FECL 32 (March 1995):
The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such Data, Common Position to be adopted by the Council, with a view to adopting the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council, Brussels, 3.2.95, 12003/1/94 REV 1, restreint.
As compared to earlier drafts, this text provides for exemptions from the requirements of certain provisions regarding the processing of personal data for purposes of journalism, as well as literary and artistic expression. The new provisions were introduced upon request of Sweden, whose national law contains extensive freedom of information guarantees. Swedish journalist organisations, however, consider the draft provisions as being too vague.
It should further be noted that the Directive does not pertain to data protection in the field of public security and criminal law (i.e. the Third Pillar of the TEU).
FECL 32 (March 1995):
Projet de Manuel Commun, Brussels, 13.2.95, SCH/Gem-Hand (91) 10, 18e rév., confidentiel, 44 p. in French.
Draft Common Handbook on the implementation by the authorities of the Schengen states of the Schengen Agreement's provisions on external border controls.
Human Rights Project Bulgaria: Annual Report 1994, Human Rights project, 55-A, Neophit Rilski Str., 1st floor, apt. 3, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria; Tel/Fax +359/2 882616.
Among other information on the Human Rights situation in Bulgaria, the report contains a chronological inventory of cases of Human Rights violations against Roma.
The Humanitarian Law Center (earlier: Humanitarian Law Fund):
Order at: HFECL, Terazije 6/III, Belgrade, FRY, Fax: +381/11 646341; Tel: +381/11 658430.
- Spotlight Report No. 16, February 1995,
30 p. Comprehensive information on the recent increase of Human Rights violations against the Albanian population in Kosovo.
- Spotlight report No. 17, March 1995, 7 p.
On the trial of General Trifunovic. The general, a commander of the ex-Yugoslav People's Army was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment after the Belgrade Military Court had found him guilty of subverting the defensive capabilities of the country. According to the HLC, the general's only crime consisted in meeting his "duty to respect the rules of humanitarian law, the human rights of the citizens of [his] country, and the code of conduct of [his] country".