A STUDY OF EURASIAN ECONOMIC THOUGHT (MEROS C)

(BEING CONTINUED FROM  10/10/11)







II. Wu-wei in France 1750- 1850


The physician and economist François Quesnay (*1694-†1774) is generally seen as the founder of 18th century Europe’s “new science of Political Economy”53 but his contemporaries knew him as the Confucius of Europe. As Fox-Genovese writes:
“ [Quesnay’s] manuscript for ‘Le despotisme de la Chine’ contains a few pages on the life of Confucius which were deleted from the published version […] Indeed, the title given him by his disciples – ‘The Confucius of Europe’ – originated […] in his own self-image.”54
Both characterizations are essential to appreciate Quesnay’s role in the history of wu-wei in Europe but unfortunately, “what is often omitted in accounts of Quesnay’s place in modern thought is his debt to China”55 in general and to wu-wei in particular.


2.1 A Eurasian Quesnay


Indeed, stressing the impact of Quesnay’s Sinophilism on his economic theories has encountered strong scepticism by various scholars who like to limit Quesnay’s intellectual origins exclusively to Europe. One part of the critics does almost categorically ignore or neglect Chinese influence on Quesnay.56 One of the most distinguished historians on the  history of laissez-faire, Jacob Viner, restricted the antecedents of Europe’s laissez-faire doctrine to four indigenous traditions: Greco-Roman, Scholastic, English common law, and mercantilist thought.57 Another group of critics admits  the existence of Quesnay’s Sinophilism but continues to overweight indigenous European explanations for the evolvement of a philosophy of free trade after 1776.58 The key writings that do underline Quesnay’s considerable debt to Chinese thought were mainly (and strangely) all published before 1950.59 Nevertheless, Davis60 and Clarke61 have recently tried to revive the reinterpretation of Quesnay’s work as an example of the historical process of intellectual Eurasian synthesis – without understating the traces of indigenous Western philosophy in it.62 Especially, John M. Hobson (like Maverick and other ‘Eurasians’ before him) newly reinforced the historical argument for a truly Eurasian perspective on Quesnay’s economic philosophy.63
Not only did Quesnay approve of China but also, writes Maverick, was directly inspired by her, copying important sections from her classics.64 The foundational theoretical assertion of Physiocracy, namely that a society which is organized on nature’s own way of functioning (i.e. Agri-culture) is the most prosperous, strongest and happiest, matches Confucianism’s claim that it can only be the achievement of agricultural prosperity by which the state and people can obtain “peace and harmony”.65 Quesnay’s preference for Chinese classics over European ones shows most clearly, when he compares the most influential text in East Asian intellectual history, Confucius’s Lun Yü (Analects) with the quality of Greek knowledge:66
“[The articles of Lun Yü] all deal with good government, virtue and good works; this collection is full of principles and moral sentences, which surpass those of the Seven Sages of Greece.”67
It is therefore accurate to describe Quesnay a faithful discipline of Confucius and an understatement to classify his work simply as “quite favourable towards China”68, as McCormick did.69 Quesnay’s vision of a political rule, which is based on the prosperity achieved via primary production i.e., nongben, is deeply embedded in a ‘Confucian vision of good government’.70 However, this nongben-model of Quesnay is adapted using China’s wu-wei framework. As Hudson explains:
“For [Quesnay], enlightenment in a ruler consisted in recognizing the principles of the ‘natural order’ and making legislation conform thereto. When the king has reformed legislation he should then ‘do nothing, but let the laws rule’; this is the wu-wei of the Chinese ideal monarch. [For Quesnay], efforts of government to control  trade […] do not create wealth […]; they are violations of the ‘natural order’.”71
Consequently, Quesnay’s model of Physiocracy is primarily based on his implementation of wu-wei erzhi. Quesnay’s Eurasian make-up is crucial for the history of wu-wei in Europe because, as McCormick accentuated, “Quesnay had a direct influence on [Adam] Smith”72. However, what were Quesnay’s sources on the wu-wei Empire? Which part did he play inside Europe’s network of Asian relations?


2.2 inside the Eurasian web


As an 18th century man who lived in the China of Europe73, Quesnay was not only influenced by the old strings of inherited Stoicism and Descartes, like his fellow citizen, the radical anti-Colbertiste Pierre Le Pesant, Sieur de Boisguilbert (*1646-†1714) had been.74 The founder of Physiocracy tried to show that the pieces of economic philosophy he received from the East were in fact more advanced compared to the ones of western Eurasia – the end result was a fusion of the two worlds of thought, the first step towards one grand design of Eurasian political economy. But how did the altering form of Chinese thought reach the mind of Quesnay?
There were of course several ‘European reasons’ why Quesnay ended up with his specific type of economic system based on ‘Natural Order i.e. Law’ (Deism and the aftershock of the religious War of the 17th century were two important factors). Nevertheless, Quesnay’s new and   challenging physiocratic mosaic is best to be seen as the zenith of the century old European movement of deep admiration for China. 75 The French physician’s economic undertaking was at its heart truly Chinese. As his disciple, Marquis Victor de Mirabeau (*1717-†1789) described his teacher after his death:
“[He was dedicated to] the whole teaching of Confucius […] aimed at restoring to human nature that first radiance, that first beauty, which it had received from Heaven, and which had become obscured by ignorance and passion. [Quesnay], therefore, exhorted his countrymen to obey the Lord of Heaven, to honour and fear him […]”76
Thus, the Lord of Heaven, for Quesnay, was most apparent in the harmonious order of the Chinese Empire, the wu-wei Empire.
Quesnay’s writings were part of an anti-mercantilist movement inside 18th century France. The French Jesuits’s publications on China provided this widespread protest movement with a completely new intellectual outlook. The texts by the Jesuits demonstrated to Quesnay the contemporary relevance of wu-wei – a significance, he thought, that the European classics were unable to offer. The Chinese example produced eventually an altered forward motion of the French mind77 – away from the interventionist mercantilism of Europe and towards a Chinese ordre naturel.
There were two publications, which did much to deepen Quesnay’s physiocratic Sinophilsm in his later life, Jacques Philibert Rousselot de Surgy’s “Mélanges intéressans et curieux…”78 (1764- 66)79 and a work by   Pierre Poivre. Quesnay directly copied large parts of the “Mélanges intéressans…” into his “Le despotisme…” (1767), composing the most lucid work of the Physiocratic school (which was at the same time its most Sinophile).80 Like the 17th-century faïence-workshops of Delft (see above) adapted the prosperous images of Chinese minben as their own, 18th-century Quesnay adapted China’s nongben. However, how did de Surgy’s text change Quesnay’s intellectual outlook?
The background to why Quesnay and de Surgy proved so receptive to the information coming from the Eurasian maritime web was the urgent need of economic and political reform in France. To attack the Republican views of Montesquieuian Liberals (who praised parliamentarianism and despised the French Monarchy), neo-monarchist like de Surgy (who praised the reformist potential of enlightened despotism) relied heavily on China as a model.81 De Surgy tried to show objectively that commercial success was achievable and even enhanced, by modelling one’s government on the contemporary achievements of China’s “enlightened monarchy”. At the heart of this enlightened approach, was the abolishment of all mercantilism’s restrictions on commerce, and further the implementation of wu-wei i.e. The institutionalization of the ‘Natural Order’. Describing the “richesses immenses”82 of Asia, de Surgy linked economic success to this form of natural government i.e. Wu-wei.
Quesnay copied the first seven chapters of “Le despotisme…” nearly entirely from de Surgy’s text.83 Moreover, in accordance with de Surgy, Quesnay identified his crucial economic concept of ordre naturel as underlying every civilized state. It is then here where Quesnay’s   position shifts towards the original economic notion of Han China and drifts away from old European conceptions of ‘Natural Order’ as a force undermining the foundations of civilisation.84 Surgy’s text enables Quesnay to go beyond the Stoic and parts of medieval thinking, arriving at a very Chinese arrangement of ‘good government’, embracing the lessons of the Lun Yü.85
The other major influence on Quesnay’s work was the retired French ambassador to China and president of the Royal Society of Agriculture at Lyons, Pierre Poivre. In 1763 and 1764, Poivre gave two lectures on agriculture to the French Academy of Lyons; they were later to be repeated in Paris and published in Switzerland in 1768.86 In Lyon, Poivre lectured on what the world might become, namely an image of flourishing China, if only the laws of China would become the laws of the world. Poivre called upon all Frenchmen to go to Beijing, to gaze at the perfect image of Heaven.87 Quesnay became aware of these axioms through copies of the lectures and his acquaintance to another Sinophile, Anne Robert-Jacques Turgot (*1727- †1781).88 Poivre’s reflections on agriculture were in essence a tribute to the Chinese superior form of virtuous economic management and government:
“This great nation unites under the shade of agriculture, founded on liberty and reason, all the advantages possessed by whatever nation, civilized or savage.”89

Poivre’s interpretation convinced Quesnay once more of China’s supreme model of ‘natural government’ – once again the wu-wei erzhi of ‘enlightened despotism’ offered itself to be the magic but subversive (i.e. Anti-mercantilist) key to open France’s door to economic, agricultural progress. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that Quesnay decided to publish his Physiocratie (1767) in made up ‘Peking’, to avoid French censorship.90 In 1767, Quesnay’s mind was already more at home in the capital of the wu-wei Empire than in Louis XV’s Paris.
In 1774, the year of Quesnay’s death, the governmental concept of wu-wei had reached a new level of prominence throughout the informed circles of Europe – in form of the physiocratic doctrine. Wu-wei had finally left the small scholarly chambers of the Jesuit- philosophes circles and started to infiltrate Europe ever more, while the images of prosperous minben continued to spread all over Europe.






(TO BE CONTINUED)

Christian Gerlach

Department of Economic History
London School of Economics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Gerlach

NOTES



53 Philippe Steiner, La "science nouvelle" de l'économie politique (Paris 1998).
54 E. Fox-Genovese, The Origins of Physiocracy (Ithaca 1976), p.74.
55 Clarke, Oriental enlightenment, p.49.
56 Recent examples include: H. Spencer Banzhaf, Productive Nature and the Net Product: Quesnay's Economies Animal and Political, in: History of Political Economy, Vol. 32, No. 3, Fall 2000, pp. 517-551; Irwin, Against the Tide, pp. 64- 74; Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought (London 19925) pp. 111-120; Walter Eltis, How    Quesnay's Tableau Économique Offered a Deeper Analysis of the Predicament of France, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, March 2002, Vol. 24 Issue 1, pp. 39-53.
57 Jacob Viner, Essays on the Intellectual History of Economics, [compiled and edited by Douglas A. Irwin], (Princeton/ Oxford 1991), pp. 24- 25.
58 Ken McCormick, Sima Qian and Adam Smith, in: Pacific Economic Review, 4: 1, 1999, pp. 85-87.
59 Reichwein, China and Europe, pp. 101-109; G.F. Hudson, Europe and China: A Survey of Their Relations from the Earliest Times to 1800 (London 1931) pp. 322- 25; Virgile Pinot, La Chine et la formation de l’esprit philosophique en France, 1640-1740 (Paris 1932); Maverick, China; Rowbotham, Missionary and Mandarin, pp. 285-286.
60 Walter W. Davis, China, the Confucian Ideal, and the European Age of Enlightenment, pp. 539-540 in: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1983) pp. 523-548; Walter W. Davis, Eastern and Western History, Thought, and Culture, 1600-1815 (Lanham 1993).
61 John James Clarke, Oriental enlightenment: the encounter between Asian and Western thought (New York/ London 1997).
62 Although one can see influences in the work of the Australian historian Robertson: Robbie Robertson, The Tree Waves of globalisation. A history of a Developing global Consciousness (London/ New York 2003), p. 96.
63 Hobson, Eastern Origins, pp.196-198.
64 Maverick, China, p. 22


71 Hudson, Europe and China, p. 322
72 McCormick, Sima Qian and Adam Smith, p. 85.
73 After 1750, people started to call France frequently the China of Europe. (Charles A. Fisher, Containing China? I. The Antecedents of Containment, p. 549 in: The Geographical Journal, Vol. 136, No. 4., Dec., 1970, pp. 534-556)
74 Paul P. Christensen, Epicurean and Stoic Sources for Boisguilbert's Physiological and Hippocratic Vision of Nature and Economics, in: History of Political Economy, Vol. 35, Annual Supplement, 2003, pp. 101-128; Douglas A. Irwin, Against the Tide (Princeton 1996) p. 65.

75 Maverick, China, p.111.
76 As quoted in: Reichwein, China and Europe, p. 104.
77 Maverick, China, pp.130-131.
78 Jacques Philibert Rousselot de Surgy, Mélanges intéressans et curieux ou, abrégé d'histoire naturelle, morale, civile et politique de l'Asie, l'Afrique, l'Amérique et des terres polaires (Paris 1744- 66) 10 vols.

79 The twelve volumes by Rousselot de Surgy’s were already partly replicas of a very influential text on China, the “Description de l’empire de la Chine et de la Tartarie chinoise” (1735) by the Jesuit Jean Baptiste duHalde.
80 Maverick, China, p. 315.
81 Ibid., p. 34.
82 Jacques Philibert Rousselot de Surgy, Mélanges intéressans et curieux, ou abrégé d'histoire naturelle, morale, civile et politique de l'Asie, l'Afrique, l'Amérique et des terres polaires (Yverdon 1764- 66), 6. Vol. of 12, p. 236.
83 Maverick, China, p. 127.

84 Maverick, China, p. 131.
85 Davis, China, the Confucian Ideal, p. 540.
86 Pierre Poivre, Voyages d'un philosophe ou, observations sur les moeurs & les arts des peuples de l'Afrique, de l'Asie et de l'Amérique (Yverdon 1768).
87 Raymond Dawson, The Chinese Chameleon – An analysis of European conceptions of Chinese civilization (New York/ Toronto 1967), p. 55.
88 Lewis A. Maverick, Chinese Influences upon Quesnay and Turgot – Read before the Society for Oriental Studies, at Claremont, in April 1942 (Claremont 1942).
89 As quoted in: Rowbotham, Missionary and Mandarin, p. 285.
90 Emma Rothschild, Economic Sentiments. Adam Smith, Condorcet, and the Enlightenment (Cambridge, Massachusetts/ London 2002), p. 67

Labels: economic philosophy

posted by The visioner @ 8:14 PM 0 comments

TO WHOM THE CITIZENS OWE AND MUST PAY?

(CLICKING THE TITLED LINK WE ARE BEING REDIRECTED TO AN ARTICLE TITLED THE AMERICAN NATIONAL DEBT - WHO DO AMERICAN OWE MONEY? )

EUROPEAN  CITIZENS AND PARTNERS,BONJOUR,
THE TODAY ARTICLE IT IS BEING FOCUSED ON AN ISSUE,WHICH THE GLOBALIZED OLIGARCHIC POLITICAL LEADERS OF ALMOST ALL THE TODAY (SO CALLED ) DEMOCRATIC PARTIES,PRETEND THAT IT CANNOT BE RESOLVED.
THE INABILITY FOR THESE POLITICAL NOMENCLATURE  ELITES TO DO SOMETHING ,IS FOR THE SAME REASON ABOUT WHY THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE DOESN'T ENTER IN A DEEPER ANALYSIS,OR IT IS LEAVING  THIS TO OTHERS WHO CLAIM TO BE MORE TECHNOCRATS,

BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL ONE,RELATED AND TIED WITH SEVERAL WAYS,MAINLY BY THEIR  HEADQUARTERS AT N.Y.

AS WE ARE CONTINUING OFFERING OUR HUMBLE SERVICES TO THE EUROPEAN CITIZENS,BUT NOT ONLY,DESPITE THE  DIFFICULTIES ,WHICH ARE BEING ARIZEN BY THE SYSTEM AND ALWAYS  FACED  WITH THE HELP OF THEUS,DIEU,ALLAH,
THE  SAME QUESTION STILL REMAINS UNANSWERED , WHICH HAS BEEN POSED  FOR SEVERAL TIMES ,THE LAST  3 YEARS ,AT THE  ARTICLES WRITTEN HERE:

to whom ,natural persons the citizens and nations ,are exactly asked to pay their debts ?

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE,APART FROM OUTRAGEOUS ,THAT THE PERSONS WHO ARE  HIDING AT THE BACK OF LEGAL ENTITIES(OTHER NATURAL PERSONS,ORGANIZATIONS,COMPANIES,INSTITUTIONS,N.G.O ETC),NOT TO BE PRESENTED IN FRONT OF THE EYES OF THE PEOPLE,WITH  THE EXCUSE THAT THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT .
USUALLY SOMEBODY WHO OWES ANYTHING, KNOWS THE PERSON TO WHOM HE IS INDEBTED TO.

nothing it is impossible,with divine guidance,scientific research and technological applications ,especially when it is made,invented,created  by other human beings

CITIZENS OF GAIA,
TODAY WE HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO UNDERSTAND,BE EDUCATED AND RESEARCH WITH SUCCESS BY THE HELP OF TECHNOLOGY,BUT FOR TOMORROW ,IT LOOKS LIKE ONLY THE OLIGARCHICAL  DESPOTS ,WANT THESE ADVANTAGES FOR THEIR HIGHNESSES,AS THEIR IDEOLOGY DICTATES FROM THE VERY ANCIENT.

THANK YOU FOR THE ATTENTION AND SUPPORT
A.C.











Who Rules the Global Economy?

Most economists today don’t ask who rules the global economy, visualizing it as a decentralized competitive market that cannot be ruled. Yet new evidence suggests that global economic clout is highly concentrated among large interlocking transnational companies.

Three Swiss experts on complex network analysis have recently examined the architecture of international ownership, analyzing a large database of transnational corporations. They concluded that a large portion of control resides with a relatively small core of financial institutions, with about 147 tightly knit companies controlling about 40 percent of the total wealth in the network.
Their analysis draws heavily on network topology, a methodology that biologists use to good effect. An article in the British magazine New Scientist describes the research as evidence of a global financial oligarchy.
The technical details of economic network analysis are daunting, but the metaphors evoke a “Star Trek” episode: the network is described as a bow-tie shaped “super entity” of concentrated corporate ownership. One cannot help but worry about threats to the safety of the starship Enterprise.
 In recent years, research on industrial organization has focused more on corporate strategy than on social consequences. A recent article in the socialist journal Monthly Review, by John Bellamy Foster, Robert W. McChesney and R. Jamil Janna, criticizes both mainstream and left-wing economists for their lack of attention to monopoly power.
Focusing on the United States, they note that the percentage of manufacturing industries in which the largest four companies account for at least 50 percent of shipping value has increased to almost 40 percent, up from about 25 percent in 1987.
Even more striking is the increase in retail consolidation, largely reflecting a “Wal-Mart effect.” In 1992, the top four companies accounted for about 47 percent of all general merchandise sales. By 2007, their share had reached 73.2 percent.
Banking, however, takes the cake. Citing my fellow Economix blogger Simon Johnson, the Monthly Review article notes that in 1995, the six largest bank-holding companies (JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) had assets equal to 17 percent of gross domestic product in the United States. By the third quarter of 2010, this had risen to 64 percent.
Some of these companies have undergone name changes in the process. A graphic published about a year ago in Mother Jones beautifully illustrates their merger history.
Large companies are often able to offer lower prices than small ones because they can take advantage of economies of scale. On the other hand, if their market power reaches a certain level, they can increase prices as much as they like. The consequences of economic concentration for consumers are complicated by more difficult-to-trace impacts on small businesses, American workers and small businesses.
The concentration of economic power at the top distills political power in ways described long ago by the sociologist William Domhoff in his classic “Who Rules America?” The related Web site provides updated information, exhorting today’s “change agents” to conduct social scientific research seriously.
Public concerns about economic concentration are stoked by hard times. Congress authorized a full-scale investigation of the topic back in days of the Great Depression.
Seems like the time has come for a fully international update.

Nancy Folbre is an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

SOURCE  http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/

Labels: geopolicy

Link

posted by The visioner @ 6:25 PM 0 comments

BUILDING A PAN-EUROPEAN DEFENSE SYSTEM (PART D HOMOSPONDICAL INTERNAL SAFETY POLICY)

(clicking on the title we are redirected at WIKI webpage,concerning the Treaty of Brussels 1948)

DEAR FELLOWS READERS,CHAIRESTHAI,
AT THE PAST WE HAD  PRESENTED SOME ARTICLES FOR A COMMON EUROPEAN DEFENCE SYSTEM.THIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE A SEPARATE ONE FROM THE NATO ,WHICH AS IT WAS PROPOSED ,OUGHT TO MOVE ITS ADMINISTRATION  NEARER TO TERRITORIES OF CONFLICT,COMBINED WITH OUR RUSSIAN ALLIES.

A)http://feraios.blogspot.com/2010/10/building-pan-european-defense-system.html
B)http://feraios.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-controls-internet-squared-jawed.html
C)http://feraios.blogspot.com/2010/11/building-pan-european-defense-system.html

AT OUR OPINION ,IT WILL BE A GREAT MISTAKE FOR THE UNION'S FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND RISE,IF THE OLIGARCHIC ELITES ,WILL FOLLOW N.Y.'S  PRESSURE POLICIES FOR A EUROPEAN CENTRALIZED ECONOMIC SYSTEM.
ON THE CONTRARY THE CREATION OF A HOMOSPONDICAL DEFENCE SYSTEM,WHICH IS REQUESTED FROM THE 1950'S,IN PARALLEL WITH NATIONAL AND REGIONAL EXISTING  INFRASTRUCTURES,FOR SURE IT WILL PROVIDE SOLUTIONS TO THE STATES  ECONOMIES,APART  FROM OUR  EUROPEAN INDEPENDENCE AND  FRONTIERS   SAFETY AND SECURITY.

THANK YOU
A.C.


TREATY
Between the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Kingdom of The Netherlands and the Portuguese Republic,

establishing the
European Gendarmerie Force
EUROGENDFOR


The Kingdom of Spain,
The French Republic,
The Italian Republic,
The Kingdom of The Netherlands
and
The Portuguese Republic,
Hereinafter referred to as the “Parties”,
Considering the Declaration of Intent on EUROGENDFOR as signed in Noordwijk on 17 September 2004;
Considering the North Atlantic Treaty signed in Washington on 4 April 1949;
Considering the Charter of the United Nations signed at San Francisco on 26 June 1945;
Considering the Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces, signed in London on 19 June 1951;
Considering the Treaty on the European Union as amended by the Treaty of Nice, signed on 26 February 2001;
Considering the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, signed in Helsinki on 1 August 1975;
Considering the Agreement between the Member States of the European Union concerning the status of military and civilian staff seconded to the institutions of the European Union, of the headquarters and forces which may be made available to the European Union in the context of the preparation and execution of the tasks referred to in Article 17(2) of the Treaty on European Union, including exercises, and of the military and civilian staff of the Member States put at the disposal of the European Union to act in this context, signed in Brussels on 17 November 2003;
Contributing to the development of the European Security and Defence Identity and strengthening the common European Security and Defence Policy;
Have agreed as follows:


Chapter I
General terms

Article 1
Object
1. The object of this Treaty is to establish a European Gendarmerie Force, which shall be operational, pre-organised, robust, and rapidly deployable, exclusively comprising elements of police forces with military status of the Parties, in order to perform all police tasks within the scope of crisis management operations.
2. This Treaty defines the fundamental principles in respect of the objectives, the status, the modalities of organisation and the operation of the European Gendarmerie Force, hereinafter referred to as EUROGENDFOR or EGF.

Article 2
Principles
The terms of this Treaty are based on the application of principles of reciprocity and cost sharing.

Article 3
Definitions
For the purposes of this Treaty the expression:
a. EUROGENDFOR means the multinational police force with military status composed of:
i) the Permanent HQ;
ii) the EGF Forces designated by the Parties following the transfer of authority.
b. PERMANENT HQ means the multinational, modular and projectable Permanent Headquarters, located in Vicenza (Italy). The role and structure of the Permanent HQ and its involvement in an operation shall be approved by CIMIN;
c. PERMANENT HQ PERSONNEL means the members of a police force with military status assigned by the Parties to the Permanent HQ as well as a limited number of civilian personnel designated by the Parties, permanently supporting the functioning of the Permanent HQ in an advisory or assisting role;
d. EGF FORCES means the personnel of the police forces with military status assigned by the Parties to EUROGENDFOR to fulfil a mission or an exercise, following the transfer of authority and a limited number of other personnel designated by the Parties in an advisory or supporting role;
e. FORCE HQ means the multinational headquarters activated in an area of operation to support the EGF Force Commander in exercising command and control for the mission;
f. EUROGENDFOR PERSONNEL means the Permanent HQ Personnel and the members of the EGF Forces;
g. CIMIN means the High Level Interdepartmental Committee. It is the decision-making body governing EUROGENDFOR;
h. EGF COMMANDER means the officer appointed by CIMIN in command of the Permanent HQ and where appropriate EGF Forces;
i. EGF FORCE COMMANDER means the officer appointed by CIMIN to command an EGF mission;
j. SENDING STATE means the Party that supplies EUROGENDFOR with forces and/or personnel;
k. HOST STATE means the Party on whose territory the Permanent HQ is located;


l. RECEIVING STATE means the Party on whose territory EGF Forces are stationed or in transit;
m. CONTRIBUTING STATE means a State that is not a Party to this Treaty but participates in EUROGENDFOR missions and tasks;
n. FAMILY MEMBER(S) means:
i) the spouse of a member of the Permanent HQ Personnel;
ii) any other person who has contracted a registered partnership with a member of the Permanent HQ Personnel, on the basis of the legislation of the Sending State, provided that the legislation of the Host State considers registered partnerships as equivalent to marriage and in accordance with the conditions laid down in the relevant legislation of the Host State;
iii) direct descendants who are under the age of 21 or are dependents and those of the spouse or partner as defined in point ii);
iv) dependent direct relatives in the ascending line and those of the spouse or partner as defined in point ii).


Chapter II
Missions, Engagement and Deployment


Article 4
Missions and tasks
1. In accordance with the mandate of each operation and operating independently or jointly with other forces, EUROGENDFOR must be capable of covering the full spectrum of police missions, through substitution or strengthening, during all the phases of a crisis management operation.
2. EGF Forces can be placed either under civilian authority or under military command.
3. EUROGENDFOR may be used for:
a. performing security and public order missions;
b. monitoring, advising, mentoring and supervising local police in their day-to-day work, including criminal investigation work;
c. conducting public surveillance, traffic regulations, border policing and general intelligence work;
d. performing criminal investigation work, including detecting offences, tracing offenders and transferring them to the appropriate judicial authorities;
e. protecting people and property and keeping order in the event of public disturbances;
f. training police officers as regards international standards;
g. training instructors, particularly through co-operation programmes.


Article 5
Framework for the missions
EUROGENDFOR may be placed at disposal of the European Union (EU) and also of the United Nations (UN), the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and other international organisations or an ad hoc coalition.


Article 6
Conditions for engagement and deployment
1. Conditions for engagement and deployment of EUROGENDFOR, decided upon by CIMIN on a case by case basis, shall be covered by a specific mandate for each operation and shall be subject to the necessary agreements between the Parties and the requesting organisation.
2. To prepare the missions assigned to EUROGENDFOR, the Parties may, under the direction of CIMIN, station and deploy their own forces and personnel on the territory of the other Parties.
3. Stationing and deployment on the territory of a third State shall be covered by an agreement between the Sending States and the third State specifying the conditions of such stationing and deployment, bearing in mind the fundamental principles of this Treaty.
Chapter III
Institutional and legal aspects

Article 7
CIMIN
1. CIMIN consists of representatives of the appropriate ministries of each Party. The choice of the representatives is a national responsibility. Specific details with respect to the membership, structure, organisation and functioning of CIMIN shall be defined by the rules to be adopted by CIMIN.
2. Decisions and guidelines shall be adopted unanimously by CIMIN.
3. The general tasks of CIMIN include the following:
a. exercising political control over and giving strategic direction to EUROGENDFOR and assuring political-military co-ordination among the Parties and, where appropriate, with the Contributing States;
b. appointing the EGF Commander and providing him or her with directives;
c. approving the role and the structure of the Permanent HQ and also the rotation criteria for the key positions within the Permanent HQ;
d. appointing the Chairman of the Financial Board and deciding on the criteria for rotating the chairmanship.
e. monitoring the implementation of the objectives stated in this Treaty;
f. approving the annual training objectives and programme proposed by the EGF Commander;
g. deciding on:
i) participation of EUROGENDFOR in missions;
ii) participation of Contributing States in EUROGENDFOR missions;
iii) requests for co-operation by third States, international organisations or others.
h. elaborating the framework for actions led by EUROGENDFOR or at the request of the EU, the UN, the OSCE, NATO, other international organisations or an ad hoc coalition;
i. defining the framework for each mission, where appropriate in consultation with relevant international organisations, namely:
i) designation of the EGF Force Commander;
ii) involvement of the Permanent HQ in the chain of command.
j. approving the structure of the Force HQ;
k. guiding and assessing EUROGENDFOR activities in case of deployment;

l. deciding on the need to conclude the security agreements referred to in Article 12, paragraph 3.
4. CIMIN approves main actions related to the administrative aspects of the Permanent HQ, and to EUROGENDFOR deployment issues, in particular the annual budget and the other financial matters in accordance with Chapter X.
5. CIMIN, following its specific guidelines:
a. evaluates the fulfilment of the conditions for accession to the Treaty, in accordance with Article 42, and forwards its proposal for approval to the Parties;
b. decides whether to grant Observer Status within EUROGENDFOR, in accordance with Article 43;
c. decides whether to grant Partner Status within EUROGENDFOR, in accordance with Article 44.
6. Meetings of CIMIN will be held in accordance with the rules of procedures as adopted by CIMIN.

Article 8
EGF Commander
The EGF Commander shall carry out the following main tasks:
a. commanding the Permanent HQ and establishing regulations for its functioning as needed;
b. implementing the directives received from CIMIN;
c. being expressly mandated by the Parties through CIMIN, and on its behalf, negotiating and concluding technical agreements or arrangements necessary for the proper functioning of EUROGENDFOR and for conducting exercises or operations carried out on the territory of a third State;
d. taking all measures necessary, in accordance with the laws of the Host State, to maintain order and security within its installations and, as necessary, outside its installations with the prior consent and assistance of the authorities of the Host State;
e. drawing up the budget for common costs of EUROGENDFOR and, after the end of the financial year, the final report related to the expenses of EUROGENDFOR for that year;
f. commanding EGF Forces, where appropriate.

Article 9
Legal capacity
1. To achieve its objectives and accomplish its missions and tasks set forth in this Treaty, EUROGENDFOR has legal capacity within each of the Parties to enter into contracts. EUROGENDFOR may consequently appear in court, where necessary.
2. For the purposes set forth in paragraph 1, EUROGENDFOR shall be represented by the EGF Commander or by any other person expressly designated by the EGF Commander to act on his or her behalf.
3. The EGF Commander and the Host State may agree that the Host State acts in subrogation in all actions to which EUROGENDFOR is a Party before the courts in that State. In that case, EUROGENDFOR must reimburse costs incurred.


Chapter IV
Permanent HQ facilities

Article 10
Facilities granted by the Host State
1. The Host State undertakes to provide at no charge the Permanent HQ facilities required for EUROGENDFOR to carry out its tasks. Such facilities are identified in a specific document approved by CIMIN.
2. The Host State will take all reasonable measures required to ensure the availability of required services, in particular electricity, water, natural gas, postal services, telephone and telegraph services, waste collection and fire protection to the Permanent HQ. Conditions concerning the Host State support services will be further specified in implementing arrangements between the appropriate authorities of the Parties.

Article 11
Access permission
Upon receipt of a substantiated request, the EGF Commander must authorise agents of the competent service to inspect, repair, maintain, rebuild or move installations, electrical networks and pipes within the infrastructure of the Permanent HQ, provided that those activities present no obstacle to normal operations and security.
Chapter V
Protection of information

Article 12
Protection of information
1. The basic principles and minimum standards for the protection of classified information or material shall be set out in a security agreement between the Parties.
2. The Parties shall take all appropriate measures in accordance with their international obligations and their national laws and regulations to protect any classified information or material which is produced by or released to EUROGENDFOR.
3. The exchange of classified information or material with third States or international organisations shall be covered by specific security agreements that shall be negotiated, signed and approved by the Parties.

Chapter VI
Provisions concerning the personnel

Article 13
Respect for laws in force
EUROGENDFOR Personnel and their family members must respect the law in force in the Host State or the Receiving State. In addition, EUROGENDFOR Personnel must refrain from  carrying out any activities incompatible with the spirit of this Treaty while on the territory of the Host State or the Receiving State.

Article 14
Entry and residence
With respect to immigration regulations and the formalities of the law governing entry and residence, the Permanent HQ Personnel and their family members are not subject to regulations in force in the Host State applicable to foreigners.

Article 15
Legal and medical aspects in the event of death
1. In the event of death of military or civilian personnel, if the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State request that an autopsy be performed in the context of a legal or administrative procedure, a representative of the Sending State is authorised to be present during the autopsy.
2. The authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State must authorise the transfer of the mortal remains to the Sending State in accordance with the transportation regulations in force on the territory of the Host State or the Receiving State that apply to mortal remains.

Article 16
Uniforms and arms
1. EUROGENDFOR Personnel shall wear their uniform in accordance with their respective national rules. The EGF Commander may establish specific procedures where appropriate.
2. EUROGENDFOR Personnel may possess, carry and transport arms, ammunitions, other weapon systems and explosives on the conditions that they are authorised to do so by their orders and that they do so in accordance with the laws of the Host State and the Receiving State.

Article 17
Driving licences
Military driving licences issued by each of the Parties are equally valid on the territory of all States that are Party to this Treaty and allow bearers to drive all EUROGENDFOR vehicles of the relevant category in the performance of official duty.

Article 18
Medical assistance
1. Medical assistance is guaranteed to EUROGENDFOR Personnel and their family members under the same conditions as it is provided to personnel of the same rank or equivalent category of the Host State or the Receiving State.
2. Medical care shall be provided in accordance with the terms agreed by the appropriate authorities of the Parties.




Chapter VII
Privileges and immunities

Article 19
Tax and customs
1. When used for official purposes, assets, income and other property, belonging to EUROGENDFOR, are exempt from all direct taxation.
2. The purchase for a substantial amount of goods or services by EUROGENDFOR for official use is exempt from turnover tax and other forms of indirect taxes.
3. The import of goods and merchandise necessary for official use by EUROGENDFOR is exempt from custom duties and other indirect taxes.
4. EUROGENDFOR vehicles intended for official use are exempt from road registration taxes.
5. The provisions of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply to EGF Forces.
6. Purchases and imports of fuel and lubricants needed for official use by EUROGENDFOR are exempt from custom duties and other indirect taxes. That exemption does not apply to purchases and imports by EGF Forces on their own territory.
7. Purchased or imported goods and merchandise that are exempt or that qualify for reimbursement in accordance with the terms of this Article may only be transferred or placed at the disposal of a third party, either free of charge or for a price, in accordance with the conditions set by the Party granting the exemptions or reimbursements.
8. In any event, EUROGENDFOR is not entitled to any exemption from taxes and duties that constitute payment for public utility services.
9. No exemption from duties or taxes, of whatever kind, may be granted for the procurement of military materials and equipment.

Article 20
Individual privileges
1. EUROGENDFOR Personnel mentioned in Article 3 paragraph c, who are not permanently resident in or nationals of the Host State, at the time of their first arrival to take up service in such State, may - within one year from the time of their first arrival and for two shipments maximum - import from the State of last residence or the State of citizenship their personal belongings and furniture, including one motor vehicle, free of customs duties and other indirect taxes, or buy free of turnover tax such items for a substantial amount in the Host State.
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall only apply if a member of the personnel is assigned for a minimum of one year.
3. For the provisions of this Article to apply, the member of the personnel concerned shall make a request to the authorities of the Host State within a year after his or her first arrival.
4. Goods which have been imported duty free referred to in paragraph 1 may be re-exported freely.
5. Motor vehicles referred to in paragraph 1 and those registered in another EU Member State, with the limit of one vehicle for each member of the above-mentioned personnel, are exempt from road registration taxes, for the term of service of such personnel in the Host State.


Article 21
Inviolability of the premises, buildings and archives
1. The premises and buildings of EUROGENDFOR shall be inviolable in the territory of the Parties.
2. The authorities of the Parties may not enter the premises and buildings, referred to in paragraph 1, without the prior consent of the EGF Commander, or where applicable, the EGF Force Commander. Such consent shall be assumed in the event of natural disaster, fire or any other event requiring immediate protective measures. In other cases, the EGF Commander, or where applicable, the EGF Force Commander, shall give serious consideration to a request for permission from the authorities of the Parties to enter the premises and buildings, without prejudice to interests of EUROGENDFOR.
3. The archives of EUROGENDFOR shall be inviolable. The inviolability of the archives shall be understood to apply to all records, correspondence, manuscripts, photographs, films, recordings, documents, computer data, computer files or any other data carrier belonging to or held by EUROGENDFOR, wherever they are located in the territory of the Parties.

Article 22
Immunity from execution
The property and funds of EUROGENDFOR and the goods which have been placed at its disposal for official purposes, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from any executive measure in force in the territory of the Parties.

Article 23
Aspects of communications
1. The Parties will take all reasonable measures to ensure the smooth flow of official communications of EUROGENDFOR.
2. EUROGENDFOR has the right to receive and transmit encrypted messages, as well as to send and receive correspondence and official packages by courier or in sealed cases, which may not be opened or held.
3. Communications addressed to or received by EUROGENDFOR may not be intercepted or interfered with.

Article 24
Domicile for tax purposes
With respect to income taxes and property taxes, Permanent HQ Personnel who, solely on the basis of their function in the service of the Permanent HQ establish residence in the Host State, shall be considered as maintaining their domicile for tax purposes in the Sending State that pays the salary for the services carried out in regard to the Permanent HQ. This term shall also apply to family members who do not engage in professional or commercial activities within the Host State.



Chapter VIII
Jurisdictional and disciplinary terms

Article 25
Criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction
1. The authorities of the Sending State shall have the right to exercise all criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the law of the Sending State over military and civilian personnel where such civilian personnel are subject to the law governing all or any of the police forces with military status of the Sending State, by reason of their deployment with those forces.
2. The authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall have the right to exercise jurisdiction over military and civilian personnel and their family members, with respect to offences committed within their respective territories and punishable by the laws of that State.
3. The authorities of the Sending State shall have the right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over military and civilian personnel where such civilian personnel are subject to the law governing all or any of the police forces with military status of the Sending State, by reason of their deployment with those forces, with respect to offences, including offences relating to its security, punishable by the law of the Sending State, but not by the law of the Host State or the Receiving State.
4. The authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall have the right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over military and civilian personnel and their family members with respect to offences, including offences relating to its security, punishable by its law but not by the law of the Sending State.
5. In cases where the right to exercise jurisdiction is concurrent the following rules shall apply:
a. the competent authorities of the Sending State shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over military and civilian personnel where such civilian personnel are subject to the law governing all or any of the police forces with military status of the Sending State, by reason of their deployment with those forces, in relation to:
i) offences solely against the property or security of that State, or offences solely against the person or property of military or civilian personnel of that State or of a family member;
ii) offences arising out of any act or omission done in the performance of official duty;
b. in the case of any other offence, the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction;
c. if the State having the primary right decides not to exercise jurisdiction, it shall notify the authorities of the other State as soon as practicable. The authorities of the State having the primary right shall give sympathetic consideration to a request from the authorities of the other State for a waiver of its right in cases where that other State considers such waiver to be of particular importance.
6. For the purposes of paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, a security offence against a State shall include:
a. treason against the State;
b. sabotage, espionage or violation of any law relating to official secrets of that State, or secrets relating to the national defence of that State.
7. The provisions of this Article shall not imply any right for the authorities of the Sending State to exercise jurisdiction over persons who are nationals of, or ordinarily resident in, the Host State or the Receiving State, unless they are members of the force of the Sending State.



Article 26
Mutual legal assistance
1. The Parties shall assist each other in the arrest of members of a force or civilian component or their family members in the territory of the Host State or the Receiving State and in handing them over to the authority which is to exercise jurisdiction in accordance with the above provisions.
2. The authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall promptly notify the military authorities of the Sending State of the arrest of any member of a force or civilian component or a family member.
3. The custody of an accused member of a force or civilian component over whom the Host State or the Receiving State is to exercise jurisdiction shall, if he or she is in the hands of the Sending State, remain with that State until he or she is charged by the Host State or the Receiving State.
4. The Parties shall assist each other in carrying out all necessary investigations into offences, and in the collection and production of evidence, including the seizure and, in proper cases, the handing over of objects connected with an offence. The handing over of such objects may, however, be made subject to their return within the time specified by the authority delivering them.
5. The Parties shall notify one another of the disposition of all cases in which there are concurrent rights to exercise jurisdiction.
6. The authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall give sympathetic consideration to a request from the authorities of the Sending State for assistance in carrying out a sentence of imprisonment pronounced by the authorities of the Sending State under the provision of this Article within the territory of the Host State or the Receiving State.

Article 27
Repatriation, absence and removal
1. When EUROGENDFOR Personnel are no longer in service of its forces and are not repatriated, the authorities of the Sending State shall immediately notify the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State and provide all useful information.
2. The authorities of the Sending State shall equally notify the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State of any illegal absence from duty exceeding twenty-one days.
3. If the Host State or the Receiving State requires the removal of EUROGENDFOR Personnel from its own territory or has issued an expulsion order for EUROGENDFOR Personnel or for their family members, the authorities of the Sending State shall either receive them on its own territory or allow them to leave the territory of the Host State or the Receiving State.
Chapter IX
Claims

Article 28
Waiver
1. Each Party shall waive all its claims against any other Party for damage to any of its property used in connection with the preparation and execution of the tasks referred to in this Treaty, including exercises, if such damage:


a. was caused by EUROGENDFOR Personnel in the execution of their duties in the framework of this Treaty; or
b. arose from the use of any vehicle, vessel, aircraft, arms or other equipment owned by the other Party and used by its services, provided either that the vehicle, vessel, aircraft, arms or equipment causing the damage was being used in the framework of this Treaty; or that the damage was caused to property being so used.
2. Each Party waives all its claims against any other Party for injury or death suffered by EUROGENDFOR Personnel in the performance of their official duties.
3. The waiver referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply if the damage, injury or death results from gross negligence or wilful misconduct of the personnel of one Party and consequently the costs of such damage, injury or death shall be paid by that Party.
4. Notwithstanding the exception mentioned in paragraph 3, each Party waives its claims in any case where the damage is less than a minimum amount to be determined by CIMIN.

Article 29
Damage to third parties
1. In the event of damage caused to a third party or to the property of the third party by a member or property of one of the Parties in preparing and carrying out the tasks referred to in this Treaty, including exercises, the compensation of said damage shall be shared by the Parties as specified in implementing agreements or arrangements, referred to in Article 45 and in accordance with the following provisions:
a. claims shall be filed, considered and settled or adjudicated in accordance with the laws and regulations of the Host State or the Receiving State with respect to claims arising from the activities of EUROGENDFOR;
b. the Host State or the Receiving State may settle any such claims; the payment of the amount agreed upon or determined by adjudication shall be made by the Host State or the Receiving State in euros;
c. such payment, whether made pursuant to settlement or to adjudication of the case by a competent tribunal of the Host State or the Receiving State, or the final adjudication by such a tribunal denying payment, shall be binding and conclusive upon the Parties concerned;
d. every claim paid by the Host State or the Receiving State shall be communicated to the Sending States concerned together with full particulars and a proposed distribution in conformity with this Article. In default of a reply within two months, the proposed distribution shall be regarded as accepted.
2. If, however, such damage results from gross negligence or wilful misconduct of the personnel of a Party, the costs of any damage shall be borne by that Party alone.
3. A member of EUROGENDFOR Personnel shall not be subject to any proceedings for the enforcement of any judgement given against him or her in the Host State or the Receiving State in a matter arising from the performance of his official duties.
4. Notwithstanding any individual liability in the event of damages caused to a third party or the property of a third party by a person or property of one of the Parties not done in the performance of official duty, claims in respect of these damages shall be dealt with in the following manner:
a. the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State shall consider the claim and assess compensation to the claimant in a fair and just manner, taking into account all circumstances of the case, including the conduct of the injured person, and shall prepare a report on the matter;



b. the report shall be delivered to the authorities of the Sending State, who shall then decide without delay whether they will offer an ex gratia payment, and if so, of what amount;
c. if an offer of ex gratia payment is made, and accepted by the claimant in full satisfaction of his claim, the authorities of the Sending State shall make the payment itself and notify the authorities of the Host State or the Receiving State of its decision and of the sum paid;
d. nothing in this paragraph shall affect the jurisdiction of the courts of the Host State or the Receiving State to entertain an action against EUROGENDFOR Personnel unless and until there has been payment in full satisfaction of the claim.


Article 30
Examination of circumstances
Without prejudice to Article 31, in case of doubts as to whether the damages were caused in the performance of official duty, CIMIN shall make a decision after examining a report of the circumstances from the EGF Commander.


Article 31
Exercises and operations
In the event of an exercise or operation on the territory of a third State, the method of distributing any compensation among the Parties and, where appropriate, Contributing States may be specified in an ad hoc arrangement governing the exercise or the operation.


Article 32
Technical or scientific experts
The provisions of Chapter VIII and Chapter IX shall also apply to a citizen of one of the Parties, who is neither part of the military or civilian personnel, but who is carrying out a specific mission of a technical or scientific nature within EUROGENDFOR and solely for the term of the mission.

Chapter X
Terms in respect of finances and property rights

Article 33
Financial Board
1. A Financial Board, comprising a financial expert designated by each Party, is created.
2. The Financial Board is responsible for the following duties:
a. advising CIMIN on financial and budgetary matters;
b. implementing the financial, contracting and budgetary procedures and proposing, if necessary, modifications to the cost-sharing formula to be approved by CIMIN;
c. examining the draft budget and the medium-term expenses planning proposed by the EGF Commander, to be approved by CIMIN;
d. examining the yearly report on the final balance of annual expenses prepared by the EGF Commander and advising CIMIN on its adoption;


e. in an emergency, approving extra expenses which may not exceed 10% of the Chapter concerned, by proxy for CIMIN. The Financial Board shall report to the next meeting of CIMIN;
f. settling financial disputes. If the Financial Board fails to settle a dispute, it shall be referred to CIMIN for settlement;
g. proposing CIMIN to perform an audit of the common expenses of EUROGENDFOR. CIMIN shall determine how the audit is to be conducted.
3. The Financial Board operating procedures and the timetable for presenting, examining and approving the draft budget of EUROGENDFOR shall be defined in a set of financial rules to be approved by CIMIN.

Article 34
Expenses
1. There are three kinds of expenses relating to EUROGENDFOR activities:
a. common costs;
b. expenses of the Host State relating to the Permanent HQ;
c. national expenses.
2. The different kinds of expenses and how they are financed shall be defined in the financial rules of EUROGENDFOR to be approved by CIMIN.

Article 35
Budget
1. The annual budget of EUROGENDFOR for common costs, calculated in euros, shall comprise receipts and disbursements.
2. Disbursements consist of, on the one hand, investment costs and operational costs for the Permanent HQ and, on the other hand, expenses approved by the Parties incurred in the course of EUROGENDFOR activities.
3. Receipts arise from the contributions of the Parties in accordance with the criteria to be defined by them in the financial rules of EUROGENDFOR.
4. The financial year begins on January 1 and ends December 31.

Article 36
Audits
To discharge their audit functions with respect to their national governments and to report to their parliament as provided in their statutes, national auditors may obtain all information and examine all documents held by EUROGENDFOR Personnel.

Article 37
Public tenders
1. EUROGENDFOR may put out contracts to public tender in accordance with the principles in force in the EU.
2. EU regulations with respect to public tenders apply under the following conditions:
a. the person responsible for putting out contracts to public tender is the EGF Commander;
b. an appeal may be filed against the award of a public tender, at no charge, to CIMIN, who will issue a ruling within one month.
3. Without prejudice to the terms in paragraphs 1 and 2, competitors are excluded from participating in public tenders if they:

a. provide goods or services originating in a State with which one of the Parties does not enjoy diplomatic relations;
b. directly or indirectly pursue objectives that one of the Parties considers to be contrary to its essential security or foreign policy interests.

Chapter XI
Final provisions


Article 38
Languages
The official languages of EUROGENDFOR will be those of the Parties. A common working language may be used.

Article 39
Settlement of disputes
Disputes among the Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of this Treaty will be resolved through negotiation.

Article 40
Amendments
1. At the proposal of a Party, this Treaty may be amended at any time with the agreement of all the Parties.
2. Any amendment shall enter into force in accordance with the terms of Article 46.

Article 41
Withdrawal
1. Each Party may, at any time, withdraw from this Treaty by giving prior written notice to the depositary.
2. Withdrawal shall take effect twelve months after the date of receipt of the notice of withdrawal by the depositary, or on such later date as may be specified in the notice of withdrawal.

Article 42
Accession
1. Any EU Member State possessing a police force with military status may apply to CIMIN for accession to this Treaty. After receiving the approval of the Parties, in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 5, subparagraph a., CIMIN shall notify the applicant State of the Parties’ decision.
2. Accession shall be effected by depositing an instrument of accession with the depositary of the Treaty, which shall notify each Party and the acceding State of the date of deposit thereof.
3. In regard to any State on behalf of which an instrument of accession is deposited, this Treaty shall come into force on the first day of the second month after notification by the depositary to all Parties.


Article 43
Observer Status
1. EU candidate countries that have a police force with military status may apply for Observer Status. EU Member States that have a police force with military status may also apply for Observer Status as a first step to accession.
2. Observer Status entails the right to second a liaison officer to the Permanent HQ in accordance with the rules approved by CIMIN.

Article 44
Partner Status
1. EU Member States and EU candidate countries that have a force with military status and some police skills may apply for Partner Status.
2. CIMIN shall define the specific rights and obligations of the Partners.

Article 45
Implementing agreements or arrangements
This Treaty may be supplemented by one or more specific implementing agreements or arrangements.

Article 46
Entry into force
This Treaty shall enter into force on the first day of the second month after notification by the depositary to all Parties of the last instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval.

Article 47
Depositary
The Government of the Italian Republic shall act as depositary and shall notify all signatory and acceding States of the deposit of each instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, accession or withdrawal.

Signed at Velsen, on 18 October 2007, in a single original in the Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese and English languages, each text being equally authoritative, which shall be deposited with the Government of the Italian Republic. The Government of the Italian Republic shall transmit certified copies thereof to all Parties.

Labels: policy

Link

posted by The visioner @ 10:08 PM 0 comments