The document summarizes the responses to a public consultation on the procedures and requirements for a proposed European Citizens' Initiative regulation. Most respondents saw the initiative as important for European democracy but wanted simple procedures. There was general agreement that initiatives should come from multiple member states, have online signature collection, and a registration system. However, there were differing views on issues like admissibility checks, minimum signatures per country, and whether to allow successive initiatives on the same topic.
Media audiovizualne. konflikt regulacyjny w dobie cyfryzacji a book reviewMichal
The book under review here is entitled Audiovisual Media: regulatory conflict in
the digitalisation era by Katarzyna Chalubinska- Jentkiewicz. As the title suggests,
I expected it to be a monograph on new regulatory problems in the increasingly
digital audiovisual field. The sector itself is well known to cause competence conflicts
between the as many as three different regulatory bodies overseeing it in Poland: the
national telecoms regulator (the UKE President), the audiovisual media supervisory
body (the KRRiT) and the competition authority (the UOKiK President). The impact
of the European Commission can also not be overlooked. The book does indeed
deal in great detail with what is seen as the ‘regulatory conflict’ in the audiovisual
field but the approach applied therein is that of the theory of administration and
administrative/constitutional law rather than that of market regulation. As a result,
the analysis focuses primarily on the perceived ‘conflict’ between Poland’s interests
and regulatory competences and the impact exercised by the European Union as
a whole, rather than on any existing or potential internal conflicts. Key to the entire
analysis is the contraposition of the notion of ‘public interest of a nation’ (State) and
the ‘general interest of the EU’ whereby the special characteristics of ‘national’ public
interest are associated with the notion of ‘public morality’ and also, ‘public mission’.
The European Commission published a White Paper on 2 April 2008 on damages
actions for breach of EU antitrust rules. The content of the White Paper is since
then being prepared to be converted into EU legislation on private antitrust
enforcement. This paper presents the developments in private antitrust enforcement
in Poland after 2 April 2008. It commences with an outline of EU actions in
this field which act as an introduction to the more detailed analysis of recent
jurisprudential and legislative developments in Poland. The latter part of the paper
covers, in particular, the 2009 Act on the Pursuit of Claims in Group Proceedings
and the 2011 Act Amending the Civil Procedure Code and Some Other Acts which
abolishes all specific elements of commercial proceedings, including the statutory ‘non-admission of evidence’ principle. These two legal acts are assessed in order
to establish whether their introduction is likely to help facilitate private antitrust
enforcement in Poland and to consider to what an extent are these developments
responding to the challenges outlined by the European Commission.
Presentation to Staffordshire University, Faculty of Arts Media and Design, M...Damian Radcliffe
Slides from presentation given to students at Staffordshire University. Includes: 1) Ofcom ‘s proposed priorities for 2011-12. and 2) Consumer Trends in the UK - looking at both usage and take up. All data and slides are culled from previous presentations which are all in the public domain.
Media audiovizualne. konflikt regulacyjny w dobie cyfryzacji a book reviewMichal
The book under review here is entitled Audiovisual Media: regulatory conflict in
the digitalisation era by Katarzyna Chalubinska- Jentkiewicz. As the title suggests,
I expected it to be a monograph on new regulatory problems in the increasingly
digital audiovisual field. The sector itself is well known to cause competence conflicts
between the as many as three different regulatory bodies overseeing it in Poland: the
national telecoms regulator (the UKE President), the audiovisual media supervisory
body (the KRRiT) and the competition authority (the UOKiK President). The impact
of the European Commission can also not be overlooked. The book does indeed
deal in great detail with what is seen as the ‘regulatory conflict’ in the audiovisual
field but the approach applied therein is that of the theory of administration and
administrative/constitutional law rather than that of market regulation. As a result,
the analysis focuses primarily on the perceived ‘conflict’ between Poland’s interests
and regulatory competences and the impact exercised by the European Union as
a whole, rather than on any existing or potential internal conflicts. Key to the entire
analysis is the contraposition of the notion of ‘public interest of a nation’ (State) and
the ‘general interest of the EU’ whereby the special characteristics of ‘national’ public
interest are associated with the notion of ‘public morality’ and also, ‘public mission’.
The European Commission published a White Paper on 2 April 2008 on damages
actions for breach of EU antitrust rules. The content of the White Paper is since
then being prepared to be converted into EU legislation on private antitrust
enforcement. This paper presents the developments in private antitrust enforcement
in Poland after 2 April 2008. It commences with an outline of EU actions in
this field which act as an introduction to the more detailed analysis of recent
jurisprudential and legislative developments in Poland. The latter part of the paper
covers, in particular, the 2009 Act on the Pursuit of Claims in Group Proceedings
and the 2011 Act Amending the Civil Procedure Code and Some Other Acts which
abolishes all specific elements of commercial proceedings, including the statutory ‘non-admission of evidence’ principle. These two legal acts are assessed in order
to establish whether their introduction is likely to help facilitate private antitrust
enforcement in Poland and to consider to what an extent are these developments
responding to the challenges outlined by the European Commission.
Presentation to Staffordshire University, Faculty of Arts Media and Design, M...Damian Radcliffe
Slides from presentation given to students at Staffordshire University. Includes: 1) Ofcom ‘s proposed priorities for 2011-12. and 2) Consumer Trends in the UK - looking at both usage and take up. All data and slides are culled from previous presentations which are all in the public domain.
Sieci szerokopasmowe w polityce telekomunikacyjnej a book reviewMichal
A new book from Professor Stanisław Piątek, an established authority on
telecommunications law, brings the reader closer to the inner workings of broadband
technology in its legal environment. The title reflects the focus of telecoms policy
on access whereby the only access that matters is to the broadband network in its
many variations. The subject matter itself makes the book worth reading, particularly
in the absence of other major Polish works on this topic. Even if some authors
regarded broadband technologies as obsolete years ago1, in reality it still represents
a lion’s share of the telecoms business. Professor Piątek himself is well aware of the
historical and transitory nature of the subject matter when he defines broadband not
by association with any particular technology but as the ability of whatever technology
available at any given moment to provide a certain minimum transmission speed.
Thus the central notion is open to absorb technologies nonexistent as of yet. This in
turn may pose serious regulatory issues as to what future industries will be subject to
regulation, particularly since the distinction between content and carrier regulation
is becoming increasingly blurred.
Report on national courts, social media and convergenceOles Kulchytskyy
The present report examines judicial approaches to social media and convergence. It identifies the jurisprudence of supreme, constitutional and appellate courts in a selected set of European Union (EU) countries that form part of the Compact project. It discusses key characteristics of related jurisprudence, and it examines judicial reasoning by exploring the interpretative efforts of judges and their contribution to the protection and balancing of distinct fundamental rights and interests in the realm of social media. The report also delves into patterns of judicial interaction between courts.
The information is prepared by the team of the COMPACT project (http://compact-media.eu/).
COMPACT is a Coordination and Support Action funded European Commission under framework Horizon 2020.
The objective of the COMPACT project is to increase awareness (including scientific, political, cultural, legal, economic and technical areas) of the latest technological discoveries among key stakeholders in the context of social media and convergence. The project will offer analyses and road maps of related initiatives. In addition, extensive research on policies and regulatory frameworks in media and content will be developed.
Presentation by PROVIDUS researcher Dace Akule in conference "EU Fundamental Rights Charter and the Role of Civil Society in Facilitating Fundamental Rights", organised by Latvian Centre for Human Rights in co-operation with Lithuanian Human Rights Monitoring Institute in Riga on 27, 28 November, 2012.
Further information: http://cilvektiesibas.org.lv/en/news/cenference-eu-fundamental-rights-charter-and-the-r-232/
PROVIDUS pētnieces Daces Akules prezentācija konferencē "Eiropas Savienības Pamattiesību harta un pilsoniskās sabiedrības loma pamattiesību veicināšanā", ko organizēja Latvijas Cilvēktiesību centrs sadarbībā ar Lietuvas Cilvēktiesību uzraudzības institūtu 2012.gada 27.-28.novembrī.
Plašāka informācija apr konferenci: http://cilvektiesibas.org.lv/lv/news/konference-eiropas-savienibas-pamattiesibu-harta-u-231/
The rule of law dialogue: five ideas for future EU presidenciesLibertiesEU
Key recommendations:
• Increase the amount of time available for the dialogue and/or consider making more of available time by splitting Member States into smaller working groups chosen by lot;
• Choose a thematic focus for each dialogue. Use the dialogue to identify challenges faced by Mem- ber States within the thematic focus by reference to the ndings of existing monitoring mecha- nisms (UN, Council of Europe, EU Fundamental Rights Agency) and examine how the national rule of law infrastructure (judiciary, NHRIs, media, civil society) is contributing to upholding the rule of law in this area;
• Involve the national rule of law infrastructure and regional and international human rights bodies in a seminar preparatory to the dialogue;
• Ensure a genuine exchange of views during the dialogue by stimulating Member States to ask questions, o er good practice solutions and make recommendations to be taken on by their peers;
• Facilitate implementation of recommendations by establishing/identifying a rule of law fund to support the rule of law infrastructure, o er technical assistance to Member States, and require Member States to report back on implementation of recommendations.
Sieci szerokopasmowe w polityce telekomunikacyjnej a book reviewMichal
A new book from Professor Stanisław Piątek, an established authority on
telecommunications law, brings the reader closer to the inner workings of broadband
technology in its legal environment. The title reflects the focus of telecoms policy
on access whereby the only access that matters is to the broadband network in its
many variations. The subject matter itself makes the book worth reading, particularly
in the absence of other major Polish works on this topic. Even if some authors
regarded broadband technologies as obsolete years ago1, in reality it still represents
a lion’s share of the telecoms business. Professor Piątek himself is well aware of the
historical and transitory nature of the subject matter when he defines broadband not
by association with any particular technology but as the ability of whatever technology
available at any given moment to provide a certain minimum transmission speed.
Thus the central notion is open to absorb technologies nonexistent as of yet. This in
turn may pose serious regulatory issues as to what future industries will be subject to
regulation, particularly since the distinction between content and carrier regulation
is becoming increasingly blurred.
Report on national courts, social media and convergenceOles Kulchytskyy
The present report examines judicial approaches to social media and convergence. It identifies the jurisprudence of supreme, constitutional and appellate courts in a selected set of European Union (EU) countries that form part of the Compact project. It discusses key characteristics of related jurisprudence, and it examines judicial reasoning by exploring the interpretative efforts of judges and their contribution to the protection and balancing of distinct fundamental rights and interests in the realm of social media. The report also delves into patterns of judicial interaction between courts.
The information is prepared by the team of the COMPACT project (http://compact-media.eu/).
COMPACT is a Coordination and Support Action funded European Commission under framework Horizon 2020.
The objective of the COMPACT project is to increase awareness (including scientific, political, cultural, legal, economic and technical areas) of the latest technological discoveries among key stakeholders in the context of social media and convergence. The project will offer analyses and road maps of related initiatives. In addition, extensive research on policies and regulatory frameworks in media and content will be developed.
Presentation by PROVIDUS researcher Dace Akule in conference "EU Fundamental Rights Charter and the Role of Civil Society in Facilitating Fundamental Rights", organised by Latvian Centre for Human Rights in co-operation with Lithuanian Human Rights Monitoring Institute in Riga on 27, 28 November, 2012.
Further information: http://cilvektiesibas.org.lv/en/news/cenference-eu-fundamental-rights-charter-and-the-r-232/
PROVIDUS pētnieces Daces Akules prezentācija konferencē "Eiropas Savienības Pamattiesību harta un pilsoniskās sabiedrības loma pamattiesību veicināšanā", ko organizēja Latvijas Cilvēktiesību centrs sadarbībā ar Lietuvas Cilvēktiesību uzraudzības institūtu 2012.gada 27.-28.novembrī.
Plašāka informācija apr konferenci: http://cilvektiesibas.org.lv/lv/news/konference-eiropas-savienibas-pamattiesibu-harta-u-231/
The rule of law dialogue: five ideas for future EU presidenciesLibertiesEU
Key recommendations:
• Increase the amount of time available for the dialogue and/or consider making more of available time by splitting Member States into smaller working groups chosen by lot;
• Choose a thematic focus for each dialogue. Use the dialogue to identify challenges faced by Mem- ber States within the thematic focus by reference to the ndings of existing monitoring mecha- nisms (UN, Council of Europe, EU Fundamental Rights Agency) and examine how the national rule of law infrastructure (judiciary, NHRIs, media, civil society) is contributing to upholding the rule of law in this area;
• Involve the national rule of law infrastructure and regional and international human rights bodies in a seminar preparatory to the dialogue;
• Ensure a genuine exchange of views during the dialogue by stimulating Member States to ask questions, o er good practice solutions and make recommendations to be taken on by their peers;
• Facilitate implementation of recommendations by establishing/identifying a rule of law fund to support the rule of law infrastructure, o er technical assistance to Member States, and require Member States to report back on implementation of recommendations.
Regional Conference
Transparency in Media Ownership and Preventing
Media Concentration
Skopje, 25-26 September 2014
Prof. Dr. Peggy Valcke
KU Leuven, Faculty of Law, iMinds-ICRI
& European University Institute, Florence
"We notice that citizens (in Belgium) emphasize the role of Europe to protect the external borders in order to compensate for the free commute within the EU. A migration policy should be based on clear rules and responsibilities for the inviting countries. This is considered to be the best safeguard against currents of identity politics and populist voices, which put the EU construction under heavy strain. Generally, migration is a
cause for concern."
Prof. Roberto Mastroianni
EUI Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom
Policy Conference, October 29th, 2012
European Union Competencies in Respect of Media Pluralism and Media
Freedom http://cmpf.eui.eu/events/policy-conference.aspx
The purpose of this document is to provide a brief overview of open consultation approaches in the current, international setting and propose a role for Information Technologies (IT) as a disruptive force in this setting.
The future of the protection of social rights in Europe - The « Brussels Doc...FPS Social Security
On 12 and 13 February 2015, the Belgian Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe organised in Brussels the European Conference on “The future of the protection of social rights in Europe”. 31 independent academic experts present during these 2 days prepared a synthesis document summing up the main proposals and possible solutions, which is called the “Brussels Document” on social rights in the greater European area.
The Brussels Document, which has been drawn up by a group of independent and international academic experts, is now available in attachment in 4 languages (EN-FR-DE-NL) and hosted on the Council of Europe website dedicated to the Turin process : http://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/high-level-conference-esc-2014
Following up on the October 2014 Turin Conference, it is the result of the “Conference on the Future of the Protection of Social Rights in Europe”, organised on 12 and 13 February 2015 in Brussels within the framework of the Belgian Presidency of the Council of Europe. Following the Turin Process, and in the wake of the General Report of the Conference of the eponymous city, the “Brussels Document” supplements the legal analyses and develops reflections for an application in synergy with the European Treaties.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of LabourWasim Ak
Normal labor is also termed spontaneous labor, defined as the natural physiological process through which the fetus, placenta, and membranes are expelled from the uterus through the birth canal at term (37 to 42 weeks
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp NetworkTechSoup
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...
ECI Summary
1. EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Brussels, xxx
SEC(2010) xxx
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
Outcome of the public consultation on the Green Paper on a European Citizens'
Initiative
Accompanying document to the
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
on the citizens’ initiative
EN EN
2. I. INTRODUCTION
One of the major innovations of the Treaty on European Union as amended by the Lisbon
Treaty, is to introduce the citizens' initiative. The Treaty provides that "not less than one
million citizens who are nationals of a significant number of Member States may take the
initiative of inviting the Commission, within the framework of its powers, to submit any
appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is
required for the purpose of implementing the Treaties"1.
The procedures and conditions for such a citizens' initiative need to be set out in a Regulation
of the European Parliament and of the Council to be adopted through the ordinary legislative
procedure on a proposal from the Commission2.
Given the importance of this new provision of the Treaty for citizens, civil society and
stakeholders across the EU, and considering the complexity of some of the issues to be
addressed, the Commission launched a broad public consultation with the adoption of a Green
Paper on 9 November 20093. The consultation ended on 31 January 2010. A public hearing
was also organised for all respondents to the Green Paper on 22 February 2010.
The consultation was structured around 10 key issues for which the Green Paper outlined the
possible options and possible advantages and disadvantages of these options. On that basis
respondents were invited to indicate whether they agreed with the Commission's initial
assessment and whether they had alternative proposals and suggestions.
The consultation elicited 329 replies from a broad range of stakeholders, including 160
individual citizens, 133 organisations and 36 public authorities. Many interesting and
innovative ideas and suggestions were put forward by stakeholders.
The responses broadly underlined the need for the procedures and conditions for the citizens'
initiative to be simple, user-friendly and accessible to all EU citizens and that they should be
proportionate to the nature of the citizens' initiative.
The responses also confirmed that a number of requirements are needed in order to ensure that
the instrument remains credible and is not abused and that these requirements should ensure
uniform conditions for supporting a citizens' initiative across the EU.
II. GENERAL COMMENTS
Most of the contributions highlight the fact that the citizens' initiative is an important step for
European democracy and the construction of a European public space. They consider that this
new instrument of participatory democracy could potentially be a good opportunity to bridge
the gap between the European Commission and EU citizens, encouraging a dialogue between
them and stimulating the feeling of a European identity.
1
Article 11, paragraph 4, of the Treaty on European Union.
2
Article 24 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
3
Green Paper on a European Citizens' Initiative, COM(2009) 622
EN 2 EN
3. Nevertheless, to fully take advantage of the opportunity offered by the citizens' initiative as
the first transnational instrument of participatory democracy, many respondents believe that
there should not be unnecessary obstacles which could make the use of the instrument too
difficult or even impossible. That is why, generally, the contributors call for simple
procedures accessible to all EU citizens; it should be easy to present and support an initiative.
Considering the difficulty in fixing thresholds and other requirements without any concrete
experience, several contributors, in particular among the organisations, are in favour of a
revision clause within the Regulation, which would give the possibility to make some changes
after a certain period of time (2 to 5 years).
III. OVERVIEW OF THE RESULTS OF THE CONSULTATION FOR THE 10 KEY ISSUES
RAISED BY THE GREEN PAPER
1. Minimum number of Member States from which citizens must come
Concerning the "significant number of Member States" required by the Treaty, many options
are proposed by the contributors, from 1 to 27 Member States. Among them, the proposal of
one third of the Member States enjoys considerable support among contributors. A number of
respondents, mainly amongst organisations, also support a lower threshold, primarily one
quarter of Member States.
2. Minimum number of signatures per Member State
Respondents, including individual citizens, organisations or public authorities, generally
favour a minimum number of citizens per Member State to ensure that a citizens' initiative is
genuinely representative of a Union interest. A number of respondents agree that a threshold
of 0.2% of the total population of each Member State could be a good approach although
many support a lower threshold (0.1% in particular). Nevertheless, several respondents argue
that there should not be this kind of threshold as it is not explicitly required by the Treaty.
A system of sliding scale is also proposed by some contributors, with different modalities. In
this kind of flexible system, if the minimum percentage is not reached in the minimum
number of States, it can be compensated by a higher number of participating Member States.
Finally, a number of respondents, notably amongst the smallest and largest Member States,
advocate a different approach to setting the threshold altogether, arguing that a set percentage
for all Member States is not equitable, since it is much easier, for instance, to collect
statements of support from 1.000 citizens (representing 0.2% of the population) in
Luxembourg than 160.000 in Germany, and therefore easier to count small Member States
than large ones.
3. Eligibility to support a citizens' initiative - minimum age
Respondents broadly support fixing a minimum age for supporting a citizens' initiative. Many
consider that it should be linked to the age to vote in the European Parliament elections. Some
respondents, however, consider that the minimum age should be the same in all the Member
States, either 16 or 18. A minimum age of 16 is proposed by a number of contributors,
principally citizens and organisations, in order to encourage the civic participation of the
younger generation and foster greater interest and debate among young people in European
issues. They argue that the citizens' initiative is not an election but only an agenda-setting
EN 3 EN
4. initiative, and that it could be a good way for young people to learn about citizenship and take
part in the political debate and the decision-making process.
4. Form and wording of a citizens' initiative
Respondents tend to agree that the promoters of an initiative should state the subject matter
and the objectives of their proposal in an unambiguous way. Thus, many respondents invite
the Commission to provide a template to be filled in by the organisers and requiring the
necessary information. A significant number of contributors suggest that organisers should be
required to provide the legal basis of the proposal. Many also think that there should be the
possibility to add a draft legal act but that it should not be mandatory as this kind of
requirement would prevent ordinary citizens from participating in the debate.
Moreover, many contributors think that the organisers should be offered neutral support and
guidance, including legal advice, in the preparation of initiatives. In addition some consider
that the translations of the initiative in all official languages of the Union should also be
provided. The respondents suggest different authorities to provide this support: the European
Commission, the European Parliament, the European Ombudsman, the Commission
representations in the Member States, the Europe Direct centres, and others.
5. Requirements for the collection, verification and authentication of signatures
Respondents broadly support the idea of a common set of procedural requirements for the
collection, verification and authentication of signatures so as to ensure a uniform process and
the same conditions across the EU and to preserve the European-wide nature of the citizens'
initiative. However, others think that priority should be given to national systems already
existing.
For many respondents, there should not be different procedures in the 27 Member States in
relation to the collection process, since it would make it too complicated for the organisers to
comply with the different requirements. Furthermore, many contributors insist on the fact that
the Member States should not be allowed to impose restrictions or requirements which would
make the collection process more difficult. They consider that there should not be any specific
restrictions placed on how statements of support are collected and they would like citizens of
the Union to be able to sign up to an initiative anywhere – for example in the street -
regardless of where they live or come from.
The possibility of online signatures is called for almost unanimously, being in line with the
development of an e-society and since it would greatly facilitate the collection of signatures.
Only a few contributors would prefer paper-based signatures, considering that online
signatures are not secure enough.
Those in favour of online collection of signatures propose different systems to ensure the
verification and authentication of the signatures and to avoid multiple signatures from one
person (CAPTCHA4, e-mail confirmation, IP address, password received by email after an
online registration which would allow the authentication of the person by means of the
personal data provided, etc.; identification by use of Passport Number, EU Driving License
Number, Voting Roll Number, ID Card number, etc.). The idea of a European citizen's
smartcard allowing e-signatures is proposed several times to solve this problem.
4
Challenge-response test used in computing to ensure that the response is not generated by a computer
EN 4 EN
5. 6. Time limit for the collection of signatures
Almost all contributors among individual citizens, organisations and public authorities think
that a time limit should be fixed for the collection of signatures. Most respondents agree that
one year would be a suitable time limit although there are also many respondents who favour
either a longer period (18 months) or a shorter one (6 months). Those in favour of a short
time-limit (less than one year) think that given the possibilities offered by Internet and the
media, it should be possible to mobilize people and collect one million signatures very
quickly. In contrast, those in favour of longer time-limits argue that a campaign in 27
countries requires a lot of time and resources.
7. Registration of proposed initiatives
Contributors generally favour a mandatory system of registration of proposed initiatives on a
specific website provided by the European Commission. This website should work as a tool
for communication and transparency, which would also help to bring the European
Commission closer to the citizens.
Others suggest that the site could be hosted by other authorities such as the European
Ombudsman, the European Parliament or the Court of Justice of the European Union.
8. Requirements for organisers - Transparency and funding
Respondents generally consider that organisers of an initiative should provide information on
the funding and support they have received to ensure that the citizens are fully aware of what
and who is involved. Some contributors think that only financial support exceeding a certain
amount should be declared to avoid overburdening the organisers.
Moreover, the provision of information on funding and support is often seen as a means to
ensure that initiatives are of a citizen-driven nature.
On the question of funding, some contributors, mainly among the organisations, are of the
opinion that the European Union should provide financial support to the organisers to keep
this instrument in the hands of citizens and to prevent it from being dependent on private
financing. For some of them, this could take the form of legal advice and / or assistance with
the translation of the initiative.
9. Examination of citizens' initiatives by the Commission
Contributors broadly favour a time limit for the examination of the initiative by the
Commission once the required number of signatures has been collected. Many agree that a 6-
month time limit would be appropriate although some also suggest a shorter period.
However, the consultation generated different views as regards the issue of assessing the
admissibility of proposed initiatives.
On the one hand, there is a tendency amongst respondents, in particular among organisations
and public authorities, to consider that the admissibility of a citizens' initiative should be
checked before signatures are collected, preferably at the moment of the registration and
within a fixed time limit. They believe that this would avoid a considerable waste of resources
as well as frustration among citizens having signed up to successful but ultimately
inadmissible initiatives. Some also favour this option in order to prevent the launching of
EN 5 EN
6. initiatives that would be contrary to the values of the Union or the Charter of Fundamental
Rights. There is also concern about public authorities having to make use of public resources
in order to carry out checks for initiatives that ultimately would not be admissible. Some have
pointed out that this would be particularly problematic for initiatives that would go against the
values of the Union and of the constitution of their Member State.
However, amongst those who support such an early admissibility check, there are different
views as to who should be responsible for carrying out such a check, some considering that it
should be the Commission and others favouring an independent body.
On the other hand, others are against an ex-ante admissibility check altogether in the name of
freedom of expression and considering that the debate created across Europe by an initiative
is more important than the immediate result. They do not think it would be appropriate for the
Commission to be able to prevent, from the outset, a public debate and campaign from taking
place on a citizens' initiative, even if it is not within the framework of its powers.
10. Initiatives on the same issue
As for the successive presentation of citizens' initiatives on the same issue, respondents
generally do not think it is necessary to regulate this issue.
EN 6 EN