Protests on Anti Counterfeiting Pact Mount in EU

Amplified protests and delays in the domestic procedures of several European Union member states have cast doubts on the future EU ratification of the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which was signed by the EU and 22 of its member states in Tokyo last month.

The EU’s signature prompted the resignation of the previous ACTA rapporteur to the European Parliament Committee on International Trade (INTA), Kader Arif.

Arif was replaced in this role by David Martin, a British Member of the European Parliament, last week amid rising tension over the pact’s provisions.

ACTA is a plurilateral trade pact aimed at combating intellectual property rights (IPRs) infringement through the establishment of new international standards of IPRs enforcement. ACTA detractors fear that some of the provisions contained in the final text, which go beyond the standards set by the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), may have a detrimental effect on access to medicines and fundamental freedoms in the digital environment.

Other ACTA signatories include Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and the United States. However, the agreement will enter into legal force only after it has been ratified by six negotiating parties.

Protests gain momentum in EU countries

On 11 February, demonstrations against ACTA erupted across several European cities in countries such as Germany, Bulgaria, Poland, Estonia, the Czech Republic, and the United Kingdom.

In a statement to AFP, Mantas Kondratavicius, one of the rally organisers in Vilnius, Lithuania, said that “some provisions of the treaty are too ambiguous and allow different interpretations,” and that these provisions should “not come at the expense of privacy or freedom of speech.”

ACTA has also become the subject of political controversy in the European Parliament (EP). In an interview to the German television station ARD, EU Parliament President Martin Schulz expressed his concerns over the pact’s imbalances between copyright protection and the freedoms of Internet users.

“I don’t find it good in its current form,” Schulz said.

To quell concerns about the agreement, newly-appointed ACTA rapporteur Martin emphasised that “ACTA is meant to be about better enforcement of existing copyright and intellectual property rights through international co-operation” and that modifications to the existing EU laws on intellectual property should not be necessary.

These debates have prompted concerns by officials over a supposed lack of evidence-based discussions on the ACTA subject, with the European Commissioner for Trade Karel De Gucht addressing a letter to the INTA asking the MEPs to “take a position based on full information.”

In the same vein, more than 50 industry associations circulated another letter last Friday urging MEPs and national ministries to conduct a “calm and reasoned assessment of the facts.”

For his part, David Martin underscored his intention to hold a facts-based discussion on ACTA in the parliament.

Roadblocks still ahead on the road to EU ratification

Protests are not the only factor troubling ACTA’s EU ratification. The EU Commission has noted that ACTA needs to be both signed and ratified by all EU countries because the treaty contains criminal enforcement provisions, an area of shared competence between the EU and its member states.

In recent weeks, many EU member states - such as Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia - have delayed their domestic procedures in order to hold more extensive discussions on ACTA.

Specifically, Germany and Slovakia have delayed their signature, while Poland and the Czech Republic have delayed their ratification of the pact.

Germany said the delay is needed “to leave room for discussion” and could perhaps postpone its signature until after the EU Parliament votes on the matter.

Finally, the Dutch Parliament on 14 February adopted a motion asking the government not to sign the treaty until it is conclusively proven that ACTA does not conflict with fundamental rights.

The EU Parliament’s express consent is needed before the Council of Ministers can decide to adopt the agreement; the parliamentary plenary session vote on ACTA is scheduled take place in the summer.