EUROPEAN
COMMISSION

Brussels, 3.6.2015
C(2015) 3773 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
on the European Citizens' Initiative "Stop Vivisection"ENEN

1. INTRODUCTION"Stop Vivisection" is the third European Citizens' Initiative submitted to the European Commission
on 3 March 2015. It was signed by 1.17 million citizens. The Initiative asks the Commission
to abrogate Directive 2010/63/EU1 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes
and put forward a new proposal aimed at phasing out the practice of animal experimentation,
making compulsory the use - in biomedical and toxicological research - of data directly
relevant for the human species2.
The Commission received the organisers on 11 May 2015 and, on the same day, the organiserspresented their initiative at a public hearing at the European Parliament, on both occasions providing
the Commission with clarifications on their request3.
This Communication sets out the Commission's legal and political conclusions, the actions it intends
to take and the reasons for taking these in line with Article 10(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011
on the Citizens' Initiative ("the Regulation")4.

2. ANIMAL WELFARE AND THE PROTECTION OF HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENTThe EU is committed to animal welfare and it aims to meet this objective while striving to also protect
human health and the environment. The EU shares the Citizens' Initiative's conviction that animal
testing should be phased out. This is the ultimate goal of EU legislation.
Animal welfare is embedded in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("the Treaty")
and covered by EU legislation. Article 13 of the Treaty5 requires that the welfare of animals must be
taken into account in the Union's policy on internal market, research, and agriculture among others.
Directive 2010/63/EU and the Cosmetics Regulation EC No 1223/20096 are among the world's mostadvanced pieces of legislation concerning animal welfare. Directive 2010/63/EU mandates theapplication of scientifically valid alternative approaches and establishes mechanisms to speed up theirdevelopment, validation and uptake. For cosmetics, the EU imposed a complete marketing ban on
cosmetics products and ingredients tested on animals. The Cosmetics Regulation acts as an accelerator
for the development of alternatives, with effects beyond the cosmetics sector. Furthermore, theEuropean Commission supports research into alternatives and promotes these approaches for meeting
regulatory requirements.
Despite significant progress in the development of alternative approaches, considerable scientificchallenges remain for the more complex endpoints in basic and applied research, pharmaceuticalproduct development and safety testing of substances. Where the toxicological or physiologicalprocesses and mechanisms are not sufficiently understood or are very complex, alternative solutions
are often not available. Thus, the complete replacement of animal studies is currently not possible
while needing to ensure a high level of protection of human and animal health and the environment.
The Citizens' Initiative "Stop Vivisection" comes at a time of transition. Technological advances
enable the processing of increasingly complex information coming from animal and non-animal
1

Directive 2010/63/EU OJ L276, 20.10.2010, p.33-79 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32010L0063
For the full text of the initiative please see: http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/initiatives/finalised/details/2012/000007
3
Annex I provides further information on the procedural aspects of this initiative.
4
Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 on the Citizens' Initiative;
O.J. L 65, 11.3.2011, p. 1. Official Register : http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/welcome
5
Article 13 of the Treaty http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT
6
Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic products http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32009R1223
2

2

research, which will allow to gradually fill the knowledge gaps currently hindering the full
replacement of animals. However, a premature ban of research using animals in the EU would likely
export the biomedical research and testing outside the EU to countries where welfare standards may belower and more animals may be needed to achieve the same scientific result.

Protecting human health and the environment
An important objective enshrined in the Treaty is for the EU to protect human health and theenvironment7. The EU strives to improve health and prevent diseases, e.g. by promoting research into
causes and diagnoses of disease as well as prevention measures such as vaccines and therapies. The
regulatory framework for inter alia health products (pharmaceuticals), chemicals (including pesticides,
biocides), and food and feed requires testing of products prior to marketing them to prove that they aresafe for humans, animals or the environment.
The EU Health Strategy 20208 and the 7th Environmental Action Programme (EAP)9 set out actions
needed to reach the Union's health and environment objectives. Whilst some of these actions imply theuse of animals, the 7th EAP also encourages the development of methods predicting toxicity without,or with reduced or refined use of animals. Whenever animal testing is performed it must follow thestringent high standards of the EU10.
The role of animal studies
Animal studies have historically been key to developing ways to prevent and reduce human andanimal diseases. They have contributed to improved health and quality of life as well as longer life
expectancy. Today, there are effective treatments for many infectious diseases, some forms of cancer,
and several chronic diseases such as diabetes. These advancements would have been impossible
without the insights gained in animal studies. Such studies are required by legislation to authorisehuman clinical trials, and to protect health and the environment. The same holds true for the predictionof medicine efficacy. In such cases, after generating as much information as possible from alternative
methods, animal studies are used to fill the knowledge gaps to safeguard human, animal andenvironmental health.
Furthermore, animal studies have provided invaluable insight into basic biological processes that
underpin health and disease of humans and animals. Animal models11 have also been used for theirpredictive value for pharmacology and toxicology12.
Animal models have their strengths and limitations, depending on the question to be addressed. For
instance, zebra fish have been an excellent model to study developmental processes of higherorganisms. Mice are a highly informative model for many human genetic diseases, e.g. for hearing,vision or bone disorders. However, the mouse is of limited use for studying Ebola or AIDS, for whichmore appropriate models exist.
In the last decade, technological advances have revolutionised biomedical research bringing new
possibilities to improve our knowledge, such as the capacity to sequence the genome of organisms,
computational tools to analyse biological processes and to simulate the complex mechanisms involved
7

Articles 168 and 191 of the Treaty http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT
http://ec.europa.eu/health/strategy/policy/index_en.htm
9
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/newprg/
10
Directive 2010/63/EU, OJ L276, 20.10.2010, p.33-79. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32010L0063
11
Model to study the biology, behaviour, spontaneous or induced diseases having common aspects with a phenomenon equivalent in humans
or other animal species.
12Special issue - 34 publications on the translational value of animal models in the European Journal of Pharmacology;
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014299915002678).
83

in health and disease. Innovative tools currently in development include human 3D-tissues andreconstituted mini organs. These major breakthroughs allow the development of alternatives based
mainly on cell or tissue cultures, as well as computational methods, thus reducing animal use.
Concerning the safety testing of chemicals, which accounts for less than 10% of animals used in theEU, alternatives are being implemented where the underlying biological mechanisms are wellunderstood – e.g. testing for local harmful effects on skin and eyes. However, more complex
toxicological effects cannot yet be adequately assessed by alternatives.

Phasing out animal testing
Directive 2010/63/EU
The Directive states that the final goal is a full phasing out of animal testing, but acknowledges thatanimal use is still necessary on the way to reaching this goal. Directive 2010/63/EU modernised andfurther harmonised rules on animal use across the EU in line with the most ambitious global standards
and hence greatly increased the welfare of animals in scientific research and testing.
The new rules firmly anchor in EU legislation the “Three Rs”13, the requirement to Replace, Reduce
and Refine the use of animals wherever possible. This means that animal studies should be either
replaced by methods not involving animals, or adapted to reduce the number of animals needed, or
refined so as to minimise pain, suffering or distress experienced by the animal, or to increase theirwelfare. If an alternative approach to achieve a research objective is available, the Directive makes its
use mandatory.
The Directive implements the Three Rs via a number of principles14 such as:
 Systematic project evaluation by a competent authority of any proposed use of live animals
that must take ethical considerations into account when weighing up potential harm to animals
against expected benefits of the project to humans, animals or environment.
 Specific requirements on education, training and competence of personnel were improved. All
staff dealing with animals must demonstrate a requisite competence.
 More detailed and comprehensive reporting 15 on animals used for scientific purposes.
 More robust and faster mechanisms for development, validation16 and uptake of alternative
approaches.
All Member States have fully completed the transposition into national law, and are now responsible
for enforcement. The Directive's effectiveness is scheduled to be evaluated in 2017.
The Directive legally established and broadened the mandate of the European Union Reference
Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EURL ECVAM)17 which is to coordinate and promote
the development and use of alternatives. Member States contribute to this crucial activity by law. A
network of national regulators was established to guide the validation of methods with the highest
13

Information on the Three Rs concept: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/3r/alternative_en.htm
Information on the Directive 2010/63 and its provisions: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/home_en.htm
15
Common format for submission of information pursuant to Directive 2010/63/EU http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02012D0707-20140115
16
Alternative methods' validation process: New test methods replacing an animal method need to be validated before they can be accepted
as meeting legal requirements for safety or efficacy testing of a chemical or a new medicine. This is to ensure that (1) the method cancorrectly predict relevant effects of concern, (2) results can be reproduced across laboratories and (3) the method is suitable for all types ofsubstances that should be tested with it. The validation process respects the principles established at international level by the Organisation of
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
17
EURL-ECVAM is part of the Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection (IHCP) of the European Commission,
located in Ispra, Italy.
14

4

regulatory relevance (PARERE-Network)18. Finally, Member States must nominate qualified
laboratories to support the validation work (EU-NETVAL)19, and must promote alternatives atnational level.
EU Research into alternative approaches
The EU Framework Programmes for Research and Innovation (FPs) aim to provide leading edge
science, removal of barriers to innovation and to make it easier for the public and private sectors todeliver innovation together. The EU FPs address major societal challenges and have greatly advanced
the development of alternatives.
More than €250 million was dedicated during FP7 (2007-2013) to research into alternatives. As part ofthis, six large projects for a total of €140 million have been co-financed as public-private partnerships
with either the cosmetics industry (through Cosmetics Europe) or the Innovative Medicines Initiative(IMI). IMI is the public-private partnership between the EC and the European Federation of
Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations working to improve health by developing innovative
medicines, particularly in areas where there is an unmet medical or social need.
Horizon 2020 (H2020), the current EU research and innovation programme (2014-2020), builds on
FP7 and provides funding to enhance human safety. Several H2020 research projects aiming at
developing and validating animal-free methods for safety assessment of chemicals, food contaminants
or nanomaterials have been or are in the process of being granted. The first calls for IMI2 proposals
include topics relevant to alternative testing, such as "the consistency approach to quality control in
vaccine manufacture", calling for a new approach to improve quality control of established human andveterinary vaccines using non-animal methods20.
Validation and practical support for promotion of alternatives to animal use
EURL-ECVAM publishes a series of strategies21 outlining holistic solutions to achieving replacement,
reduction and refinement of animal use while maintaining or improving human and environmental
protection. Such strategies exist for skin sensitisation, genotoxicity, acute systemic toxicity, aquatic
toxicity and bio-concentration / bioaccumulation testing, and one on toxico-kinetics soon to be
published. ECVAM also issues recommendations on validated test methods summarising theirperformance and possible use for regulatory and non-regulatory purposes. Prior to finalising these,
EURL ECVAM consults with regulators via PARERE, its stakeholder community via the EURLECVAM Stakeholder Forum (ESTAF) as well as validation bodies under the International
Collaboration on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM).
Since its establishment, EURL ECVAM has validated around 50 test methods in various toxicologicalareas for the testing of chemicals, biological products and vaccines. Most of these approaches
achieved regulatory acceptance (e.g. incorporated into the EU Test Method Regulation22) and havebeen adopted internationally (e.g. as OECD test guidelines). See also recent reports by EURLECVAM23 .

18

PARERE Network (Preliminary Assessment of REgulatory RElevance) under Article 47(5) of Directive 2010/63/EU
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/parere_en.htm
19
EU NETVAL: https://eurl-ecvam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eu-netval
20
http://www.imi.europa.eu/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/IMI2Call3/IMI2Call3_TopicTextWebFINAL.pdf
21https://eurl-ecvam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eurl-ecvam-strategy-papers
22
Regulation (EC) No 440/2008 laying down test methods pursuant to regulation (EC) no 1907/2006 (REACH) . OJ L142:1-739.
23
EURL ECVAM status report on the development, validation and regulatory acceptance of alternative methods and approaches (2013April 2014). JRC report EUR 26702 EN. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC90989
Alternative methods for regulatory toxicology – a state-of-the-art review. JRC report EUR 26797 EN.
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC91361

5

The Commission and sector regulatory agencies do complementary work to facilitate the process fromthe development of alternative methods to their validation and implementation. Some examples:The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) plays a key role in ensuring that data requirements
in EU chemicals regulations REACH and Biocides are met by alternatives where possible.
ECHA publishes materials (e.g. webinars, fact sheets, practical guides) promoting the use ofalternatives24. ECHA is also active on (1) the OECD QSAR (Quantitative Structure-Activity
Relationship) Toolbox, which is the most comprehensive, widely recognised platform forfilling data gaps in regulatory hazard assessment without animal testing; it now holds 1.5
million information items for 90 000 substances; (2) making publicly available data from
REACH registration dossiers.
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) contributes to the elimination of animal testing
through its role in developing harmonised regulatory requirements for the testing of humanand veterinary medicinal products, applicable at EU level and, through collaboration withmultinational organisations such as ICH25 and VICH26, at global level. To promote bestpractice in the implementation of the 3Rs, EMA set up an expert group to advise its
committees and working parties on the use of animals in regulatory testing of medicinal
products and actively cooperates with other groups working in the 3Rs area.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA27) through its Scientific Committee and Scientific
Panels is continuously reviewing new scientific approaches to contribute to the Three Rs
within EFSA’s activities28.

Moreover, the voluntary collaboration platform European Partnership for Alternative Approaches toAnimal Testing (EPAA) 29, launched in 2005, grouping the European Commission, European tradeassociations, and currently 36 companies from 7 industry sectors, aims for the replacement, reduction
and refinement of animal use for meeting regulatory requirements through better, more predictive
science. EPAA works towards identifying scientific gaps and facilitating regulatory acceptance ofalternative methods.
International cooperation
As industry works globally, Europe cannot act in isolation, but must find solutions at global level
through internationally harmonised approaches.
The Commission and EPAA are working together with OECD and other international organisations toachieve globally harmonised results. Alternatives to animal testing have been the focus of theInternational Collaboration on Cosmetics Regulation (ICCR), a cooperation forum between regulatory
authorities of the USA, Brazil, Canada, Japan and the EU30. The International Cooperation on
Alternative Test Methods (ICATM) including EURL ECVAM and the respective agencies of Japan,
US, South Korea, Canada, and Brazil, works together on the validation process, the development ofinternational guidance and guidelines, and the dissemination and promotion of alternative methods
worldwide.

24

http://echa.europa.eu/support/information-toolkit
ICH - International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
http://www.ich.org/home.html
26
VICH - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products.
http://www.vichsec.org/
27
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/animalwelfare.htm
28
EFSA Opinions:
EFSA Journal 2012;10(6):2767. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/it/efsajournal/doc/2767.pdf;
EFSA Journal (2009) 1052, 1-77. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2760.htm;
EFSA Journal (2005) 292, 1-46. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/292.pdf;
EFSA Journal 2014;12(4):36384 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/it/efsajournal/pub/3638.htm.
29
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/epaa/index_en.htm
30
http://www.iccrnet.org/
25

6

3. ASSESSMENT OF AND ACTIONS ON THE CITIZENS' INITIATIVE
Assessment
The Citizens' Initiative asks for the abrogation of Directive 2010/63/EU and for the adoption of a newlegislative framework that fully phases out animal experiments by 2020.
The organisers underline that "there are clear ethical objections of EU citizens to animal
experiments"31 and claim that "the animal model is not suitable to predict human responses and thatanimal testing hinders the development of new and more efficient methods in research […]".
The Commission shares the Citizens' Initiative's conviction that animal testing should be phased out.
This is the ultimate goal of EU legislation.
However, the Commission does not share the view that scientific principles invalidate the 'animalmodel'. Indeed, despite differences with humans, animal models have been the key scientific drivers todevelop almost all existing effective and safe medical treatments and prevention measures for humanand animal diseases32. In medicine development, animal models have been very effective in removing
candidate medicines that could have been dangerous to humans when tested in later clinical phases. In
areas of great biological complexity where existing alternatives do not yet provide sufficient predictive
power, animal models are still needed to decipher the complex biological mechanisms leading to an
observed effect or to provide the information needed to ensure that a product is safe.
The Commission is of the opinion that animal experimentation does not pose an obstacle todeveloping alternative research tools. The use of animals in research actually provides a mechanistic
understanding of the biology of animals and humans, which enables the development of more ethical,
cost-effective, predictive and faster alternative methods. The Commission recognises the limitations ofboth animal models and alternatives, and constantly follows up and supports new developments for
improved predictive methods. Today, the development processes for new medicines, basic researchand predictive safety testing of substances no longer rely exclusively on animal models. In all areas, aweight of evidence approach is followed that takes into account existing knowledge, resulting fromalternatives, animal tests and human exposures together. Most relevant pieces of EU legislation in thefield of testing make the use of reliable alternatives mandatory once they have been validated.
The continued need for Directive 2010/63/EU
The Directive is needed to ensure a high level of protection of the animals in accordance with Article
13 of the Treaty. Abrogating the Directive would not prevent the use of animals in experiments. It
would instead deregulate the way in which such experiments are carried out, make the animals
concerned more vulnerable and hinder the perspectives of developing alternatives.
A full implementation of Directive 2010/63/EU is paramount to increasing the welfare of animals stillused today. The Commission rigorously examines the correct and complete transposition of the
Directive into national legislation and will follow up through infringement procedures33 whereappropriate.
31

The organisers refer to a 2006 survey. The Commission notes that the 2006 report did not address ethical views on animal experiments. It
addressed whether more needs to be done to enhance welfare of animals still in use, which animals should be used, or which type of researchshould be allowed. In that survey a large majority of respondents supported additional measures to be taken at EU level to increase thewelfare of animals. The EU responded by improving the existing EU standards through the adoption of the 2010/63/EU Directive.
32
Examples of treatments developed thanks to animal research include anaesthetics, vaccines, penicillin, insulin, scanning techniques like CT
and MRI, asthma medication, organ transplants and various treatments to increase cancer and AIDS survival rates. More information at
http://eara.eu/home/.
33
http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringements-proceedings/index_en.htm

7

The Directive has not been in force long enough to draw conclusions on its effectiveness. The
Commission plans to review it in 2017 and will emphasize the availability of alternative approaches.
In addition, the Directive requires an implementation report in 2019. These reports will be the firstassessments of the extent to which the Directive is reaching its objectives.

Actions in relation to the ECIThe Commission will take the following actions to accelerate the development and uptake of nonanimal approaches in research and testing.
1. Accelerating progress in the Three Rs through knowledge sharing
Translating knowledge across disciplines and sectors accelerates progress in the Three Rs. Relevant
knowledge is wide-ranging and can include scientific understanding of fundamental biologicalprocesses, how to refine animal experiments to minimise potential pain and suffering, how to
optimally design non-animal approaches to tackle research questions or assess the safety of a
substance, or how to characterise and standardise novel models to ensure that they are fit-for-purpose.
A number of platforms and networks exist that contribute greatly to the advancement of the Three Rs,
some of which are facilitated by the Commission. However, the systematic sharing of information andknowledge could likely be further enhanced.
Action 1 - Building on existing activities of the Commission, relevant EU agencies and OECD, theCommission will analyse technologies, information sources and networks from all relevant sectors
with potential impact on the advancement of the Three Rs, and will present by end 2016 an assessmentof options to enhance knowledge sharing among all relevant parties. The assessment will consider how
to systematically accelerate knowledge exchange through communication, dissemination, educationand training.

2. Development, validation and implementation of new alternative approaches

Action 2 - The Commission will continue to support the development, validation and implementationof alternative approaches for regulatory and research use. This will include close cooperation between
the Commission, Member States and international organisations and be supported, as appropriate, by
EU programmes.

8

3. Enforcement of compliance with the Three Rs principle and alignment of relevant sector
legislation
In line with Directive 2010/63/EU, sector legislation and related guidance should reflect therequirement to use non-animal approaches as soon as they are validated and accepted for regulatory
purposes.
Action 3 – The Commission will actively monitor compliance with the Directive, in particular theThree Rs principle, and with the relevant obligations in sector legislation to use available alternatives.
The Commission will also actively monitor the correct enforcement by all Member States.
By end 2016, the Commission will examine regulatory requirements in the relevant sector legislation
mandating animal testing to assess if the legislative text enables an efficient up-take of available
alternative approaches and the Commission will ensure that future proposals for relevant sector
legislation will reflect the rules on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes.

4. Engaging in a dialogue with the scientific community

Action 4 – To facilitate an efficient dialogue, by end 2016 the Commission will organise a conference
engaging the scientific community and relevant stakeholders in a debate on how to exploit theadvances in science for the development of scientifically valid non-animal approaches and advancetowards the goal of phasing out animal testing.
On that occasion, the Commission will also report progress on actions 1, 2 and 3.

94. CONCLUSIONSIn reply to the European Citizens' Initiative "Stop Vivisection", the Commission concludes as follows:
The Commission welcomes the mobilisation of citizens in support of animal welfare. The Citizens'
Initiative has provided an opportunity to critically examine how the EU can reinforce its efforts inmoving from animal to non-animal based research and testing.
The Commission underlines that, for the time being, animal experimentation remains important forprotecting human and animal health, and for maintaining an intact environment. While working
towards the ultimate goal of full replacement of animals, Directive 2010/63/EU is an indispensable
tool at the EU level to protect those animals still required.
The Directive implements the Three Rs - to replace, reduce and refine animal use in Europe - and theCommission underlines the importance of continued efforts by all players, from Member States to theresearch community, to reach these goals.
At the same time, Directive 2010/63/EU is the catalyst for the development and uptake of alternative
approaches, which is in line with the request of this Initiative.
The Commission therefore does not intend to submit a proposal to repeal Directive 2010/63/EU and is
not intending to propose the adoption of a new legislative framework.
Fully recognising the need to further advance the scientific understanding before alternatives can be
developed for all areas where testing still occurs, the Commission will continue to promote thedevelopment and implementation of alternative approaches, encourage cooperation and knowledge
sharing across sectors, validate new methods and facilitate their regulatory approval. In addition, theCommission will actively monitor compliance with Directive 2010/63/EU in particular the Three Rs
principle. The Commission will stay in close dialogue with the scientific community at EU andinternational level to identify alternative test methods, and will organise a conference by end 2016 on
how to advance towards the goal of phasing out animal testing.
Finally, the Commission urges the Member States, acting within their competences, to take account of
the concerns raised in this initiative and to step up their efforts to fully implement and enforce
Directive 2010/63/EU, and to actively participate in the development of alternative approaches.
In accordance with article 10(2) of the Regulation, the Communication will be notified to theorganisers of the initiative as well as to the European Parliament and the Council and it will be madepublic.

10EUROPEAN
COMMISSION

Brussels, 3.6.2015
C(2015) 3773 final
ANNEX 1ANNEX
to theCOMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
on the European Citizen's Initiative 'Stop Vivisection'

EN

EN

ANNEX 1
PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE STOP VIVISECTION CITIZENS' INITIATIVE
In accordance with Article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 the present initiative wasregistered on 22 June 2012 and published in the Commission's online register.
The members of the citizens' committee registered with the Commission are residents of thefollowing Member States: the United Kingdom, Italy, Belgium, France, the Netherlands,
Spain and Sweden.
The initiative was registered in English. Then the organisers provided translations of the title,
subject-matter, and objectives of the initiative in all official EU languages.
In accordance with the Regulation on the Citizens' Initiative, the forms used by citizens togive their support to the initiative contained the title, subject-matter and objectives of theinitiative. The link to the Commission's online register (see above) was also available on theforms, allowing citizens who wished so to find more detailed information on the initiative, as
provided by the organisers in an Annex as part of their registration request. The organisers
provided the translation of this Annex in Italian. This Annex may not have been consulted by
all citizens who supported the initiative.
The formal 12-month collection period for the initiative ended on 22 June 2013. However,
the Commission has accepted statements in support of the initiative up until 1 November
2013, due to the difficulties that most organisers experienced as regards the setting-up of their
online collection systems during the start-up phase of the European Citizens' Initiative1. Afterthe verification of the collected statements of support by the relevant competent Member
States' authorities, the organisers submitted their initiative to the Commission on 3 March
2015, together with certificates issued by the 26 Member States' competent authorities andinformation on their sources of funding and support, in accordance with Article 9 of theRegulation.
The number of valid statements of support indicated in the certificates and information
provided by the Member States' competent authorities are reflected in the table below. Thesefigures take into account the additional collection period until 1 November 2013.

1

Member State

Number of signatories

Threshold to be counted among theminimum number of seven Member States

Austria

9 208

14 250Bulgaria

12 59813 500Cyprus533

4 500

Press release of 18/07/2012: http://ec.europa.eu/archives/commission_2010-2014/sefcovic/headlines/pressreleases/2012/07/2012_07_18_eci_en.htm

2

Czech Republic

4 075

16 500Denmark

4 610

9 750

Estonia

2 502

4 500

Finland

12 495

9 750

France61 81855 500Germany

164 304

74 250

Greece1 952

16 500Hungary

26 94816 500

Ireland

3 333

9 000

Italy

690 325

54 750Latvia

3 167

6 750

Lithuania

4 737

9 000

Luxembourg

1 291

4 500

Malta

1 662

4 500

Netherlands

9 909

19 500Poland38 82438 250Portugal

11 30516 500Romania

1 645

24 750Slovakia

12 055

9 750

Slovenia

19 507

6 000

Spain

47 19440 500Sweden

7 661

15 000

United Kingdom

19 47254 750Total

1 173 130

Threshold reached in 9 Member States3

In accordance with Article 10 of the Regulation, the Commission:- published on 3 March 2015 the relevant information in the register at:
http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/initiatives/finalised/details/2012/000007- received the organisers on 11 May 2015.
During the meeting at the Commission, the Commission was represented by Vice-President
Katainen and senior officials from the various services concerned.
On the same day in the afternoon, in accordance with Article 11 of the Regulation, organisers
were given the opportunity to present their initiative in a public hearing organised at theEuropean Parliament. On this occasion, for the first time, external experts have also been
invited to take the floor. The Commission was represented by Vice-President Katainen.

4