| s-602
| With a view to ensuring the clear structure in the fight against currency counterfeiting as well as close cooperation and efficient flow of information National Central Offices (NCO) were established in all Member States. |
| s-603
| Databases and communication systems are operating in the ECB and Europol. |
| s-604
| Dedicated bodies were created for the technical analysis of counterfeits in the Member States, the ECB - for banknotes, and the Commission - for coins. |
| s-605
| The Pericles programme is playing a significant role in achieving the present results in the protection of the euro and the fight against the crime of counterfeiting, through the exchange of information and the development of cooperation. |
| s-606
| Continuing vigilance is needed in order to maintain and build on the results currently achieved in the fight against euro counterfeiting. |
| s-607
| Training and technical assistance plays an important role in this respect, hence the need to continue the Pericles programme. |
| s-608
| In line with Article 13 of the Pericles Decision, the evaluation of the Pericles programme was assigned to the independent auditor of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) who submitted the evaluation report on 30 November 2004. |
| s-609
| The evaluator examined the files of 21 of the Pericles actions carried out until March 2004, on Member State or Commission initiative. |
| s-610
| Based on questionnaires to organisers and participants, as well as discussions with stake holders, he reached the following main conclusions [6]: |
| s-611
| - The programme has improved awareness of the Community dimension of the euro and has also developed a greater understanding amongst the participants of the related laws and instruments and in particular of the relevant Community and broader European law. |
| s-612
| - With regard to the range of information exchanges and methodologies/measures, most have been presented in the various workshops, meetings and seminars. |
| s-613
| - The target groups for the programme have been reached in part with a very high participation by law enforcement officials; |
| s-614
| attendance by commercial banking sector, specialist lawyers or chambers of commerce was not sufficient. |
| s-615
| - The activities examined were considered relevant to and among the main objectives of the programme. |
| s-616
| - In terms of costs, the evaluator found that some of the projects were particularly costly and highlighted specific cost items. |
| s-617
| The evaluator made the following main recommendations: |
| s-618
| A second evaluation should take place after four years. |
| s-619
| - The programme should continue to be available to all Member States but a priority should be given (in the first instance) to those with low participation or who did not organise actions in the first programme, as well as the new Member States. |
| s-620
| - Emphasis should be put on practical training. |
| s-621
| There should be a prioritisation in favour of staff exchanges and specific training, including case studies. |
| s-622
| These activities are also more cost efficient. |
| s-623
| - Co-operation between the European institutions/bodies (Commission/OLAF, ECB and Europol) should be further developed so as to eliminate any overlapping between different programmes and to further improve the co-ordination of the main actors (law enforcement, banks, prosecutors) in the fight against euro counterfeiting. |
| s-624
| - With regard to the effect of the programme on the convergence of high level training for trainers, it was not possible to make an assessment as there was not sufficient information on the link between national strategies and the activities under Pericles. |
| s-625
| - With a view to enabling the assessment of the effect of the programme, among others on the convergence of high level training for trainers, the evaluator recommends the preparation of a strategy document, to be finalised before the new Pericles enters into effect. |
| s-626
| The implementation of the Programme made a slow start, mainly due to its adoption in December 2001. |
| s-627
| Thus, the first project under Pericles was only carried out in October 2002 and the amount committed in 2002 was just under 40% of the initial budget allocation (the allocation was reviewed downwards in the course of the year). |
| s-628
| Subsequently, the programme took off and the budget allocation was completely committed in 2003 and 2004. |
| s-629
| Intentions for 2005 show that the remaining amount will also be completely consumed. |
| s-630
| Based on these statistics/forecasts, the overall level of commitments during the period 2002-2005 will reach 80% of the initial reference amount. |
| s-631
| The main aggregates in the implementation of Pericles are shown on Table 2. |
| s-632
| In the course of the first three years of the programme 38 projects were initiated; |
| s-633
| for 2005 another 18 actions are intended by the Member States and the Commission. |
| s-634
| Of the total 56 projects, 41 originate at the competent authorities of Member States, while 15 are an initiative of the Commission/OLAF. |
| s-635
| Most of the actions carried out are conferences, seminars and workshops, as well as specialised training courses. |
| s-636
| Staff exchange has, nonetheless, gained ground and has now become a standard feature of Pericles. |
| s-637
| Following enlargement, this type of activity is likely to develop further, which is also in line with the recommendation of the Pericles evaluator. |
| s-638
| Only one technical study was undertaken under the current Pericles, which is planned to continue at a broader level in 2005. |
| s-639
| The analysis of Pericles by type of project is shown in Table 3. |
| s-640
| Almost 2600 persons participated in these events. |
| s-641
| In earlier periods the large majority of participants were law enforcement agents, reflecting the priority to establish closer professional ties for a more efficient fight against euro counterfeiting. |
| s-642
| In that respect, the evaluation report (p. 10 and 11) shows that, until March 2004, 65% of participants were mainly from law enforcement agencies. |
| s-643
| As of 2003, a greater involvement of judiciary authorities is observed, while as of 2004 and 2005, there is a more pronounced participation of the financial sector (public sector financial intermediaries, National Central Banks, commercial banking and other financial institutions). |
| s-644
| This development is in line with the recommendation of the evaluator, while the organisation of more technical seminars is also being promoted. |
| s-645
| In terms of origin of the participants, the evaluation report notes that these came from 76 countries, with a majority from Member States. |
| s-646
| It was noted that some countries showed a low level of participation, among them some of the euro area countries. |
| s-647
| This situation may reflect organisational rather than structural situations and an effort to balance it is currently under way. |
| s-648
| Some countries are more active in organising events, with Italy representing over 21% of the total number of activities. |
| s-649
| As of 2005, the new Member States became active in organising Pericles actions. |
| s-650
| As the evaluation report also mentions (p. 14) that the organisation of Pericles actions covered all the areas relevant to the protection of the euro: |
| s-651
| law enforcement, judicial, financial and technical and promoted particularly the creation of networks useful for achieving greater efficiency in the fight against the crime of counterfeiting. |
| s-652
| Contributions at the Pericles actions are ensured by the ECB, the Commission, Europol and, in some cases, Eurojust, Interpol and the US Secret Service. |
| s-653
| With regard to the aspects of euro protection, where the responsibility belongs to the Member States, expertise was systematically sought in their specialised services. |
| s-654
| The Pericles actions take place mostly inside the EU. |
| s-655
| However, a number of actions have been organised in third or candidate countries, reflecting the specific needs to protect the euro. |
| s-656
| Such is the case with actions undertaken in Colombia, for all South American countries and Bulgaria, also including other South-Eastern European countries. |
| s-657
| As a result, the transnationality and multidisciplinarity required under Article 3 of the Pericles Decision have been respected, with the latter pursued both at the level of professional background of the participants and in terms of the content of the actions. |
| s-658
| In line with Article 5 of the Pericles Decision, the programme is implemented and coordinated by the Commission and the Member States working closely together. |
| s-659
| The coordination of the Pericles and other training actions is carried out at the Commission’s Euro counterfeiting experts group, which brings together experts from all member states and candidate countries, with participation of Europol, the ECB and Interpol. |
| s-660
| This is in also line with Recital (7) of the Pericles Decision. |
| s-661
| Pericles has now practically centralised Community level carried out by the Commission and Member States action with respect to the protection of the euro and has also largely replaced the Commission’s specific ‘ Protection of the euro ’ budget line. |
| s-662
| A small number of actions geared on the protection against currency counterfeiting are carried out under other Community programmes, such as TAIEX and Twinning. |
| s-663
| Such actions are mainly single-country or single-subject actions (i.e. not eligible under Pericles) and are systematically coordinated with Pericles by the competent service in the Commission in coordination with Member States. |
| s-664
| In addition to their awareness and training content, the Pericles actions have led to a number of structural and other improvements in Member Sates and in third countries. |
| s-665
| Among others, National Central Offices for the fight against counterfeiting were created in several countries; |
| s-666
| two Pericles seminars assisted the (then) acceding countries in their efforts to apply the acquis in the specific area; |
| s-667
| a code of conduct was drawn with respect to press and communication issues; |
| s-668
| In line with the above analysis and in the light of the conclusions of the evaluator of Pericles, this Communication is accompanied by a proposal for the adaptation and continuation of Pericles. |
| s-669
| In line with Article 13 of Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the ‘ Pericles’ programme) and based on the Pericles evaluation report of 30 November 2004, it is proposed that the Council decision be extended and amended. |
| s-670
| The proposed period for extension is six years and the reference amount unchanged at one million euro per year. |
| s-671
| The adaptations proposed concern the increase of the proportion of co-financing by the Community budget; |
| s-672
| the introduction of flexibility in the number of applications by each Member State and consequent coordination; |
| s-673
| and the extension of the content of the technical and operational back-up to administrative support for active investigations, with intermediation by Europol. |
| s-674
| In line also with the recommendation of the evaluator of Pericles, it is appropriate to extend the Pericles programme, based on the need to: |
| s-675
| - continue vigilance in order to maintain or reduce the current level of euro banknote counterfeiting and avoid any increase in euro coin counterfeiting that would undermine the confidence of the public; |
| s-676
| - train/inform new staff and extend the training to sectors that have less benefited from the Pericles programme, namely financial agents, prosecutors and technical staff; |
| s-677
| - train relevant staff in the features of the new generation of the euro banknotes, to be issued at the end of this decade; |
| s-678
| - particularly insist on training and technical assistance in the new Member States, with priority to those who will first introduce the euro as their single currency. |
| s-679
| Universal Declaration of Human Rights. |
| s-680
| Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217A (III) of 10 December 1948. |
| s-681
| PREAMBLE. |
| s-682
| Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people; |
| s-683
| Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law; |
| s-684
| Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations; |
| s-685
| Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom; |
| s-686
| Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms; |
| s-687
| Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge; |
| s-688
| Now, therefore, The General Assembly Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. |
| s-689
| Article 1. |
| s-690
| All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. |
| s-691
| They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. |
| s-692
| Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. |
| s-693
| Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. |
| s-694
| Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person. |
| s-695
| No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; |
| s-696
| slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. |
| s-697
| No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. |
| s-698
| Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. |
| s-699
| All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. |
| s-700
| All are entitled to equal protection against all types of discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to any form of discrimination. |
| s-701
| Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. |