1. Reg 211/2011: Proposal for Revision Alexander Prosser

2. Overview Focus on three main issues:  Art 3: Citizens’ Committee  Art 5/6: “Privatization” of Collection  Annex III ... many more which cannot be treated now. SEITE 2

3. Issue 1: Citizens’ Committee (Art 3)  “The organisers shall be citizens of the Union …” “The organisers shall form a citizens’ committee …”  No governance structure...  What does this group legally constitute?  How do they decide?  What happens if one dies or leaves?  Subject to which MS’s law?  Tax treatment?  No governance structure discernible in Regulation, except... .. one contact to the Commission SEITE 3

4. Issue 1: Citizens’ Committee (Art 3)  “The organisers shall be citizens of the Union …” “The organisers shall form a citizens’ committee …”  No governance structure and unlimited liability  See Art 12, 13, 14  Penal  Administrative  Civil  Each member of the Citizens’ Committee is liable down to his/her last penny. SEITE 4

5. Solution 1: Art 3  Define legal character of Committee …  … ideally, by reference to an existing legal construct (eg, association under Belgian Law)  Defines registration and legal declaration obligations  Defines internal decision mechanism  Defines tax treatment  Gives the Committee a legal frame  Define change process in composition of Committee SEITE 5

6. Issue 2: Privatisation of Collection Process (Art 5,6)  “The organisers shall be responsible for the collection of the statements of support …”  The Citizens’ Committee is mainly an economic entity, not a political decision-making body.  Costs of the collection process  Only software (OCS) provided by COM  Legal disputes, risk exposure  Art 13: “... liable... in accordance with applicable national law.“ SEITE 6

7. Issue 2: Example  Local supporters of an ECI in Italy violate Italian privacy law.  Need Italian lawyer to counter charges  Italian court issues fine of EUR 20 per case.  100,000 cases = EUR 2,000,000  Who is liable? SEITE 7

8. Issue 2: Example  The ruling of the Italian court is enforceable all over the Union. => It is the combination of Art 3 and 5/6 that creates an unacceptable risk exposure for those who exercise a civil right granted to them by the Lisbon Treaty SEITE 8

9. Solution 2: Art 5, 6  Online system permanently run by COM (if paper relevant => MS)  Assign responsibilities emerging from running the system to COM (who may employ commercial contractor)  Plus: Strong Support Infrastructure for all other questions and issues SEITE 9

10. Issue 3: Annex III  1 million support declarations overall  National quota => declaration must be attributable to an MS  To attribution principles are possible Residence or Passport principle SEITE 10

11. Issue 3: Annex III SEITE 11 Source: wikipedia under Creative Commons Werner Karl-Heinz Sue Jane

12. Issue 3: Annex III SEITE 12 Source: wikipedia under Creative Commons Werner Karl-Heinz Sue Jane Passport Principle

13. Issue 3: Annex III SEITE 13 Source: wikipedia under Creative Commons Werner Karl-Heinz Sue Jane Residence Principle

14. Issue 3: Annex III SEITE 14 Source: wikipedia under Creative Commons Werner Karl-Heinz Sue Jane Annex III Residence Principle Passport Principle

15. Issue 3: Annex III  11 million citizens* are deprived of their right to support an ECI due to Annex III * Robert Müller-Török/Robert Stein: Die Europäische Bürgerinitiative aus Sicht nationaler Wahlbehörden; Verwaltung und Management 2010/5  This issue (like most current issues) was already pointed out in the public consultation process in Dec 2009 by Prosser/Müller-Török: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/citizens_initiativ e/docs/prosser_mueller_toeroek_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/citizens_initiativ e/docs/prosser_mueller_toeroek_en.pdf

16. Solution 3: Annex III  Either residence OR passport principle for all MS  Unify Annex III requirements

17. Side-step: Dir 93/109/EC  Harmonisation mechanism for voter rolls (EP)  COM Report 2010/603: “information on EU citizens sent by MS... Very often cannot be used” In 2009 elections, identified / total received: CZ: 2,500 / 3,800 IE: 208 / 4,795 PT: 38,619 / 83,556

18. Department Informationsverarbeitung und Prozessmanagement Augasse 2-6, 1090 Wien, Österreich Univ.Prof. Dr. Alexander Prosser prosser@wu.ac.at http://e-voting.at http://www.wu.ac.at Kontaktdaten ergänzen SEITE 18