities such as Serbians or Roma. Other issues, such as lacking freedom of the press, also hinder a fast accession of Kosovo to the EU. In order to take a step forward to the accession to the European Union it will be crucial for both, Serbia and Kosovo, to improve their relations to each other, solve their economic problems, focus on good governance and become reliable partners for the European Union.

                                                                                                               31 http://www.tradingeconomics.com/serbia/unemployment-rate 32 http://ieconomics.com/kosovo 33 http://www.salaryexplorer.com/salary-survey.php?&loctype=1&loc=193 34http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/serbia_hopefully_a_new_government_renews_the_fight_against_corruption

18

 

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE The Stabilisation and Association Agreement is signed by a state that expresses its wish to become a member of the European Union. It includes obligations for the candidate states such as political or economic commitments and improvements of (human) rights. In exchange the state may receive financial and technical assistance as well as tariff free access to some or all EU markets. The EU’s aim in this agreement is to protect itself from unforeseen economic events after the accession of candidate states to the EU. Serbia signed the agreement in 2007 and ratified it in 2013 after long negotiations about the Serbian policy on war criminals. Kosovo signed the agreement in 2014. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy of the Republic of Serbia was implemented in 2013. It’s goal is a considerable reduction of corruption in Serbia until 2018. The strategy’s main principles are: rule of law, zero tolerance for corruption, accountability, efficiency, universality of implementation of measures and cooperation of entities. These principles are to be achieved by measures such as an institutional framework for preventing and combating corruption, establishing ethical standards and transparent financing of political parties. The European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo is the largest civilian mission ever launched under the European Security and Defence Policy. The central aim is to assist and support the Kosovo authorities in the rule of law area, specifically in the police, judiciary and customs. Finally, the Western Balkans Platform on Education and Training, an EU initiative that encourages regional cooperation and communication, sharing of good practices in the region and the EU and pooling of resources, is another key tool.

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Serbia

• Reforms in Serbia https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/serbia-faces-tough-reforms-remains-track-eu-membership

Relations between Serbia and Kosovo • Kosovar - Serbian conflict explained

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBgYS8uljrQ • Current situation in talks between Serbia and Kosovo http://www.wsj.com/articles/serbia-and-kosovo-

resume-talks-after-10-month-gap-1423515456

Integration of the Western Balkans to the EU • Executive Summary of “The Western Balkans and the EU: 'the hour of Europe'”:

http://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/detail/article/the-western-balkans-and-the-eu-the-hour-of-europe/ • Integrating the Western Balkans into the European Union: Overcoming Political and Economic constraints

http://www.jeanmonnetchair.info/file/2_CEP_Revija_Qorraj.pdf • Interview with Ulrike Lunacek, Vice President of the European Parliament on the latest Kosovo report

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20150310STO33146/html/Lunacek-The-EP-must-continue-to-push-for-visa-liberalisation-for-Kosovo

19

 

» COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (INTA)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on International Trade (INTA) Chairpersons: Milica Simeunovic (RS) & David Rauch (AT) Topic: In light of recent protests and rising public concern: How should the EU position itself in the next round of TTIP negotiations with regards to consumer protection and food safety standards?

1. KEY TERMS • Free Trade Agreement – A treaty between two or more parties to establish an area of free

trade, in which goods and services can be exchanged without tariffs. • Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – A Free Trade Agreement

between the European Union and United States planned to be finalised in 2015. • Directorate General Trade – A department of the European Commission responsible for

shaping the trade environment and negotiating multilateral trade agreements. • Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) - Organisms, for example plants, which have

been genetically modified in order to make them more resilient or increase their nutritional value.

• Trade barriers – Government induced restrictions on International Trade aimed at making imported products less competitive than local products. In international trade we speak of tariff and non-tariff barriers.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “It is anachronistic that, in the 21st century, Europeans and Americans still impose customs duties on each other's products. These should be swiftly and fully abolished. I also believe that we can go a significant step further in recognising each other's product standards or working towards transatlantic standards.” - Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission With the EU and US together accounting for approximately 46% of the world’s total Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the goal of the TTIP is to support bilateral economic growth and employment. This goal is to be achieved through a set of measures focused around the elimination of trade barriers between the EU and US. The agreement would focus on three main elements: removing custom duties on goods and restrictions on services, removing regulatory barriers, and improved cooperation on international standards. While custom duties between the EU and US are already relatively low,

20

 

the great extent of trade between the two parties would result in even small reductions having drastic effects. It is estimated that the EU’s economy could grow by €199 billion per year due to TTIP, which is equivalent to about €500 per household. Negotiations between DG Trade and the United States Trade Representative (USTR) started in 2013 and were also an important part of the 2014 EU-US summit. While negotiations are carried out by the European Commission, it has to consult Member States through the European Council on all aspects of the negotiations. Although TTIP has officially been welcomed by the EU and US, civil society and some organisations have voiced criticism towards parts of the agreement. One widely-discussed part of TTIP focuses on the alignment of EU and US food safety standards. While critics claim that TTIP would lower EU food safety rules and allow the growing of GMOs, proponents say that an alignment of rules does not imply a decrease in safety.

3. KEY QUESTIONS

• Should European standards on consumer protection and food safety be compromised for economic and financial gain?

• Considering examples such as the EU’s strict laws on hormonal growth promoters and the US’s rules on microbial contaminants, to what extent should food safety regulations be aligned?

• How can the public’s concerns about consumer protection and food safety be addressed? • What are the main differences between European and US standards in the production of

goods and provision of services in areas of food safety and consumer protection? • What are the main concerns caused by these differences? • How can the consumers’ right of choice and right to be informed be ensured?

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES

• The EU and US account for 46% of the world’s total GDP. • Removing existing tariffs could raise Europe’s GDP by around 0,4% and America’s by 1%. • TTIP is estimated to cause an annual growth of €119 billion for the EU economy.35 • European countries hold investments of more than €1.6 trillion in the US, making the EU the

biggest investor in the US.36 • EU-US trade amounts to €4.7 trillion annually.37 • In the EU, all genetically modified organisms and food products must respect strict labelling

conditions. • The EU and US have different approaches when it comes to animal welfare, which are also

relevant in the food safety debate.

                                                                                                               35 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/may/tradoc_152462.pdf 36 Ibid. 37 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/08/talks-over-a-huge-u-s-europe-trade-deal-start-this-week-heres-what-you-need-to-know/

21

 

• The EU currently accepts around 50 GM products which are either imported or originate in Europe, while the US has a positive policy towards all GMOs.

5. KEY ACTORS Especially the European Commission Directorate General on Trade as the main negotiator led by the European Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström as well as the European Council as the representative of the Member States play key roles. Furthermore, national governments of the Member States which have to ratify the agreement in the EU Council of Ministers are important actors. Some Member States (e.g. France) require national laws in order to ratify FTAs such as TTIP. Moreover, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European agency responsible for risk assessment regarding food and food safety, plays a vital role in backing up the deal on the European side. On the other side of the Atlantic, US Congress has to ratify the agreement in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. In addition, businesses and lobbying groups have a strong interest in gaining improved access to larger markets and therefore try to influence the process.

6. KEY CONFLICTS Concerning the EU-US negotiations, the key question is what should and should not be included in the treaty. With measures ranging from agriculture to regulation of financial services, there are many areas for negotiation. Opposition towards TTIP has mainly focussed on the fear that the harmonisation of standards might lead to lower food safety and consumer protection standards, since GMOs are strictly regulated by the EU and supported in the US. An example of a possible change would be allowing the use of growth hormones and GMOs in the EU or lowering standards on microbial contaminants in the US. Lower American requirements for environmental protection have also been at the centre of the opposition’s argument. The European Commission has recently pointed out that it will not consider a compromise on some controversial areas, such as GMOs. The European Commission has been accused of lacking transparency in the negotiations and failing to clarify the raised concerns. There have been concerns about food products that originate from animals. Europe has a principle called ‘farm to fork’, which means that animals are tested before they are further processed while the US checks the safety of the final products. Also, when it comes to food risk evaluation, the EU requires a complete scientific assessment by the EFSA for regulated products such as GMOs and additives while the US largely relies on companies own private assessments. TTIP has also been criticised by some NGOs for lacking transparency in the negotiations. Numerous organisations that are dealing with consumer affairs, labour and the environment as well as trade groups are criticising both sides of the Atlantic for dealing with this problem in an introvert manner. These opposition groups argue that negotiators will likely weaken health and

22

 

environmental standards in their bid to smooth over regulatory differences between the two sides. Even after EU ombudsman pointed out this problem and the level of transparency significantly increased, critics claim that only selected information is being shared and greater public involvement is an absolute necessity.

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE TTIP negotiations are currently in the second of the three planned phases. The first step, which involved setting up the mandate for the negotiations, was completed and, although initially classified, has been declassified in October 2014. 38The second stage is about negotiating the contents of the agreement between the EU and US, while the last phase will be the ratification by both parties. The EU and US have been negotiating since July 2013. Five rounds of negotiations have taken place and every round had its own chapter to be discussed. Some aspects have been covered, for example technical barriers to trade, competition, SMEs, sustainable development, labour, environment, energy and raw materials. But, while negotiations are almost finished for some areas, the more controversial aspects such as food safety agreements are still heavily debated both, between official negotiators and amongst the public. While negotiations were originally scheduled to be concluded by the end of 2014 in order to support struggling economies, the deadline has now been extended to 2015 because of public concerns and negotiation difficulties in some areas.

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH TTIP explained

• European Commission: TTIP explained: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/may/tradoc_152462.pdf

• European Commission: How TTIP would work: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/about-ttip/contents/

• TTIP, regulatory part: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151605.pdf

• Showing the controversy: o A video about the potential profits of TTIP:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41snQ9AEQOU o A video critical of TTIP:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAp6cD5i8O0

Food Safety • European Commission: An Overview of TTIP’s implications on food safety and plant health:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_153004.3%20Food%20safety,%20a+p%20health%20(SPS).pdf

                                                                                                               38 http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11103-2013-DCL-1/en/pdf

23

 

• Article about the differences in food safety regulations between the EU and US: http://ensia.com/features/banned-in-europe-safe-in-the-u-s/ Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory Politics

• http://www.cfr.org/agricultural-policy/regulation-gmos-europe-united-states-case-study-contemporary-european-regulatory-politics/p8688

• Video that raises questions about welfare of TTIP and opposes this partnership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtgCG3JAAOc

• TTIP is a lethal attack on food safety and animal welfare http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2015-articles/15927-ttip-is-a-lethal-attack-on-food-safety-and-animal-welfare

• Article about labelling genetically modified organisms; consumer protection http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2015-articles/15878-eu-agriculture-commissioner-promises-gmo-labelling-despite-ttip

24

 

» COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT (DEVE)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on Development (DEVE) Chairpersons: Hana Ivana Breitenfeld (HR) & Danilo Laban (RS) Topic: Establishing a post-2015 development agenda: How should the EU revise its strategy to guarantee a sustainable global partnership with the poorest regions of the world?

1. KEY TERMS • Post-2015 Development Agenda – The United Nations’ long-term agenda that will

succeed the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which target date in 2015. The goals are to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, to achieve universal primary education, to promote gender equality and empower women, to reduce child mortality, to improve maternal health, to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, to ensure environmental sustainability, and to develop a global partnership for development.

• Global Partnership for Development – One of the eight MDGs, with the target of further developing an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system. It addresses various different issues and needs in developing countries.

• Development aid – Financial aid given by governments and other agencies to support the economic, environmental and social development of developing countries, and distinguished from humanitarian aid by focusing on alleviating poverty in the long term, rather than in the short term.

• EuropeAid – Directorate General Development and Cooperation aims to help reduce and ultimately eradicate poverty in developing countries through the promotion of sustainable development, democracy, peace and security.

• Least Developed Countries39 - Countries that have the lowest indicators of social and economic development in the world; these indicators are: poverty, human resource weakness and economic vulnerability. The classification (as of 24 January 2014) applies to 48 countries.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “There is no global project more worthwhile… Let us keep the promise.” –Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General                                                                                                                39 http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_list.pdf  

25

 

In the year 2000 the largest summit of world leaders to date – the Millennium Summit was held at the United Nations’ headquarters, where the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)40 were agreed upon and given a deadline to reach the goals by the end of 2015. The eighth MDG, which is to develop a Global Partnership for Development, is presented as one of the priorities for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), enabling access to the international market and various technologies, providing aid for development and dealing with countries’ debt, amongst others. Today, less than a year from the deadline, none of these MDGs have been met in developing countries, although significant improvements have been made. In need of a new strategy, world leaders have called for a post-2015 Agenda, which is to be formed based on a global stakeholders’ debate and adopted in September 2015 during the Special Summit on Sustainable Development. The debate has gone global with many stakeholders giving their contribution, even individual citizens. To support this effort, the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, has taken several initiatives to further the debate. He has established the UN System Task Team on the post-2015 UN Development Agenda, launched a High-level Panel of Eminent Persons and appointed his own Special Advisor on post-2015 Development Planning. These processes are complemented by a set of eleven global thematic consultations and national consultations in over 60 countries facilitated by the United Nations Development Group. The European Union and its Member States have provided over 50% of global aid and have been the best market for LDCs’ exports to date. This aid has been focused into the Aid for Trade41 programme and supported by the Everything but Arms42 scheme. In addition, in 2007 more than 100 donor and developing countries signed the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, aiming to maximise the impact of aid for developing countries. With the goals not being met, the European Commission, in its latest Communication to the European Parliament43, is now calling for a transformative response to the global challenges we face. The European Commission further defined key principles of this Global Partnership to be: an effective policy environment in all countries, developing capacities to deliver the Agenda, mobilisation of domestic and international finances and stimulating trade. Special attention was given to the need for cooperation in the post-2015 Agenda and the need for improved monitoring, accountability and review in order to make sure that this time the Agenda can be met. The three global directions that can be taken next with the post-2015 development agenda are either to simply extend the deadline for MDGs, to modify the existing goals or to formulate something entirely different. The EU, as one of the biggest stakeholders in global partnerships, needs to re-evaluate, reformulate and advocate its new strategy for partnerships with the poorest regions in the world.

                                                                                                               40 http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ 41 http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/development/aid-for-trade/index_en.htm 42 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/april/tradoc_150983.pdf 43 https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/com-2015-44-final-5-2-2015_en.pdf    

26

 

3. KEY QUESTIONS

• What should replace the Millennium Development Goals after 2015 – what should the EU strive for in the post-2015 development agenda?

• Does the post-2015 Agenda need to have priorities, what should they be? • Should the EU strive for a different framework for global partnerships? • How can aid effectiveness of the EU in developing countries be increased? • In what way can the EU set an example to other global stakeholders? • Which steps should be taken by the governments of developing countries to facilitate

cooperation with international partners? • How can the sustainability of the post-2015 Agenda and other global partnerships be

ensured?

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES

• The poorest countries’ access to markets and technologies has increased since the year 2000 and their debt has been decreased; aid levels started declining in 2010.

• The EU and its Member States provide more than 50% of current aid with 0.7% of gross national income spent on aid (highest in the world).

• EU aid primarily focuses on social infrastructure (i.e. education and health) and then on the economic infrastructure (i.e. transport and energy), with the majority going to sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s neighbours.

5. KEY ACTORS The MDGs were adopted by the United Nations in 2000 and most of the actions towards a new global approach to development are taken under the supervision of the UN, the UN System Task Team on the Development Agenda in particular. The efforts and aid coming from the EU have two sources: the EU institutions, lead by the European Commission, and EU Member States’ governments. These two have acted in unison in most cases. LDCs’ governments need to make a significant effort to guarantee the success and sustainability of the post-2015 Agenda. Above all, they should ensure their own development and strive to maximise the impact of global partnerships.

6. KEY CONFLICTS No definite framework has been put forward to replace the MDGs yet. The UN High Level Panel on Global Sustainability proposes to replace them with Sustainable Development Goals, another project by UN Member States. A different option, supported by stakeholders who believe the MDGs were too idealistic, is to simply re-adjust the deadline for the MDGs, or to revise the goals and modify them to better match the current situation. Furthermore, the relationship between donor and recipient countries is a highly contested one and there is by no means consensus on what these partnerships should look like or where the

27

 

responsibilities of one state end and those of another begin. A key challenge will be to formulate realistic goals as well as actual strategies for implementation that all partners agree on. Finally, the European Commission has stated its stance towards the necessity of a different and transformative approach if sustainable partnerships are to be achieved. It has also been shown that the EU needs partners in order to maximise the effects of aid and advance towards truly global partnerships. The question is whether the EU can propose a different and transformative framework which will be supported by other stakeholders.

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE The MDGs already include developing Global Partnerships for Development as one of the eight goals with efforts directed to developing a better financial and trading system, deal with debt and the availability of medicine and technology – information and communication especially. The EU adopted the Aid for Trade programme and the Everything but Arms scheme in order to help developing countries to position themselves on the European market. In addition, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness44 has been signed by over 100 countries and is organised on five principles of effective cooperation. It discusses key principles to base global partnerships on in order for them to be beneficial for all parties. Current progress in this field can be seen with the launch of a global debate on what should follow the MDGs, as well as establishing Working Groups by the UN. What is more, the discussion has also started inside the EU and its institutions, with the EC publishing their latest Communication on poverty eradication and sustainable development to the European Parliament in February 2015.45

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH EU contribution to MDGs

• European Commission programmes: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/mdg-brochure-2013_en.pdf

Suggestions for the post-2015 Agenda • UN Working Group:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-4143_en.htm • UN System Task Team on the Development Agenda:

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/Think%20Pieces/1_countries_with_special_needs.pdf • European Commission:

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/com-2015-44-final-5-2-2015_en.pdf • Centre for International Governance Innovation:

                                                                                                               44 http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/45827300.pdf 45 http://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/mimica/announcements/press-statement-publication-post-2015-communication-global-partnership-poverty-eradication-and_en    

28

 

https://issuu.com/cigi/docs/mdg_post_2015/11?e=0 • Beyond2015 - a global civil campaign:

http://www.beyond2015.org/ • World We Want 2015

https://www.worldwewant2015.org/

29

 

» COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS (LIBE)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Chairpersons: Andrzej Daniluk (PL) & Inna Shcherbyna (UA) Topic: Between the recent annulment of the European Data Retention Directive and the proposal for a European Internet: How can the EU help protect its citizens’ online data whilst ensuring their safety and security?

1. KEY TERMS • European Data Retention Directive - obliges providers of publicly available electronic

communications services or networks to store citizens’ telecommunications data for a period of six months to two years. The directive gives the police and security agencies the possibility to request access to those details for the purpose of investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crimes.

• European Internet - a term describing an inner European network, based on non-US servers that fall under European jurisdiction.

• Personal data - any information concerning a person’s private, professional or public life. This includes data such as their name, photo, email address, bank details, posts on social networks or computer’s IP address.

• Principle of the limited retention of data - requires Member States to ensure that personal data is kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected or for which they are further processed. Data must therefore be erased when those purposes have been served.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “Companies cannot just say, ‘We don’t have anything to do with surveillance or misuse of data,’ because in fact they are at the core of it, so if they engage in calling for less strict standards, they will lose trust in their services.” – Jan Philipp Albrecht, German MEP The development of communication technologies has provided a wealth of data that has been welcomed by law enforcement authorities as a means of tracking, tracing and profiling users. As digital systems grew, changes in commercial practices led to communication providers no longer seeing the need to retain data that law enforcement authorities considered critical to investigatory processes. At the same time, terrorist attacks and the threat thereof have caught the attention of law enforcement authorities and governments. Following the bombings in Madrid (2004) and London (2005), the UK Government, in its role as the presidency of the European Council from July to December 2005, took a leading role in the creation of a European Directive requiring

30

 

communication service providers to retain traffic and location data. The initial concept of the Directive was to harmonise provisions across the Member. The European Data Retention Directive (DRD) enabled law enforcement and security agencies to request access to details such as the IP address and time of every received or sent email, text and phone call. In order to protect citizens’ privacy, access to this information could only be permitted through a court order. Ireland was the first Member State to question the legality of the Directive and asked the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to annul the Directive. While discussing the issue of legality, the ECJ found that the the Directive was in violation of fundamental rights, in particular the right to privacy and the right to data protection as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.46 The annulment of the DRD and the publication of classified documents47 made it clear that Europe will have to increase its efforts to protect its citizens’ data. This online information is also monitored and collected by intelligence and surveillance agencies from all over the world, including the US National Security Agency. Additionally, companies such as Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Microsoft support the state of weak regulations and have already begun aggressive lobbying campaigns to stop or dilute tighter privacy rules, which they say would interfere with their business models and decrease profits and growth.

3. KEY QUESTIONS • How can the protection of personal online data be ensured without impeding investigations

on possible security threats? • Will the creation of a new European inner communication network help improve data

protection? • How can a future European agreement on data protection strengthen citizens’ rights? • Is the establishment of a European Internet a feasible solution to data protection concerns?

What are its advantages and limitations? • Should personal online data be stored by telecommunication providers? Under which

conditions would this be an option?

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES • Member States regularly exchange requests, with a copy sent to Europol, for investigations

of serious crimes. An estimated 50% of these requests involve communication data. 48 • The UK claims that for an average murder investigation, there may be between 500 and

1000 communication data requests.49 • Finland states that 56% of all requests for data proved important or essential to the

outcome of criminal investigation or prosecution.50

                                                                                                               46 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/charter/index_en.htm 47 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26210053 48 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/police_cooperation/evidence_en.pdf 49 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/police_cooperation/evidence_en.pdf 50 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/police_cooperation/evidence_en.pdf

31

 

• The majority of requests in criminal investigations involve mobile telephony data (approximately 75%).51

• According to the German federal and state police, for 44.5% of all the cases there were no other means of conducting an investigation but requesting historical traffic data.52

5. KEY ACTORS The European Parliament was the first institution to improve data protection policies across the Member States. It has already taken steps concerning internet privacy and will likely continue to do so in the future. On behalf of Germany and as an authority strongly supporting common European data protection standards, Angela Merkel supports the establishment of a European communications network in order to improve data protection. She states that ‘Internet companies which are operating in Europe, such as Facebook and Google, must give [...] European countries the information about who they have given data to.’53 Opponents have voiced concerns that such restrictions might hamper economic recovery. Günther Oettinger, European Commissioner for Digital Economy & Society, stands for the creation of a digital single market that will be able to compete with the USA and Korea. To do so, he also supports unified data protection rules and common copyright laws.54 Telecommunication companies and internet providers (ISPs) widely criticised the DRD. One of their arguments is that such a law requires them to store more data than necessary, therefore increasing their operational costs without significantly increasing the ability to prevent any terrorist attacks. 55Moreover, telecom companies such as Orange, Telefonica and BT already have to comply with the ePrivacy directive,56 requiring them to ensure that their customers’ communications are confidential and therefore not shared with anyone without their consent.

6. KEY CONFLICTS The most important issue is finding the right balance of security and privacy. While not providing sufficient safeguarding against possible abuse of personal data, the Data Retention Directive still served as a valuable tool for national authorities in the fight against serious crime.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        51 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/police_cooperation/evidence_en.pdf 52 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/police_cooperation/evidence_en.pdf 53 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-calls-for-tighter-internet-data-protection-rules-for-websites-registered-in-the-uk-amid-allegations-of-us-surveillance-8708975.html 54 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/infosociety/oettinger-it-sector-needs-new-generation-shakespeares-312161 55 https://web.archive.org/web/20110726042329/http://www.eurocop-police.org/pressreleases/2005/05-06-02%20PRESS%20JHA%20Council_E.pdf 56 http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/internet/e-privacy-directive  

32

 

In order to substitute the previous Directive, the idea of creating a European Internet was born. The notion was to avoid external interference and that European-based servers could contribute to better protect personal online data. However, possible negative side-effects for companies that offer online services include a rise in operational costs due to stricter legislation. While all things point towards stricter legal measures, the influence of these economic giants should not be underestimated. In addition one should not overlook the underlying question of whether or not it is truly possible to shield European data from foreign invaders. Critics of the concept argue that limiting Internet to European territory goes against the basic design of the world wide web. Moreover, several institutions within the EU, such as the British Government Communications Headquarters, actively acquire citizens’ data and share it with US agencies. Opponents of the idea further suggest that the limits of this project would soon be reached when technical difficulties were encountered. These are predicted to severely impact international competition of IT companies.

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data is the core document. It was adopted to ensure that European institutions and bodies respect the right to privacy and data protection when they process personal data and develop further national legislation. Directive 2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communication sector is another important agreement. It requires Member States to ensure the rights and freedoms of natural persons57 with regard to the processing of personal data, and their right to privacy in particular, in order to ensure the free flow of personal data in the Community. The Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC was adopted with the aim to store citizens’ telecommunications data for the purpose of investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crimes. It was annulled by the European Court of Justice in 2009.

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

1. Communications Data Retention: A Pandora’s Box for Rights and Liberties? http://www.infosectoday.com/Articles/Communications_Data_Retention.pdf

2. Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) Invalidates Data Retention Directive http://www.loc.gov/law/help/eu-data-retention-directive/eu-data-retention-directive.pdf

3. Overview of national data retention policies http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Transposition

                                                                                                               57 A natural person is a real human being as opposed to a legal person who may be an individual, a business entity or an organisation.  

33

 

4. The Data Retention Directive too fast, too furious a response? Implementing and Transposing European Directive 2006/24/EC http://www.petermilford.com/downloads/Data_Retention_PMilford.pdf

5. The Legality of the Data Retention Directive in Light of the Fundamental Rights to Privacy and Data Protection http://ejlt.org//article/view/29/75

6. Angela Merkel express the need of tightening internet protection data rules http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-calls-for-tighter-internet-data-protection-rules-for-websites-registered-in-the-uk-amid-allegations-of-us-surveillance-8708975.html

7. What the EUDRD means for ISPs: http://telecoms.com/17337/eu-data-retention-directive-golden-rules-for-isps/

8. Video explaining the principle of ‘net neutrality’: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/europe-takes-another-look-at-net-neutrality/

34

 

» COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE (SEDE)

TOPIC OVERVIEW Committee: Committee on Security and Defence (SEDE) Chairpersons: Gosia Osypiuk (PL) & Alexander Proctor (FI) Topic: Ukraine in crisis: In light of continued violence despite all parties signing the new Minsk agreement how far should the EU push diplomacy before considering arming Ukraine?

1. KEY TERMS • Minsk Protocol – An agreement to halt the war in the Donbass region in Ukraine. Ukraine,

the Russian Federation, the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), and the Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR) signed the agreement in the Belarusian capital Minsk, 5 September 2014. The protocol consisted of 12 points.

• Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements – The new Minsk agreement signed on 12 February 2015. After continuous violations of the Minsk protocol, the new deal aims to help the enforcement of the September 2014 agreement. The new plan is based on the former protocol, but offers the rebels a “high degree of autonomy” over a much larger area, reflecting their recent land grabs.

• Hard power – The use of military and economic means to influence other political entities. • Soft power – An approach that is focused on the legitimacy of policies and cultural means

to influence instead of resorting to military force. • Territorial integrity – A principle under international law that nation-states should not

attempt to promote secessionist movements or to promote border changes in other nation-states.

• Sovereignty – The right for a state to independent control over itself without any interference from outside sources.

2. RELEVANCE AND EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUE “There are ‘no excuses’ for the annexation of Crimea, just as there is no justification for Russia’s indirect participation in the battles in Donetsk in Ukraine’s East. Russia’s policy is breaking international law and challenges the European order of peace” 58 – Angela Merkel, German Chancellor In November 2013 Ukraine’s president, Yanukovych failed to sign the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement leading to the Euromaidan demonstrations in Kiev which expanded into the

                                                                                                               58 http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/11/26/berlin-and-washington-the-political-battles-that-could-decide-ukraines-fate/

35

 

2014 Ukrainian revolution. Ukrainian president Yanukovych fled Ukraine on February 22nd and, at the end of the month, the Crimean peninsula was seized. The “People’s Republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk declared independence on May 11th while Ukrainians voted pro-European Petro Poroshenko as president on May 25th. By the end of July, the Association Agreement and the EU agreed on sanctioning Russia due to its strong involvement in the crisis. The question of Crimea already long forgotten, and although a ceasefire agreement, the Minsk Protocol, was signed in September 2014, the Ukrainian civil war continues in the Donbas region. On February 12th of this year, a new agreement was signed in Minsk, Belarus, with the aim of helping the enforcement of the September agreement. A month later, it looks like the situation in eastern Ukraine has improved – although it continues to be critical. 59 Many are sceptical of the new “Minsk II” agreement, claiming it does not do much more than the Minsk Protocol. If the agreement does not stop the bloodshed, the questions of the EU implementing additional sanctions against Russia, and weapons being delivered to Ukraine will be back up for discussion. 60 As Ukraine is not the only country where Russian minorities make up almost 30% of the population61, the crisis has sparked anxiety in other Baltic countries such as Estonia and Lithuania. 62 The crisis has also raised a lot of discussion on NATO and the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). 63 Observing the diplomatic actions of the EU, with the Minsk Protocol, and the new Minsk agreement it should be noted that European leaders are strongly against the use of military power and prefer diplomacy as well as foreign assistance including economic support. However, the question remains if the European Union will manage to establish a sense of security in its Member States and Ukraine, using only soft power and economic sanctions. Knowing that previous actions of the EU Member States revealed a lack of efficacy and sanctions did not stop the fighting, does the EU have the political will and motivation to stop violence in Eastern Ukraine?

3. KEY QUESTIONS • How can the EU ensure the implementation of the new Minsk agreement? • How should the already existing framework and instruments be improved to ensure safety

for both the Ukraine and the EU? • Can existing sanctions be amended in order to influence Russia’s approach towards

Ukraine? If yes, how? • What other non-military actions should the EU consider in tackling the Ukrainian crisis? • Should the European Union focus on the Common European Security Strategy including

non-EU states or should the security of its Member States be prioritised?

                                                                                                               59 http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150307/1019202963.html 60  http://www.dw.de/opinion-we-should-be-skeptical-after-new-minsk-ceasefire-deal/a-18251509 61  http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/664-eumidis_mainreport_conference-edition_en_.pdf 62  http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/milex/milex_database 63  http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/  

36

 

• Is arming Ukraine a necessary step to protect European safety? How would this affect civilians in the region?

4. KEY FACTS AND FIGURES

• According to a report by the United Nations, over 6 000 have been killed due to the crisis in Ukraine. 64

• The EU has taken diplomatic, restrictive, and economic measures, to end the current crisis, in the form of sanctions against Russia65, along with the USA. The sanctions have had an affect on the Russian economy.66 Should the new ceasefire fail, more sanctions could be enforced.67

• The U.S. military estimates that around 12 000 Russian soldiers are supporting pro-Moscow separatists in eastern Ukraine68 and in January Poroshenko said Russia has more than 9 000 soldiers and 500 tanks, heavy artillery and armoured personnel carriers in Eastern Ukraine.69

• The US may be considering resorting to arming Ukrainian forces.70 • Russian president Vladimir V. Putin is said to have pressured Ukraine’s separatists to agree

on the new ceasefire.71 • In 2010 Russia introduced a new military program with the aim of modernising weapon kits

by 2020.72 • 22 out of the 28 Members of EU are also Members of NATO.

5. KEY ACTORS The Eastern Partnerships initiative (EaP) was inaugurated by the European Union in 2009. The Association Agreement, which was the main trigger for the crisis in Ukraine, was a part of the EaP and strongly opposed by Russia. The Russian Federation has continuously demonstrated its objectives to control eastern European countries and fears that further EU involvement would diminish its power over them. Russia sees itself isolated and threatened by NATO presence in Europe, and thus US influence. The United States has taken a strong role in condemning Russia’s involvement in Ukraine and has taken a lead role in pressuring Russia to respect Ukrainian sovereignty. Ukraine has a large Russian minority, and a large role in Russian energy trade as most of Russian gas and oil is transported through Ukraine into Europe. The Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic form the pro-Russian separatist forces, lead by fighting Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine, with Russian support.                                                                                                                64 http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=50215 65 http://europa.eu/newsroom/highlights/special-coverage/eu_sanctions/index_en.htm 66 http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/011515/how-us-european-union-sanctions-impact-russia.asp 67 https://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2015/02/eu-sanctions-against-russia/ 68 http://www.dw.de/evidence-mounting-of-russian-troops-in-ukraine/a-18294255 69 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30913027 70 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/world/us-taking-a-fresh-look-at-arming-kiev-forces.htm 71 http://www.dw.de/ukraine-ceasefire-deal-live-updates/a-18250801 72 http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21602743-money-and-reform-have-given-russia-armed-forces-it-can-use-putins-new-model-army  

37

 

Within the EU the European External Action Service (EEAS) implements the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is a significant part of the CFSP. The EU also has EU Battlegroups under the control of the Council of the European Union. Out of the EU countries Germany, France, and Great Britain have shown most effort in resolving the crisis. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is an intergovernmental organisation that works on early warnings, crisis management, post conflict rehabilitation and conflict prevention. It currently monitors the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. The United Nations (UN), greatly criticised on its weak actions, has condemned the annexation of Crimea and is working on a peaceful solution to the crisis. It further seeks to ensure the respect of human rights in the conflict zones. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was created to safeguard security and freedom of its members. It is bound by shared democratic values and capable of using political and military means.

6. KEY CONFLICTS First and foremost, it needs to be assessed how close the EU is to exhausting its diplomatic options and which possibilities it still has before further considering arming Ukraine. With an increasing number of people calling for military action in the region and the US sending troops to Estonia, the EU is under a lot of pressure to explore further peaceful options. One should also keep in mind the EU’s long-term plans for the Eastern Partnership countries as well as the significance of military action taken by the Union. It is widely known that European Union leaders strongly believe in diplomatic language and foreign assistance but more creativity and efficiency are needed in order to have a relevant impact on the crisis. The EU is torn between the numerous attempts of resolving the situation with diplomatic measures and the continuous failures of these attempts. Although the Franco-German orchestrated new agreement was welcomed, Ukrainian prime minister, Arseney Yatsenyuk still said his government would “never consider anything that undermines the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence of Ukraine and its European future” while on the other side the pro-Russian separatists are fighting for independence. Finally, it is not likely that Russia would allow Ukraine to deepen its relations with the EU without consequences. Russia is intimidated by the current pro-European emphasis of Ukrainian leadership and the signing of the Association Agreement.

7. MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE The European Union already undertook many diplomatic measures to prevent further escalation of the Ukrainian conflict. One example is the existing Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) that allowed the EU to put forward three rounds of sanctions against Russia. Among them were

38

 

travel bans against Russian as well as Ukrainian officials who support the annexation of Crimea and economic sanctions which caused Russia to implement counter-sanctions. Worth to mention are also restrictions for Crimea and Sevastopol and diplomatic measures regarding the cancellation of the EU–Russia G8 summit. Furthermore, as stated in the Lisbon Treaty73, the EU may use its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) to stop human rights violations, bring and hold peace, and provide security. However, actions in the name of collective security still demand individual decisions of all Member States. In addition, the Berlin Plus Agreement between the EU and NATO74 allows the EU to control crisis-management actions. The Minsk Protocol consists of 12 points aiming at halting the war and finding means to end it. The new Minsk agreement aims to enable and enforce the Minsk Protocol. The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine is an unarmed, civilian mission, present on the ground 24/7 in all regions of Ukraine.

8. LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

The European Union • Handbook on CSDP The Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/csdp_handbook_web.pdf • Understanding the Limitations of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy

http://www.e-ir.info/2013/09/26/understanding-the-limitations-of-the-eus-common-security-and-defence-policy-a-legal-perspective/

• European Defence Agency (EDA) http://www.eda.europa.eu/

The United Nations

• March 2015 Monthly Forecast: Ukraine http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2015-03/ukraine_2.php

Articles • Why should Europe care what happens between Ukraine and Russia

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2014/05/02/ukraine-russia/#.VPHdz3yG_AY • Arming Ukraine

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?_r=0 • Beginning of the Ukrainian crisis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY_CA2nRCiY • The Telegraph: timeline of major events

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11449122/Ukraine-crisis-timeline-of-major-events.html

• The New York Times: A closer look on the Minsk agreement http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/opinion/a-closer-look-at-the-ukraine-cease-fire-agreement.html?_r=0

• Ukraine: The EU should send a CSDP mission to Ukraine http://www.euractiv.com/sections/europes-east/yelisieiev-eu-should-send-csdp-mission-ukraine-312778

                                                                                                               73 http://eeas.europa.eu/csdp/about-csdp/lisbon/index_en.htm 74 http://www.nato.int/docu/comm/2004/06-istanbul/press-kit/006.pdf

39

 

» RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The deliberations of the General Assembly are regulated by the rules of procedure contained in this code. There will be six (6) motions for resolution to be debated. Approximately forty-five (45) minutes will be devoted to each passage during the Assembly. The sittings of the Assembly are public, provided the venue so permits.

1. GENERAL RULES When addressing the Assembly, delegates should speak distinctly and clearly. Interventions are made while standing. Only when table microphones are being used may the delegates remain seated when making their intervention.

2. OFFICIAL LANGUAGE English is the official working language. It is recommended to delegates to speak clearly and slowly.

No profane language will be tolerated in the Assembly.

3. BOARD OF PRESIDENTS The President of the Assembly opens and closes the debates. She leads the debates, submits the motions for resolution to a vote and announces the results of each vote. She is assisted by two Vice-Presidents, who are the only ones together with the President permitted to chair debates.

The authority of the President is absolute and delegates are required to respect the President’s decision in order to facilitate the smooth running of the Assembly.

40

 

4. RESOLUTIONS EYP produces its statements in the format of resolutions. The resolution is a formal statement of an opinion proposed by the delegates on how to deal with a given issue.

The resolution consists of introductory and operative clauses: • An introductory clause in a resolution gives background information on the issue the

resolution is dealing with; • An operative clause in a resolution states a certain measure which needs to be taken.

The draft resolution submitted by a committee becomes a motion in order to be debated and eventually voted upon by the General Assembly.

5. DEBATING MOTIONS FOR A RESOLUTION

Each passage is organised as follows: PRESENTATION OF THE MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

The President calls upon the proposing committee to present its motion for a resolution. This is done by a member of the committee reading out the operative clauses from the podium.

DEFENCE OF THE MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION The President calls upon the proposing committee to defend its motion for a resolution. A member of the committee is thus called to make a defence speech from the podium during a maximum of three (3) minutes. This one aims to show in which way the resolution answers to the question and to emphasise the key points of the resolution.

ATTACK OF THE MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION The President asks the Assembly whether any committee would like to attack the motion for a resolution that has been presented and defended. The attack speech should contain constructive criticism and point out the weaknesses of the resolution. The committee designated by the President to attack the resolution receives the right to speak and a member of that committee makes an attack speech at the podium. The time allotted to this speech is a maximum of three (3) minutes. Even if several committees would like to attack the same motion for a resolution, the total time allotted remains, however, three (3) minutes.

OPEN DEBATE

The President submits the motion for a resolution to an open debate for the rest of the time available per resolution, approximately thirty (30) minutes. The first

41

42

 

committee to speak is the proposing committee as its motion for a resolution has just been attacked. The President will make tours between the proposing committee and other committees. Only the President can grant the right to speak and the right to reply. The debate is devoted for interventions with a constructive aim. The members of the other committees have the opportunity to share their views on the resolution while arguing and bringing in new ideas. It is the President’s responsibility to ensure that the time is devoted to a debate rather than a Q&A session.

SUM-UP

After the open debate is closed, the President asks one or two members of the proposing committee to sum up the debate for a maximum of three (3) minutes. The sum-up permits the committee to show what the debate has brought to the resolution and to reaffirm its position.

42

 

» OFFICIALS, WHO ARE THEY? Participants at the session known as Officials are responsible for the academic part and strategic part of the session. Officials are usually more experienced alumni members of EYP.

» PRESIDENT President is the Official who is responsible for the execution of the session, particulary the General Assembly. Presidents usually have quite a lot of experiences from EYP. President of Ljubljana 2015 is Teresa Stadler from Austria.

» BOARD During the General Assembly, the President will chair the debates and the voting, and make sure that the parliamentary procedures are respected. During the Generayl Assembly, the President is aided by two Vice-Presidents, both with experience as Chairpersons, during previous sessions. The board decides which order the various resolutions are to be debates, and is responsible for creating an agenda as well as making sure that it is follwed.

The two Vice-Presidents in the Board together with Teresa are Alexander Proctor from Finland and David Rauch from Austria.

» CHAIRPERSONS The Committee Chairpersons are responsible for facilitating and organising the discussions in the committee. Chairpersons are also expected to make sure the committee is making progress, solving problems, mediate when needed, create a good atmosphere, prevent discussions from taking too long, break deadlocks, etc.

The Chairperson are Patrick Brushek from Austria, Hana Ivana Breitenfield from Croatia, Andrzej Daniluk from Poland, Danilo Laban from Serbia, Dimitris Krokos from Greece, Gosia Osypiuk from Poland, Petra Radić from Croatia, Milica Simeunović from Serbia and Inna Shcherbyna from Ukraine.

» ORGANISERS Organisers are responsible for the organisation of the strategic part of the session. Food, accommodation, transportation, any additional information and other important things are all taken care of by the Organisers.

The Head Organisers of the session are Oskar Košenina and Ira Mešiček from Slovenia

43

 

» CONTACT DETAILS If you might have any questions or would like to inquire some more information about the session, you may contact one of the personnel bellow.

PRESIDENT OF EYP SLOVENIA

HEAD ORGANISERS OF LJUBLJANA 2015

KEVIN KOMOČAR President of EYP Slovenia

komocar.kevin@gmail.com +386 40 775 057

 

IRA MEŠIČEK

Head-organiser of Ljubljana 2015 Ira.mesicek@gmail.com

+386 31 278 617  

OSKAR KOŠENINA

Head-organiser of Ljubljana 2015 oskar.kosenina@gmail.com

+386 41 266 216  

44

 

 

EXPERIENCE EYP, EXPERIENCE SLOVENIA

Copyrights of EYP Slovenia, 2015 www.eypslovenia.org / www.facebook.com/eypslovenia / info@eypslovenia.org

1st National Session of EYP Slovenia – LJUBLJANA 2015