Grasping the nettle: Ending Europe’s Trade in Execution and Torture Technology 9 Committee recommended that, “The Government states whether it will close this loophole, and, if so, by what means and in what timescale.”18 On 5 May 2015, in his response to Amnesty International and Omega, the Chief Executive Officer of the Survitec Group stated that: “Every one of our global offices is required to vet a potential export order against a “world list” of countries and organisations subject to trading embargoes. This process further confirmed, before the order was agreed, that neither the Maldives nor the Maldives Police Force appeared on any wider international embargo list. “Although our system of ensuring export embargo compliance applies to any order, no matter how small, Survitec, as is usual with any global company, allows appropriate autonomy to its subsidiaries to handle, along pre-agreed guidelines, the management of contracts below a certain value, without reference to head office. The relatively low value of the contract allowed the order to be processed in Singapore and we can confirm that no one from Survitec in the UK was involved in the transaction. There was no element of brokering or other promotional activity from the UK falling within the scope of the UK trafficking and brokering rules. Whilst Survitec did not infringe any kind of export restriction in the sale of this type of merchandise to the Government of the Maldives, we subsequently considered the implications of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office’s statement on 31 October 2013 regarding the democratic process in the country. As a result we immediately suspended the sale of these products to the Maldives by any of our companies until further notice.”19 Commission proposals to strengthen the Regulation In its January 2014 Proposals, the Commission recognised the need to regulate brokering activities. It stated that, “Since the only use to which equipment or goods listed in Annex II can be put is forbidden, a prohibition on the provision of brokering services is a necessary and proportionate measure to protect public morals.” 20 Consequently, under Article 4a of its Proposals, the Commission recommended that, “A broker shall be prohibited from providing to any person, entity or body in a third country brokering services in relation to goods listed in Annex II, irrespective of the origin of such goods.”21 Furthermore Article 7a of the Proposals states: “A broker shall be prohibited from providing to any person, entity or body in a third country brokering services in relation to goods listed in Annex III, irrespective of the origin of such goods, if the broker knows or has grounds for suspecting that any part of a shipment of such goods is or may be intended to be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in a country that does not belong to the customs territory of the Union.”22 The Commission has also proposed a similar amendment under Article 7d which would extend such provisions to Annex IIIa goods.23 Amnesty International and Omega are supportive of these proposals as they seek to address a loophole we have repeatedly highlighted in our reports24 and during the Expert Group process. However, we are concerned that the effectiveness of these provisions will be limited due to the restricted definition of the brokering entities and the activities to be regulated by the Regulation. And consequently Amnesty International and Omega believe the Commission proposals should be strengthened accordingly. 18 UK Parliament, House of Commons, Committees on Arms Export Controls - First Report - Volume II - Memorandum Scrutiny of arms Exports and Arms Control, 14 July 2014, paragraph 68. 19 Email correspondence from CEO of Survitec Group to Amnesty International and Omega, 5 May 2015. 20 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit., Section 3.2.1. 21 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit., Article 4a, paragraph 1. 22 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit. Article 7a, paragraph 1. 23 European Commission Proposal (14 January 2014) op.cit. Article 7d, paragraph 1. 24 See for example: Amnesty International and Omega Research Foundation, From Words to Deeds: Making the EU ban on the trade in “tools of torture” a reality, Index: EUR 01/004/2010, April 2010. Index: EUR 01/1632/2015 Amnesty International May 2015