Decision Maker

European Commission


Does European Commission have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning Edouard Philippe, Antonio Tajani, François de Rugy, Stanislas Guerini, Emmanuel Macron, Brigitte Macron, Donald Tusk, nicolas hulot, Council of the European Union, European Parliament, European Com...

Coller des animaux vivants : NON MERCI

Le Conseil d'Etat valide la chasse à la glu.   Je m'appelle Laurent KLEIN-PIERRON, je suis directeur de jardinerie et engagé politiquement comme animateur local au sein de la République En Marche à Montigny les Metz en Moselle. Je ne me prétends pas être particulièrement écologiste ou défenseur de la cause animale mais simplement un citoyen responsable qui pense que la barbarie n'a pas sa place dans les grandes démocraties. Comment prétendre vouloir sauver la planète et d'un autre côté ne pas se préoccuper d'un acteur majeur de la biodiversité qui disparait années après années. Malgré nos différences je pense que l'on peut se rassembler sur un sujet « transpartisan » qui nous concerne tous. Cette chasse dite «traditionnelle», jugée «cruelle» par les défenseurs des oiseaux, consiste à capturer des oiseaux à l’aide de baguettes en bois enduites de glu et dissimulées dans la végétation, sur des arbres ou buissons. Les chasseurs viennent ensuite décoller ceux qui ont été pris au piège et les nettoyer, souvent à l’aide d’un solvant. Gardés vivants, les oiseaux sont placés dans des petites cages, pour attirer grâce à leur présence leurs congénères, qui seront tirés au fusil. "Ils oublient que restant collés, (les oiseaux) peuvent se blesser et mourir d'épuisement ou de stress dans leur tentative de libération. En outre, le 'prélèvement' de l'animal par les chasseurs se réalise avec des solvants toxiques. S'il parvient toutefois à être défait de cette glu, l'oiseau peut également présenter des lésions traumatiques qui lui seront fatales les heures suivantes" Tous ensemble mobilisons nous pour faire pression sur les pouvoirs publics et la commission Européenne pour que cette chasse barbare soit bannie. Il est inadmissible dans les démocraties qui se disent mobilisées pour sauver la planète nous ne nous préoccupions pas des habitants de celle-ci. Protéger la biodiversité n'est pas une passion ou un hobby pour bobos parisiens mais une nécessité pour la planète et l'équilibre de la vie sur terre.  En seulement 30 ans, plus de 420 millions d'oiseaux en Europe ont disparu La sixième extinction massive de la biodiversité est bien en marche : en seulement 30 ans, 421 millions d'oiseaux ont disparu, non pas sur Terre mais seulement en Europe ! C'est l'estimation édifiante réalisée par une étude publiée dans le journal scientifique Ecology Letters. Pour les auteurs, « le déclin global de la biodiversité est sans précédent » (dans l'histoire de l'humanité). Les alertes scientifiques, les mobilisations internationales et locales semblent inefficaces devant le rouleau-compresseur d'une société marchande aveugle à son propre support de vie. Résultat : les écosystèmes s'appauvrissent ou sont méthodiquement stérilisés comme en témoigne le projet de barrage de Sivens en France qui a détruit une zone humide remarquable qui abritait de nombreuses espèces pourtant « protégées ». Si quelques espèces en voie d'extinction connaissent parfois un peu de répit, elles sont trop souvent les représentantes de la biodiversité symbolique, celle qui marque les esprits : pandas, baleines… Laissant de côté les espèces plus communes, dont les oiseaux, qui paient pourtant un lourd tribut. Cette étude menée par Richard Inger et Richard Gregory s'est basée sur 144 espèces d'oiseaux européens sur une échelle de 30 ans. Les données exploitées proviennent du Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme En effet, ces oiseaux offrent de multiples avantages pour les écosystèmes : ils aident à lutter contre les ravageurs en contrôlant leur prolifération, ils disséminent les graines des fruits qu'ils mangent et participent ainsi à la reproduction des végétaux. De plus, les oiseaux détritivores jouent un rôle clé dans l'élimination des charognes dans l'environnement. En outre, pour beaucoup de gens, les oiseaux demeurent le principal moyen dont ils interagissent avec les animaux sauvages, en écoutant leurs chants, en profitant de leur présence, en les alimentant et les observant. https://www.birdlife.org/europe-and-central-asia/news/les-oiseaux-des-champs-une-population-en-voie-de-disparition-en-europe MOBILISONS NOUS !!! MERCI POUR VOTRE CONTRIBUTION

Laurent KLEIN-PIERRON
242,130 supporters
Petitioning Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Parliament, Ban Ki-moon (Secretary-General of the United Nations), United Nations

Premio Nobel de la Paz para Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart

Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart fueron los primeros presos políticos encerrados por el procés de Catalunya. Fueron acusados de un supuesto delito de sedición y enviados a la cárcel de Soto del Real en octubre de 2017. Están en prisión por sus ideas políticas y por ejercer sus derechos de expresión y participación política sin haber usado jamás la violencia. Que estén privados de libertad precisamente por estas causas es una vulneración del derecho internacional. Por eso pedimos el Premio Nobel de la Paz para Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart. Firma aquí para que le den este reconocimiento a su labor por expresar la voluntad de un pueblo. Durante estos meses, los Jordis han permanecido en una prisión del Estado español y sus únicas vías de contacto con el mundo exterior son el correo postal y alguna visita ocasional. “Nuestras instituciones han recibido un ataque sin precedentes, pero la respuesta también lo está siendo: más serenos que nunca, más cívicos y pacíficos que nunca, pero con todo el coraje y la determinación”, dijo Jordi Cuixart poco después de su ingreso en prisión. Firma si tú también crees que ambos merecen el Premio Nobel de la Paz, que se otorga a personas que han contribuido notablemente a la sociedad. [English version]

Rita Bocca
150,302 supporters
Petitioning European Commission

Für ein EU-weites Verbot von Wildtieren im Zirkus

Am Ostermontag kam es in Spanien zu einem Verkehrsunfall mit fünf Zirkuselefanten. Der Unfall führte zum Tod eines Elefanten und zwei weitere wurden schwer verletzt. Nur durch Zufall wurden keine Menschen verletzt. Diese Tragödie hätte verhindert werden können - deshalb fordere ich ein Verbot des Einsatzes von Wildtieren in Zirkussen in der Europäischen Union. Aktuelle Berichte belegen schockierende Zwischenfälle mit der Bevölkerung und wilden Tieren in Zirkussen in ganz Europa. Nicht selten sind dabei  Zirkusunternehmen  und deren Tiere beteiligt, welche auf dem ganzen Kontinent unterwegs sind und so die Gesundheit sowie Sicherheit der europäischen Bürger gefährden. So ist in Spanien vor einigen Wochen bereits zum fünften Mal in Folge der Ausbruch eines Flußpferds dokumentiert worden. Die Elefanten, die bei dem jüngsten Unfall beteiligt waren, waren auf dem Weg zu ihrem nächsten Aufführungsort mit dem spanischen Circus Gottani. Die Tiere wurden vor Jahren illegal  aus Deutschland geschmuggelt und in der Folge u.a. durch Frankreich, Lettland, Litauen, Irland und schließlich Spanien transportiert. Die Familie, der die Elefanten gehören, ist in der Vergangenheit schon durch fahrlässiges Verhalten aufgefallen, welches zu mehreren Vorkommnissen geführt hat. Die große Mehrheit der EU-Mitgliedstaaten hat den Einsatz von Wildtieren in Zirkussen bereits verboten oder stark eingeschränkt. Die Europäische Tierärztevereinigung  hat die europäischen wie auch die zuständigen Behörden der Mitgliedsstaaten bereits aufgefordert, den Einsatz von Säugetieren wild lebender Arten in Wanderzirkussen zu verbieten. Auch ich fordere das Ende dieser Praxis. Es ist an der Zeit, dass die Europäische Union handelt. Nur so können die physischen und psychischen Leiden von Wildtieren in Zirkussen beendet und die damit verbundenen Risiken für die öffentliche Sicherheit verringert werden. Bitte unterschreiben und teilen.

Infocircos .org
866,202 supporters
Petitioning Karmenu Vella, European Commission, Antonio Tajani, Sergio Costa

Garantire il diritto alla riparabilità nel pacchetto sull'economia circolare in Europa

Per il Diritto alla Riparazione Rischiamo di perdere un’occasione unica per trasformare la nostra attuale economia “usa e getta”: c’è il rischio concreto che i paesi membri dell’Unione Europea diluiscano o votino contro alcune misure chiave del Pacchetto sull’Economia Circolare, che stipula prodotti più riparabili e più longevi. L’Italia e’ tra i paesi che stanno bloccando il voto. L’Italia deve pubblicamente cessare di opporsi al voto. Perché questo è fondamentale? Non c’è mai stata così tanta sensibilità tra la gente e così tanto supporto per la lotta contro gli sprechi, con la crisi della plastica nel mare e lo spreco alimentare che hanno visto una mobilizzazione di massa attraverso l’Europa e nel mondo durante quest’ultimo anno. E oltre il cibo e il packaging, il pubblico vuole che tutti i prodotti siano migliori. Un’inchiesta realizzata da Eurobarometer rivela che il 77% dei cittadini europei è a favore di prodotti più riparabili. **A livello globale, questo è l’anno in cui, secondo le stime, produrremo circa 50 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti elettronici, l’equivalente di quasi 1000 Titanic** La Commissione Europea ha lavorato per anni sul Pacchetto sull’economia circolare con politiche per governare le risorse ed i rifiuti, che fissano obiettivi per il riciclo più ambiziosi e nuove misure che renderanno elettrodomestici e prodotti elettronici più riparabili e longevi garantendo: l’accesso ai pezzi di ricambio la documentazione per la riparazione la facilità di smontaggio Non sono solo gli euroscettici che stanno cercando di bloccare questi nuovi standard trasformativi. Fabbricanti e lobbisti al soldo delle multinazionali stanno lavorando dietro le quinte per far naufragare le misure più innovative e più pro-pianeta che siano mai state avanzate. É arrivato il momento per l’Italia di intervenire affinché l’Europa difenda gli interessi della maggioranza dei suoi cittadini. Come la grande maggioranza dei cittadini europei, anche noi in Italia siamo stanchi dell’obsolescenza prematura dei prodotti che compriamo. E l’anno scorso, il Parlamento Europeo ha preso posizione votando in favore di prodotti elettronici più riparabili. L’Italia deve sostenere il Diritto alla Riparazione, che allo stesso tempo aiuterà i nostri portafogli, e salverà il pianeta. Come sarà consegnata Se riusciamo a raccogliere un numero sufficiente di firme, consegneremo la petizione al governo italiano a Roma e alla delegazione italiana presso l’Unione Europea, a Bruxelles.

Restarters Milano-GiacimentiUrbani
102,246 supporters
Victory
Petitioning United Nations

I stand with Carola Rackete

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty." The captain of the Sea-Watch 3 charity rescue vessel threatened Tuesday to enter Italian waters illegally to bring 42 migrants to shore after they spent 13 days in limbo at sea. Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has banned the Dutch-flagged vessel from approaching under a "closed ports" policy, which has seen migrants repeatedly stranded at sea. "I will enter Italian waters and bring them to safety on Lampedusa," Carola Rackete said in an interview with La Repubblica daily, in reference to Italy's southernmost island. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg on Tuesday declined to intervene but called on Italy to "continue to provide all necessary assistance" to vulnerable migrants. The German NGO Sea-Watch had asked the ECHR to impose "interim measures" on Italy, saying the court could ask Rome to take urgent steps to resolve the standoff in order to "prevent serious and irremediable violations of human rights". Salvini said Tuesday the charity vessel could "stay there until Christmas and New Year" but would never be allowed in. Of the 53 migrants initially rescued by the Sea-Watch 3 off Libya on June 12, Italy took in 11 vulnerable people. "That's enough! Whatever Strasbourg tells us, with great serenity we will maintain our position," Salvini said. "Imagine if a country like Italy -- the second-largest industrial power in Europe -- let an NGO dictate immigration rules," he said. On Lampedusa, where Salvini's far-right League won 45 percent in May's European elections, a priest has camped in the street to demand those on board -- including three minors -- be allowed to disembark. Dozens of German cities have said they are ready to welcome them, and the Bishop of Turin, Cesare Noviglia, said Monday his diocese would be willing to take them in. "We can't hold on any longer. It's like we're in a prison because we are deprived of everything. Help us, think of us," one migrant from the Ivory Coast said in a video broadcast by Sea-Watch. In January, 32 migrants rescued by the vessel were stranded on board for 18 days before they were allowed to disembark in Malta thanks to a distribution deal made between several European countries. Those on board Sea-Watch 3 risk prosecution for aiding illegal immigration, as well as the seizure of the boat and a fine of 50,000 euros, according to a new decree of the Italian Minister of the Interior. Doctors Without Borders humanitarian affairs adviser Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui told the Star: “Every stand-off at sea further exposes how broken the European asylum system is, as politicians prioritise political point-scoring rather than the wellbeing of vulnerable people. “Men, women and children continue to flee Libya, where many suffer in detention centres in inhumane conditions amidst an active conflict. There must be sustainable, reliable and predictable disembarkation systems for survivors where they will be treated humanely and will be able to seek asylum. “As European governments criminalise search and rescue efforts, we see that they are losing their humanity. “Fining humanitarian actors for rescuing people at sea is like fining ambulances for bringing patients to hospital. “Saving lives is not a crime, it’s a duty. Life must prevail over political grandstanding.” We urge the European Institutions, the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights to take action and protect Carola against any charges. Saving life cannot be crimilanized. 

Tara Riva
101,284 supporters
Petitioning European Parliament, European Commission, Council of the European Union

Respect, promote and protect freedom of informed vaccination consent throughout Europe

Français  Italiano  Español  Deutsch  Polskie   Hrvatski  Português  Norsk  Slovene   Svenska  Magyar  Česky  Slovensky  Lietuviška. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states clearly: ‘Free and informed consent must be respected in the fields of medicine and biology’[1].   Approximately 40% of EU citizens[2] do not however have this basic right when faced with the medical act of vaccination.  This is a breach of our Universal Human Rights.  In 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe’[3], so mandatory vaccination as imposed on these citizens is not medically or ethically acceptable, especially where medical, religious or philosophical exemptions are not allowed. The EFVV (http://www.efvv.eu), a group representing some 20 European countries (both EU member states and non-EU members) is therefore demanding: 1.     That compulsory vaccination be abolished throughout Europe as it is a breach of our Universal Human Rights, 2.   That mandatory vaccination never be introduced in any country where vaccines are only recommended at present. 3.     That the Precautionary Principle be applied in the case of vaccination in Europe, 4.     That European citizens benefit from freedom of fully informed vaccination choice and consent, 5.     That an effective, independent European Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting (VAER) system be established to monitor vaccine safety. Whatever your own government’s policy, please unite by signing and then sharing this petition far and wide. In 2016, it is estimated that nearly 400 million Europeans in EU member countries enjoy freedom of informed vaccination choice but approximately 258 million do not [4].  Vaccinations are mandatory in Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia[5] and potentially other countries if new members, e.g. Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia or others join the European Union.  We therefore call on all Europeans to stand together in a demand for a united vaccination policy based on freedom of informed choice and consent.  We also demand the formation of an independent and effective vaccino-vigilance unit with transparency and public availability of results.  We believe that mandatory vaccination must be abolished and an effective Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting (VAER) system established because: Any involuntary or enforced medical treatment is a breach of:        o   the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights,       o   the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,       o   the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child,       o   the European Council’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine,       o   the European Charter of Patients’ Rights,       o   the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,        o   and even the Nuremberg Code (a set of research ethics principles for medical experimentation on humans set as a result of the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second World War). In detail: The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states clearly: ‘Everyone has the right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity’[6].  It also states: ‘Free and informed consent must be respected in the fields of medicine and biology’[7] and lastly: ‘The prohibition of eugenic practices and of making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain must be respected’[8].The European Council’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine states clearly: ‘The interests and welfare of the human being shall prevail over the sole interest of society or science’[9].  It also states: ‘An intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it.  This person shall beforehand be given appropriate information as to the purpose and nature of the intervention as well as on its consequences and risks.  The person concerned may freely withdraw consent at any time.’[10]The European Charter of Patients’ Rights states clearly: ‘Every individual has the right of access to all information that might enable him or her to actively participate in the decisions regarding his or her health; this information is a prerequisite for any procedure and treatment, including the participation in scientific research (4 – Right to Consent)[11]’.  It also states:  ‘Each individual has the right to freely choose from among different treatment procedures and providers on the basis of adequate information (5 – Right to Free Choice)’[12] and also ‘Each individual has the right to be free from harm caused by the poor functioning of health services, medical malpractice and errors, and the right of access to health services and treatments that meet high safety standards (9 – Right to Safety)’[13].The UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child states clearly: ‘Parents … have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern’[14].The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states clearly: ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes… freedom … to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance’[15].The Nuremberg Code states clearly: ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.’[16]Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), which would include Vaccine Adverse Effects (VAEs), are reported to be the fifth-leading cause of hospital death in the EU[17] but this could be even higher since there is gross under-reporting of these events, as acknowledged by David Kessler, head of the FDA during most of the 90s[18], and in the case of vaccines, failure to acknowledge a causal link is a further problem.The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe’[19].According to the German Criminal Code [20], vaccination is an invasive medical act causing bodily harm and as such, it requires the informed consent of either the individual being vaccinated or his/her carers.  It has however been acknowledged officially that there are still enormous gaps in current scientific knowledge regarding vaccination, so the provision of full and comprehensive prior information is simply not possible.  Vaccine package inserts[21] list many possible adverse effects, sometimes including death.  As long as there is risk involved in a medical procedure, if safety cannot be guaranteed and if comprehensive prior information cannot be given, the Precautionary Principle must be applied.It has been shown in regions with freedom of informed vaccination choice that high WHO-recommended levels of vaccine uptake are achieved without mandatory vaccination [22].Each European country sees legal responsibility for vaccine damage differently but in the main, medical and political authorities as well as the vaccine manufacturers are not fully accountable, leaving victims with no compensation or support.No significant research has yet been done to compare the health of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children but there are an increasing number of studies suggesting that unvaccinated children enjoy far greater health than their vaccinated peers[23].  This is an area where further research is needed. Given all of the above, we demand: 1.  That mandatory vaccination be abolished in all European countries, 2.  That mandatory vaccination never be introduced in any country where vaccines are only recommended at present, 3.  That the Precautionary Principle be applied in the case of vaccination in Europe, 4.  That European citizens benefit from freedom of fully informed vaccination choice and consent, a universal human right, 5.  And that an independent vaccino-vigilance unit be established where Vaccine Adverse Effects (VAEs) will be reported and the number and severity of VAEs in Europe will be easily accessible to all.  Footnotes: [1] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9 [2] Calculated using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_population and http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg [3] Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 131 S. Ct. 1068, 179 L.Ed.2d 1 (2011), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf [4] Calculated using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_population and http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg[5] http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg[6] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9[7] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9[8] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9.[9] http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm, Article 2 – Primacy of the Human Being[10] http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm, Article 5 – General Rule[11]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 5[12]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 5[13]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 6[14] http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx, Article 18[15] https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20999/volume-999-I-14668-English.pdf, Article 18, page 8.[16] http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf, Item 1, page 1[17] Arlett, Dr. Peter, Setting the Scene: New European Union Pharmacovigilance Legislation, November 2012, slide 6 - (http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Presentation/2013/01/WC500137839.pdf) and also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4412588/ [18] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16689555 [19] Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 131 S. Ct. 1068, 179 L.Ed.2d 1 (2011), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf [20]http://www.impfkritik.de/upload/pdf/Koerperverletzung/Koerperverletzung-IfSG-Erdle.pdf: §§ 20-22 (§ 223 in the German Criminal Code)[21] http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm [22] For example, uptake is at 97% in Scotland: http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Child-Health/publications/index.asp [23] http://www.vaxchoicevt.com/science/studies-comparing-vaccinated-to-unvaccinated-populations/, http://www.efi-online.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/VaccineFreeChildrenHealthier.pdf,  http://www.rescuepost.com/files/mawson-et-al-2017-vax-unvax-jnl-translational-science.pdf and  http://vaccineinjury.info/survey/comparison-of-the-state-of-health-of-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-children.html

Secretary European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance (EFVV)
225,313 supporters
Petitioning International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Conservation International, World Wildlife Fund, European Commission, United Nations Environment Program, United Nations Development Program, Gov...

Completely Re - Work the Overall Management Plan for the Sinharaja National Forest Reserve

As the island's largest remaining tract of untouched lowland tropical rainforest, the Sinharaja National Forest Reserve's current overall management plan is in dire need of re - working. Although it was first declared as a National Forest Reserve (referred to in this petition as the Sinharaja NFR) on the 3rd of May 1875 (under the Waste Lands Ordinance), it has since had a second national designation (the highest one available on the island), as well as three international designations attached, and they are as follows (in order of importance): 1. Individual Natural UNESCO World Heritage Site (1989) 2. International UNESCO Man & Biosphere Reserve (April 1978) 3. National Heritage Wilderness Area (National Designation) (October 21st 1988) 4. Important Bird & Biodiversity Area (BirdLife International) (2004) As a result of its two UNESCO designations, the Sinharaja NFR is legally required to be divided into three different zones, and they are as follows (interior to exterior): 1. The Core Zone (strict eco - system and landscape protection/conservation) 2. The Buffer Zone (scientific research and compatible ecological practices) 3. The Transitional or Peripheral Zone (sustainable economic development) If the Sinharaja NFR's overall management plan is to be effectively re - worked then recognition, demarcation and enforcement of the Buffer and Transitional/Peripheral Zones is critical to achieving such a target. To achieve this both the aforementioned zones need to have their overall width increased to 2 miles each (a total of 4 miles). The Buffer Zone should be restricted to eco - system related scientific research and should remain an untouched wilderness, that serves the purpose of safeguarding the Reserve's Core Zone. The Transitional or Peripheral Zone should be divided into two 1 mile width segments, with the inner segment being managed through the planting of tall grass barriers, while the outer segment should be utilised for the purposes of conducting sustainable agriculture/agro - forestry (the latter preferably with floral varieties that are unfavourable to the dietary requirements of the Lowland Tropical Rainforest Elephants living within the Reserve. Finally, all of the villages located within the two aforementioned zones, need to be removed and relocated to suitable locations outside the Reserve's three zones. This would help relieve a large amount of the pressure that is currently placed upon the Reserve on a daily basis, and help reduce instances of the Human - Wildlife Conflict in the Reserve's vicinity (which would be mutually beneficial to all the parties involved). Keep in mind that an estimated 8000 - 10000 people live in 20 villages that almost completely surround the Reserve, so assistance for the removals and relocations mentioned above, should be be sought from the relevant Divisional Secretariats, the Land Reform Commission, the Central Environmental Authority and the appropriate Ministries.    Additionally, the Reserve is (for management purposes), divided into two sectors and four sub - sectors by the Department of Forest Conservation (hereafter referred to as the DFC), due to the different types of eco - regions that the Reserve covers: 1. The Western Sector (Lowland Tropical Rainforest) Further divided into North Western & South Western Sub - Sectors2. The Eastern Sector (Sub - Montane or Lower Montane Forest) Further divided into North Eastern & South Eastern Sub - SectorsThe Eastern Sector of the Sinharaja NFR (both sub - sectors included) (hereafter referred to as Eastern Sinharaja) is of particular importance to the scientific community, due to its location in the nearly completely devastated Sub - Montane Wet Zone. The forests found in this eco - region are unique, and different ecologically to the island's Lowland Tropical Rainforests and Cloud Montane Forests. This forest type is also (as of the 28th of June 2018), the most critically threatened forest type on the island, occupying only 0.05% of the island, even though only an estimated 45% of the flora and fauna contained within such forests is known to science. Furthermore, Eastern Sinharaja's terrain is extremely hilly and nearly impassible, thereby making this sector inaccessible to the vast majority of the island's human population. This has resulted in Eastern Sinharaja's retention of forests and eco - systems that are millions of years old and virtually untouched, creating a "Lost World" that continues to inspire, amaze and interest the general public, despite the technological advancements of the 21st century. It also needs to be noted, that the Sinharaja NFR is part of its own Collective Protected Area (hereafter referred to as a CPA), the South Western Biodiversity Super Cluster, and is the largest Protected Area (hereafter referred to as a PA) in the heavily fragmented Sinharaja Rainforest Complex which includes a number of PAs: 1. The Dellawa P.R. (Other State Forest) 2. The Morapitiyarunakanda P.R. (Other State Forest) 3. The Waratalgoda P.R. (Other State Forest) 4. The Neluketiyamukalana P.R. (Other State Forest) 5. The Kudumiriya P.R. (Other State Forest)  6. The Delgoda Conservation Forest Any re - worked management plan, needs to include the six PAs mentioned above and ensure the integration of such PAs into the Sinharaja NFR, an action that will increase the current size of the Reserve (298 square kilometres), to a size that is more conducive to its long term future. Furthermore, there is an estimated 2500 acres of unprotected, primary Lowland Tropical Rainforest under the control of the Land Reform Commission (hereafter referred to as the LRC), which needs to be integrated into the Sinharaja NFR (as a result of Cabinet Paper No. PS/CS/26/2004, dated as on the 22nd of July 2004), an action that after 18 years, has yet to actually be implemented. This would expand the overall size of the Reserve to 323 square kilometres, especially important for the last remaining Lowland Tropical Rainforest Elephants (one of the island's three regional Elephant variants), as it would ensure the expansion of their continuously dwindling range, thus contributing towards their future existence. As of the 28th of June 2018, there are only two such Elephants in the Sinharaja NFR, both of which are males (and are thought to be siblings). Since there are no female Elephants of this regional variant present, these two males have turned their sexual frustrations into anger, and directed it towards certain villages on the Reserve's Boundary (i.e. where the Core and Buffer Zones converge). It is very important to remember, that this anger is entirely justified as the inhabitants of certain villages engage in illegal activities such as deforestation, poaching, illicit alcohol production, land grabbing, unauthorised construction etc, etc, and have tried to badly maim/murder the two aforementioned Elephants, in order to freely carry out such illegal activities. Additionally, plantation companies involved in tea and rubber production, have illegally encroached upon several historical Elephant corridors, blocking the Elephants traditional (localised) migratory routes. Under this much pressure, retaliation by these two Elephants is expected, but such issues are solvable. The introduction of 2 - 4 domesticated female Lowland Tropical Rainforest Elephants (following a period of rehabilitation and close monitoring), would satisfy the needs of the two Bulls, and lay the groundwork for the recovery of this regional variant's overall population (important given the fact that historically, the highest density of Elephants on the island, was found within the Wet - Zone's Lowland Tropical Rainforests, Sub - Montane or Lower Montane Forests and Cloud Montane Forests). Currently the two Sinharaja Bull Elephants traverse the length and breadth of the Reserve's Eastern Sector, alongside (potentially) the highest density of Black Leopards on the island. This is a result of a recessive allele, which in Leopards tends to emerge in the tallest, thickest, greenest forest types, which usually are low in light penetration (in this case the three forest types mentioned above have the highest chance of ensuring the birth of a Black Leopard). Based on the number of Black Leopards that have been killed on the Reserve's Boundary, estimates have suggested that there are anywhere between 10 - 20 Black Leopards living in the Sinharaja NFR (with the majority of them inhabiting the Reserve's Eastern Sector). The issues surrounding the last two Lowland Tropical Rainforest Elephants evolved into a serious political struggle between the Ministry of Sustainable Development, Wildlife and Regional Development (hereafter referred to as the MSDWRD) and the Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment (hereafter referred to as the MMDE), following the decisions made by both the Minister (Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka) and the Deputy Minister (Palitha Thewarapperuma) of the MSDWRD (due to the demands of two particular villages located on the Reserve's Boundary), to remove and relocate the two Elephants in question, inevitably signing their death warrants, given their specialist behaviours and dietary requirements as a regional variant. However, thanks to the intervention of the Minister (President Maithripala Sirisena) of the MMDE, this action was halted indefinitely, before it was carried out. This state of affairs has also undermined the authority and mandate of the DFC, as the Department of Wildlife Conservation (hereafter referred to as the DWC), was selected to carry out the removal and relocation operation. Adding to the already hostile rivalry between the DFC and the DFC (with the same applying to their parent ministries), the selection of the DWC resulted in public erosion of the DFC's control and authority over the Sinharaja NFR. Ergo, if the DFC is to effectively manage and safeguard the Reserve, then the DWC should never be allowed to undermine the DFC's mandate in any manner, ever again. Instead, the DWC should follow the lead of the DFC, with regards to the administration of the Reserve's wildlife, and work in conjunction with the former, to achieve the goals relating to wildlife conservation in and around Sinharaja (i.e. through cooperation, knowledge sharing and diffusion). For those who aren't aware, the Sinharaja NFR is among the top five most valuable PAs on the island, with a floral endemism percentage that is over 60% and a faunal endemism percentage that is over 50% (extremely impressive, given the Reserve's currently dwindling size). As far as large or "charismatic" mammalian fauna are concerned, the overall populations aren't as secure or numerous as those in the island's Dry - Zone, though the sheer variety and number of endemic avian fauna is more than enough to make up for this large mammalian fauna deficit. Species such as the Sri Lankan Wood Pigeon, the Red - Faced Malkoha, the Green - Billed Coucal, the Sri Lankan Blue Magpie and the Sri Lankan Hanging Parrot, are among the numerous avian endemics that inhabit the Reserve. Examples of endemic mammalian fauna include the Southern Lowland Wet - Zone Purple - Faced Langur (alternatively known as the Purple - Faced Leaf Monkey) and the Sri Lankan Leopard. Other genera that display high degrees of endemism include Reptiles and Amphibians (the latter of which has nine species identified as endemic). It should be noted that as far as flora is concerned, the average height of the Reserve's canopy is between 35 - 40 metres on average, with certain heights (impressively) exceeding 50 metres. Additionally the Reserve is an ecological laboratory for butterflies (which form an order classified as Lepidoptera), with over 50% of the aforementioned order identified as endemics to the island's Lowland Wet - Zone.  All of the steps mentioned above are absolutely necessary to ensure the Reserve's future, indirectly and directly benefiting the numerous communities that depend on the Reserve's existence, for their financial needs, thereby enhancing the standards of living and education in the process. As such, the support of the general public is needed, in order to bring about the changes (as well as the associated, positive dividends) mentioned above, safeguarding the Sinharaja National Forest Reserve.

John Wilson
63,018 supporters
Petitioning Denise Nyakeru Tshisekedi, Ida sawyer, Chantal Mulop, Denise DUSAUCHOY, United Nations, European Commission, Michelle Obama, UNICEF, Donald J. Trump

Exigeons la condamnation de tous les violeurs collectifs de la mineure de 13 ans en #rdc

KINSHASA : AFFAIRE VIOL COLLECTIF SUR UNE ÉLÈVE DE 13 ANS DE L'ÉCOLE REV. KIM, LE VERDICT EST TOMBÉ SUR LES 14 GARÇONS : 2 condamnations et 5 acquittements. Les 5 acquittés sont notamment ceux qui ont doigté la fille et ceux qui ont introduit leurs verges dans sa bouche, 7 autres dont on a préféré flouer les noms parce qu'ils sont fils des personnalités qui ont acheté la justice. La fille et sa soeur ont été renvoyées de l'école alors que les violeurs ont passés leurs examens sans problème. Rappelons que les faits se sont produits le 17 Mai dernier à l'initiative d'un groupe d'élève de ladite école qui avaient pris en location un appartement à Gombe pour organiser un barbecue. Vexé par l'attitude de la victime d'inciter ses amies à quitter le lieu, l'élève Osée Autsaï (Petits-fils du Sénateur Autsaï) dilua de la drogue dans la bouteille de soda que prenait la fille qui la paralysa. Osée n'avait plus qu'à la conduire dans la chambre de l'appartement, abuser d'elle, la filmer puis appeler ses amis pour en faire ce qu'ils veulent. Parmi les violeurs, outre Osée Autsaï, il y a également le fils de l'honorable Mike Mukebay et d'autres députés nationaux. P.S.: Nous continuons à croire que la justice est toujours partisane dans ce pays. 10.000$ payé par les parents d'un violeur pour que soit acquitté leur fils ne peut remettre à cette fille sa virginité. Exigeons la condamnation de tous les violeurs. Je suis une mère, j'ai le devoir sacré de me protéger et protéger ma progéniture. Mobilisons-nous afin que la justice fasse son travail et que ces enfants aient une sentence exemplaire. UN VIOL EST UN VIOL, TOLÉRANCE ZÉRO.

Denise DUSAUCHOY
57,082 supporters
Petitioning European Commission, Council of the European Union, European Parliament

Act now to stop the EU vape tax

The European Commission is holding a public consultation into the taxation of tobacco and vaping products, ending on 3rd September (1). Consumer associations and tobacco harm reduction organizations are issuing an urgent call for mobilization. Answer the questionnaire >> Public consultation on excise duties applied to manufactured tobacco and the possible taxation of novel products. Vaping has enabled more than 7.5 million Europeans to stop smoking and helped a further 9 million to reduce their cigarette consumption (2). Sin taxes (excise duties) are not justifiable on consumer products which are not tobacco products and which are far less harmful to health than combustible tobacco. Any harmonization project should instead look to prohibiting the levy of excise duty on vaping products in the European Union. Vaping products do not contain tobacco and are not combustible. Vaping does not therefore produce smoke, carbon monoxide or tar, and vaping is at least 95% less harmful to health than smoking combustible cigarettes (3). Vaping products are not tobacco products and the users of vaping products should not have to suffer a punitive and unjustified tax. Taxation on vaping products ultimately protects smoking, as is shown by the effects in the population in countries which have already introduced a taxation: Italy, Portugal, Greece, Estonia and Hungary. The results in these countries show that punitive taxation would undermine the measures introduced by the European Tobacco Directive (TPD), which was designed to protect people’s health (4). In a recent similar consultation, in 2016, 89.88% of respondents rejected the suggestion of taxing vaping products. That should suffice! We call on those concerned about public health, those concerned about the right of access to reduced risk products, including for the most disadvantaged, and those who want the right to protect their own health, to respond to the Commission's public consultation on the taxation of tobacco products and vaping. The consultation is available in the various languages. We are accompanying this appeal with an online petition to defend the right of access to tax-free vaping throughout Europe. Acvoda (Netherlands)Aiduce (France)Anesvape (Spain)ANPVU (Italy)Cyprus Vaping Association (Cyprus)DADAFO (Denmark)IG-ED (Germany)Initiativ Fräien Damp Lëtzebuerg (Luxembourg)La vape du Coeur (France)NNA Suitsuvaba Eesti (Estonia)NNA Sweden (Sweden)NNA UK (United Kingdom)ÖDC (Austria)Sovape (France)UBV-BDB (Belgium)Villanypára Egyesület (Hungary) References: (1) Public consultation on excise duties applied to manufactured tobacco and the possible taxation of novel products : https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco- and-possible-taxation-novel-products_en(2) According to Eurobarometer 458, conducted in March 2017.(3) Nicotine without smoke, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016(4) DIRECTIVE 2014/40/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and tobacco-related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC   DEUTSCH Nein zu einer „Tabaksteuer“ auf E-Dampfprodukte. Lasst uns die EU zur Vernunft bringen Die Europäische Kommission hält derzeit eine öffentliche Konsultation zum Thema Besteuerung von Tabak und E-Dampfprodukten ab, die am 3. September enden wird. Verbrauchervereinigungen und Organisationen zur Minimierung der Gesundheitsschäden durch Tabakgenuss („Harm Reduction“) rufen dringend rufen dringend dazu auf, ihre Mitglieder und Nutzer zu mobilisieren. Das E-Dampfen hat  inzwischen mehr als 7,5 Millionen Europäern ermöglicht, mit dem Rauchen aufzuhören und mehr als weiteren 9 Millionen geholfen, ihren Zigarettenkonsum zu reduzieren (2). Sündensteuern (Verbrauchsabgaben) sind keinesfalls für normale Konsumgüter zu rechtfertigen, die keine Tabakprodukte und obendrein noch weitaus weniger gesundheitsschädlich als verbrannter Tabak sind. . Eine harmonisierte neue Steuerrichtlinie sollte stattdessen danach trachten, die Erhebung von Verbrauchsteuern auf E-Dampfprodukte in der EU zu verbieten. E-Dampfprodukte enthalten keinen Tabak, und es wird nichts verbrannt(3). E-Dampfen erzeugt daher weder Rauch, noch Kohlenmonoxid oder Teer und es ist mindestens 95% weniger gesundheitsschädlich als konventionelle Zigaretten. E-Dampfprodukte sind normale Konsumgüter und keine Tabakprodukte, daher sollten die Nutzer nicht mit einer unberechtigten Steuer bestraft werden. Die Besteuerung von E-Dampfprodukten fördert letztendlich das Rauchen, wie die Effekte in Ländern zeigen, die bereits eine solche Maßnahme eingeführt haben: Italien, Portugal, Griechenland und Ungarn. Die Ergebnisse in diesen Ländern zeigen, dass Strafsteuern die Maßnahmen unterlaufen, die mit der Europäischen Tabakverordnung (TPD) zum Schutz der Volksgesundheit eingeführt wurden(4). In einer ähnlichen Konsultation in 2016 lehnten 89,88% der Befragten die Forderung nach einer Besteuerung von E-Dampfprodukten ab. Das sollte reichen! Wir fordern alle (Bürger und Organisationen) auf, die öffentliche Konsultation zur Besteuerung von Tabak und E-Dampfprodukten zu beantworten. Insbesondere diejenigen, die sich für: - die Verbesserung der öffentlichen Gesundheit - das Recht auf Zugang zu einem Produkt mit verringertem Risiko - das Recht die eigene Gesundheit zu schützen einsetzen. Die Konsultation liegt in mehreren Sprachen vor. Wir begleiten diesen Appell mit einer Onlinepetition, um das Recht auf Zugang zum steuerfreien E-Dampfen überall in Europa zu verteidigen. 1 Öffentliche Konsultation zu Verbrauchsteuern auf Tabakwaren und zur möglichen Besteuerung neuartiger Tabakerzeugnisse - https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco-and-possible-taxation-novel-products_de 2 Entsprechend dem Eurobarometer 458, durchgeführt im März 2017 3 Nikotin ohne Rauch, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016 4 RICHTLINIE 2014/40/EU DES EUROPÄISCHEN PARLAMENTS UND DES RATES vom 3. April 2014 zur Angleichung der Rechts- und Verwaltungsvorschriften der Mitgliedstaaten über die Herstellung, die Aufmachung und den Verkauf von Tabakerzeugnissen und verwandten Erzeugnissen und zur Aufhebung der Richtlinie 2001/37/EG   EESTI Anna oma vastuhääl Euroopa Liidu veipimise maksule Euroopa Komisjon kuulutas kuni 3. septembrini välja avaliku konsultatsiooni tubakatoodete ja veipimistoodete maksustamise osas (1). Tarbijate organisatsioonid ja tubakakahjude vähendamise organisatsioonid kutsuvad üles reageerima. Veipimine on aidanud rohkem kui 7,5 miljonil eurooplasel loobuda suitsetamisest ning lisaks 9 miljonil eurooplasel vähendada sigarettide suitsetamist (2). Pahede maksustamine (aktsiiside näol) ei ole põhjendatud nende toodete puhul, mis ei ole tubakatooted ning mis on tervisele oluliselt vähem kahjulikumad kui põletatav tubakas. Euroopa Liidu ühtlustamise plaanid peaksid hoopis keelama aktsiisi kehtestamist veipimisele. Veipimiseks mõeldud tooted ei sisalda tubakat ning nendes ei põletata tubakat. Seetõttu ei teki veipimisel suitsu ning need tooted ei sisalda vingugaasi ega tõrva. Veipimine on vähemalt 95 protsenti vähem kahjulikum kui sigarettide suitsetamine (3). Veipimiseks mõeldud tooted ei ole tubakatooted ning nende kasutajad ei pea kannatama karistava ja põhjendamatu maksu pärast. Veipimise maksustamisega kaitstakse lõpuks suitsetamist nagu on näha riikides, kus veipimisele on kehtestatud maks: Itaalia, Portugal, Kreeka, Eesti ja Ungari. Tulemus on, et nendes riikides on karistava maksu tõttu läbi kukkumas Euroopa Tubakadirektiivi meetmed, mille eesmärgiks oli kaitsta inimeste tervist (4). 2016. aastal toimus sarnasel teemal Euroopa Komisjoni konsultatsioon, kus 89,88 protsenti vastanutest olid vastu veipimise maksustamisele. See peaks olema piisav! Kutsume üles inimesi, kes on mures rahva tervise ja vähemkahjulikumate toodete kättesaadavuse pärast ning kes tahavad õigust kaitsta iseenda tervist, vastama Euroopa Komisjoni avalikule küsitlusele tubakatoodete ja veipimise maksustamise osas. Anna oma allkiri käesolevale petitsioonile ning vasta Euroopa Liidu küsitlusele, mis on kättesaadav erinevates keeltes, et kaitsta inimeste õigust juurdepääsuks maksuvabale veipimisele üle Euroopa.   ESPAÑOL No a un "impuesto del tabaco" a los productos de vapeo. Hagamos que la Unión Europea entre en razón La Comisión Europea está llevando a cabo una consulta pública sobre la tributación de los productos de tabaco y vapeo, que finaliza el 3 de septiembre (1). Las asociaciones de consumidores y las organizaciones pro reducción de  daños por Tabaquismo hacemos un llamamiento urgente a la movilización. El vapeo ha permitido a más de 7,5 millones de europeos dejar de fumar y ha ayudado a otros 9 millones a reducir su consumo de cigarrillos (2). Los impuestos especiales no se justifican en los productos de consumo que no son productos de tabaco y que son mucho menos perjudiciales para la salud que el tabaco de combustión. Por lo tanto, cualquier proyecto de armonización debe tratar de prohibir el impuesto especial sobre los productos de vapeo en la Unión Europea. Los productos de vapeo no contienen tabaco y no hay combustión. Por lo tanto, el vaporizador personal no produce humo, monóxido de carbono o alquitrán, y el vapeo es, como mínimo, un 95% menos nocivo para la salud que fumar cigarrillos tradicionales (3). Los productos de vapeo no son productos de tabaco y los usuarios de productos de vapeo no deberían tener que sufrir un impuesto punitivo e injustificado. Los impuestos a los productos de vapeo protegen fundamentalmente al tabaquismo, como así ha quedado demostrado entre la población de los países que ya han introducido dicho impuesto: Italia, Portugal, Grecia y Hungría. Los resultados en estos países demuestran que la imposición de un impuesto punitivo socavaría las medidas introducidas por la Directiva Europea del Tabaco (TPD), que fue diseñada para proteger la salud de las personas (4). En una consulta similar reciente, en 2016, el 89.88% de los encuestados rechazaron la sugerencia de imponer impuestos a los productos vapeo. ¡Eso debería ser más que suficiente! Hacemos un llamamiento a aquellas personas a las que les preocupa la salud pública, a aquellas personas a las que les importa su derecho a poder acceder a productos de riesgo reducido, incluidas las más desfavorecidas y a aquellas personas que ansían su derecho a proteger su propia salud, a responder a la consulta pública de la Comisión sobre la tributación de los productos del tabaco y del vapeo. La consulta está disponible en varios idiomas. Acompañamos este llamamiento con una petición en línea para defender el derecho de acceso a los productos de vapeo libres de impuestos en toda Europa. Referencias 1. Consulta en línea https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco-and-possible-taxation-novel-products_en 2 Según el Eurobarómetro 458, realizado en marzo de 2017. 3 Nicotina sin humo, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016 4.DIRECTIVA 2014/40 / UE DEL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO Y DEL CONSEJO de 3 de abril de 2014 relativa a la aproximación de las disposiciones legales, reglamentarias y administrativas de los Estados miembros sobre la fabricación, presentación y venta de tabaco y productos relacionados con el tabaco y por la que se deroga la Directiva 2001/37 / CE   FRANÇAIS Pour une vape sans taxe tabac, faisons entendre raison à l’Union Européenne La Commission Européenne a lancé une consultation publique sur la taxation du tabac et de la vape ouverte jusqu’au 3 septembre (1). Associations d’usagers et de défense de la réduction des risques face aux dommages du tabagisme lancent un appel urgent à la mobilisation. Répondez aussi à la consultation, c’est très important ! Pour vous aider à répondre : https://www.sovape.fr/petition-taxes-vape-consultation-europeenne/ La vape a permis à plus de 7,5 millions d’européens de se libérer du tabagisme et à 9 millions de réduire leur consommation de cigarettes (2). Aucune surtaxe punitive n’est justifiable contre un produit de consommation courante qui n’est pas un produit du tabac et qui réduit massivement les dommages à la santé par rapport au tabac fumé. Le projet d’harmonisation devrait envisager de bannir toute accise sur le vapotage dans l’Union Européenne. La vape ne contient pas de tabac et surtout ne se consume pas. Le vapotage ne produit pas de fumée, pas de monoxyde de carbone, pas de goudrons ; vapoter réduit d’au moins 95 % les dommages à la santé par rapport à fumer des cigarettes (3). Les produits de vapotage ne sont pas des produits du tabac, ses usagers ne doivent pas subir de taxe punitive injustifiée. La fiscalité anti-vape protège in fine le tabagisme, comme le montrent les effets sur la population des pays ayant déjà mis en place une telle taxe : Italie, Portugal, Grèce, Estonie et Hongrie.  Ces pays montrent qu’une taxation punitive fait voler en éclat les dispositifs mis en œuvre par la directive tabac européenne (TPD) destinés à protéger les populations (4). 89,88 % des participants ont déjà rejeté la proposition de taxe punitive contre les produits de vapotage lors de la précédente consultation de la Commission européenne Taxud en 2016. Ça suffit ! Nous appelons toutes les personnes soucieuses de santé publique, du droit à l’accès aux outils de réduction des risques, y compris pour les plus défavorisés, et celles qui tiennent au droit de protéger leur propre santé, à répondre à la consultation publique de la Commission sur la taxation des produits du tabac et du vapotage. Cette consultation est disponible dans les différentes langues. Nous accompagnons cet appel d’une pétition en ligne pour défendre le droit à l’accès au vapotage sans taxe tabac partout en Europe.   ITALIANO Per uno svapo senza tassa sul tabacco, facciamo sentire le nostre ragioni all'Unione Europea La Commissione Europea ha avviato una consultazione pubblica sulla tassazione del fumo e dello svapo aperta fino al 3 settembre (1). Le Associazioni di Consumatori di e-cig e le Associazioni che difendono la riduzione dei rischi di fronte ai danni causati dal fumo richiedono una mobilitazione. Lo svapo ha permesso a oltre 7,5 milioni di europei di liberarsi dal fumo e a 9 milioni di persone di ridurre il consumo di sigarette (2). Non è giustificabile alcuna sovrimposta punitiva che riduca l'accesso e la libertà degli utenti nei confronti di un prodotto di consumo che non è un prodotto a base di tabacco e che riduce in modo significativo i danni alla salute rispetto al tabacco fumato. Il progetto di armonizzazione dovrebbe vietare tutte le accise sullo svapo nell'Unione Europea. Lo svapo non contiene tabacco, né foglie o filtro, e soprattutto non si consuma come una sigaretta (3). Lo svapo non produce fumo, né monossido di carbonio o catrame. Inoltre, è un prodotto di consumo per il quale gli utenti non devono essere sottoposti a un'ingiustificata imposta punitiva. In definitiva, la tassa anti-svapo protegge il fumo, come dimostrano gli esempi dei paesi che hanno introdotto tale tassa (Italia, Portogallo, Grecia, Ungheria, Estonia...). La tassazione punitiva infrangerebbe le misure attuate dalla direttiva europea sul tabacco (DET) intesa per proteggere le persone (4). L'89,88% dei partecipanti ha già respinto un progetto di imposta punitiva contro gli svapatori e la riduzione dei rischi nella precedente consultazione analoga della Commissione europea Taxud nel 2016. Adesso basta! Chiediamo a tutti coloro che si preoccupano per la salute pubblica, per il mantenimento del diritto di accesso agli strumenti di riduzione del rischio, anche per i più svantaggiati, e per il diritto di proteggere la propria salute, di rispondere alla consultazione pubblica della Commissione sulla tassazione dei prodotti di fumo e di svapo disponibile nelle varie lingue. Accompagniamo questo appello con una petizione online per difendere il diritto di accesso allo svapo esente da imposte in tutta Europa.        

Collective of EU Vapers Associations
51,004 supporters