By Ynze Kliphuis, real estate lawyer at Russell Advocaten (embassydesk@russell.nl) Embassies, Consulates and Diplomats enjoy diplomatic immunity. Nevertheless, Dutch law is applicable to real estate owned by diplomats and diplomatic missions in the Netherlands, because these premises – regardless of their diplomatic status – are Dutch territory. What is important to know before you buy or lease real estate in the Netherlands? Dutch real estate contracts Dutch contracts are concise when compared to common law contracts, because basic rules are codified in laws, acts and regulations. These rules do not have to be repeated in the contract. Moreover, the meaning of a Dutch contract is not only in its wording, but also in the intentions, expectations and factual behaviour of the parties involved. To minimize conflicts, it is important to clearly record these in the contract. Buying or leasing? Buying is a long term investment. Prices for housing accommodation in Amsterdam and The Hague are rising. Here, buying is an attractive investment if the premises suit your needs for a number of years. Leasing offers more flexibility. This can be pleasant in case of a short stay or changing needs with respect to square meters. A Diplomat with a large family and staff will need more space than a young, single employee at the beginning of his or her diplomatic career. In addition, lessees only need to perform small daily maintenance activities. Office space will be abundantly available in the years to come. Those in search of a (common) office space should be able to negotiate competitive lease conditions. It is important to verify in advance whether your purposes for the premises, correspond with the zoning plan (not all villas in Wassenaar may be used as an office) and whether municipal permits are required. Changes to the building that have an effect on the appearance of the premises (cleaning/painting the facade or changing single glazing into double glazing!) require a permit, especially if the premises are a registered monument or part of a conservation area, as is the case with most Embassies. Security measures for Embassies, such as alarms, cameras, fences and/or roll-down shutters, often require a permit. Buying real estate For buyers it is important to do as much research as possible into the state of the premises (No defects? All permits?) and into its designated use according to the municipal zoning plan. The seller can only be held accountable for hidden defects if these defects prevent the normal use of the premises, e.g. foundations affected by woodworm or seriously polluted soil. For the purchase of real estate usually a written deed of purchase is used. A separate notarial deed of transfer is required for the transfer of ownership, which has to be registered in the land register. After that, the buyer will be owner and the premises are safe from seizure by a creditor of the seller. Leasing real estate In the event of leasing it’s important to realize that tenants are allowed to make only minor changes to leased premises without prior approval from the landlord, for example paintjobs to the interior, putting a coat of arms on the façade or erecting a flagpole. Major changes, such as implementing thorough security measures (fences and/or bulletproof glass), removing walls or extending the premises, require the landlord’s approval which can be replaced by the District Court’s permission. Therefore, it’s wise to check in advance whether major changes have to be carried out. If both location and rent are attractive, it’s worth considering to ask the landlord whether he gives permission for a major reconstruction. As mentioned above, a municipal permit may (also) be required for changes. When property is leased, usually a deposit must be paid. If the lessee returns the leased property without defects to the lesser, the lesser has to refund the deposit, Therefore, the condition of the leased object has to be documented (with photos) at the beginning and at the end of the lease. We advise the lessee to be present on both occasions. Office space is usually leased for a definite period of time. A fixed term lease will be terminated by operation of law, but the tenant must receive an eviction notice. The lease of office space for an indefinite term can formally be terminated one month ahead. Residential accommodation is usually leased for an indefinite term. However, it is also possible to lease or let for a fixed term, for instance if you will stay in a different place for a short period of time. This must be laid down in a so-called ‘diplomats clause’. Lessees of residential accommodation enjoy a lot of protection and it is difficult to evict them from their lodgings. Conclusion Although Embassies and Consulates, and diplomats, enjoy a special status in the Netherlands, they have to deal with Dutch real estate law when it comes to their Dutch premises and houses. If questions or issues arise, it is advisable to get specialist legal advice.  

By Aleksandra Krstic. The recent all-shoot out in Azerbaijan between the ethnic Armenians and Azerbaijani forces brought yet another round of casualties, psychological traumas and property destructions. Sudden and severe as it was, the event sent its shock waves all over Caucasus and well beyond. Is Caucasus receiving the ‘residual heat’ from the boiling MENA? Is this a next Syria? Is a grand accommodation pacific scenario possible? Or will it be more realistic that the South Caucasus ends up violently torn apart by the grand compensation that affects all from Afghanistan up to the EU-Turkey deal? ********   Most observes would fully agree that for such (frozen) conflicts like this between Azerbaijan and Armenia, mediation and dialogue across the conflict cycle have no alternative. Further on, most would agree that the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) with its Minsk Group remains both the best suited FORA as well as the only international body mandated for the resolution of the conflict. However, one cannot escape the feeling that despite more than 20 years of negotiations, this conflict remains unresolved. What is the extent of the OSCE failure to effectively utilize existing conflict resolution and post-conflict rehabilitation tools? The very mandate of the Co-Chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group is based on CSCE Budapest Summit document of 1994, which tasks them to conduct speedy negotiations for the conclusion of a political agreement on the cessation of the armed conflict, the implementation of which will eliminate major consequences of the conflict and permit the convening of the Minsk Conference. In Budapest, the participating States have reconfirmed their commitment to the relevant Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and underlined that the co-Chairmen should be guided in all their negotiating efforts by the OSCE principles and agreed mandate, and should be accountable to its Chairmanship and the Permanent Council (PC). Nevertheless, as it emerged from this sudden eruption of violence in the region in late March/early April of 2016, the OSCE and its Minsk Group have been side-stepped from the settlement process. Why? Over the years, the role of the OSCE and its participating States, including those that are members of the Minsk Group, has been limited to extending formal support to the activities of the Co-chairmen. It gradually led to change the conflict resolution process into conflict containment activities as reflected in artificial and out-of-mandate prioritization of tasks of the co-Chairmen to focus on prevention of escalation rather than lasting solution, and interference with the activities of other international organizations wishing to contribute to the true and comprehensive settlement of the conflict. In parallel, one may observe rather selective approaches by some OSCE Member States and regional groupings to the principles with regard to the protracted conflicts in the OSCE area. As an ending result, the Organization as such lost its control over the process. Such a lack of control over the activities led to negligence to inherent balance and inter-linkage between the principles of the most fundamental Security structure of Europe achieved ever – the Helsinki Final Act. It is rather dangerous and counterproductive to equalize the principles of non-use of force against the territorial integrity of political independence of the States, territorial integrity and equal rights and self-determination of peoples, which some publicly present as a basis for a settlement. Misinterpretation is evident even in naming of these principles. These voices claim that there is no hierarchy among the above mentioned principles and that these elements should be observed and applied independently of each other. In fact, such a voluntary interpretation of the principles is in direct contradiction to the letter and very spirit of the Helsinki Decalogue and its Final Act, which in seven out of ten principles places strong emphasis on the necessity to fully respect internationally recognized borders of states and their territorial integrity against any attempt of forceful acquisition of territories or change of borders, and (one-sided) application of self-determination. Such a deviation from the agreed character of the principles unfortunately provided Armenia with a card blanche to justify its territorial claims against Azerbaijan, consolidate the status-quo and made the process of settlement dependent on whims of the Armenian side. Several FORAs (incl. the OSCE mechanisms) openly claim that they have no responsibility for the conflict resolution, and that the parties need to demonstrate political will and to make necessary compromises (‘no way to exert pressure on the sides’ and ‘we can only be a communication channel between the two conflicting parties’ lines of usual rhetoric). In the meantime, Armenia keeps holding a premium over the internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan, which it continues to occupy. Clearly, that ‘process’ is far away from OSCE principles and commitments, and will dangerously backfire elsewhere in Europe. Unless we want another Syria, and yet Europe entirely enveloped by the insecure neighbourhood all the way from Mediterranean to Caucasus, we need a tremendous progress in the settlement of the conflict. Over last years, most of conflict resolution-potent initiatives have been blocked in the OSCE. Discussion on the conflict has been turned into a taboo within the OSCE, even when the informal discussions are in question – and so, not only when Caucasus was in case. If we want to revive this particular process and return it from a de facto conflict containment back on track to the conflict resolution process, the following steps for Caucasus are needed: To unblock and fully revitalize the OSCE Minsk Group, and intensify the efforts towards earliest pacific solution of the conflict, especially by using the best services from the member countries willing to constructively solve the problem. Serious attempt of the OSCE to re-establish the dialogue at the level of the communities affected by the conflict is more than essential stabilizer. It is an indispensable instrument for any confidence building measure. To it related as complementary is the exchange of data on the missing persons, a mechanism foreseen in a tripartite approach by the French, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents late last year. It should be coupled and further enhanced by variety of the P2P programs that could bring Armenians and Azerbaijanis all profiles, ages and origins together. Items above surely presuppose the relaxation of tensions and renunciation of usage of military effectives as a means of conflict resolution. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan (either at different occasions, also through their top diplomats at the OSCE Vienna, ambassador Arman Kirakossian and ambassador Galib Israfilov) signalled their wishes and efforts to move beyond this status quo. That is in line with all statements of the UN and OSCE in past 20 years. Surely, the best way to shake this status quo of containment back on track to the lasting solution, is to eliminate the military factor. Regrettably, the only military factor remaining in the region in/around Nagorno Karabakh is the presence of the Armenian troops – something that surely does not service Armenian community there on a long run! (Mind how much Serbs harmed their own community in Kosovo by their rigid military stance.) If, as currently as of now, Armenian Government is serious of the danger and incidents along the Line of Contact they should withdraw their troops. If so, people could at least feel safer in those territories, halt the massive migratory wave, and plan their own future viably. And finally, a pacific, orderly and balanced re-integration of the currently occupied territories back into the Azerbaijani political, legal, social and economic system – that serves ethnic Armenians on a long run the most. It will shield them from an otherwise lost demographic battle. This would be the best way to reinvigorate the OSCE’s relevance in mediation efforts and create an environment in which the OSCE as an organization can play a meaningful role applying its existing tools – all for the lasting benefits of the peoples and nations of Caucasus. The OSCE area should be what is meant to be – the area of security and stability. Stubbornness and irrational pride should never be an obstacle to this higher end.   About the author: Aleksandra Krstić, studied in Belgrade (Political Science) and in Moscow (Plekhanov’s IBS). Currently, a post-doctoral researcher at the Kent University in Brussels (Intl. Relations). Specialist for the MENA-Balkans frozen and controlled conflicts. Contact: alex-alex@gmail.com    

At the beginning of the new school year, and periodically throughout, American School of The Hague (ASH) welcomes new students, families and teachers into its international community. At the same time, the current community “refreshes” for the new school year and students are faced with different classes, making new friends, learning new routines, which can be a lot of change to adapt too. This can leave new ASH members feeling disoriented and lonely, experiencing grieving for those they left behind, or facing cross cultural confusion, misunderstandings or conflicts within their new learning situations and living environments. To help ease the transition process, A Safe Harbour was established at ASH many years ago and is still considered one of the best Transitions Programs in the international school community. A Safe Harbour isn’t just one program or one person, it is an umbrella of individuals, activities, programs and committees that work hand in hand to help each of the community members with all of the aspects of arriving, orientating, integrating and departing. It is a network of teachers, students and parents working together to provide a comprehensive approach, to address the challenges and opportunities that arise with moving among cultures. Due to these collaborative efforts, A Safe Harbour committees work together “to help students, parents, and staff cope with the challenges, and maximize the opportunities, inherent in the experience of international relocation and cross-cultural mobility”. Throughout the school year, A Safe Harbour helps families, staff, and students transition to the School and to their new lives in The Netherlands: Expat Life Experience – addressing the various transitional phases that individuals pass through and identifying challenges faced as expats, Third Culture Kids and Global Nomads. Student Ambassadors – selecting and training of 60 students, Grades 9 – 12, who help run New Student Orientation in August and any intakes during the school year, as well as communicating with new students prior to their arrival. Student Ambassadors hold weekly meetings throughout the year to plan for, and train, students for Orientation Week in August. Regular Parent Welcome Coffees – held by the PTO and their various committees to give new parents an opportunity to expand their social network within the school and feel more at home in The Netherlands. The various committees within the ASH PTO help families’ transition, be it through practical information on living in the host country to getting settled with the dynamics of the School. Staff Ambassadors – helping new staff transition to ASH, checking-in with new hires throughout the school year to make sure they are settling in well. The key to a good arrival is a good departure, no matter where you go in the world, which is why A Safe Harbour initiatives also support students, parents and staff when departing from the American School of The Hague community. The joint efforts of parents, staff and students are what make the ASH community flourish. A Safe Harbour – bridging cultures, bridging lives.      

  Today the European Commission is presenting proposals to reform the Common European Asylum System by creating a more efficient system for allocating asylum applications among Member States. The basic principle will remain the same – asylum seekers should, unless they have family elsewhere, apply for asylum in the first country they enter – but a new fairness mechanism will ensure no Member State is left with a disproportionate pressure on its asylum system. Today’s proposals also include transforming the existing European Asylum Support Office (EASO) into a fully-fledged European Union Agency for Asylum to reflect its enhanced role in the new system and reinforcing of the EU’s fingerprinting database, Eurodac, in order to better manage the asylum system and to help tackle irregular migration. First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said: “Managing migration better requires action on several fronts, to manage our external borders more effectively, cooperate better with third countries, put an end to smuggling and resettle refugees directly to the EU. We also know that people will keep arriving at our borders and ask for asylum, and we will need to make sure those who need protection receive it. Yet we have seen during this crisis how just a few Member States were placed under incredible strain because of the shortcomings of the present system, which was not designed to deal with situations of this kind. There’s simply no way around it: whenever a Member State is overwhelmed, there must be solidarity and a fair sharing of responsibility within the EU. This is what our proposal of today is meant to ensure.” Commissioner for Migration and Home Affairs, Dimitris Avramopoulos, said: “If the current refugee crisis has shown one thing, it is that the status quo of our Common European Asylum System is not an option. The time has come for a reformed and more equitable system, based on common rules and a fairer sharing of responsibility. With the proposed reform of the Dublin system, the reinforcement of Eurodac and the transformation of EASO into a true European Agency for Asylum, today we are taking a major step in the right direction and putting in place the European-level structures and tools necessary for a future-proof comprehensive system. We will now put all our efforts into working side-by-side with the European Parliament and Member States. We must turn these proposals into reality as swiftly as possible.” Today’s proposals are part of a first set of legislative proposals the Commission is presenting in the context of a major reform of the Common European Asylum System, as outlined in the Commission’s Communication of 6 April 2016. This reform is intended to form the medium term response to future migratory challenges. In the meantime, existing Dublin rules and the two emergency relocation decisions continue to apply and will be enforced by the Commission to the full. Reforming the ‘Dublin’ System The EU’s rules for determining which Member State is responsible for dealing with each asylum application (known as the Dublin System) were not designed to ensure a sustainable sharing of responsibility across the EU and guarantee timely processing of applications. The new elements include: A fairer system based on solidarity: The new system will automatically establish when a country is handling a disproportionate number of asylum applications. It will do this by reference to a country’s size and wealth. f one country is receiving disproportionate numbers above and beyond that reference (over 150% of the reference number), all further new applicants in that country will (regardless of nationality) be relocated, after an admissibility verification of their application, across the EU until the number of applications is back below that level. A Member State will also have the option to temporarily not take part in the reallocation. In that case, it would have to make a solidarity contribution of €250,000 for each applicant for whom it would otherwise have been responsible under the fairness mechanism, to the Member State that is reallocated the person instead; A mechanism that also takes account of resettlement efforts: the fairness mechanism will also factor in the effort being made by a Member State to resettle those in need of international protection direct from a third country. This will acknowledge the importance of efforts to implement legal and safe pathways to Europe. A system: with shorter time limits for sending transfer requests, receiving replies and carrying out transfers of asylum seekers between Member States, and removing shifts of responsibility; Discouraging abuses and secondary movements: with clearer legal obligations for asylum applicants, including a duty to remain in the Member State responsible for their claim, geographic limits to the provision of material reception benefits and proportionate consequences in case of non-compliance; Protecting asylum seekers’ best interests: with stronger guarantees for unaccompanied minors and a balanced extension of the definition of family members; The UK and Ireland are not required but instead determine themselves the extent to which they want to participate in these measures, in accordance with the relevant Protocols attached to the Treaties. If they do not opt in, the current rules as they operate today will continue to apply to them, in line with the Treaties. Reinforcing the Eurodac system To support the implementation of the reformed Dublin System, the Commission is also proposing to adapt and reinforce the Eurodac system and to expand its purpose, facilitating returns and helping tackle irregular migration. The proposal will extend the scope of the Eurodac Regulation to include the possibility for Member States to store and search data belonging to third-country nationals or stateless persons who are not applicants for international protection and found irregularly staying in the EU, so that they can be identified for return and readmission purposes. In full compliance with data protection rules, it will also allow Member States to store more personal data in Eurodac, such as names, dates of birth, nationalities, identity details or travel documents, and facial images of individuals. Increasing the information in the system will allow immigration and asylum authorities to easily identify an irregular third-country national or asylum applicant without having to request the information from another Member State separately, as is currently the case. Establishing a European Union Agency for Asylum The proposal will transform the existing European Asylum Support Office into a fully-fledged European Union Agency for Asylum with an enhanced mandate and considerably expanded tasks to address any structural weaknesses that arise in the application of the EU’s asylum system. One of the main new tasks of the Agency will be to operate the reference key in order to apply the fairness mechanism under the new Dublin system. The Agency will also be tasked with ensuring a greater convergence in the assessment of applications for international protection across the Union, strengthening the practical cooperation and information exchange between Member States and promoting Union law and operational standards regarding asylum procedures, reception conditions and protection needs. Similarly to what was proposed by the Commission for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency on 15 December 2015, the role and functions of the Asylum Agency regarding operational and technical assistance will be expanded. This will include the possibility to deploy asylum support teams from a reserve of experts composed of a minimum of 500 experts from Member States and experts seconded by the Agency, as well as a capacity to provide operational and technical assistance in cases where a Member State is subject to disproportionate pressure which places exceptionally heavy and urgent demands on its asylum or reception systems. Photography by Euractiv  

Wat een bal weekend! Het Tulpen Bal! / What a ball weekend! The Tulips Ball! By Duke Michael of Mecklenburg. The Tulips Ball Committee hosted its second edition of the Tulips Ball from 18 to 20 March 2016. In total, more than 140 guests visited the Grand Tulips Ball on March 19. The Netherlands, Germany, Armenia, Italy, the UK, Ireland, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, France, Lichtenstein, Romania, Spain, the US, and Hong Kong SAR, China were all were present at this years’ Tulips Ball! With such an international crowd and more than 300 tulips, the Ball Committee was proud to have hosted the Tulips Ball at Hotel van Oranje. The weekend featured a lot of fun, laughing, dancing, interesting conversations and cultural appreciation in the wonderful city of Noordwijk. Diplomat Magazine congratulates the Tulips Ball Committee and especially Clemens van Steijn, the initiator of this great success. On Friday 18 of March the ball weekend started with an exceptional programme highlight: a morning horse riding trip along the beach in Noordwijk! After a refreshing start, the noon and afternoon were free and the guests came back for the Eintanzen to get to know the other guests or speak with familiar faces. There was a short dancing lesson in Friesenrock and Waltz for those who wanted to learn the basics or improve their style. After the lesson, one side of the room’s walls slid aside, revealing tables and a delicious dinner buffet. Having eaten and feeling refreshed, the dance floor filled rapidly, accompanied by a variety of music enabling everyone to find their moment to dance to their preferences. As it grew late, the after-party got into full swing. The whole crowd found enough energy to sing along to songs from all over the world played by a pianist until well after midnight. On Saturday noon, the ball crowd visited the nearby city of Leiden to do some sightseeing by boat through the old channel system of the University City. The Tulips Ball guests were warmly welcomed by the captain of ‘Rederij Rembrandt’, who provided them with a typically Dutch drink called Jenever. This made sure that even though it was still very early and some of the guests had only caught a short night of sleep, the perfect atmosphere was created to enjoy some of the great sights Leiden has to offer. After a relaxing trip, the group had lunch next to the castle of Leiden in the Koetshuis de Burcht in the historical city centre. Guests then had a free afternoon which allowed everyone to prepare and dress up for the Grand Tulips Ball. As guests arrived for the evening, the weekend came to its peak. The Grand Tulips Ball was opened by Clemens van Steijn with a fine opening speech, welcoming the guests, thanking all supporters and encouraging everyone to enjoy the special evening to the fullest extent. This was followed by a speech of the mayor of Noordwijk, Jan Rijpstra, who welcomed all guests to the beautiful city of Noordwijk, and wished everyone a great evening. Finally, a third speech was given regarding the charity aspect of the ball. A wonderful dinner was then served to everyone’s satisfaction. During the main course, charity raffle tickets were sold. The main price was provided by Hermance Gransberg – Baroness van Heeckeren van Kell (attelier2adorn) who received a gilded roe head on a pedestal. Furthermore, Hotel van Oranje, Countess Yasmin von Schweinitz and Krain (Lunari.de), Museum van Loon and L’Oreal generously donated to the charity tombola. More than 1,000 euros was collected and donated to the foundation Het Vergeten Kind. After the main course and a fantastic dessert, the music started to play and the opening Waltz commenced and was joined by many guests, after the first dance by the Ball Committee. After some classical music, the song Staying Alive by the Bee Gees brought most of the guests onto the dance floor to dance Friesenrock, which is a mix of rock and roll and swing. In German it is called a Knotentanz. Towards midnight, the prizes from the raffle tickets were read out and given to the winners. The dancing then continued until the early hours. On the final day of the weekend, the guests had an opportunity to observe holy mass or a chapel service. At noon, the guests also had a chance to use the facilities of Hotel van Oranje, which included a spa and other relaxing activities. Overall, the atmosphere was great and the Ball Committee received much positive feedback. The Ball Committee is certain that there will be another Tulips Ball in the coming year. After the Tulips Ball weekend, some of the far-traveling guests stayed a bit longer to enjoy some of the great sights the Netherlands has to offer. The Keukenhof, Amsterdam and of course The Hague were on the agenda and ensured the Tulips Ball mood was sustained long after the ball weekend. The Ball Committee is very enthusiastic about next year’s ball and has already started working on some ideas to make the next ball an ever greater success than that of this year. In order to do so, the Committee is open to suggestions and is looking forward to expanding cooperation with diplomatic and other organisations that wish to support the ball or its charity cause in any way they see fit. Moreover, the ball committee would be delighted to invite to the ball guests from the diplomatic community in the Netherlands and beyond. For more information, please visit the website: www.tulipsball.com

European Commission opens way for decision by June on visa-free travel for citizens of Turkey The European Commission is today proposing to the European Parliament and Council of the European Union to lift the visa requirements for the citizens of Turkey, under the understanding that the Turkish authorities will fulfil, as a matter of urgency and as they committed to do so on 18 March 2016, the outstanding benchmarks of its Visa Liberalisation Roadmap. The proposal is presented together with a Report on progress by Turkey in fulfilling the requirements of the Roadmap. First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said: “Turkey has made impressive progress, particularly in recent weeks, on meeting the benchmarks of its visa liberalisation roadmap. There is still work to be done as a matter of urgency but if Turkey sustains the progress made, they can meet the remaining benchmarks. This is why we are putting a proposal on the table which opens the way for the European Parliament and the Member States to decide to lift visa requirements, once the benchmarks have been met.” Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos said: “The Turkish authorities have made remarkable progress since the 18 March EU-Turkey Summit and we trust Turkey is committed to delivering on all fronts as soon as possible. On the understanding that all benchmarks will be met as a matter of urgency, the Commission has decided to put forward a proposal to transfer Turkey to the list of visa-free countries. Of course, the Commission will continue to monitor the continuous fulfilling of these criteria.”   Visa liberalisation for Turkey is a key component of the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 which stated that the fulfilment of the visa liberalisation roadmap will be accelerated with a view to lifting the visa requirements for Turkish citizens at the latest by the end of June 2016, provided that all benchmarks have been met. In order to meet a June deadline for adoption by the co-legislators, a Commission proposal to put Turkey on the visa-free list has to be tabled at the beginning of May to allow an eight-week period to elapse between a draft being made available to national Parliaments and its adoption. The Progress Report adopted today assesses progress made to date by Turkey in implementing the benchmarks, identifies outstanding benchmarks and sets out the concrete measures that Turkey needs to meet in order to complete the remaining requirements, in areas such as the fight against corruption, data protection, judicial cooperation with all Member States, enhanced cooperation with EUROPOL and revision of the legislation and practices on terrorism. In a number of exceptional cases, the acceleration of the Roadmap’s implementation has made completion of some benchmarks, such as a full roll-out of biometric passports and a review of the implementation of the EU-Turkey readmission agreement (fully applicable only as of 1 June), impossible to date. In others, the Commission acknowledges the good progress made by the Turkish authorities so far, and encourages them to urgently step up these efforts to meet all requirements in order to obtain visa liberalisation by the end of June. Visa-free travel will apply to all EU Member States except for Ireland and the UK, and to the four Schengen associated countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). The exemption concerns only short stays of up to 90 days (in any 180-day period) for business, tourist or family purposes, among others. The visa exemption does not provide for the right to work in the EU. Other entry conditions for accessing the Schengen area will continue to apply, including the need to be able to prove their purpose of travel and sufficient subsidence means. As for all countries listed in Annex II of the Visa Regulation and whose citizens can travel visa-free to Europe, the safeguard clause introduced in the beginning of 2014 will apply to visa-free travel for citizens of Turkey. Taking into account recent discussions with Member States on the EU’s visa policy as a whole, the Commission has today proposed to strengthen this suspension mechanism to make it easier for Member States to notify circumstances leading to a possible suspension and enabling the Commission to trigger the mechanism on its own initiative. Background The European Union launched the Visa Liberalisation Dialogue with Turkey on 16 December 2013, in parallel with the signature of the EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement. The Visa Liberalisation Dialogue is based on the Roadmap towards a visa free regime with Turkey, a document setting out the requirements that Turkey needs to meet in order to enable the Commission to propose to the European Parliament and the Council an amendment to Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 which would allow Turkish citizens to travel without a visa for short stays of 90 days within any 180-day period for business, touristic or family purposes, in the Schengen area. The 72 requirements listed in the Roadmap are organised in five thematic groups: document security; migration management; public order and security; fundamental rights and readmission of irregular migrants. On 20 October 2014, the Commission adopted its First Report on progress by Turkey in fulfilling the requirements of its visa liberalisation roadmap. The First Report assessed the fulfilment of each requirement and issued recommendations for making further progress in all of them. At the EU-Turkey Summit of 29 November 2015, activating the EU-Turkey Joint Action Plan, the EU welcomed the commitment by Turkey to accelerate the fulfilment of the Visa Roadmap benchmarks vis-à-vis all participating Member States. Turkey committed to accelerating the fulfilment of the Roadmap, including by bringing forward the application of all the provisions of the EU-Turkey Readmission agreement. On 4 March 2016, the Commission adopted its Second Report on progress by Turkey in fulfilling the requirements of its visa liberalisation roadmap. The Report welcomed the new level of engagement and determination demonstrated by the Turkish authorities. At the EU-Turkey Summit of 18 March, Turkey committed to accelerating the fulfilment of the Roadmap even further. In the Joint Statement after this meeting, the 28 EU Heads of State or Government committed to lifting the visa requirements for Turkish citizens at the latest by the end of June 2016, provided that all 72 benchmarks of the Roadmap are fulfilled. Photography by Curaçao Chronicle.  

From Traditional aid to Responsible Trade: the role of the private sector By Prof. Dr. André Nijhof & Nika Salvetti At present many governments are in a transition from traditional aid to responsible trade and the Netherlands is at the forefront of this development. What is the background of this transition and why is the private sector involved in addressing development cooperation objectives? Traditional aid starts with the definition introduced by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) which in 1972 described the Official Development Assistance (ODA) as those flows of capital, goods and services to countries and territories on the DAC list of ODA recipients and to multilateral institutions with the aim to promote economic development and welfare of developing countries. At that time the formulation of a common international definition was necessary to enable the measurement and comparison of spending by donor countries. However only funding provided by public authorities could qualify as ODA. So no place for responsible trade at that time. The approach to aid for developing countries has been since changing. A main reason is that the provision of development cooperation through aid is now part of a more vast and complex global agenda which expanded its horizon to new goals, such as climate change, migration and security, taking into account the new UN Sustainable Development goals (post 2015). Also the financial instruments used for aid provision are becoming more complex and innovative; special forms of insurances and guarantees to minimize risks for private funding as well as public private financial and technical partnerships. Donors are also increasing in the form of private funding flows through charity, remittances and direct investments. But the most relevant reason for change, as also emphasized in Rome (2003), Paris (2005), Accra (2008) and Busan (2011), is motivated by the need to ensure aid effectiveness by mutual efforts and co-responsibility of donors and recipient countries. The challenge at this point is to couple aid with the benefits of trade and investment to promote a sustainable and inclusive growth. How to do this is still work in progress but a promising example is the public-private partnership that resulted in an eco-system supporting business at the base of the pyramid. Since its launch in November 2014 the Inclusive Business Accelerator has grown to a global platform, assisting more than 180 ventures across 37 different geographies with the required ammunition to scale up their business and increase their benefits for low income communities (see iba.ventures). And many more examples will follow with the implementation of the “A world to Gain: A New agenda for Aid, Development and Trade” policy of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. About the authors: Prof Dr André Nijhof is full professor in Sustainable Business and Stewardship and is visiting professor at Chang Gung University in Taiwan and the University for Peace in Costa Rica. Nika Salvetti is a PhD candidate and practitioner in the field of CSR, Sustainability, Social Responsibility where she worked on in different developing countries such as Bangladesh, Uganda, Guatemala, as well as in Costa Rica, the overall Balkans and Middle East. About Nyenrode Business Universiteit Nyenrode Business Universiteit is the only private university in the Netherlands, founded for and by business. Nyenrode pillars of Leadership, Entrepreneurship and Stewardship are reflected in all of their programs which include undergraduate and graduate degrees in management, business, finance and accounting. Nyenrode is a proud partner of Diplomat Magazine. Together, they have developed the Nyenrode – Diplomat Magazine Award which recognizes the talents from the diplomat network in the Netherlands and worldwide by providing them with exclusive scholarships for the programs Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Master (MSc) in Management, full-time International MBA and part-time Executive MBA. For more information visit www.nyenrodemasters.nl/diplomat and register for the launching event on June 1st at the Carlton Ambassador Den Haag.