natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
C. vzhledem k tomu, že prvotním cílem partnerství AKT–EU a Dohody z Cotonou je zlepšení perspektiv sociálního a hospodářského rozvoje pro země AKT,
C. whereas the primary objective of the ACP-EU partnership and the Cotonou Agreement is to improve the social and economic development prospects of the ACP countries;
D. vzhledem k tomu, že EU i nadále dodržuje závazky rozvojových cílů tisíciletí, měly by tyto cíle být pouze prvním krokem při vymýcení chudoby,
D. whereas the EU remains committed to the MDGs, these should only be seen as the first step in the eradication of poverty;
E. vzhledem k tomu, že cíle Dohody z Cotonou a EU jsou jasné, přesto se vzhledem k očekávanému dopadu EPA, jež v současné době stojí na křehkých ekonomikách zemí AKT a různých úrovních rozvoje ekonomik EU a AKT, stává úloha EPA při dosahování těchto cílů stále problematičtější, jak to prohlásili různí účastníci včetně afrických ministrů, některých členských států EU a zástupců evropské a občanské společnosti v rozvojovém světě,
E. whereas the goals of the Cotonou Agreement and the EU are clear, yet considering the expected impact of the EPAs as they stand at present on fragile ACP economies and the different levels of development between the EU and ACP economies, the EPAs' role in achieving these goals has been increasingly questioned by various players, including African Ministers, some EU Member States and European and civil society in the developing world,
F. vzhledem k tomu, že integraci trhů v rámci EU doprovází opatření pro soudržnost na podporu hospodářsky slabších zemí,
F. whereas market integration within the EU has been accompanied by cohesion measures in support of economically weaker countries,
G. vzhledem k tomu, že Dohoda z Cotonou zdůrazňuje potřebu využívání iniciativ pro regionální integraci zemí AKT, jelikož vytváření širších regionálních trhů a hlubší regionální integrace bude na obchodníky a investory působit jako pobídka,
G. whereas the Cotonou Agreement underlines the need to build on the regional integration initiatives of ACP States, as the creation of larger regional markets and deeper regional integration will act as an incentive for traders and investors,
H. vzhledem k tomu, že Dohoda z Cotonou stanoví, aby zúčastněné strany uzavíraly nové dohody o obchodních režimech v souladu s pravidly WTO, postupně mezi sebou odstraňovaly obchodní bariéry a prohlubovaly spolupráci ve všech oblastech souvisejících s obchodem,
H. whereas the Cotonou Agreement sets out the Parties’ agreement to conclude new WTO-compatible trading arrangements, progressively removing barriers to trade between them and enhancing co-operation in all areas relevant to trade,
J. vzhledem k tomu, že EPA by měly určovat nové obchodní vztahy mezi EU a zeměmi AKT, účinnost liberalizace obchodu mezi nerovnými partnery jako nástroje rozvoje se historicky ukázala jako neúčinná a dokonce kontraproduktivní,
J. whereas EPAs are supposed to define new trade relationships between EU Member States and ACP countries, yet liberalising trade between unequal partners as a tool for development has historically proven to be ineffective and even counterproductive,
K. vzhledem k tomu, že regionální aspekt EPA je nezbytný nejen pro posilování obchodu mezi severem a jihem, ale i vzájemného obchodu mezi partnery na jihu,
K. whereas the regional aspect of the EPAs is essential in strengthening not only North-South trade, but also South-South trade,
L. vzhledem k tomu, že nejméně rozvinuté země AKT získaly přístup na trh EU na principu režimu „Všechny produkty kromě zbraní“ (EBA),
L. whereas ACP Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have been granted market access to the EU under 'Everything But Arms' (EBA),
M. vzhledem k tomu, že článek 19 Dohody z Cotonou umožňuje, aby byl rámec spolupráce AKT-EU přizpůsoben individuálním podmínkám jednotlivých zemí AKT,
M. whereas Article 19 of the Cotonou Agreement allows the ACP-EU cooperation framework to be tailored to the individual circumstances of each ACP country,
P. vzhledem k tomu, že jednání EPA probíhají nyní čtvrtý rok, zdá se však, že je ještě mnoho překážek, mají-li být jednání ukončena do 31. prosince 2007, jak to je stanoveno v Dohodě z Cotonou; vzhledem k tomu, že článek XXIV GATT požaduje plán a harmonogram pro dokončení zóny volného obchodu „v rozumné době“,
P. whereas the EPA negotiations are currently in their fourth year, however it seems many hurdles remain if the negotiations are to be concluded by 31 December 2007 as provided for in the Cotonou Agreement ; whereas Article XXIV of GATT requires a plan and a schedule for completion of a free-trade area "within a reasonable length of time",
2. je přesvědčen, že vhodně navržené EPA jsou příležitostí k oživení obchodních vztahů AKT-EU, podpoře hospodářské diversifikace a regionální integrace AKT a snížení chudoby v zemích AKT;
Believes that, appropriately designed, EPAs represent an opportunity to revitalise ACP – EU trading relations, promote ACP economic diversification and regional integration, and reduce poverty in the ACP countries;
5. je přesvědčen, že k dosažení těchto rozvojových cílů by se měly EPA soustředit zejména na podporu řádné hospodářské správy, podporu regionální integrace ekonomik AKT a získání a udržení vyšší úrovně investic v zemích AKT;
Believes that in order to achieve these developmental objectives EPAs should notably focus on fostering good economic governance, promoting regional integration of ACP economies, and attracting and retaining higher levels of investment within ACP countries;
8. zdůrazňuje, že výsledky jednání EPA by měly poskytnout ochranu domácích a regionálních trhů výrobců AKT, která poskytne zemím AKT potřebný prostor pro politiky k prosazení vlastních rozvojových strategií;
Stresses that the outcome of the EPA negotiations should provide protection for ACP producers’ domestic and regional markets and allow ACP countries the necessary policy space to pursue their own development strategies;
11. zdůrazňuje důležitost veřejných služeb pro rozvoj a demokracii a v důsledku toho žádá Komisi, aby jednala obezřetně při posuzování liberalizace odvětví služeb a zejména aby chránila před liberalizací služby v oblasti vody, zdraví, vzdělávání, dopravy a energie;
Stresses the importance of public services for development and democracy and consequently asks the Commission to act with caution when considering the liberalisation of service sectors, and in particular to protect water, health, education, transport and energy from liberalisation;
15. naléhá na Komisi, aby prosazovala ambiciózní nové iniciativy vedoucí ke stabilizaci cen komodit, jež jsou pro rozvojové země podstatné, a zdůrazňuje důležitost iniciativ Komise ke stimulaci diverzifikace výrobků a vytváření přidané hodnoty;
Urges the Commission to pursue ambitious new initiatives to stabilise the price of commodities which are essential to developing countries, and stresses the importance of Commission initiatives to stimulate product diversification and value-added production;
19. vyzývá Komisi, aby do EPA zavedla bezpečnostní mechanismy, jež by zemím AKT poskytly dostatečný prostor v rámci politik, a bude-li to nutné, aby v případě problémů s platební bilancí nebo makroekonomických šoků dočasně pozastavovaly liberalizaci;
Calls on the Commission to introduce a safeguard mechanism in the EPAs, in order to provide the ACP with sufficient policy space and, if necessary, temporarily suspend liberalisation in the event of balance of payments difficulties or macro-economic shocks;
21. je si vědom důležitosti investic pro ekonomický rozvoj zemí AKT a vybízí Komisi, aby usilovala o změny v činnosti investičních možností EIB, aby tyto možnosti mohly podporovat další a pro rozvojové investice;
Noting the importance of investment for the economic development of the ACP, urges the Commission to seek changes in the working of the EIB's investment facility, to enable the facility to promote additional and pro-development investment;
23. vyzývá Komisi, aby věnovala zvláštní pozornost potřebám nejméně rozvinutých zemí a poskytla odpovídající podporu tvorbě kapacit a řešila omezení na straně dodavatelů, aby tak bylo těmto zemím umožněno využít přístupu na trh v rámci programu „Všechno kromě zbraní“;
Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the needs of LDCs and provide adequate support for capacity-building and to address supply-side constraints in order to allow such countries to take advantage of the market access granted under 'Everything But Arms';
30. připomíná Komisi, že se zdá neproveditelné, aby všechna regionální uskupení byla schopna začít postupně provádět asymetrické reciproční dohody o volném obchodu s EU do roku 2008, nebudou-li přijata odpovídající podpůrná opatření;
Reminds the Commission that it might not be feasible for all regional groupings to be in a position to begin gradually implementing an asymetrically reciprocal free trade agreement with the EU by 2008 unless adequate supporting measures are taken;
32. naléhá na Komisi, aby upřednostnila a zaměřila pozornost na zlepšení výrobních a zpracovatelských kapacit ve vnitrostátním a regionálním obchodě v rámci AKT před prováděním jakýchkoli recipročních EPA s EU;
Urges the Commission to focus its attention on and prioritise improving production and processing capacities, and national and regional trade within the ACP, rather than implementing any reciprocal EPA with the EU;
37. připomíná, že Dohoda z Cotonou stanoví, že v případě, že některá země či region si nepřeje podepsat EPA/FTA, neměly by se dostat do horšího postavení, pokud jde o jejich přístup na trh; vyzývá Komisi, aby prozkoumala všechny alternativní možnosti včetně nerecipročních režimů podle čl.
Calls on the Commission to make available alternatives for countries not willing to sign EPAs, and especially to consider a better implementation of a GSP+ regime,
38. vyzývá Komisi, aby zvážila, že EU a země AKT jsou dohromady dostatečně velkou skupinou, aby mohly požadovat případné reformy pravidel WTO tak, aby byla spravedlivější a více vyhovovala potřebám rozvojových zemí i malých evropských producentů;
Calls on the Commission to consider that EU and ACP countries together are a constituency large enough to demand for eventual reforms of WTO rules, to make them more just and suited to the needs of both developing countries and small European producers;
4 Dohody z Cotonou, a věří, že bude chápána jako příležitost zabývat se komplexním a reálným vyhodnocením rozsahu, ve kterém bude EPA podporovat vhodné podmínky pro vymýcení chudoby a pro rozkvět dlouhodobého sociálního a hospodářského rozvoje;
Welcomes the review of the EPA negotiations due to take place in 2006, as provided for in Article 37 (4) of the Cotonou Agreement, and trusts that it will be perceived as an opportunity to engage in a comprehensive and genuine assessment of the extent to which the EPAs will promote the appropriate conditions for poverty eradication and for long-term social and economic development to flourish;
44. pověřuje svého předsedu, aby předal toto usnesení Radě, Komisi, vládám členských států EU a zemí AKT, Radě AKT-EU a Smíšenému parlamentnímu shromáždění AKT-EU.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of the EU Member States and of the ACP countries, the ACP-EU Council and the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly.
Background and Legal Base
Background and Legal Base
Between 1975 and 2000 the EU's trade relationship with the ACP countries was governed by the Lomé Conventions which granted ACP countries unilateral preferential access to the European market.
Between 1975 and 2000 the EU's trade relationship with the ACP countries was governed by the Lomé Conventions which granted ACP countries unilateral preferential access to the European market.
The preferences enjoyed by ACP countries under Lomé were non-reciprocal.
The preferences enjoyed by ACP countries under Lomé were non-reciprocal.
In 2000, the Cotonou Partnership Agreement was signed, which was “centred on the objective of reducing and eventually eradicating poverty, consistent with sustainable development and the gradual integration of ACP countries into the world economy”
In 2000, the Cotonou Partnership Agreement was signed, which was “centred on the objective of reducing and eventually eradicating poverty, consistent with sustainable development and the gradual integration of ACP countries into the world economy”
Article 1 (2) of the Cotonou Agreement. .
Article 1 (2) of the Cotonou Agreement. .
As stipulated in the Cotonou Agreement, the EU and ACP countries began negotiating Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) - regional free trade agreements compatible with WTO rules – in September 2002.
As stipulated in the Cotonou Agreement, the EU and ACP countries began negotiating Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) - regional free trade agreements compatible with WTO rules – in September 2002.
Under the EPAs ACP countries have been asked to liberalize their markets and enter new reciprocal regional trading systems with the EU.
Under the EPAs ACP countries have been asked to liberalize their markets and enter new reciprocal regional trading systems with the EU.
For the purposes of the negotiations and the new trading system, Africa has been divided into four regional groups – based on, but not totally respecting, the existing regional organisations of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), and Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) – whilst the Caribbean and Pacific represent one regional group each.
For the purposes of the negotiations and the new trading system, Africa has been divided into four regional groups – based on, but not totally respecting, the existing regional organisations of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), and Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) – whilst the Caribbean and Pacific represent one regional group each.
One of the reasons for negotiating EPAs is that the EU’s non-reciprocal trade relationship with ACP countries granted under the Lomé Conventions and, in the interim period, under the Cotonou Agreement, is inconsistent with the WTO’s “enabling clause”.
One of the reasons for negotiating EPAs is that the EU’s non-reciprocal trade relationship with ACP countries granted under the Lomé Conventions and, in the interim period, under the Cotonou Agreement, is inconsistent with the WTO’s “enabling clause”.
Under this clause industrial countries are permitted to give unilateral non-reciprocal preferential treatment to just two categories of countries: either, all LDCs, or, all developing countries.
Under this clause industrial countries are permitted to give unilateral non-reciprocal preferential treatment to just two categories of countries: either, all LDCs, or, all developing countries.
As the ACP regions cover countries of both groups, the original preferences granted to the ACP countries are incompatible with current WTO rules.
As the ACP regions cover countries of both groups, the original preferences granted to the ACP countries are incompatible with current WTO rules.
At the founding of the WTO in 1995 the EU and ACP countries managed to secure a waiver to cover the Lomé Conventions which was then extended in Doha 2001 to cover the intervening period of the Cotonou Agreement.
At the founding of the WTO in 1995 the EU and ACP countries managed to secure a waiver to cover the Lomé Conventions which was then extended in Doha 2001 to cover the intervening period of the Cotonou Agreement.
However, in order to make the EU-ACP trade relationship WTO-compliant in the long-term, a solution has been sought in the EPAs.
However, in order to make the EU-ACP trade relationship WTO-compliant in the long-term, a solution has been sought in the EPAs.
Under the proposed EPAs the trade relationship between the EU and the different ACP regional groups will be reciprocal; EPAs will therefore be governed by GATT Article XXIV rather than its “enabling clause”.
Under the proposed EPAs the trade relationship between the EU and the different ACP regional groups will be reciprocal; EPAs will therefore be governed by GATT Article XXIV rather than its “enabling clause”.
Under Article XXIV countries at different levels of development can enter into a reciprocal free trade agreement providing that the liberalisation of “substantially all trade” occurs within a “reasonable length of time” – in the context of the EPAs this has come to be understood as roughly 90% of trade within 10-12 years
Under Article XXIV countries at different levels of development can enter into a reciprocal free trade agreement providing that the liberalisation of “substantially all trade” occurs within a “reasonable length of time” – in the context of the EPAs this has come to be understood as roughly 90% of trade within 10-12 years
Major Developments
Major Developments
Although the Cotonou Agreement was signed in June 2000, it took a further two years for the EU and the ACP to adopt formal negotiating mandates/guidelines for the EPAs.
Although the Cotonou Agreement was signed in June 2000, it took a further two years for the EU and the ACP to adopt formal negotiating mandates/guidelines for the EPAs.
In June 2002 EU Foreign Ministers adopted a mandate for the European Commission to negotiate EPAs, whilst on the ACP side, guidelines for negotiations were agreed by ACP Trade and Finance Ministers.
In June 2002 EU Foreign Ministers adopted a mandate for the European Commission to negotiate EPAs, whilst on the ACP side, guidelines for negotiations were agreed by ACP Trade and Finance Ministers.
The first phase of the negotiations (September 2002-September 2003) whereby ACP countries negotiated as a whole, did not lead to a formal agreement as was hoped for by the ACP countries.
The first phase of the negotiations (September 2002-September 2003) whereby ACP countries negotiated as a whole, did not lead to a formal agreement as was hoped for by the ACP countries.
Instead the EU and ACP adopted a joint report in September 2003 that simply listed convergences and divergences.
Instead the EU and ACP adopted a joint report in September 2003 that simply listed convergences and divergences.
Although this all-ACP-EU phase was never closed, in 2003 the regional negotiations were initiated between the EU and the ACP countries beginning with Central Africa and West Africa, and in 2004 with Eastern and Southern Africa, the Caribbean and lastly the Southern Africa Development Community.
Although this all-ACP-EU phase was never closed, in 2003 the regional negotiations were initiated between the EU and the ACP countries beginning with Central Africa and West Africa, and in 2004 with Eastern and Southern Africa, the Caribbean and lastly the Southern Africa Development Community.
Since the start of the regional negotiations, most have followed a broadly similar trajectory by establishing a Joint Roadmap between the EU and individual ACP region.
Since the start of the regional negotiations, most have followed a broadly similar trajectory by establishing a Joint Roadmap between the EU and individual ACP region.
The Roadmaps present the objectives, principles, structures and sequencing of negotiations for each EPA.
The Roadmaps present the objectives, principles, structures and sequencing of negotiations for each EPA.
In addition to the Joint Roadmaps, regions have established (or are currently in the process of establishing) Regional Preparatory Taskforces.
In addition to the Joint Roadmaps, regions have established (or are currently in the process of establishing) Regional Preparatory Taskforces.
The outcome of the current negotiation process - started under the legal framework of the Cotonou Agreement which is centred on the objective of poverty reduction - will be WTO-compatible regional free trade agreements aimed predominantly at progressive trade liberalisation; this hardly seems to respect the development objectives of the Cotonou Agreement itself.
The outcome of the current negotiation process - started under the legal framework of the Cotonou Agreement which is centred on the objective of poverty reduction - will be WTO-compatible regional free trade agreements aimed predominantly at progressive trade liberalisation; this hardly seems to respect the development objectives of the Cotonou Agreement itself.
Main Controversies and Concerns
Main Controversies and Concerns
The main objective of the Cotonou Agreement – and by extension the EPAs – is the reduction and eradication of poverty and the achievement of sustainable development.
The main objective of the Cotonou Agreement – and by extension the EPAs – is the reduction and eradication of poverty and the achievement of sustainable development.
After almost a year of regional negotiations, major concerns about the impact of EPAs on fragile ACP economies and indeed the effectiveness of trade liberalisation as a tool for development, have been raised by both NGOs and many ACP governments.
After almost a year of regional negotiations, major concerns about the impact of EPAs on fragile ACP economies and indeed the effectiveness of trade liberalisation as a tool for development, have been raised by both NGOs and many ACP governments.
In order to ensure that poverty reduction is the final outcome of the EPAs, a number of concerns need to be addressed within the following two years of negotiations.
In order to ensure that poverty reduction is the final outcome of the EPAs, a number of concerns need to be addressed within the following two years of negotiations.
Most controversial in terms of development is the requirement for a reciprocal trade relationship.
Most controversial in terms of development is the requirement for a reciprocal trade relationship.
It is clear that implementing a reciprocal free trade agreement will be extremely difficult for the ACP countries whose level of development is firstly, very much behind the EU's and secondly, varies a great deal within regions themselves.
It is clear that implementing a reciprocal free trade agreement will be extremely difficult for the ACP countries whose level of development is, firstly, very much behind the EU's and, secondly, varies a great deal within regions themselves.
The scope and terms of the trade preferences granted under the Lomé conventions were decided mainly by the EU and did not halt the decline in ACP market share.
The scope and terms of the trade preferences granted under the Lomé conventions were decided mainly by the EU and did not halt the decline in ACP market share.
However this does not mean that reciprocal free trade represents a better solution for strengthening ACP economies.
However this does not mean that reciprocal free trade represents a better solution for strengthening ACP economies.
Reciprocity represents a major shift in the EU's approach to development and trade policies with ACP partners; considering the negative impact that premature liberalisation may have on partner countries - as is now recognized by most development practitioners - it needs to be carefully sequenced.
Reciprocity represents a major shift in the EU's approach to development and trade policies with ACP partners; considering the negative impact that premature liberalisation may have on partner countries - as is now recognized by most development practitioners - it needs to be carefully sequenced.
The European Commission and the ACP countries therefore need to work in partnership to press for a revision of GATT Article XXIV, to allow for special and differential treatment for developing countries.
The European Commission and the ACP countries therefore need to work in partnership to press for a revision of GATT Article XXIV, to allow for special and differential treatment for developing countries.
The EU needs to use its powerful position in the WTO to push for greater flexibility.
The EU needs to use its powerful position in the WTO to push for greater flexibility.