Unconsciousness, incompetence or malevolence from A.N.S.V.S.A.?
Following our steps, A.N.S.V.S.A. has removed the obligation established by the Service Note no. 25561/07.03.2018, by which they added additional requirements for pet transport within the EU.
We quote: "prior to the validation of the animal health certificate in TRACES, the veterinarian from the place of origin will ask the veterinarian from the place of destination (possibly through animal protection organizations that are involved ), the acceptance of the transport arrival at the place of destination referred to.” With this additional condition introduced, pet transport was prevented and made impossible, which is a violation of the free movement of goods and of the single market in EU principle.
Art. 6 of Regulation (EC) no. 576/2013 according to which pets may not be transferred to another Member State if they are not marked with a transponder and unless a pet passport is added completed in accordance with the Regulations and which contains the targeting of rabies vaccination.
The adoption Regulation (EC) No 599/2004 of a harmonized model of certificate and minute of inspection, relating to intra-Community trade in animals and products of animal origin contains a model of certificate-with explanations for intra-Community trade.
For the place of destination in space I.13, with reference to the explanations relating to space I.12 it is shown that an approval or registration number shall be indicated only insofar as this is required.
Commission Decision of 30.03.2004 on the implementation of the TRACES system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…/Trade_Control_and_Expert_System ) and amending Decision 92/486/EEC established that the country of origin should always issue theTRACES certificate necessary for the pet transport from one Member State to another.
There is no European provision to establish such additional conditions. On the contrary, EU law clearly establishes that the pet transport from one EU member State to another cannot be conditioned on an activity and/oradditional control (already established EU procedures) in the country of destination, as this is an infringement of the free movement of goods and the principle of the single market.
We also recalled the Decision of 03.12.2015 given by the CJEU, in which it is stated that Directive 90/425/EEC must serve precisely to harmonize the single market and, by a restriction of the checks of veterinary law at the place of departure, to remove the impediments that stand in the wayof the development of intra-Community trade in animals.
Both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European legislature have clarified that the dogs and cats transport from the Member States of the European Union to another cannot be conditioned on an activity or control (in addition to the directives) in the country of destination becausethis is a violation of the free movement of goods and the single marketprinciple.
A.N.S.V.S.A. has imposed additional obligations on EU laws that have already been studied and signed up for membership. Proving yet another attempt to control and brake international adoptions in the interest of the internal rendering, which worksgreat with the payment from local funds paid by the citizens. A.N.S.V.S.A. by address no. 3545/22.02.2019 informed us that, following our action, it was agreed to amend the Service Note for the purposes of giving up the last paragraph, cited above.
We congratulate the A.N.S.V.S.A. President because,in the twelfth hour, he eliminated an abuse on free society with followings and blameson Romania in the EU's Expert Committee.
We ask whether the refusal to work with us on group or general interest activities is a process of lawsuits and referrals to the abuses of the institution??!!
The Institution is likely to select "collaborators" on the basis of the political-informational service and not the efficiency in the citizens’ interests and the animal welfare provided for in the function requirement.
Our Association prepares legal actions for the elimination of abuses and sanctioning the culprits in liability functions and paid by the taxpayers.
The right of animals without the right of their owners is cynicism.
No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment