BETA


2013/2747(RSP) Resolution on wildlife crime

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead ENVI JORDAN Romana (icon: PPE PPE), POC Pavel (icon: S&D S&D), GERBRANDY Gerben-Jan (icon: ALDE ALDE), BÉLIER Sandrine (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), ROSBACH Anna (icon: ECR ECR)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 136-p5

Events

2014/01/15
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2014/01/15
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 647 votes to 14 with 10 abstentions a resolution on combating wildlife crime. The resolution was tabled by the EPP, S&D, ALDE, Greens/EFA, ECR, and GUE/NGL groups. It noted that wildlife crime, was a serious transnationally organised criminal business with an annual turnover of at least USD 19 billion , and was now the fourth largest illegal activity in the world, after drug trafficking, counterfeiting and human trafficking. Stressing that the EU was a major transit destination for illegal wildlife products such as ivory and live animals, and therefore in a privileged position to control this trade, Parliament urged the Commission to establish an EU plan of action against wildlife crime and trafficking , including clear deliverables and timelines. It remarked that the EU was both a significant market and a transit route for illegal wildlife trade with Europol estimating revenues generated by the trafficking of endangered species amounted to between EUR 18 billion and EUR 26 billion per annum, and with the EU being the foremost destination market in the world.

Action within the EU: Members expressed concern that organised crime groups found wildlife trafficking attractive because of the lack of law enforcement capacity and implementation, and because of high profits and weak penalties. They called on Member States to introduce moratoria on all commercial imports, exports and domestic sales and purchases of tusks and raw and worked ivory products until wild elephant populations were no longer threatened by poaching.

Parliament asked the Commission and Council to:

· support dedicated training for the complete enforcement chain under the relevant existing financial instruments;

· leverage their trade and development instruments to establish dedicated programmes to strengthen the implementation of CITES and provide resources for capacity-building against poaching and trafficking, in particular by supporting, strengthening and expanding enforcement initiatives such as ASEAN-WEN (ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network), HA-WEN (Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network), LATF (Lusaka Agreement Task Force), which aim to establish regional centres of expertise and provide models for cooperation against wildlife crime;

Member States were also asked to:

· join other CITES Parties in sending out a clear signal against wildlife trafficking and demand for illegal wildlife products by destroying their stockpiles of illegal ivory;

· provide for immediate confiscation of any seized specimens, in order to better implement CITES and protect the welfare of live animals;

· strengthen the judiciary in the EU so that wildlife criminals receive penalties which are commensurate with the seriousness of the crime. The Commission was asked to streamline harmonisation between Member States under Commission Recommendation No 2007/425/EC in order to avoid Member States with the lowest penalties being exploited as a preferred entry point;

· set appropriate levels of sanctions under Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, which harmonises the definitions for wildlife crime related offences throughout the Union;

· ensure that illicit trafficking of wild fauna and flora with the involvement of organised criminal groups was defined as a criminal offence punishable by up to four years of prison or more , so that the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime could be used as a basis for international cooperation and mutual legal assistance.

Parliament wanted to see a specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol, which would have full transnational powers as well as sufficient and skilled human resources and adequate funding, with a view to centralising information and analysis and coordinating investigations, the result being more joint investigations and a more coordinated strategic approach. Member States were asked to establish the National Environmental Security Task Force (NESTs) recommended by Interpol, and to engage in coordinated operations through the proposed specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol.

International action: Parliament called for the fight against wildlife crime to be included as a priority in the programming of the financial instruments for development aid , in both thematic and regional programming. It called on the Commission and Member States to do their utmost, at CITES and in bilateral dialogue with consumer countries , to ensure the closure of parallel legal markets, international and domestic, that were stimulating demand for species at significant risk such as elephants, rhinos and tigers.

It also urged:

· the establishment of a Trust Fund under Article 187 of the revised financial regulation, with the objective of safeguarding protected areas and combating wildlife trafficking and poaching, as part of an Action Plan against wildlife trafficking;

· strong support for the International Consortium on combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC), comprising CITES, Interpol, UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), the World Bank and the World Customs Organisation, including through provision of financial resources and specialist expertise;

· collaboration with African and Asian range states , to help those countries strengthen their policies and legal frameworks, increase law enforcement capacity, develop effective judicial systems and reinforce mechanisms to tackle corruption;

Lastly, Parliament called on the Commission to support the development of alternative livelihoods for local communitie s closest to the wildlife concerned and engage the communities in anti-poaching operations.

Documents
2014/01/15
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2014/01/13
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2014/01/09
   EP - Oral question/interpellation by Parliament
Documents
2014/01/08
   EP - Motion for a resolution
Documents
2013/11/07
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2013/09/04
   EP - JORDAN Romana (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2013/09/04
   EP - POC Pavel (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2013/09/04
   EP - GERBRANDY Gerben-Jan (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2013/09/04
   EP - BÉLIER Sandrine (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2013/09/04
   EP - ROSBACH Anna (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI

Documents

Votes

B7-0013/2014 - § 27 #

2014/01/15 Outcome: +: 540, -: 106, 0: 20
DE ES FR IT RO HU PL BE BG AT SK PT IE NL FI HR EL LT DK SI LU EE MT LV SE CZ CY GB
Total
91
50
53
49
28
22
45
20
18
17
13
21
12
24
12
12
19
11
12
7
6
6
6
9
18
18
5
61
icon: PPE PPE
232

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Czechia PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

2
icon: S&D S&D
172

Ireland S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Finland S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
77

Austria ALDE

1

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Greece ALDE

1

Lithuania ALDE

1
3

Slovenia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: NI NI
25

Spain NI

1

France NI

2

Italy NI

For (1)

1

Romania NI

1

Belgium NI

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1
5
icon: EFD EFD
27

France EFD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFD

Abstain (1)

3

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Greece EFD

2

Lithuania EFD

2

Denmark EFD

Abstain (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1
4

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

3

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
51

Italy ECR

Against (1)

2

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

B7-0013/2014 - § 30/1 #

2014/01/15 Outcome: +: 648, -: 18, 0: 4
DE FR IT ES PL GB RO HU PT BE CZ BG SE EL NL SK AT IE DK FI HR LT LV SI LU EE MT CY
Total
92
53
50
50
46
63
28
22
21
20
19
18
18
18
22
13
18
12
12
12
12
11
9
7
6
6
6
5
icon: PPE PPE
232

Czechia PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2
2
icon: S&D S&D
173

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
81

Greece ALDE

1

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Austria ALDE

1
3

Lithuania ALDE

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
51

Hungary ECR

For (1)

1

Belgium ECR

For (1)

1

Denmark ECR

For (1)

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

2

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
31

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

1

Greece GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Croatia GUE/NGL

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: EFD EFD
27

France EFD

Against (1)

1

Belgium EFD

For (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2
icon: NI NI
25

France NI

2

Italy NI

For (1)

1

Spain NI

1

Romania NI

1

Belgium NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

1
5

Ireland NI

For (1)

1

B7-0013/2014 - § 30/2 #

2014/01/15 Outcome: +: 347, -: 293, 0: 10
FR IT DE DK ES BE NL EL FI EE IE RO AT BG SK PT CZ CY MT LT HR SE LU SI LV GB HU PL
Total
50
48
90
12
47
19
23
19
12
6
11
27
17
17
13
21
17
5
5
11
12
19
5
6
8
61
22
46
icon: S&D S&D
162

Netherlands S&D

3

Finland S&D

2

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
76
3

Greece ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

1

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Greece GUE/NGL

3

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Croatia GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: NI NI
25

France NI

2

Italy NI

For (1)

1

Spain NI

1

Belgium NI

For (1)

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1

Romania NI

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
28

France EFD

Against (1)

1

Denmark EFD

1

Belgium EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

2

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

Against (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: ECR ECR
49

Italy ECR

Against (1)

2

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Hungary ECR

For (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
227

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Czechia PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

2

Malta PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

B7-0013/2014 - § 30/3 #

2014/01/15 Outcome: -: 334, +: 311, 0: 10
FR IT DK BE EE ES FI EL IE RO MT BG SK DE NL LT LU SI AT HR LV CZ CY SE HU PT GB PL
Total
49
49
12
17
6
47
12
19
12
28
6
17
13
92
24
11
5
7
17
12
9
19
5
18
22
20
61
45
icon: S&D S&D
164

Belgium S&D

2

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Ireland S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
78
3

Finland ALDE

Abstain (1)

3

Greece ALDE

1

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: NI NI
24

France NI

2

Italy NI

For (1)

1

Spain NI

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1

Romania NI

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1
5
icon: EFD EFD
27

France EFD

Against (1)

1

Denmark EFD

1

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Greece EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

3

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
52

Italy ECR

Against (1)

2

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
228

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Czechia PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

2

B7-0013/2014 - Résolution #

2014/01/15 Outcome: +: 647, -: 14, 0: 10
DE FR ES GB IT PL RO HU PT BE SE CZ EL NL BG AT SK IE DK FI HR LT LV SI EE MT LU CY
Total
92
55
50
63
49
45
28
21
21
20
19
19
19
24
17
18
13
12
12
12
12
11
9
7
6
6
5
5
icon: PPE PPE
230

Czechia PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3
2
icon: S&D S&D
173

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
81

Greece ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

1

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1
3

Lithuania ALDE

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
51

Hungary ECR

For (1)

1

Belgium ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Denmark ECR

For (1)

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

1

Greece GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Croatia GUE/NGL

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
27

France EFD

Against (1)

1

Belgium EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

2

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2
icon: NI NI
25

France NI

2

Spain NI

1

Italy NI

For (1)

1

Romania NI

1

Belgium NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Abstain (1)

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

events/0/docs
  • url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-7-2014-01-13-TOC_EN.html title: Debate in Parliament
committees/0/rapporteur/5
name
LIOTARD Kartika Tamara
date
2013-09-04T00:00:00
group
European United Left - Nordic Green Left
abbr
GUE/NGL
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE522.971
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AM-522971_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-7-2014-0013_EN.html
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-7-2014-0013_EN.html
events/0/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140113&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
events/2
date
2014-01-15T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0031_EN.html title: T7-0031/2014
summary
events/2
date
2014-01-15T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0031_EN.html title: T7-0031/2014
summary
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
rapporteur
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
date
rapporteur
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B7-2014-0013&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-7-2014-0013_EN.html
events/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0031
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0031_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2014-01-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140113&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2014-01-15T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=23955&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0031 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0031/2014 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Environment commissioner: POTOČNIK Janez
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
date
rapporteur
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
ENVI
date
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
rapporteur
docs
  • date: 2013-11-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE522.971 title: PE522.971 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2014-01-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B7-2014-0013&language=EN title: B7-0013/2014 type: Motion for a resolution body: EP
  • date: 2014-01-09T00:00:00 docs: title: B7-0529/2013 type: Oral question/interpellation by Parliament body: EP
events
  • date: 2014-01-13T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140113&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2014-01-15T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=23955&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2014-01-15T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0031 title: T7-0031/2014 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 647 votes to 14 with 10 abstentions a resolution on combating wildlife crime. The resolution was tabled by the EPP, S&D, ALDE, Greens/EFA, ECR, and GUE/NGL groups. It noted that wildlife crime, was a serious transnationally organised criminal business with an annual turnover of at least USD 19 billion , and was now the fourth largest illegal activity in the world, after drug trafficking, counterfeiting and human trafficking. Stressing that the EU was a major transit destination for illegal wildlife products such as ivory and live animals, and therefore in a privileged position to control this trade, Parliament urged the Commission to establish an EU plan of action against wildlife crime and trafficking , including clear deliverables and timelines. It remarked that the EU was both a significant market and a transit route for illegal wildlife trade with Europol estimating revenues generated by the trafficking of endangered species amounted to between EUR 18 billion and EUR 26 billion per annum, and with the EU being the foremost destination market in the world. Action within the EU: Members expressed concern that organised crime groups found wildlife trafficking attractive because of the lack of law enforcement capacity and implementation, and because of high profits and weak penalties. They called on Member States to introduce moratoria on all commercial imports, exports and domestic sales and purchases of tusks and raw and worked ivory products until wild elephant populations were no longer threatened by poaching. Parliament asked the Commission and Council to: · support dedicated training for the complete enforcement chain under the relevant existing financial instruments; · leverage their trade and development instruments to establish dedicated programmes to strengthen the implementation of CITES and provide resources for capacity-building against poaching and trafficking, in particular by supporting, strengthening and expanding enforcement initiatives such as ASEAN-WEN (ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network), HA-WEN (Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network), LATF (Lusaka Agreement Task Force), which aim to establish regional centres of expertise and provide models for cooperation against wildlife crime; Member States were also asked to: · join other CITES Parties in sending out a clear signal against wildlife trafficking and demand for illegal wildlife products by destroying their stockpiles of illegal ivory; · provide for immediate confiscation of any seized specimens, in order to better implement CITES and protect the welfare of live animals; · strengthen the judiciary in the EU so that wildlife criminals receive penalties which are commensurate with the seriousness of the crime. The Commission was asked to streamline harmonisation between Member States under Commission Recommendation No 2007/425/EC in order to avoid Member States with the lowest penalties being exploited as a preferred entry point; · set appropriate levels of sanctions under Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, which harmonises the definitions for wildlife crime related offences throughout the Union; · ensure that illicit trafficking of wild fauna and flora with the involvement of organised criminal groups was defined as a criminal offence punishable by up to four years of prison or more , so that the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime could be used as a basis for international cooperation and mutual legal assistance. Parliament wanted to see a specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol, which would have full transnational powers as well as sufficient and skilled human resources and adequate funding, with a view to centralising information and analysis and coordinating investigations, the result being more joint investigations and a more coordinated strategic approach. Member States were asked to establish the National Environmental Security Task Force (NESTs) recommended by Interpol, and to engage in coordinated operations through the proposed specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol. International action: Parliament called for the fight against wildlife crime to be included as a priority in the programming of the financial instruments for development aid , in both thematic and regional programming. It called on the Commission and Member States to do their utmost, at CITES and in bilateral dialogue with consumer countries , to ensure the closure of parallel legal markets, international and domestic, that were stimulating demand for species at significant risk such as elephants, rhinos and tigers. It also urged: · the establishment of a Trust Fund under Article 187 of the revised financial regulation, with the objective of safeguarding protected areas and combating wildlife trafficking and poaching, as part of an Action Plan against wildlife trafficking; · strong support for the International Consortium on combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC), comprising CITES, Interpol, UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), the World Bank and the World Customs Organisation, including through provision of financial resources and specialist expertise; · collaboration with African and Asian range states , to help those countries strengthen their policies and legal frameworks, increase law enforcement capacity, develop effective judicial systems and reinforce mechanisms to tackle corruption; Lastly, Parliament called on the Commission to support the development of alternative livelihoods for local communitie s closest to the wildlife concerned and engage the communities in anti-poaching operations.
  • date: 2014-01-15T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/environment/ title: Environment commissioner: POTOČNIK Janez
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
ENVI/7/13428
New
  • ENVI/7/13428
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 136-p5
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 128-p5
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.70.01 Protection of natural resources: fauna, flora, nature, wildlife, countryside; biodiversity
  • 7.30.30 Action to combat crime
New
3.70.01
Protection of natural resources: fauna, flora, nature, wildlife, countryside; biodiversity
7.30.30
Action to combat crime
procedure/subtype
Old
Debate or resolution on oral questions
New
Debate or resolution on oral question/interpellation
procedure/subject/1
7.30.30 Action to combat crime
activities/0
date
2013-11-07T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE522.971 type: Amendments tabled in committee title: PE522.971
body
EP
type
Amendments tabled in committee
activities/1
date
2014-01-08T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B7-2014-0013&language=EN type: Motion for a resolution title: B7-0013/2014
body
EP
type
Motion for a resolution
activities/1/docs/0
url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=23955&l=en
type
Results of vote in Parliament
title
Results of vote in Parliament
activities/1/docs/1/text
  • The European Parliament adopted by 647 votes to 14 with 10 abstentions a resolution on combating wildlife crime.  The resolution was tabled by the EPP, S&D, ALDE, Greens/EFA, ECR, and GUE/NGL groups. It noted that wildlife crime, was a serious transnationally organised criminal business with an annual turnover of at least USD 19 billion, and was now the fourth largest illegal activity in the world, after drug trafficking, counterfeiting and human trafficking. Stressing that the EU was a major transit destination for illegal wildlife products such as ivory and live animals, and therefore in a privileged position to control this trade, Parliament urged the Commission to establish an EU plan of action against wildlife crime and trafficking, including clear deliverables and timelines. It remarked that the EU was both a significant market and a transit route for illegal wildlife trade with Europol estimating revenues generated by the trafficking of endangered species amounted to between EUR 18 billion and EUR 26 billion per annum, and with the EU being the foremost destination market in the world.

    Action within the EU: Members expressed concern that organised crime groups found wildlife trafficking attractive because of the lack of law enforcement capacity and implementation, and because of high profits and weak penalties. They called on Member States to introduce moratoria on all commercial imports, exports and domestic sales and purchases of tusks and raw and worked ivory products until wild elephant populations were no longer threatened by poaching.

    Parliament asked the Commission and Council to:

    ·        support dedicated training for the complete enforcement chain under the relevant existing financial instruments;

    ·        leverage their trade and development instruments to establish dedicated programmes to strengthen the implementation of CITES and provide resources for capacity-building against poaching and trafficking, in particular by supporting, strengthening and expanding enforcement initiatives such as ASEAN-WEN (ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network), HA-WEN (Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network), LATF (Lusaka Agreement Task Force), which aim to establish regional centres of expertise and provide models for cooperation against wildlife crime;

    Member States were also asked to:

    ·        join other CITES Parties in sending out a clear signal against wildlife trafficking and demand for illegal wildlife products by destroying their stockpiles of illegal ivory;

    ·        provide for immediate confiscation of any seized specimens, in order to better implement CITES and protect the welfare of live animals;

    ·        strengthen the judiciary in the EU so that wildlife criminals receive penalties which are commensurate with the seriousness of the crime. The Commission was asked to streamline harmonisation between Member States under Commission Recommendation No 2007/425/EC in order to avoid Member States with the lowest penalties being exploited as a preferred entry point;

    ·        set appropriate levels of sanctions under Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, which harmonises the definitions for wildlife crime related offences throughout the Union;

    ·        ensure that illicit trafficking of wild fauna and flora with the involvement of organised criminal groups was defined as a criminal offence punishable by up to four years of prison or more, so that the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime could be used as a basis for international cooperation and mutual legal assistance.

    Parliament wanted to see a specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol, which would have full transnational powers as well as sufficient and skilled human resources and adequate funding, with a view to centralising information and analysis and coordinating investigations, the result being more joint investigations and a more coordinated strategic approach. Member States were asked to establish the National Environmental Security Task Force (NESTs) recommended by Interpol, and to engage in coordinated operations through the proposed specialised Wildlife Crime Unit within Europol.

    International action: Parliament called for the fight against wildlife crime to be included as a priority in the programming of the financial instruments for development aid, in both thematic and regional programming. It called on the Commission and Member States to do their utmost, at CITES and in bilateral dialogue with consumer countries, to ensure the closure of parallel legal markets, international and domestic, that were stimulating demand for species at significant risk such as elephants, rhinos and tigers.

    It also urged:

    ·        the establishment of a Trust Fund under Article 187 of the revised financial regulation, with the objective of safeguarding protected areas and combating wildlife trafficking and poaching, as part of an Action Plan against wildlife trafficking;

    ·        strong support for the International Consortium on combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC), comprising CITES, Interpol, UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), the World Bank and the World Customs Organisation, including through provision of financial resources and specialist expertise;

    ·        collaboration with African and Asian range states, to help those countries strengthen their policies and legal frameworks, increase law enforcement capacity, develop effective judicial systems and reinforce mechanisms to tackle corruption;

    Lastly, Parliament called on the Commission to support the development of alternative livelihoods for local communities closest to the wildlife concerned and engage the communities in anti-poaching operations.

activities/1/docs/1/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0031
activities/1/type
Old
Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
New
Results of vote in Parliament
activities/2
date
2014-01-09T00:00:00
docs
type: Oral question by Parliament title: B7-0529/2013
body
EP
type
Oral question by Parliament
committees/0/rapporteur/0/group
Old
EPP
New
PPE
committees/0/rapporteur/1/mepref
Old
4de187b00fb8127435bdc22b
New
4f1ada78b819f207b3000072
committees/0/rapporteur/2/mepref
Old
4de185240fb8127435bdbe92
New
4f1ac83bb819f25efd0000d5
committees/0/rapporteur/3/mepref
Old
4de183770fb8127435bdbc20
New
4f1ac646b819f25efd00002e
committees/0/rapporteur/4/mepref
Old
4de188070fb8127435bdc2a3
New
4f1adadcb819f207b3000095
committees/0/rapporteur/5/mepref
Old
4de186580fb8127435bdc044
New
4f1ad263b819f27595000020
procedure/legal_basis/0
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 115-p5
New
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 128-p5
activities/4/docs
  • type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0031/2014
activities/4/type
Old
Vote in plenary scheduled
New
Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
New
Procedure completed
procedure/title
Old
Wildlife crime
New
Resolution on wildlife crime
activities/1
date
2014-01-08T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B7-2014-0013&language=EN type: Motion for a resolution title: B7-0013/2014
body
EP
type
Motion for a resolution
activities/2
date
2014-01-09T00:00:00
docs
type: Oral question by Parliament title: B7-0529/2013
body
EP
type
Oral question by Parliament
activities/3/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140113&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
activities/3/type
Old
Debate in plenary scheduled
New
Debate in Parliament
activities/1/date
Old
2014-01-14T00:00:00
New
2014-01-13T00:00:00
activities/1/date
Old
2014-01-16T00:00:00
New
2014-01-14T00:00:00
activities/1/type
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
New
Debate in plenary scheduled
activities/2
date
2014-01-15T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Vote in plenary scheduled
activities/0/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE522.971
activities
  • date: 2013-11-07T00:00:00 docs: type: Amendments tabled in committee title: PE522.971 body: EP type: Amendments tabled in committee
  • date: 2014-01-16T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
committees
  • body: EP responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2013-09-04T00:00:00 2013-09-04T00:00:00 2013-09-04T00:00:00 2013-09-04T00:00:00 2013-09-04T00:00:00 2013-09-04T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: EPP name: JORDAN Romana group: S&D name: POC Pavel group: ALDE name: GERBRANDY Gerben-Jan group: Verts/ALE name: BÉLIER Sandrine group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: LIOTARD Kartika Tamara
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/environment/ title: Environment commissioner: POTOČNIK Janez
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
ENVI/7/13428
reference
2013/2747(RSP)
title
Wildlife crime
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 115-p5
stage_reached
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
subtype
Debate or resolution on oral questions
type
RSP - Resolutions on topical subjects
subject
3.70.01 Protection of natural resources: fauna, flora, nature, wildlife, countryside; biodiversity