L. whereas the list of items and equipment whose trade is controlled by Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 does not include some policing and security equipment, currently traded internationally, which may have legitimate law enforcement or penal uses when their use is regulated in accordance with international human rights obligations and law enforcement best practice standards, but which are widely misused for torture or other ill-treatment, including handcuffs, batons and other hand-held impact devices, high-voltage electric-shock stun weapons operating below 10 000 volts, as well as specially designed components and ...[+++]accessories for controlled and prohibited equipment,

Given the significant differences between the criminal law of the Member States, particularly as regards the classification of punishments into primary, [47] additional [48] and ancillary [49] penalties, it is hardly surprising that the term "alternative sanction or penalty" is not interpreted in the same way in all Member States.

Given the significant differences between the criminal law of the Member States, particularly as regards the classification of punishments into primary, [47] additional [48] and ancillary [49] penalties, it is hardly surprising that the term "alternative sanction or penalty" is not interpreted in the same way in all Member States.

4. Consequently, Articles 1 to 7 of the Framework Decision – which deal with the definition of offences, the principle of the obligation to impose criminal penalties, the rules on participation and instigation, the level of penalties, accompanying penalties and the specific rules on the liability of legal persons – which, “on account of both their aim and their content”, “have as their main purpose the protection of the environment”, “could have been properly adopted on the basis of Article 175 EC”[5]. “In those circumstances, the entire framework decision, being indivisible, infringes Article 47 EU as it encroaches on the powers which Article 175 EC confers on the Community”[6], and should be annulled. Art 47 EU estab ...[+++]lishes the primacy of Community law over Title VI of the TEU.

Bill C-217 likewise would have to include a clear prohibition tied to an offence, in order to conclude that it was criminal law legislation (1535) There is no prohibition tied to an offence as the main purpose of Bill C-217; rather, the offences contained in Bill C-217 are ancillary or regulatory in nature: to help support privacy concerns related to the subsequent events to the acquisition of the blood sample.

Mr. Spreutels: Yes, and I might also tell you that I am also, incidentally, a professor in comparative criminal law at the Université de Bruxelles.