# EUR-Lex - 52011PC0759 - EN

*|*

# 52011PC0759

**Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing for the period 2014 to 2020 the Justice Programme /* COM/2011/0759 final - 2011/0369 (COD) */**

			*

			*

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

As confirmed by
the Stockholm Programme, the development of an area of freedom, security and
justice remains a priority for the European Union. Although significant
progress has already been achieved in this field, judicial cooperation in civil
and criminal matters is still insufficient. In the post-Lisbon era and after
the abolition of the third pillar the area of justice develops dynamically in
order to respond to all challenges. Legislative and policy measures as well as
their coherent implementation are key tools. Funding can contribute to the
development of this area through supporting legislation and policy-making and
promoting their implementation.

In accordance with the Communication on the
EU Budget Review[1],
a fresh look was taken at the existing funding instruments and delivery
mechanisms to ensure clear focus on European added value and to cater for
rationalisation and simplification of the funding mechanisms. In ‘A Budget for
Europe 2020’[2],
the Commission identified the need for a simpler and more transparent budget to
overcome the problems that arise from the complexity of programme structures
and the existence of multiple programmes. The area of justice was mentioned as
an example of the existing fragmentation, where action should be taken.

Within this framework and aiming at
simplification and rationalisation, the Justice programme is the successor of
three current programmes:

- Civil Justice (JCIV),

- Criminal Justice (JPEN),

- Drug Prevention and Information Programme
(DPIP).

Whereas DPIP was based on a public health
legal basis and therefore covered health considerations, notably the reduction
of health harms associated with drug use, the Justice programme approaches
anti-drugs policy via the angle of crime prevention. Illicit drug trafficking,
which is one of the areas of crime where the European legislator may adopt
minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions on
the basis of Article 83 TFEU, and other illegal activities related to drugs
will be the main focus of drug-related funding under the new programme.

The merge of these programmes, all based on
provisions in Part III, Title V of the TFEU, will allow for a comprehensive
funding approach in this area and for a more efficient allocation of funds for
horizontal issues, such as training.

The general objective of this proposal is
to contribute to the creation of a genuine area of justice through promoting
judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters. To achieve this general
objective, the proposal aims to promote effective, comprehensive and consistent
application of Union legislation in the areas of judicial cooperation in civil
and criminal matters, to fostering access to justice and to prevent and reduce drug
demand and supply.

This can be
achieved by supporting training and awareness-raising, strengthening networks
and facilitating transnational cooperation. Moreover, the European Union needs
to equip itself with a sound analytical basis to support policy-making and
legislation in the area of justice.

2.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE
INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

2.1.        Consultation with the
interested parties

A public stakeholder consultation on future
funding activities in the area of Justice, Fundamental Rights and Equality for
the period after 2013[3]
was launched on 20 April 2011. It was available online for two months and was
open to all interested stakeholders and individuals. 187 respondents – with an
important part of NGOs - from most Member States submitted their contribution.

The respondents evaluated positively the
policy objectives of the programmes and confirmed the need for funding in the
areas covered. The European added value was acknowledged and no area was
identified where funding should be discontinued. The need for simplification
and improvement was acknowledged and most of the proposed measures received a
positive response, including the reduction of the number of programmes and the
simplification of procedures.

The stakeholders were in favour of funding
activities such as exchange of good practices, training of professionals,
information and awareness raising activities, support to networks, studies,
etc. All types of activities which met with approval by the respondents are
foreseen explicitly in Article 6 of the proposal. The respondents were in
agreement with the Commission's proposals concerning the actors appropriate to
receive funding and the types of funding mechanisms that could be used.

2.2.        Impact Assessment

One impact assessment was carried out
concerning the future funding activities for the whole area of justice, rights
and equality, which currently comprises six programmes[4]. This impact assessment is
relevant for both the proposal on the Justice Programme, as well as the
proposal on the Rights and Citizenship Programme. The impact assessment builds
on the interim evaluations of the current programmes[5], which confirmed the overall
effectiveness and efficiency of the programmes, but they also identified some
shortcomings and room for improvement. The impact assessment has considered
three options:

Option A: to maintain six programmes and to
address some of the identified problems through changes in the internal
management of the programmes. Improving management and fostering strong
synergies between the programmes would address some of the issues. However, the
main cause of the problems, i.e. the multitude of programmes would not be
directly addressed and consequently the improvements to be achieved by this option
would be limited.

Option B: to
maintain all measures of option A and additionally to merge the current six programmes into two programmes. This option would
allow for flexibility in the use of funds and in addressing annual policy
priorities. It would achieve increased simplification (both for the
beneficiaries and the administration) and efficiency of the programmes, since
significantly fewer procedures would be needed. The effectiveness of the
programmes would also be improved as the fragmentation and dilution of funds
would be addressed better within two programmes. Human resources could be
freed, since fewer procedures would reduce the administrative burden and they
would be allocated to activities improving the effectiveness of the programmes
(dissemination of results, monitoring, providing information, etc).

Option C: to implement only one programme. This option addresses all problems
caused by the multiple legal instruments and by the increased administrative
burden of managing multiple programmes. However, due to legal constraints the
scope of this programme would not be able to cover the funding needs of all
policy areas. A choice would have to be made between the area of justice and
the area of rights and citizenship. Although this solution can deliver maximum
impact in terms of management, however it would not be possible to address
sufficiently the policy priorities and needs of the whole policy area.

Resulting from the analysis and comparison
of the options, the preferred option is the implementation of two
programmes which would cover the funding needs of all policy areas (option
B). In comparison to the status quo option B presents clear advantages and
no disadvantage. Option A is not as beneficial as option B and option C only
offers partial coverage of the policy areas, which renders this option
unsuitable.

3.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL

The proposal is based on Article 81 (1) and
(2), Article 82 (1) and Article 84 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union.

The combination of Articles 81 and 82
allows for a comprehensive approach in supporting the development of judicial
cooperation in civil and criminal matters, especially in terms of cross-cutting
and horizontal issues affecting both justice areas.

Article 84 foresees the establishment of
measures to promote and support the action of Member States in the field of
crime prevention. The Programme does not intend to cover the whole area of
crime prevention, but only the area of anti-drugs policy. It aims to adopt a
comprehensive approach to fighting drug demand and supply, covering funding to
support Member States’ cross-border cooperation on enforcement.

The funding activities proposed respect the
principles of European added value and of subsidiarity. Funding from the Union
budget concentrates on activities whose objectives cannot be sufficiently
achieved by the Member States alone, where the Union intervention can bring
additional value compared to action of Member States alone. Activities covered
by this Regulation contribute to the effective application of the acquis by
developing mutual trust between Member States, increasing cross-border
cooperation and networking and achieving correct, coherent and consistent
application of Union law across the Union. The European Union is in a better
position than Member States to address cross-border situations and to provide a
European platform for mutual learning. A sound analytical basis for the support
and the development of policies will be supported. European Union intervention
allows for these activities to be pursued consistently across the Union and
brings economies of scale.

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle in that it
does not go beyond the minimum required in order to achieve the stated
objective at European level and what is necessary for that purpose.

4.           BUDGETARY IMPLICATION

The financial envelope for the
implementation of the Justice Programme for the period 1 January 2014 to 31
December 2020 shall amount to EUR 472 million (current prices).

5.           MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL

The aim of the
proposed approach is to combine the simplification of funding procedures, as
requested by all involved parties, with a more result-oriented approach. The
main elements of this approach are the following:

- The proposal
defines the general and specific objectives pursued by the Programme (Articles
4 and 5) and the areas of action where the Programme will focus on (Article 6).
The general and specific objectives define the scope of the programme (policy
areas), whereas the types of actions are funding-oriented, they are applicable
to all policy areas concerned and define in a horizontal way the outputs that
can be achieved by funding. At the same time, they define where funding can really
be of added value for the achievement of the policy objectives. In implementing
this Regulation the Commission will establish annually the funding priorities
in the respective policy areas. The Programme can make use of all financial
instruments foreseen in the Financial Regulation. The participation is open to
all legal entities legally established in the Member States or in a third
country participating in the Programme, with no further limitations to the
access to the programme. This structure allows for
simplification, as well as for better orientation of the programme to the
policy needs and developments. Moreover, it provides a stable context for
evaluation, as the specific objectives are directly linked to indicators for
evaluation, which will remain consistent for the whole duration of the
programme and will be monitored and evaluated regularly. It is proposed not to reserve specific amounts per policy area
within the programme in order to achieve flexibility and to improve the
implementation of the programme.

- The
participation of third countries is limited to EEA, accession and candidate
countries and potential candidates. Other third
countries, notably countries where the European Neighbourhood Policy applies,
may be associated to actions of the Programme, if this serves the purpose of
these actions.

- The annual
priorities of the programme will be defined in an annual work programme.
Because this implies policy-driven choices, the adoption of the annual work
programme is subject to the opinion of a Committee of Member States under the
Advisory procedure.

- The Commission
may use, on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis, an existing executive agency
for the implementation of the programme, as provided for in Council Regulation
(EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive
agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community
programmes.

The notion
of ‘judiciary and judicial staff'

Judicial
training of the judiciary and judicial staff is a key element of Justice
policies. Judicial training enhances mutual confidence between Member States,
practitioners and citizens and the Commission’s
Communication on European judicial training, "Building
trust in EU-wide justice, a new dimension to European judicial training", sets concrete training objectives to be achieved by 2020[6]. Articles 81(2)(h) and 82(1)(c) TFEU
explicitly target "Judiciary and Judicial staff". In accordance with
the Commission's Communication lawyers, while constituting an autonomous
profession, are an integral and necessary part of judicial activity and they
play a central role in the implementation of Union law. As for notaries in
several Member States they have important competence in the judicial field,
which also leads them to contribute to the implementation of Union law. Taking
into account the spirit and the aims of the Treaty's provisions these
provisions are extended to include these two professions.

2011/0369 (COD)

Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

establishing for the period 2014 to 2020
the Justice Programme

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 81(1) and (2), Article
82(1) and Article 84 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the
European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative
act to the national Parliaments,

Acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure,

Whereas:

(1)
The Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union provides for the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice, in
which persons are free to move. To that end, the Union may adopt measures to
develop judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters and promote and
support the action of Member States in the field of crime prevention, notably
for the prevention and reduction of drug demand and supply.

(2)
The Stockholm Programme[7] reaffirms the priority of
developing an area of freedom, security and justice and specifies within its
political priorities the achievement of a Europe of law and justice. Financing
is identified as one of the important tools for the successful implementation
of the Stockholm Programme's political priorities.

(3)
The Communication from the Commission on Europe
2020[8] sets out a strategy for smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth. A well-functioning area of justice, where
obstacles in cross-border judicial proceedings and access to justice in
cross-border situations are eliminated, should be developed as a key element to
support and promote the specific objectives and flagship initiatives of the
Europe 2020 Strategy.

(4)
Experience of action at Union level has shown
that achieving these objectives in practice calls for a combination of
instruments, including legislation, policy initiatives and funding. Funding is an important tool complementing legislative measures. A funding programme should therefore be established.

(5)
The Commission Communication on ‘A budget for
Europe 2020’[9]
stresses the need for rationalisation and simplification of Union funding.
Meaningful simplification and efficient management of funding can be achieved
through the reduction in the number of programmes and rationalisation,
simplification and harmonisation of funding rules and procedures.

(6)
In response to the need for simplification and
efficient management of funding, this Regulation establishes the Justice
Programme to provide for the continuation and development of activities previously
carried out on the basis of three programmes, established by Decision No 1149/2007/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 25 September 2007 establishing
for the period 2007-2013 the Specific Programme 'Civil Justice' as part of the
General Programme 'Fundamental Rights and Justice'[10],
Council Decision 2007/126/JHA of 12 February 2007
establishing for the period 2007-2013, as part of the General Programme on
Fundamental Rights and Justice, the Specific Programme 'Criminal Justice'[11] and Decision No 1150/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 25 September 2007
establishing for the period 2007-2013 the Specific Programme 'Drug prevention
and information' as part of the General Programme 'Fundamental Rights and
Justice'.[12]

(7)
Whereas the Drug
prevention and information programme was based on a
public health legal basis and therefore covered health considerations, notably
the reduction of health harms associated with drug use, the Justice programme should
approach anti-drugs policy via the angle of crime prevention. Illicit drug
trafficking and other illegal activities related to drugs should be the main
focus of drug-related funding under the new programme.

(8)
The Commission Communications ‘The EU Budget
Review’[13]
and ‘A budget for Europe 2020’ also underline the importance of focusing
funding on activities with clear European added value, i.e. where the Union
intervention can bring additional value compared to action of Member States
alone. Actions covered by this Regulation should contribute to the creation of
a European area of justice by promoting the principle of mutual recognition,
developing mutual trust between the Member States, increasing cross-border
cooperation and networking and achieving correct, coherent and consistent
application of Union law. Funding activities should also contribute to
achieving effective and better knowledge of Union law and policies by all those
concerned, and provide a sound analytical basis for the support and the
development of Union legislation and policies. Union intervention allows for those
actions to be pursued consistently across the Union and brings economies of
scale. Moreover the Union is in a better position than Member States to address
cross-border situations and to provide a European platform for mutual learning.

(9)
In the field of drugs, demand and supply create
a real threat that Member States cannot tackle sustainably on their own. Union
intervention under this Regulation should support Member States' actions to
prevent and reduce drug demand and supply, notably by supporting cross-border
cooperation on enforcement.

(10)
In order to implement the principle of sound
financial management, this Regulation should provide for appropriate tools to
assess its performance. To that end, it should define general and specific
objectives. To measure the achievement of those specific objectives, a set of
indicators should be established which should remain valid for the whole
duration of the Programme.

(11)
This Regulation lays down for the multiannual
programme a financial envelope which is to constitute the prime reference,
within the meaning of point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of XX
between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation
in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, for the budgetary
authority during the annual budgetary procedure.

(12)
This Regulation should be implemented in full
compliance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No XX/XX of XX on the financial rules applicable
to the annual budget of the European Union. In particular, it should make use
of the simplification tools introduced by the latter. Moreover, the criteria
for identifying actions to be supported should aim at allocating the financial
resources available on actions generating the highest impact in relation to the
policy objective pursued.

(13)
Implementing powers should be conferred on the
Commission in respect of the adoption of annual work programmes. Those powers should
be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the
rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States
of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers[14]. Given the annual amounts
concerned, the budgetary implications can be considered as non-substantial.
Therefore, the advisory procedure should apply.

(14)
In order to ensure efficient allocation of funds
from the Union budget, consistency, complementarity and synergies should be
sought between funding programmes supporting policy
areas with close links to each other, in particular between the Programme and
the Rights and Citizenship programme established by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of
XX[15], the Instrument
for financial support for police cooperation, crime prevention and the fight
against cross-border, serious and organised crime established
by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of XX[16], the Health for Growth Programme established
by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of XX[17], the Erasmus for all Programme established
by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of XX,[18] the Horizon 2020 Framework
Programme established by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of XX[19] and
the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance established
by Regulation (EU) No XX/XX of XX[20].

(15)
Pursuant to Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union, the Programme should support the mainstreaming
of equality between women and men and anti-discrimination objectives in all its
activities. Regular monitoring and evaluation should be carried out to assess
the way in which gender equality and anti-discrimination issues are addressed in
the Programme's activities.

(16)
The financial interests of the Union should be
protected through proportionate measures throughout the expenditure cycle,
including the prevention, detection and investigation of irregularities, the
recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where
appropriate, penalties. The
European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) should be authorised to carry out on-the-spot
checks and inspections on economic operators, in accordance with the procedures
laid down in Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96[21] with a view to establishing
whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity
affecting the financial interests of the Union in connection with Union funding
under the Programme.

(17)
Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to
contribute to the creation of a European area of justice, cannot be
sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can be better achieved at Union
level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of
subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In
accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article,
this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that
objective.

(18)
[In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol
(No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union
and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, those Member States
have notified their wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation]
OR [Without prejudice to Article 4 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of
the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and
Justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, the United Kingdom and Ireland will not take
part in the adoption of this Regulation and will not be bound by it or be
subject to its application].[22]

(19)
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the
Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European
Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is
not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or
subject to its application,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Establishment and
duration of the Programme

1.           This Regulation
establishes the European Union programme on Justice, hereinafter referred to as
‘the Programme’.

2.           The Programme shall cover
the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.

Article 2
Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the
following definitions shall apply:

(a)          'Member States' means the Member
States with the exception of [Denmark] OR [Denmark, the United Kingdom and
Ireland, without prejudice to Article 4 of the Protocol (No 21)];

(b)          ‘members of the judiciary and
judicial staff' means judges, prosecutors, advocates, solicitors, notaries,
court officers, bailiffs, court interpreters and other professionals associated
with the judiciary.

Article 3
European added value

The Programme shall finance actions with
European added value. To that effect, the Commission shall ensure that the
actions selected for funding are intended to produce results with European
added value and shall monitor whether European added value was actually
achieved through the final results of the actions financed by the Programme.

Article 4
General objective

The general objective of the Programme shall
be to contribute to the creation of a European area of justice by promoting
judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters.

Article 5
Specific objectives

To achieve the general objective set out in
Article 4, the Programme shall have the following specific objectives:

(a)     to promote effective, comprehensive
and consistent application of Union legislation in the areas of judicial
cooperation in civil and criminal matters.

The indicator to measure the
achievement of this objective shall be, inter alia, the number of cases
of trans-border cooperation.

(b)     to facilitate access to justice.

The indicator to measure the
achievement of this objective shall be, inter alia, the European
perception of access to justice.

(c)     to prevent and reduce drug demand and
supply.

The indicator to measure the achievement
of this objective shall be, inter alia, the number of cases of
trans-border cooperation.

The Programme
shall aim to promote equality between women and men and combat discrimination
based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or
sexual orientation in all its activities.

Article 6
Actions

1.           With a view to pursuing
the objectives set out in Article 4 and Article 5, the actions of the Programme
shall focus on the following areas of action:

(a)     enhancing public awareness and
knowledge of Union law and policies;

(b)     supporting the implementation of Union
law and policies in the Member States;

(c)     promoting transnational cooperation
and building up of mutual knowledge and mutual trust;

(d)     improving the knowledge and understanding
of potential issues affecting the smooth functioning of a European area of
justice with a view to ensuring evidence-based policy making and legislation.

2.         The Programme shall finance inter
alia the following types of actions:

(a)
analytical activities, such as collection of
data and statistics; development of common methodologies and, where
appropriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and
surveys; evaluations and impact assessments; elaboration and publication of
guides, reports and educational material; monitoring and assessment of the
transposition and application of Union legislation and of the implementation of
Union policies; workshops, seminars, experts meetings, conferences;

(b)
training activities for members of the judiciary
and judicial staff, such as staff exchanges, workshops, seminars,
train-the-trainer events, development of online or other training modules;

(c)
mutual learning, cooperation, awareness raising and
dissemination activities, such as identification of, and exchanges on, good
practices, innovative approaches and experiences, organisation of peer review
and mutual learning; organisation of conferences and seminars; organisation of
awareness-raising and information campaigns, media campaigns and events, including
corporate communication of the political priorities of the European Union; compilation
and publication of materials to disseminate information as well as results of
the Programme; development, operation and maintenance of systems and tools using
information and communication technologies;

(d)
support for main actors, such as support for Member
States when implementing Union law and policies; support for key European level
networks whose activities are linked to the implementation of the objectives of
the Programme; networking among specialised bodies and organisations, national,
regional and local authorities at European level; funding of experts' networks;
funding of European level observatories.

Article 7
Participation

1.           Access to the Programme
shall be open to all public and/or private bodies and
entities legally established in:

(a)     Member States;

(b)     EFTA countries which are party to the
EEA Agreement, in accordance with the conditions laid down in the EEA
Agreement;

(c)     accession
countries, candidate countries and potential candidates, in accordance with the
general principles and the general terms and conditions laid down in the
framework agreements concluded with them on their participation in Union
programmes;

(d)     Denmark, on the basis of an
international agreement.

2.           Public
and/or private bodies and entities legally established in other third
countries, notably countries where the European Neighbourhood Policy applies,
may be associated to actions of the Programme, if this serves the purpose of
these actions.

3.           Under the Programme, the
Commission may cooperate with international organisations active in the areas
covered by the Programme, such as the Council of Europe, the United Nations and
the Hague Conference on Private International Law. Access to the Programme shall
be open to those international organisations.

Article 8
Budget

1.           The financial envelope for
the implementation of the Programme shall be EUR 472 million.

2.           The financial allocation
of the Programme may also cover expenses pertaining to preparatory, monitoring,
control, audit and evaluation activities which are required for the management
of the Programme and the achievement of its objectives; in particular, studies,
meetings of experts, information and communication actions, including corporate
communication of the political priorities of the European Union, as far as they
are related to the general objectives of this Regulation, expenses linked to IT
networks focusing on information processing and exchange, together with all
other technical and administrative assistance expenses incurred by the
Commission for the management of the Programme.

3.           The budgetary authority
shall authorise the available annual appropriations within the limits of the
Multiannual Financial Framework established by Council Regulation (EU, Euratom)
No XX/XX of XX laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years
2014-2020.

Article 9
Implementing measures

1.           The Commission shall
implement the Union financial support in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No XX/XX of XX on the financial rules applicable to
the annual budget of the European Union.

2.           In order to implement the
Programme, the Commission shall adopt annual work programmes in the form of
implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with
the advisory procedure referred to in Article 10(2).

3.           The annual work programmes
shall set out the measures needed for their implementation, the priorities of
calls for proposals and all other elements required by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No XX/XX of XX on the financial rules applicable to
the annual budget of the European Union.

Article 10
Committee procedure

1.           The Commission shall be
assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning
of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2.           Where reference is made to
this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

Article 11
Complementarity

1.           The Commission, in
cooperation with the Member States, shall ensure overall consistency,
complementarity and synergies with other Union instruments, inter alia,
with the Rights and Citizenship Programme, the Instrument for financial support
for police cooperation, crime prevention and the fight against cross-border,
serious and organised crime, the Health for Growth Programme, the Erasmus for
all Programme, the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme and the Instrument for
Pre-accession Assistance.

2.           The programme may share
resources with other Union instruments, in particular the Rights and
Citizenship Programme, in order to implement actions meeting the objectives of
both programmes. An action for which funding has been awarded from the
Programme may also give rise to the award of funding from the Rights and
Citizenship Programme, provided that the funding does not cover the same cost
items.

Article 12
Protection of the financial interests of the Union

1.           The Commission shall take
appropriate measures ensuring that, when actions financed under this Regulation
are implemented, the financial interests of the Union are protected by the
application of preventive measures against fraud, corruption and any other
illegal activities, by effective checks and, if irregularities are detected, by
the recovery of the amounts wrongly paid and, where appropriate, by effective,
proportionate and deterrent penalties.

2.           The Commission or its
representatives and the Court of Auditors shall have the power of audit, on the
basis of documents and on-the-spot, over all grant beneficiaries, contractors
and subcontractors who have received Union funds under the Programme.

The European Anti-fraud
Office (OLAF) may carry out on-the-spot checks and inspections on economic
operators concerned directly or indirectly by such funding in accordance with
the procedures laid down in Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 with a
view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other
illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union in connection
with a grant agreement or grant decision or a contract concerning Union funding.

Without prejudice to the first
and second sub-paragraphs, cooperation agreements with third countries and
international organisations and grant agreements and grant decisions and
contracts resulting from the implementation of this Regulation shall expressly empower
the Commission, the Court of Auditors and OLAF to conduct such audits,
on-the-spot checks and inspections.

Article 13
Monitoring and evaluation

1.           The Commission shall
monitor the Programme regularly in order to follow the implementation of actions
carried out under it in the areas of actions referred to in Article 6 (1) and
the achievement of the specific objectives referred to
in Article 5. The monitoring will also provide a means
of assessing the way in which gender equality and anti-discrimination issues
have been addressed across the programme’s activities. Where relevant,
indicators should be disaggregated by sex, age and disability.

2.           The Commission shall
provide the European Parliament and the Council with:

(a) an interim evaluation report, by mid-2018
at the latest;

(b) an ex-post evaluation report.

3.           The interim evaluation
shall report on the achievement of the Programme's
objectives, the efficiency of the use of resources and the Programme’s European
added value with a view to determining whether funding
in areas covered by the Programme shall be renewed,
modified or suspended after 2020. It shall also address
the scope for any simplification of the Programme, its internal and external
coherence, as well as the continued relevance of all objectives and actions. It
shall take into account the results of the ex-post evaluations of the
programmes mentioned in Article 14.

4.           The
ex-post evaluation shall report on the longer-term impact of the Programme and
on the sustainability of effects of the Programme, with a view to feed into a
decision on a subsequent programme.

Article 14
Transitional measures

Actions which are initiated before 1
January 2014 on the basis of Decision 1149/2007/EC, Decision 2007/126/JHA or
Decision 1150/2007/EC shall continue to be governed by the provisions of those
Decisions, until their completion. In respect of those actions, reference to
the Committees provided for in Article 10 and 11 of Decision 1149/2007/EC, in
Article 9 of Decision 2007/126/JHA and in Article 10 of Decision 1150/2007/EC
shall be interpreted as references to the Committee provided for in Article 10
of this Regulation.

Article 15
Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on
the 20th day following that of its publication in the Official
Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament                       For
the Council

The President                                                 The
President

ANNEX

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL
STATEMENT

1.           FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

1.1.    Title of the proposal/initiative

1.2.    Policy
area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure

1.3.    Nature
of the proposal/initiative

1.4.    Objective(s)

1.5.    Grounds
for the proposal/initiative

1.6.    Duration
and financial impact

1.7.    Management
method(s) envisaged

2.           MANAGEMENT MEASURES

2.1.    Monitoring
and reporting rules

2.2.    Management
and control system

2.3.    Measures
to prevent fraud and irregularities

3.           ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE
PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

3.1.    Heading(s)
of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected

3.2.    Estimated
impact on expenditure

3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure

3.2.2. Estimated
impact on operational appropriations

3.2.3. Estimated
impact on appropriations of an administrative nature

3.2.4. Compatibility
with the current multiannual financial framework

3.2.5. Third-party
participation in financing

3.3.    Estimated impact on revenue

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

1.
FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1.
Title of the proposal/initiative

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the
Council establishing for the period 2014 to 2020 the Justice Programme

1.2.
Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB
structure[23]

Title 33 - Justice

1.3.
Nature of the proposal/initiative

þ The
proposal/initiative relates to a new action

 ̈ The
proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot
project/preparatory action[24]

 ̈ The
proposal/initiative relates to the extension of an existing action

 ̈ The
proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action

1.4.
Objectives
1.4.1.
The Commission's multiannual strategic
objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative

The Programme aims to contribute to the creation of a European area
of freedom, security and justice, and in particular of a European area of
justice, by promoting judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters. A
well-functioning area of justice, where obstacles in cross-border judicial
proceedings are eliminated, will also support and promote the specific
objectives and flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 Strategy.

1.4.2.
Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies)
concerned

Specific objectives

To achieve the general objective of contributing to the creation of
a European area of justice, the Programme has the following specific objectives:

(a)      to promote effective, comprehensive and consistent application
of Union legislation in the areas of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal
matters;

(b)     to facilitate access to justice;

(c)      to prevent and reduce drug demand and supply.

ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned

ABB 33 03 and 33 04.

1.4.3.
Expected result(s) and impact

Specify the effects
which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.

The proposal will contribute to the enforcement of the acquis,
allowing citizens and businesses in the Union to fully benefit from the
existing legislation. They will be better aware of their rights, and Member
States and stakeholders will have better tools to exchange information on best
practices and to cooperate with each other. The effects of the proposal on
beneficiairies/target groups is described in more detail in Section 4.1.2 of
the Impact Assessment.

In addition, the changes to the funding programmes proposed will
have a clear beneficial effect on the processes under which financial support
will be managed. This would start from an integrated approach across the
programmes in the applications processes, the documentation required and the
IT-systems to be used. This in itself will constitute a concrete time-saving as
many stakeholders which are active in fields covered by several of the current
generations of programmes, would no longer have to address diverging
requirements and could concentrate more on developing strong proposals from a
content and quality point of view.

Furthermore, with a harmonised and streamlined single project
selection process, the delays between submitting applications and receiving the
results would be substantially reduced and this would leave applicant
organisation with a shorter interval of uncertainty. This would bring the
further added advantage of projects starting much shorter after their
conception and therefore would respond much more effectively to the concrete
needs they seek to address in line with Union policy priorities

1.4.4.
Indicators of results and impact

Specify the
indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.

The indicators to measure the achievement of the above-mentioned
specific objectives, shall be, inter alia, the number of cases of
trans-border cooperation for (a) and (c) and the European perception of access
to justice for (b).

DG Justice does not have enough information about the current
situation to establish meaningful long- or medium-term targets, but before
implementation of the programme starts, DG Justice will try to collect more
information on the current situation so that milestones and targets can be set.

1.5.
Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1.
Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long
term

Whereas legislation is a key tool to implement the Union’s objectives
in the area of Justice, it needs to be complemented by other means. In this
context, funding has an important role to play. In particular, funding should
enhance the effectiveness of legislation by increasing knowledge, awareness and
capacity of citizens, professionals and stakeholders, through supporting:

Information and public awareness raising, including support for
national and European campaigns to inform people of their rights, as guaranteed
under Union law, and how to enforce them in practice;

Training and capacity building for legal professionals (such as
judges and prosecutors) and other practitioners, to equip them with the tools
to effectively put Union rights and policies into practice.

Funding also has a central role in promoting cooperation at
transnational level and developing mutual trust, through:

Strengthening networks, i.e. Union-wide organisations to assist with
the preparation of future initiatives in this area, as well as to promote their
consistent implementation across Europe;

Cross-border cooperation on enforcement, for example establishing
missing child alert systems, coordination of operational and cross-border
anti-drug cooperation.

Additionally, funding should support:

Research, analysis and other support activities, to provide to the
legislator clear and detailed information on the problems and the situation on
the ground. The results of these activities feed into the development and the
implementation of Union policies and ensure that they are evidence-based, well
targeted and well structured.

1.5.2.
Added value of EU involvement

Funding covered by the Justice Programme concentrates on activities
where the Union’s intervention can bring additional value compared to action of
Member States alone. Activities covered by this Regulation contribute to the
effective application of the acquis by developing mutual trust between Member
States, increasing cross-border cooperation and networking and achieving
correct, coherent and consistent application of Union law across the Union.
Only action at Union level can provide coordinated activities that can reach
all Union Member States. The European Union is in a better position than Member
States to address cross-border situations and to provide a European platform
for mutual learning. Without Union support, stakeholders would tend to address
similar problems in a fragmented and disconnected way. Collaboration and
networking between them will lead to the dissemination of best practices, in
particular innovative and integrated approaches in different Member States. The
participants in these activities will then act as multipliers in their
respective professional activities and disseminate wider the best practices
within their Member State.

A sound analytical basis for the support and the development of
policies will be supported. European Union intervention allows for these
activities to be pursued consistently across the Union and brings economies of
scale. Funding at national level would not provide the same results, but only a
fragmented and limited approach not covering the needs of the European Union as
a whole.

1.5.3.
Lessons learned from similar experiences in the
past

The mid-term evaluations carried out for the current programmes in
the area of justice have confirmed the overall effectiveness of the programmes,
but they have also identified a number of problems such as a dilution of funds
('saupoudrage') amongst many small-scale projects with limited impact. Despite
the fact that funding is allocated to a multitude of projects, there is no balanced
geographical spread among the organisations which receive funding. The mid-term
evaluations agree that more should be done to improve the dissemination and
exploitation of results and outputs of the funded activities. Improvement in
dissemination goes hand in hand with improvement in the evaluation and
monitoring. The mid-term evaluations and the public consultation highlighted in
terms of efficiency the complex and bureaucratic procedures that the applicants
are facing. From an administrative point of view the multiplication of
procedures for the different programmes imposes a high administrative burden on
the Commission. The multiplication of procedures and the high administrative
burden contribute to increasing the length of procedures. Merging the programmes
would address this issue and create synergies between the programmes.

1.5.4.
Coherence and possible synergy with other
relevant instruments

The Programme will seek synergies, consistency and complementarities
with other Union instruments, inter alia with the programmes in the
areas of home affairs, health and consumers, education and research.
Duplication with activities under these other programmes will be avoided, and
resources may be shared between the Justice programme
and the Rights and Citizenship Programme to achieve
common objectives.

1.6.
Duration and financial impact

þ Proposal/initiative of limited
duration

–
þ  Proposal/initiative in effect from 01/01/2014 to 31/12/2020

–
þ  Financial impact from 2014 to 2020 and further

 ̈ Proposal/initiative of unlimited
duration

–
Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY
to YYYY,

–
followed by full-scale operation.

1.7.
Management mode(s) envisaged[25]

þ Centralised direct management by the Commission

þ Centralised indirect management with the delegation of implementation tasks to:

–
þ  executive agencies

–
þ  bodies set up by the Communities[26]

–
 ̈  national public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service mission

–
 ̈  persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions
pursuant to Title V of the Treaty on European Union and identified in the
relevant basic act within the meaning of Article 49 of the Financial Regulation

 ̈ Shared management with the Member States

 ̈ Decentralised management with third countries

þ Joint management with international organisations (as specified below)

If more than one
management mode is indicated, please provide details in the
"Comments" section.

Comments

The
possibility to use an existing executive agency for the full or partial
implementation of the Programme is provided for in the Explanatory Memorandum.
At this stage, no decision has been taken in this regard, and no cost/benefit
analysis has been carried out, but the option should be kept open.

Joint
management is another option that is not used at the moment, but could be
envisaged in the future. This concerns in particular the international
organisations named in Article 7(2): Council of Europe, United Nations and the
Hague Conference on Private International Law.

2.
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1.
Monitoring and reporting rules

Specify frequency
and conditions.

The proposal includes monitoring and evaluation obligations.
Achievement of the specific objectives will be monitored on the basis of the
indicators contained in the proposal; on an annual basis.

Furthermore, an interim evaluation report on the achievement of the
Programme’s objectives, the efficiency of the use of resources and its European
added value will be provided by the Commission by mid-2018 at the latest. An ex
post evaluation on the longer-term impacts and the sustainability of the
effects of the Programme will be provided after the end of the Programme.

2.2.
Management and control system
2.2.1.
Risk(s) identified

DG Justice has not been facing important risks of errors in its
spending programmes. This is confirmed by the recurrent absence of significant
findings in the annual reports of the Court of Auditors as well as by the
absence of residual error rate above 2% in the past years in DG Justice’s (and
former DG JLS) annual activity reports (with one single exception for the
Daphne programme in 2009).

The main risks identified are the following:

- Risk of poor quality of selected projects and poor technical
implementation of the project, reducing the programmes' impact; due to
inadequate selection procedures, lack of expertise or insufficient monitoring;

- Risk of inefficient or non-economic use of funds awarded, both for
grants (complexity of reimbursing actual eligible costs coupled with limited
possibilities to check eligible costs at the desk) and for procurement
(sometimes limited number of economic providers with the required specialist
knowledge entailing insufficient possibilities to compare price offers);

- Risk relating to the capacity of
(especially) smaller organisations to effectively control expenditure as well
as to ensure the transparency of operations carried out;

- Reputational risk for the Commission, if fraud or criminal
activities are discovered; only partial assurance can be drawn from the third
parties' internal control systems due to the rather large number of heterogeneous
contractors and beneficiaries, each operating their own control system, often
rather small in size.

Most of these risks are expected to be reduced thanks to a better
targeting of proposals and the use of simplified elements included in the
Triennal revision of the Financial Regulation.

2.2.2.
Control method(s) envisaged

Description of internal control system

The control system envisaged for the future programme is a
continuation of the current control system. It is composed of different
building blocks: supervision of operations by the Programme Management Unit,
the ex-ante control (financial verification) by the central Budget and Control
Unit, the internal procurement committee (JPC), the ex-post controls for grants
and the audits from the Internal Audit Capacity and/or the Internal Audit
Service.

All transactions are subject to an ex ante verification by the
Programme Management Unit and a financial verification by the Budget and
Control Unit (except for low-risk prefinancings). For grants, cost claims are
verified thoroughly, and supporting documents are requested when deemed
necessary, based on a risk assessment. All open and restricted procurement
procedures and all negotiated procedures above € 60.000 are submitted to the
internal procurement committee for checks before the award decision is adopted.

The ex-post control sector applies a
"detection strategy" aimed at detecting a maximum of anomalies in
view of recovering undue payments. Based on this strategy, the audits are
carried out on a sample of projects selected almost entirely on the basis of a
risk analysis.

Costs and benefits of controls

We estimate that between 50 and 70% of all staff involved in the
management of the current financial programmes performs control functions in a
broad sense (from the selection of beneficiaries/contractors to the
implementation of audit results). This corresponds to a range between EUR 2,1
million (50% of 2014 Human resource costs set out in Section 3.2.3) and EUR 3,2
million (70% of 2020 Human resource costs set out in Section 3.2.3) In
addition, externalisation of ex post audits produce costs in the range of
between € 75.000 and 100.000 per year, which are financed from administrative
support appropriations. These costs represent between 6 and 3% of the total
budget of the Programme, decreasing over the seven year period, due to the fact
that the annual appropriations increase substantially between 2014 and 2020,
whereas the costs of control remain quite stable.

Thanks to this combination of ex-ante and ex-post controls as well
as desk checks and on-site audits, in the past years the quantifiable average
residual error rate was lower than 2%, with one exception for the Daphne
programme in 2009, where the error rate rose slightly above 2%. This was
addressed the year after via an increase of ex post controls on the spot. These
controls have detected and corrected the remaining errors in this population.
Therefore, the internal control system as well as its cost is deemed adequate
in DG Justice to achieve the objective of a low error rate.

However, within this framework, DG Justice will continue to explore
possibilities to enhance the management and to increase simplification. With
the reduction of the number of programmes, harmonised rules and procedures will
apply, reducing the risk of error. In addition, the simplification tools made
available in the Triennal revision of the Financial Regulation will be used as
much as possible as it is expected that they will contribute to the reduction
of administrative burden for beneficiaries and thus represent a simultaneous
reduction of risks of error and of administrative burden for the Commission.

Summary of nature and intensity of (current)
controls.

Summary of controls || Amount MEUR || Number of beneficiaries/ transactions (% of total) || Depth *(assessment 1-4) || Coverage (% of Value)

Ex ante controls on all financial transactions || N/A || 100% || 1-4, based on risk and type of transaction || 100%

Justice Procurement Committee controls on procurement award decisions || N/A || 100% of procurement procedures above 125.000 € and of negotiated procedures above 60.000 € || 4 || 100% of procurement procedures above 125.000 € and of negotiated procedures above 60.000 €

Ex post controls on grants final payments || N/A || At least 10% || 4 || Between 5 and 10%

*Depth of controls:

1. Minimal administrative/ arithmetic
control with no reference to supporting documents

2. Control with reference to corroborative
information incorporating an element of independent oversight (e.g. audit
certificate or other verification), but no reference to underlying documents.

3. Control with reference to fully
independent corroborative information (e.g., database which justifies certain
elements of the claim, 3rd party or Commission assessment of
milestones achieved, etc.)

4. Control with reference to and including
access to the underlying documentation that is available at the stage of the
process in question, for all inputs and outputs (e.g. timesheets, invoices,
physical verification, etc.); i.e. control of the same intensity of transaction
testing as those carried out by the ECA as part of the DAS.

2.3.
Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities

Specify existing or
envisaged prevention and protection measures.

Different measures are or will be put in place for the future
Justice Programme to prevent fraud and irregularities. The proposal contains in
its Article 12 a provision on the protection of the financial interests of the
European Union. In line with the Commission Anti-fraud strategy (CAFS), adopted
in June 2011, DG Justice is devising an anti-fraud strategy covering the whole
expenditure cycle, having regard to the proportionality and cost-benefit of the
measures to be implemented. This strategy is based on two pillars: prevention,
based on effective checks, and appropriate response, if fraud or irregularities
are detected, consisting in the recovery of amounts wrongly paid and where
appropriate, by effective, proportionate and deterrent penalties. The
anti-fraud strategy describes the system of ex ante and ex post checks, based
on a system of red flags, and specifies the procedures to be followed by staff
when fraud or irregularities are detected. It also provides information on the
working arrangements with OLAF.

3.
ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1.
Heading(s) of the multiannual financial
framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected

·
New budget lines requested

In order of multiannual financial framework
headings and budget lines.

Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution

Number [Heading............................................] || Diff./non-diff. || from EFTA countries || from candidate countries || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 18(1)(aa) of the Financial Regulation

[3...] || [33 01 04.YY] [Justice Programme] || [Non diff...] || YES || YES || YES[27] || NO

[3...] || [33 YY YY YY] [Justice Programme] || [Diff...] || YES || YES || YES || NO

|| || || || || ||

3.2.
Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1.
Summary of estimated impact on expenditure

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Heading of multiannual financial framework: || Number || [Heading 3 – Security and citizenship]

DG: Justice || || || Year 2014[28] || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Post 2020 || TOTAL

Ÿ Operational appropriations || || || || || || || || ||

Number of budget line- 33 xx xx || Commitments || (1) || 45,800 || 52,800 || 59,300 || 66,300 || 73,800 || 80,800 || 84,800 || || 463,600

Payments || (2) || 18,300 || 30,400 || 43,600 || 53,700 || 64,400 || 71,500 || 77,100 || 104,600 || 463,600

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope for specific programmes[29] || || || || || || || || ||

Number of budget line 33 01 04 yy* || || (3) || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || || 8,400

TOTAL appropriations for DG JUSTICE || Commitments || =1+1a +3 || 47,000 || 54,000 || 60,500 || 67,500 || 75,000 || 82,000 || 86,000 || || 472,000

Payments || =2+2a +3 || 19,500 || 31,600 || 44,800 || 54,900 || 65,600 || 72,700 || 78,300 || 104,600 || 472,000

The Commission may envisage (partially)
externalising the implementation of the Programme to existing executive
agencies. Amounts and imputations will be adjusted if necessary according to
the results of the externalisation process.

Ÿ TOTAL operational appropriations || Commitments || (4) || 45,800 || 52,800 || 59,300 || 66,300 || 73,800 || 80,800 || 84,800 || || 463,600

Payments || (5) || 18,300 || 30,400 || 43,600 || 53,700 || 64,400 || 71,500 || 77,100 || 104,600 || 463,600

Ÿ TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope for specific programmes || (6) || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || || 8,400

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 3 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || =4+ 6 || 47,000 || 54,000 || 60,500 || 67,500 || 75,000 || 82,000 || 86,000 || || 472,000

Payments || =5+ 6 || 19,500 || 31,600 || 44,800 || 54,900 || 65,600 || 72,700 || 78,300 || 104,600 || 472,000

Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 5 || " Administrative expenditure "

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

|| Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Post 2020 || TOTAL

DG: JUSTICE ||

Ÿ Human resources || 4,185 || 4,247 || 4,165 || 4,254 || 4,344 || 4,433 || 4,522 || || 30,150

Ÿ Other administrative expenditure || 0,054 || 0,055 || 0,056 || 0,057 || 0,059 || 0,060 || 0,061 || || 0,402

TOTAL DG JUSTICE || Appropriations || 4,239 || 4,302 || 4,221 || 4,311 || 4,403 || 4,493 || 4,583 || || 30,552

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || (Total commitments = Total payments) || 4,239 || 4,302 || 4,221 || 4,311 || 4,403 || 4,493 || 4,583 || || 30,552

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

|| Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Post 2020 || TOTAL

TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || 51,239 || 58,302 || 64,721 || 71,811 || 79,403 || 86,493 || 90,583 || || 502,552

Payments || 23,739 || 35,902 || 49,021 || 59,211 || 70,003 || 77,193 || 82,883 || 104,600 || 502,552

3.2.2.
Estimated impact on operational appropriations

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational
appropriations

–
þ  The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational
appropriations, as explained below. It is not possible for DG Justice to
provide an exhaustive list of all outputs to be delivered by means of the
financial intervention under the programme, their average costs and numbers, as
requested by this section. There are no statistical tools at the moment
allowing to produce average costs on the basis of the current programmes, and
such a precise definition would be contrary to the principle that the future
programme should provide enough flexibility to cater for political priorities
between 2014-2020. However, this is a (non-exhaustive) list of outputs that are
expected:

- Number of persons in target group reached by awareness-raising
activities;

- Number of
members of the judiciary and judicial staff in target group trained.

- Number of
legal practitioners participating inter alia in networking, exchanges, study
visits;

- Number of
cases of trans-border cooperation, including via the use of IT tools and
European procedures.

- Policy initiatives designed on the basis of
evaluations, impact assessments and drawing on comprehensive stakeholders’ and
experts’ consultations;

- Number of evaluations and impact assessments
carried out as a result of the implementation of the programme.

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal
places)

Indicate objectives and outputs ò || || || Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || TOTAL

OUTPUTS

Type of output[30] || Average cost of the output || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Total number of outputs || Total cost

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1[31]... || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

- Output || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

- Output || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

- Output || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

Sub-total for specific objective N°1 || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2... || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

- Output || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

Sub-total for specific objective N°2 || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

TOTAL COST || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

3.2.3.
Estimated impact on appropriations of an
administrative nature
3.2.3.1.
Summary

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of administrative
appropriations

–
þ  The proposal/initiative requires the use of administrative
appropriations, as explained below:

EUR million (to 3
decimal places)

|| Year 2014[32] || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || TOTAL

HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || || || || || || || ||

Human resources || 4,185 || 4,247 || 4,165 || 4,254 || 4,344 || 4,433 || 4,522 || 30,150

Other administrative expenditure || 0,054 || 0,055 || 0,056 || 0,057 || 0,059 || 0,060 || 0,061 || 0,402

Subtotal HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || 4,239 || 4,302 || 4,221 || 4,311 || 4,403 || 4,493 || 4,583 || 30,552

Outside HEADING 5[33] of the multiannual financial framework || || || || || || || ||

Human resources || || || || || || || ||

Other expenditure of an administrative nature || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 8,400

Subtotal outside HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 1,200 || 8,400

TOTAL || 5,439 || 5,502 || 5,421 || 5,511 || 5,603 || 5,693 || 5,783 || 38,952

The Commission may envisage (partially)
externalising the implementation of the Programme to existing executive agencies.
Amounts and imputations will be adjusted if necessary according to the results
of the externalisation process.

3.2.3.2.
 Estimated requirements of human resources

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human
resources

–
þ  The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as
explained below:

Estimate to be expressed in full time
equivalent units

|| Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020

Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary agents, in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)

33 01 01 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) || 30,75 || 30,75 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75

XX 01 01 02 (Delegations) || || || || || || ||

XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research) || || || || || || ||

10 01 05 01 (Direct research) || || || || || || ||

External personnel (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)[34]

33 01 02 01 (CA, INT, SNE from the "global envelope") || 0,5 || 0,5 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0

XX 01 02 02 (CA, INT, JED, LA and SNE in the delegations) || || || || || || ||

XX 01 04 yy [35] || - at Headquarters[36] || || || || || ||

- in delegations || || || || || ||

XX 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - Indirect research) || || || || || || ||

10 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - Direct research) || || || || || || ||

Other budget lines (specify) || || || || || || ||

TOTAL || 31,25 || 31,25 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75 || 29,75

33 is the
policy area or budget title concerned.

The human resources required
will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the action
and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any
additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual
allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints. Amounts and
imputations will be adjusted depending on the results of the envisaged
externalisation process.

Description of
tasks to be carried out:

Officials and temporary agents || The tasks to be carried out comprise all tasks necessary to the management of a financial programme, such as: - providing input to the budgetary procedure; - preparing annual work programmes/financing decisions, establishing annual priorities; - managing calls for proposals and calls for tenders and the subsequent selection procedures; - communicating with stakeholders (potential/actual beneficiaries, Member States, etc); - managing projects, operationally and financially; - performing controls, as described above (ex ante verification, procurement committee, ex post audits, internal audit) ; - accounting; - developing and managing grant management IT tools; - monitoring and reporting on achievement of objectives , including in AAR and AOS reports

External personnel || The tasks are similar to those of officials and temporary agents, except for tasks that cannot be fulfilled by external personnel

3.2.4.
Compatibility with the current multiannual
financial framework

–
þ  Proposal/initiative is compatible the next multiannual
financial framework.

–
 ̈  Proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant
heading in the multiannual financial framework.

Explain what reprogramming is required,
specifying the budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.

–
 ̈  Proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility
instrument or revision of the multiannual financial framework[37].

Explain what is required, specifying the
headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.

3.2.5.
Third-party contributions

–
þ  The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third
parties

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated
below:

Estimated impact on revenue

–
 ̈  Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.

–
þ  Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:

 ̈         on own resources

þ         on miscellaneous revenue

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Budget revenue line: || Appropriations available for the ongoing budget year || Impact of the proposal/initiative[38]

Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020

Article 6xxxx............. || || || || || || || ||

For miscellaneous
assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.

[33 yyyyyy...] Revenue line

Specify the method for
calculating the impact on revenue.

The revenues are not known at this stage and will depend on the
participation of candidate countries to the programme.

[1]               Communication on the EU Budget Review, COM(2010)700
final of 19.10.2010.

[2]               Commission
Staff Working Paper, A Budget for Europe 2020: the current system of funding,
the challenges ahead, the results of stakeholders consultation and different
option on the main horizontal and sectoral issues, SEC(2011) 868 final,
Accompanying the Communication on A Budget for Europe 2020, COM(2011)500 final
of 29.6.2011.

[3]               http://ec.europa.eu/justice/news/consulting_public/news_consulting_0010_en.htm

[4]               Civil
Justice Programme (JCIV), the Criminal Justice Programme (JPEN), the
Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme (FRC), the Daphne III Programme
(DAP), the Drug Prevention and Information Programme (DPIP) and the sections
"Antidiscrimination and Diversity" and "Gender Equality" of
the Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity (PROGRESS).

[5]               Interim
evaluation report on the results obtained from and the qualitative and
quantitative aspects of the implementation of the Civil Justice financing
programme, COM(2011)351 final of 15.06.2011; Interim evaluation report on the
Criminal Justice Programme, COM(2011)255 final of 11.5.2011; Report on the
interim evaluation of the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme 2007 –
2013, COM(2011)249 final of 5.5.2011; Report on the interim evaluation of the
Daphne III Programme 2007 – 2013, COM(2011)254 final of 11.05.2011; Report on
the interim evaluation of the specific Programme Drug prevention and
information (DPIP) 2007 – 2013, COM(2011)246 final of 5.5.2011.

[6]               Commission’s
Communication of 13.9.2011, COM(2011)551 final.

[7]               OJ
C 115, 4.5.2010, p. 1.

[8]               COM(2010)2020 final of 3.3.2010.

[9]               COM(2011)500
of 29.6.2011.

[10]             OJ
L 257, 3.10.2007, p. 16.

[11]             OJ L 58, 24.2.2007, p. 13.

[12]             OJ L 257, 3.10.2007, p.23.

[13]             COM(2010)700 of 19.10.2010.

[14]             OJ
L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.

[15]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[16]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[17]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[18]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[19]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[20]             OJ
L XX, XX, p. XX.

[21]             OJ
L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2.

[22]             The
final wording of this recital in the RegulationDirective
will depend on the actual position of the United Kingdom and Ireland taken in
accordance with the provisions of protocol (No 21).

[23]             ABM:
Activity-Based Management – ABB: Activity-Based Budgeting.

[24]             As
referred to in Article 49(6)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.

[25]             Details
of management modes and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on
the BudgWeb site: http://www.cc.cec/budg/man/budgmanag/budgmanag_en.html

[26]             As
referred to in Article 185 of the Financial Regulation.

[27]             Possibly
DK

[28]             Year
N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.

[29]             Technical
and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the
implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former "BA" lines),
indirect research, direct research.

[30]             Outputs
are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges
financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).

[31]             As
described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific objective(s)..."

[32]             Year
N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.

[33]             Technical
and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the
implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former "BA" lines),
indirect research, direct research.

[34]             CA=
Contract Agent; INT= agency staff ("Intérimaire"); JED= "Jeune
Expert en Délégation" (Young Experts in Delegations); LA= Local Agent;
SNE= Seconded National Expert;

[35]             Under
the ceiling for external personnel from operational appropriations (former
"BA" lines).

[36]             Essentially
for Structural Funds, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
and European Fisheries Fund (EFF).

[37]             See
points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement.

[38]             As
regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts
indicated must be net amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 25% for
collection costs.