Grasping the nettle: Ending Europe’s Trade in Execution and Torture Technology 29 Chapter 5 / Mechanisms to halt inappropriate exports, in urgent situations, of goods not listed in Annex II or III Like many trade control systems, EC Regulation 1236/2005 is list-based, containing categories of specifically named items whose international trade is either prohibited or controlled. Although listbased systems can provide clarity for exporters and importers, such control systems have inherent weaknesses - especially when intended to regulate evolving or new products. Weaknesses or limitations in list-based systems include: (a) Not controlling a range of harmful products (even though they fall within the intended scope of the agreement), because they are not specifically named on the control lists; (b) The delay experienced between the manufacture, transfer and use of a newly designed type of equipment, and the time then taken for it to be added to a control list; (c) The potential for suppliers to evade controls simply by re-naming or re-specifying their products and their uses. Amnesty International and Omega believe that these shortfalls should be addressed by two complimentary processes: (a) urgency procedures allowing the Commission to quickly amend Annexes; (b) targeted end-use control, allowing individual Member States to halt or suspend a specific transfer until a decision is made by the Commission. Commission power to amend the Annexes in urgent cases As part of its Proposals, the Commission has argued for the inclusion of an urgency procedure that could be applied for amendments of certain Annexes to the Regulation. The Commission considers that such a procedure would be appropriate where the lists of prohibited and controlled goods are amended, “Especially if new equipment or goods enter the market and it is imperative to apply the relevant measure immediately to prevent building of stocks during the period of two months (assuming it is not extended) that is allotted to the European Parliament and to the Council for expressing any objection they may have to the measure.”122 Consequently, the Commission Proposals under Article 12 state that, “Where, in the case of amendment of Annex II, III or IIIa, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 15b shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article.” 123 Article 15b states, “Delegated acts adopted under this Article shall enter into force without delay and shall apply as long as no objection is expressed in accordance with paragraph 2. The notification of a delegated act to the European Parliament and to the Council shall state the reasons for the use of the urgency procedure.”124 Amnesty International and Omega are supportive of these proposals as they seek to address a previous long-standing limitation in the Regulation to react speedily to developments in the international security markets, which we have highlighted in our reports and during the Expert Group process. We believe that this urgency procedure will complement the proposed targeted end use control mechanism outlined below. 122 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit., Section 3.4, implementation of delegated powers. 123 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit. , Article 12, paragraph 1. 124 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit. , Article 15b, paragraph 1. Index: EUR 01/1632/2015 Amnesty International May 2015