Council Decision (EU) 2025/962 of 12 May 2025 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland (Text with EEA relevance)

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/962 20.5.2025
(1) There remains a need to alleviate economic and social disparities within the European Economic Area, and a new mechanism for the financial contributions of the EEA EFTA States and a new Norwegian financial mechanism should therefore be established.
(2) On 20 May 2021, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an agreement on the future financial contributions of the EEA EFTA States to economic and social cohesion in the European Economic Area.
(3) The EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 (‘EEA Financial Mechanism’) and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 ‘Norwegian Financial Mechanism’) will contribute to the reduction of economic and social disparities in the European Economic Area and to the strengthening of relations between the EEA EFTA States and the Beneficiary States.
(4) The EEA Financial Mechanism reflects the benefits drawn by the EEA EFTA States from their participation in the internal market and takes account of the aim of promoting the continuous and balanced strengthening of trade and economic relations between all Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement in accordance with Article 115 of the EEA Agreement.
(5) The EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism establish special procedures that increase the efficiency of the implementation and the consultation of Beneficiary States. In particular, both the EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism provide for consulting the Commission at a strategic level during the negotiations for the Memoranda of Understanding between the Donor States and the Beneficiary States. They also include arrangements for the Commission to provide assistance to the Beneficiary States in the consultations on the provisions for the implementation of the mechanisms. These safeguards will contribute to the efficient and timely implementation of the mechanisms, while taking full account of the needs of the Beneficiary States and of substantial difficulties that they may experience in the implementation of the financial mechanisms, including in relation to the common values and the principles of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. In this regard, attention should be paid to the right of a Beneficiary State to be heard where measures such as the suspension of payments and the recovery of funds are concerned.
(6) Considering that the EEA Financial Mechanism will be added as an additional protocol to the EEA Agreement, the Union is able, in accordance with the relevant procedures under the Treaties, to bring disputes about the interpretation or application of the additional protocol before the Joint Committee, pursuant to Article 111 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with Article 89 of the EEA Agreement, the EEA Council can consider any issue giving rise to a difficulty.
(7) The special provisions on imports into the Union of certain fish and fisheries products originating in Iceland and Norway, set out in the Additional Protocols to their respective Free Trade Agreements with the European Economic Community, expired on 30 April 2021 and have been reviewed in accordance with Article 1 of those Additional Protocols. Alongside the negotiations of a future financial contribution and as part of a comprehensive package deal, the Council therefore, on 20 May 2021, authorised the Commission to open negotiations on an agreement on market access for fish and fishery products originating in Iceland and Norway.
(8) The replacement of the existing financial mechanisms by new mechanisms, which relate to different time periods, different amounts of funds, and different implementing provisions, as well as the renewal and extension of the concessions relating to certain fish and fisheries products, which were part of the comprehensive package of negotiations, constitute, taken as a whole, an important development of the association with the EEA EFTA States, which justifies the recourse to Article 217 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
(9) In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2024/2604(2), the Agreements and the Additional Protocols were signed in Brussels on 12 September 2024, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreements and Additional Protocols. The said Agreements and Protocols should be approved on behalf of the European Union.
(10) In accordance with the Treaties, the Commission should express the consent of the Union to be bound by the Agreements and the Additional Protocols,
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 217, in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1) There remains a need to alleviate economic and social disparities within the European Economic Area, and a new mechanism for the financial contributions of the EEA EFTA States and a new Norwegian financial mechanism should therefore be established.
(2) On 20 May 2021, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an agreement on the future financial contributions of the EEA EFTA States to economic and social cohesion in the European Economic Area.
(3) The EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 (‘EEA Financial Mechanism’) and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028 ‘Norwegian Financial Mechanism’) will contribute to the reduction of economic and social disparities in the European Economic Area and to the strengthening of relations between the EEA EFTA States and the Beneficiary States.
(4) The EEA Financial Mechanism reflects the benefits drawn by the EEA EFTA States from their participation in the internal market and takes account of the aim of promoting the continuous and balanced strengthening of trade and economic relations between all Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement in accordance with Article 115 of the EEA Agreement.
(5) The EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism establish special procedures that increase the efficiency of the implementation and the consultation of Beneficiary States. In particular, both the EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism provide for consulting the Commission at a strategic level during the negotiations for the Memoranda of Understanding between the Donor States and the Beneficiary States. They also include arrangements for the Commission to provide assistance to the Beneficiary States in the consultations on the provisions for the implementation of the mechanisms. These safeguards will contribute to the efficient and timely implementation of the mechanisms, while taking full account of the needs of the Beneficiary States and of substantial difficulties that they may experience in the implementation of the financial mechanisms, including in relation to the common values and the principles of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. In this regard, attention should be paid to the right of a Beneficiary State to be heard where measures such as the suspension of payments and the recovery of funds are concerned.
(6) Considering that the EEA Financial Mechanism will be added as an additional protocol to the EEA Agreement, the Union is able, in accordance with the relevant procedures under the Treaties, to bring disputes about the interpretation or application of the additional protocol before the Joint Committee, pursuant to Article 111 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with Article 89 of the EEA Agreement, the EEA Council can consider any issue giving rise to a difficulty.
(7) The special provisions on imports into the Union of certain fish and fisheries products originating in Iceland and Norway, set out in the Additional Protocols to their respective Free Trade Agreements with the European Economic Community, expired on 30 April 2021 and have been reviewed in accordance with Article 1 of those Additional Protocols. Alongside the negotiations of a future financial contribution and as part of a comprehensive package deal, the Council therefore, on 20 May 2021, authorised the Commission to open negotiations on an agreement on market access for fish and fishery products originating in Iceland and Norway.
(8) The replacement of the existing financial mechanisms by new mechanisms, which relate to different time periods, different amounts of funds, and different implementing provisions, as well as the renewal and extension of the concessions relating to certain fish and fisheries products, which were part of the comprehensive package of negotiations, constitute, taken as a whole, an important development of the association with the EEA EFTA States, which justifies the recourse to Article 217 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
(9) In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2024/2604 (2), the Agreements and the Additional Protocols were signed in Brussels on 12 September 2024, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreements and Additional Protocols. The said Agreements and Protocols should be approved on behalf of the European Union.
(10) In accordance with the Treaties, the Commission should express the consent of the Union to be bound by the Agreements and the Additional Protocols,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland are hereby approved on behalf of the European Union (3).
The Commission shall designate the person(s) empowered to deposit the instruments of approval on behalf of the Union as provided for in Article 3 of the Agreement between the European Union, Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway on an EEA Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, Article 11 of the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Union on a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period May 2021–April 2028, Article 5 of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway, and Article 4 of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland, in order to express the consent of the Union to be bound by those Agreements and Protocols (4).
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Council Decision (EU) 2025/961 of 12 May 2025 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2024–2029)

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/961 21.5.2025
(1) In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2024/2588(2), the Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2024–2029) (‘the Protocol’) was signed on 18 September 2024, subject to its conclusion at a later date.
(2) The objectives of the Protocol are to enable Union vessels to fish in Guinea-Bissau’s fishing zone and to enable the Union and Guinea-Bissau to work closely together to further promote the development of a sustainable fisheries policy and the responsible exploitation of fishery resources in Guinea-Bissau’s fishing zone. That cooperation will also contribute to decent working conditions in the fisheries sector.
(3) The Protocol should be approved on behalf of the Union.
(4) In accordance with the Treaties, the Commission should give the notification provided for in Article 20 of the Protocol.
(5) Article 10 of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau(3)(‘the Agreement’) establishes a Joint Committee responsible for monitoring the application of the Agreement and the Protocol. That committee has the power to approve certain amendments to the Protocol. In order to facilitate the approval of such amendments, the Commission should be empowered, subject to substantive and procedural conditions, to approve them on behalf of the Union under a simplified procedure.
(6) The Union’s position on proposed amendments to the Protocol should be established by the Council. The proposed amendments should be approved unless a blocking minority of Member States, in accordance with Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, objects to them.
(7) The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council(4)and delivered an opinion on 27 August 2024,
(1) The Commission shall ensure that the approval on behalf of the Union:(a)is in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy;(b)is consistent with the relevant rules adopted by regional fisheries management organisations and takes account of joint management by coastal states;(c)takes account of the most recent statistical, biological and other relevant information sent to the Commission. (a) is in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy; (b) is consistent with the relevant rules adopted by regional fisheries management organisations and takes account of joint management by coastal states; (c) takes account of the most recent statistical, biological and other relevant information sent to the Commission.
(a) is in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy;
(b) is consistent with the relevant rules adopted by regional fisheries management organisations and takes account of joint management by coastal states;
(c) takes account of the most recent statistical, biological and other relevant information sent to the Commission.
(a) is in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy;
(b) is consistent with the relevant rules adopted by regional fisheries management organisations and takes account of joint management by coastal states;
(c) takes account of the most recent statistical, biological and other relevant information sent to the Commission.
(2) Before approving the proposed amendments on behalf of the Union, the Commission shall submit them to the Council in sufficient time before the relevant Joint Committee meeting.
(3) The Council shall assess whether the proposed amendments comply with the criteria laid down in point 1.
(4) Unless a number of Member States equivalent to a blocking minority in the Council, in accordance with Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, object to the proposed amendments, the Commission shall approve them on behalf of the Union. If there is such a blocking minority, the Commission shall reject the proposed amendments on behalf of the Union.
(5) If, in the course of subsequent meetings of the Joint Committee, including on-the-spot meetings, it is impossible to reach an agreement, the matter shall be referred back to the Council, in accordance with the procedure set out in points 2, 3 and 4, in order for the Union position to take account of new factors.
(6) The Commission is invited to take, in due time, any steps necessary to follow up on the decision of the Joint Committee, including, where appropriate, publishing the relevant decision in theOfficial Journal of the European Unionand submitting any proposal necessary for the implementation of that decision.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 43, in conjunction with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), and Article 218(7) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2024/2588 (2), the Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2024–2029) (‘the Protocol’) was signed on 18 September 2024, subject to its conclusion at a later date.
(2) The objectives of the Protocol are to enable Union vessels to fish in Guinea-Bissau’s fishing zone and to enable the Union and Guinea-Bissau to work closely together to further promote the development of a sustainable fisheries policy and the responsible exploitation of fishery resources in Guinea-Bissau’s fishing zone. That cooperation will also contribute to decent working conditions in the fisheries sector.
(3) The Protocol should be approved on behalf of the Union.
(4) In accordance with the Treaties, the Commission should give the notification provided for in Article 20 of the Protocol.
(5) Article 10 of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (3) (‘the Agreement’) establishes a Joint Committee responsible for monitoring the application of the Agreement and the Protocol. That committee has the power to approve certain amendments to the Protocol. In order to facilitate the approval of such amendments, the Commission should be empowered, subject to substantive and procedural conditions, to approve them on behalf of the Union under a simplified procedure.
(6) The Union’s position on proposed amendments to the Protocol should be established by the Council. The proposed amendments should be approved unless a blocking minority of Member States, in accordance with Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, objects to them.
(7) The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and delivered an opinion on 27 August 2024,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2024–2029) (‘the Protocol’) is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.
The Commission shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 20 of the Protocol, in order to express the consent of the Union to be bound by the Protocol (5).
In accordance with the provisions and conditions laid down in the Annex to this Decision, the Commission is authorised to approve, on behalf of the Union, amendments to the Protocol adopted by the Joint Committee established under Article 10 of the Agreement.
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Where the Joint Committee is asked to adopt amendments to the Protocol under Article 10 of the Agreement and Article 16 of the Protocol, the Commission is authorised to approve the proposed amendments on behalf of the Union, under the following conditions:

(1) The Commission shall ensure that the approval on behalf of the Union:
(a) is in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy;
(b) is consistent with the relevant rules adopted by regional fisheries management organisations and takes account of joint management by coastal states;
(c) takes account of the most recent statistical, biological and other relevant information sent to the Commission.

(2) Before approving the proposed amendments on behalf of the Union, the Commission shall submit them to the Council in sufficient time before the relevant Joint Committee meeting.

(3) The Council shall assess whether the proposed amendments comply with the criteria laid down in point 1.

(4) Unless a number of Member States equivalent to a blocking minority in the Council, in accordance with Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, object to the proposed amendments, the Commission shall approve them on behalf of the Union. If there is such a blocking minority, the Commission shall reject the proposed amendments on behalf of the Union.

(5) If, in the course of subsequent meetings of the Joint Committee, including on-the-spot meetings, it is impossible to reach an agreement, the matter shall be referred back to the Council, in accordance with the procedure set out in points 2, 3 and 4, in order for the Union position to take account of new factors.

(6) The Commission is invited to take, in due time, any steps necessary to follow up on the decision of the Joint Committee, including, where appropriate, publishing the relevant decision in the Official Journal of the European Union and submitting any proposal necessary for the implementation of that decision.

As regards other matters which do not concern amendments to the Protocol, in accordance with Article 10 of the Agreement and Article 16 of the Protocol, the position to be adopted by the Union within the Joint Committee shall be determined in accordance with the Treaties and established working practices.

Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/960 of 20 May 2025 amending Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 concerning restrictive measures against the proliferation and use of chemical weapons

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/960 20.5.2025
(1) On 15 October 2018, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544(1)concerning restrictive measures against the proliferation and use of chemical weapons.
(2) On 18 November 2024 and 14 February 2025, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) issued reports from two Technical Assistance Visits confirming the presence of the riot control agent CS and related compounds in the samples collected, pointing to a pattern of riot control use as a method of warfare on the front-lines in Ukraine, which is prohibited under Article I, paragraph 5, of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
(3) In that context and in view of the continued threat posed by the proliferation and use of chemical weapons, three entities should be included in the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies subject to restrictive measures set out in the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544.
(4) Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Name Identifying information Grounds for designation Date of listing
‘4. Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation(Войска радиационной, химической и биологической защиты Министерства обороны Российской Федерации) Address: Corpus 2, Building 22, Frunze Embankment, 119160 Moscow, Russian FederationWebsite:https://eng.mil.ru/en/structure/forces/ground/structure/rhbz.htmRegistration number: 1037739635890Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 7704195013 The Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are the competent entity in the Russian Armed Forces in charge of chemical and biological warfare. In this capacity, the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are involved in the Russian Federation’s use of chemical weapons. These include riot control agents, such as CS gas, which have been used as a method of warfare by Russian forces in Ukraine, in breach of Article I, paragraph 5, of the Chemical Weapons Convention, to which Russia is a State Party. The use of CS gas has been confirmed by reports published in November 2024 and February 2025 by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), following Technical Assistance Visits in Ukraine.Thus, the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are involved in the use of chemical weapons. 20.5.2025
5. 27th Scientific Centre of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation(27-й Центральный научно-исследовательский институт Министерства обороны Российской Федерации) Address: 51 st Khoroshevsky Passage, 123007 Moscow, Russian FederationPhone: + 7 (495) 945 76 96Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 7714676767Website:http://eng.mil.ru/en/science/sro/information.htm?id=10992@morfOrgScienceEmail: [email protected] entity: Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation The Russian Ministry of Defence 27th Scientific Centre is a subordinate unit of the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops. As a leading research entity within the Russian military, it belongs to the Russian military and is associated with the development and use of chemical agents.Thus, the Russian Ministry of Defence 27th Scientific Centre is associated with the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops. 20.5.2025
6. 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation(33 Центральный научно-исследовательский испытательный институт Министерства обороны Российской Федерации) Address: 1 Ulitsa Krasnoznamennaya, Volsk-18/Shikhany, Saratov Oblast, Russian Federation; Krasnoznamennaya Street 1, Volsk-18, Saratov, 412918 Russian FederationPhone: + 7 (343) 255 99 88Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 6441013942 / 644101001Website:https://ens.mil.ru/science/SRI/information.htm?id=12027@morfOrgScienceEmail: [email protected] entity: Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation The Russian Ministry of Defence 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute is a subordinate unit of the Radiological, Biological and Chemical Defence Troops. As a leading chemical research and testing entity within the Russian military, it belongs to the Russian military and is associated with the development and use of chemical agents.Thus, the Russian Ministry of Defence 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute is associated with the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops. 20.5.2025’
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
Whereas:
(1) On 15 October 2018, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 (1) concerning restrictive measures against the proliferation and use of chemical weapons.
(2) On 18 November 2024 and 14 February 2025, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) issued reports from two Technical Assistance Visits confirming the presence of the riot control agent CS and related compounds in the samples collected, pointing to a pattern of riot control use as a method of warfare on the front-lines in Ukraine, which is prohibited under Article I, paragraph 5, of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
(3) In that context and in view of the continued threat posed by the proliferation and use of chemical weapons, three entities should be included in the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies subject to restrictive measures set out in the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544.
(4) Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

In the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544, under the heading ‘B. Legal persons, entities and bodies’, the following entries are added:

Name
Identifying information
Grounds for designation
Date of listing
‘4. Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
(Войска радиационной, химической и биологической защиты Министерства обороны Российской Федерации)
Address: Corpus 2, Building 22, Frunze Embankment, 119160 Moscow, Russian Federation
Website: https://eng.mil.ru/en/structure/forces/ground/structure/rhbz.htm
Registration number: 1037739635890
Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 7704195013
The Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are the competent entity in the Russian Armed Forces in charge of chemical and biological warfare. In this capacity, the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are involved in the Russian Federation’s use of chemical weapons. These include riot control agents, such as CS gas, which have been used as a method of warfare by Russian forces in Ukraine, in breach of Article I, paragraph 5, of the Chemical Weapons Convention, to which Russia is a State Party. The use of CS gas has been confirmed by reports published in November 2024 and February 2025 by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), following Technical Assistance Visits in Ukraine.
Thus, the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops are involved in the use of chemical weapons.
20.5.2025 5. 27th Scientific Centre of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
(27-й Центральный научно-исследовательский институт Министерства обороны Российской Федерации)
Address: 51 st Khoroshevsky Passage, 123007 Moscow, Russian Federation
Phone: + 7 (495) 945 76 96
Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 7714676767
Website:
http://eng.mil.ru/en/science/sro/information.htm?id=10992@morfOrgScience
Email: [email protected]
Associated entity: Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
The Russian Ministry of Defence 27th Scientific Centre is a subordinate unit of the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops. As a leading research entity within the Russian military, it belongs to the Russian military and is associated with the development and use of chemical agents.
Thus, the Russian Ministry of Defence 27th Scientific Centre is associated with the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops.
20.5.2025 6. 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
(33 Центральный научно-исследовательский испытательный институт Министерства обороны Российской Федерации)
Address: 1 Ulitsa Krasnoznamennaya, Volsk-18/Shikhany, Saratov Oblast, Russian Federation; Krasnoznamennaya Street 1, Volsk-18, Saratov, 412918 Russian Federation
Phone: + 7 (343) 255 99 88
Taxpayer Personal Identification Number (INN): 6441013942 / 644101001
Website: https://ens.mil.ru/science/SRI/information.htm?id=12027@morfOrgScience
Email: [email protected]
Associated entity: Radiological Chemical and Biological Defence Troops of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
The Russian Ministry of Defence 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute is a subordinate unit of the Radiological, Biological and Chemical Defence Troops. As a leading chemical research and testing entity within the Russian military, it belongs to the Russian military and is associated with the development and use of chemical agents.
Thus, the Russian Ministry of Defence 33rd Central Scientific Research and Testing Institute is associated with the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops.
20.5.2025’

Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/957 of 20 May 2025 amending Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Russia

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/957 20.5.2025
(1) On 27 May 2024, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484(1).
(2) The Union remains unwavering in its condemnation of human rights violations and repressions in Russia.
(3) In view of the gravity of the situation, the Council considers that 28 natural persons should be added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484.
(4) Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Name Identifying information Statement of Reasons Date of listing
‘20. Olesya Anatoleyevna MENDELEYEVA(Олеся Анатольевна МЕНДЕЛЕЕВА) Position: judge of the Meshchansky Court of MoscowDOB: 18.4.1981Nationality: RussianGender: female Olesya Mendeleyeva is a judge of the Meshchansky Court of Moscow. She sentenced Alexei Gorinov, local activist and municipal deputy, to 7 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the dissemination of deliberately false information about the actions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The basis for the sentencing was Gorinov’s opinion expressed during a meeting of the Council of Deputies of the Krasnoselsky municipal district that a children’s drawing competition following Russia’s aggression against Ukraine looked like a “feast during the plague”. The trial was swift and, according to independent experts, served as a tool to intimidate other dissenting Russian citizens. This sentence was one of the first sentences of imprisonment imposed by a Russian judge under Article 207.1 which was not suspended. During the trial, Judge Mendeleyeva regularly sided with the prosecution and refused almost all requests of the defence and the defendant, including a request to release him from custody due to a deteriorating health condition. Judge Mendeleyeva fully satisfied the prosecution’s demands and sentenced Gorinov to 7 years imprisonment for non-violent action. That imprisonment has led to a significant deterioration of his health condition in a penal colony and to inadequate medical care.Therefore, Olesya Mendeleyeva is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
21. Olga Vladimirovna BALANDINA(Ольга Владимировна БАЛАНДИНА) Position: judge of the Sovetsky City Court of Kaliningrad OblastDOB: 5.6.1979Nationality: RussianGender: female Olga Balandina is a judge of the Sovetsky City Court of Kaliningrad Oblast. She sentenced Igor Baryshnikov, local activist, to 7,5 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges, pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for publishing posts about Russia’s bombardment of Mariupol and atrocities in Bucha. During the trial, despite an attending physician testifying under oath that imprisonment might prove fatal for Baryshnikov due to cystotomy and a catheter in his abdomen, the judge refused to conduct a forensic examination of the defendant’s health. Consequently, imprisonment has led to inadequate treatment in the penal colony and to the deterioration of Igor Baryshnikov’s health condition. The judge also refused to allow Igor Baryshnikov to attend his mother’s funeral when she passed away 1,5 months after the sentencing.Therefore, Olga Balandina is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
22. Svetlana Fyodorovna ZHURAVLOVA(Светлана Фёдоровна ЖУРАВЛЁВА) Position: Senior Assistant of the Meshchansky Interdistrict Prosecutor’s OfficeDOB: 8.7.1988Nationality: RussianAddress: 1 Krasnoselsky per. 5/14, 107140 Moscow Svetlana Zhuravlova is a Senior Assistant of the Meshchansky Interdistrict Prosecutor’s Office. She served as a prosecutor during Alexei Gorinov’s trial. Mr. Gorinov is a local activist and municipal deputy, who was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the dissemination of deliberately false information about the actions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The basis for the sentencing was Mr. Gorinov’s opinion expressed during a meeting of the Council of Deputies of the Krasnoselsky municipal district that a children’s drawing competition following Russia’s aggression against Ukraine looked like a “feast during the plague”. The trial was swift and, according to independent experts, served as a tool to intimidate other dissenting Russian citizens. This sentence was on of the first sentences of imprisonment imposed by a Russian judge under Article 207.1 which was not suspended. Prosecutor Zhuravlova opposed all defence requests which could have improved the situation of the defendant or clarified the legal situation, including a request to release Mr. Gorinov from the glass cage in which he had to stay during the trial, a request to release him from custody due to a deteriorating health condition and a request to determine whether Article 207.1 complied with the Russian constitution. The judge sided with Prosecutor Zhuravlova on all of the above-mentioned requests. Prosecutor Zhuravlova demanded that the court sentence Mr. Gorinov to 7 years imprisonment for non-violent action, which was fully satisfied by the judge. That imprisonment has led to the significant deterioration of his health condition in the penal colony and to inadequate medical care.Therefore, Svetlana Zhuravlova is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
23. Alexey Sergeyevich KHARLAMOV(Алексей Сергеевич ХАРЛАМОВ) Position: Chairman of the Moscow Regional CourtDOB: 25.1.1975Nationality: RussianGender: male Alexey Kharlamov is the Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court who was previously a judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and a member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court.In his position as member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in April 2018, he upheld the verdict against the opposition politician Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg in the Yves Rocher case even though, in October 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Russia had violated the Navalny brothers’ right to a fair trial and punishment solely on the basis of the law. Consequently, Alexei Navalny was pronounced guilty and, as a result, imprisoned years later in a high-security penal colony in order to prevent him from taking part in political activities.Therefore, Alexey Kharlamov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
24. Tatiana Alexandrovna MOLITVINA(Татьяна Александровна МОЛИТВИНА) Position: judge of the Moscow City CourtDOB: 28.3.1987Nationality: RussianGender: female Tatiana Molitvina is a judge of the Moscow City Court. Before her appointment to her present position, she was a judge of the Tverskoy District Court in the city of Moscow.In her position as a judge of the Tverskoy District Court in the city of Moscow, she refused to accept a claim against the Prosecutor General, Yuri Chaika, and the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, made by Alexei Navalny and the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Mr. Navalny’s claim was one of several attempts to sue Yuri Chaika for defamation following the release of an investigative film by Mr. Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation that accused Chaika’s family members of involvement in illegal activities.Therefore, Tatiana Molitvina is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
25. Tatiana Anatolevna PETROVA(Татьяна Анатольевна ПЕТРОВА) Position: Deputy Chairwoman of the Supreme Court of the Russian FederationDOB: 27.7.1961POB: Sychevka, Smolensk regionNationality: RussianGender: female Tatiana Petrova is the Deputy Chairwoman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.In her position as member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in April 2018, she upheld the verdict against the opposition politician Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg in the Yves Rocher case even though, in October 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Russia had violated the Navalny brothers’ right to a fair trial and punishment. Consequently, Alexei Navalny was pronounced guilty and, as a result, was imprisoned years later in a high-security penal colony in order to prevent him from taking part in political activity.Therefore, Tatiana Petrova is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
26. Sergei Vladimirovich BOGDANOV(Сергей Владимирович БОГДАНОВ) Position: State Prosecutor of the Kirov oblastDOB: Probably 1973Nationality: RussianGender: male Sergei Bogdanov is a state prosecutor of the Kirov oblast, Russia.He represented the state prosecutor’s office in several court hearings against Alexei Navalny and Pyotr Ofitserov in the Kirovles case.In July 2013, he requested 6 years imprisonment in a general regime penal colony for Mr. Navalny and 5 years for Mr. Ofitserov. Moreover, the state prosecution imposed an additional punishment on the defendants of a fine of 1 million RUB each.In December 2016, the state prosecutor, Mr. Bogdanov presented a “similar indictment” to the one filed in 2013. That happened despite the fact that, following the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation overturned the sentences against Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov and sent the case back for retrial.In February 2017, at the retrial of the Kirovles case, Prosecutor Bogdanov delivered a speech similar to the one he delivered in 2013 and only added a comment on the decisions of the ECHR and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to overturn the sentencing of Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov. In his opinion, the reference to these decisions had no legal basis, since an independent trial was taking place and the ECHR verdict had no predetermined force. As a result, the court found Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov guilty and sentenced them to 5 and 4 years probation and a fine of 500 000  RUB each.Therefore, Sergey Bogdanov is responsible for serious human rights violations and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
27. Ekaterina Sergeevna FROLOVA(Екатерина Сергеевна ФРОЛОВА) Position: State prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s OfficeDOB: Around 1988Nationality: RussianGender: femaleAssociated entities: Criminal Justice Department of the Moscow Prosecutor’s Office Ekaterina Frolova is a state prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s Office.In 2020, she was promoted from the Central Administrative District to prosecutor of the Criminal Justice Department of the Moscow Prosecutor’s Office. In that position, she acted as the prosecutor in several proceedings against Alexei Navalny. In February 2021, she supported in court the replacement of Alexei Navalny’s suspended sentence with a term of actual imprisonment in the Yves Rocher case, despite his treatment at the Charité clinic, the expiration of his probationary period and the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights. In the same month, she asked the court to find Mr. Navalny guilty of slander against WWII veteran Ignat Artemenko. After her participation in the Navalny trial, Ekaterina Frolova was promoted to state prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s Office.Therefore, Ekaterina Frolova is responsible for serious human rights violations and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
28. Mikhail Yurevich KAZAKOV(Михаил Юрьевич КАЗАКОВ) Position: Judge of the Moscow City CourtDOB: 9.2.1976Nationality: RussianGender: MaleAssociated entities: Moscow City Court Mikhail Kazakov is a Russian judge working in the Moscow City Court. In the proceedings to classify the Anti-Corruption Foundation, its legal entity, the Foundation for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights, and the Navalny headquarters as extremist organisations, he classified the materials in the case, preventing access to them for Alexei Navalny and his lawyers. In December 2021, Mr. Kazakov ruled to liquidate the Memorial Human Rights Center and its structural units.Therefore, Mikhail Kazakov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of association and freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
29. Alexander Alexandrovich KEMEROV(Александр Александрович КЕМЕРОВ) Position: Investigator at the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Kemerovo regionDOB: 27.9.1984Nationality: RussianGender: male Alexander Kemerov is the investigator at the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Kemerovo region, Kuzbass.In that position, he was involved in the fabrication of the “extremism case” against Alexei Navalny’s supporters, including Vadim Ostanin, the former head of the Navalny headquarters in Barnaul, as well as the fabricated fraud case against Alexei Navalny himself. Mr. Kemerov put pressure on the former employee of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, Fyodor Gorozhanko, to testify against Alexei Navalny in order to incriminate him.Therefore, Alexander Kemerov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, arbitrary arrests or detentions. He is also responsible for violations or abuses of freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
30. Valentin Valentinovich ERSHOV(Валентин Валентинович ЕРШОВ) Position: Deputy Chairman of the Moscow Regional CourtDOB: 8.4.1985Nationality: RussianGender: male Valentin Ershov is the Deputy Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court. In the past, he held the position of judge of the Presnensky District Court of Moscow, followed by the position of judge of the Moscow Regional Court.In his position, in a politically motivated proceeding, he refused to process a lawsuit filed by Alexei Navalny and the Anti-Corruption Foundation against Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika and the editorial board of the electronic periodical “Ekho Moskvy” for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation.Therefore, Valentin Ershov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
31. Ruslan Shavkyatovich NEVEROV(Руслан Шавкатович НЕВЕРОВ) Position: Investigator for especially important cases of the 1st control-zonal department of the procedural control and criminalistics department of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee, colonel of justiceDOB: 22.6.1979Nationality: RussianPhone number: +7-905-503-1997 Ruslan Neverov is the investigator for especially important cases of the 1st control-zonal department of the procedural control and criminalistics department of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee.In his position, in March 2021 in the proceeding in the 235th Garrison Military Court, he requested the dismissal of a complaint about the inaction of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee regarding the poisoning of Alexei Navalny in 2020 by Novichok nerve agent. The Court agreed to reject Mr. Navalny’s claim.Therefore, Ruslan Neverov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
32. Elena Alekseevna KOROBKOVA(Елена Алексеевна КОРОБКОВА) Position: Head of the Department for the Execution of Sentences not Related to the Isolation of Convicts from SocietyDOB: 4.10.1970Gender: femalePhone number: + 7-916-456-3230 Elena Korobkova is the head of the Department for the Execution of Sentences not Related to the Isolation of Convicts from Society. In 2020, Russian opposition leader and anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny was poisoned with Novichok nerve agent and as a result was hospitalised in a serious condition in Berlin, Germany. Due to his condition, he was unable to attend the inspection ordered by the Federal Penitentiary Service (FSIN) of the Russian Federation. Following that event, on December 29, 2020, the Penitentiary Inspectorate of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia in Moscow made a submission to the court to cancel Mr. Navalny’s suspended sentence and execute the sentence imposed by the court. Elena Korobkova, as a representative of FSIN, demanded that the opposition activist’s suspended sentence be replaced with a custodial one.Therefore, Elena Korobkova is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
33. Margarita Nikolaevna KOTOVA(Маргарита Николаевна КОТОВА) Position: Judge of the Moscow City Court; former Judge of the Lefortovsky District Court of MoscowDOB: 25.6.1984Nationality: RussianGender: femaleAddress: Severodvinskaya Street, 11 Bldg. 1, Moscow, Russia, 127224ITN: 771508948129Phone number: + 7-926-288-0049 Margarita Kotova is a judge of the Moscow City Court. She was a judge of the Lefortovsky District Court of Moscow until 2022. In her former capacity, Judge Margarita Kotova found Alexei Navalny guilty in a court inside the maximum-security prison in Pokrov, 100 km east of Moscow where he is already serving a 2,5 -year sentence for violating parole while in recovery from poisoning. She sentenced Alexei Navalny to 9 years imprisonment in a maximum-security colony with a fine of 1,2  million RUB on a trumped-up case of fraud and insult to the court. Alexei Navalny was also accused of fraud in relation to donations and of insulting a judge. She also extended pre-trial detention for a man under false motives for his pro-Ukrainian views in breach of his rights of defence.Therefore, Margarita Kotova is responsible for serious violations of the right of defence and of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
34. Nadezhda Viktorovna TIKHONOVA(Надежда Викторовна ТИХОНОВА) Position: prosecutor of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian FederationDOB: 23.9.1974Nationality: RussianGender: female Nadezhda Tikhonova is a prosecutor of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation. Nadezhda Tikhonova asked a court to find Alexei Navalny guilty and to sentence him to 13 years imprisonment and 2 years of restriction of liberty, with a fine of 1,2  million RUB in a fabricated case of fraud for collecting donations for the work of the Anti-Corruption Foundation, and of contempt of court.Therefore, Nadezhda Tikhonova is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
35. Viktor Vladimirovich ROGOV(Виктор Владимирович РОГОВ) Position: Judge of the First Court of Appeal of General JurisdictionDOB: 26.5.1965Phone number: + 7-919-075-0024 Viktor Rogov is a judge at the First Court of Appeal of General Jurisdiction. He upheld the sentences against politician Alexei Navalny and Daniel Kholodny, technical director of the YouTube channel “Navalny LIVE”. The Moscow City Court found Mr. Navalny guilty of creating an NGO that encroaches on the rights of citizens, financing extremism, creating an extremist community, involving minors in committing dangerous acts, and rehabilitating Nazism. Mr. Navalny was sentenced to 19 years imprisonment in a special regime colony and a fine of 500 000 RUB. Mr. Kholodny was found guilty of financing extremist activities and participation in the activities of an extremist organisation and was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment in a general regime colony. After hearing the sentence, Mr. Navalny and Mr. Kholodny appealed the court’s decision at the First Court of Appeal in Moscow where judge Rogov refused their appeal and upheld the original decision. Mr. Rogov also upheld the decision sentencing opposition leader Vladimir Kara-Murza to 25 years imprisonment in a maximum security penal colony for charges of high treason, involvement in the activities of an undesirable group, and discrediting Russia’s armed forces.Therefore, Viktor Rogov is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
36. Denis Gennadievich POPOV(Денис Геннадьевич ПОПОВ) Position: Prosecutor of the city of MoscowDOB: 12.1.1972POB: SverdlovskNationality: RussianGender: maleTIN: 770970517335 Denis Popov is the prosecutor of the city of Moscow. He was appointed by President Putin in 2019. Mr. Popov is responsible for organising the state prosecution of Alexei Navalny and other opposition leaders and political activists in Moscow. He directly oversaw the recognition as extremist structures of organisations created by Alexei Navalny to support his political activities.Therefore, Denis Popov is responsible for serious violations or abuses of human rights or for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of lawin Russia. 20.5.2025
37. Alina Vladimirovna IBRAGIMOVA(Елена Владимировна ИБРАГИМОВА) Position: Judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint PetersburgNationality: RussianGender: female As judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint-Petersburg, Alina Ibragimova sentenced Olga Smirnova, architect and political activist, to 1 month imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Olga Smirnova was arrested for publishing anti-war information on social media in a VK-group.Therefore, Alina Ibragimova is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
38. Olesya Igorevna KABOCHKINA(Олеся Игоревна КАБОЧКИНА) Position: Assistant Prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint PetersburgNationality: RussianGender: female As assistant prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg, Olesya Kabochkina asked for a 7 year sentence of imprisonment for Ioann Kurmoyarov, blogger and priest, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ioann Kurmoyarov was arrested for publishing video content on different social media platforms, where he criticised Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on Christian pacifist and Orthodox theological bases. Olesya Kabochkina also works as prosecutor in the case of Evgeny Bestuzhev who has been detained for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army.Therefore, Olesya Kabochkina is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
39. Ulyana Andreyevna KALUGINA(Ульяна Андреевна КАЛУГИНА) Position: Deputy Prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint PetersburgNationality: RussianGender: female As deputy prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg, Ulyana Kalugina asked for compulsory medical measures for Viktoria Petrova, manager, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page. Ulyana Kalugina also acted as prosecutor in the beginning of Ioann Kurmoyarov’s case, asking for a prison sentence for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army.Therefore, Ulyana Kalugina is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
40. Dmitry Alekseyevich MIHAILOV(Дмитрий Алексеевич МИХАЙЛОВ) Position: Judge of the Supreme Court of the Republic of KareliaNationality: RussianGender: male As judge of the Supreme Court of Republic of Karelia in Petrozavodsk, Dmitry Mihailov sentenced Sergey Drugov, blogger and activist, to 2 years of forced labour on politically-motivated charges for so-called “rehabilitation of Nazism”. Drugov was arrested for reposting anti-war information on his Telegram-channel, which was followed by approximately 67 people.Therefore, Dmitry Mihailov is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
41. Natalya Vladimirovna PETROVA(Наталья Владимировна ПЕТРОВА) Position: Judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint PetersburgNationality: RussianGender: female As judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Natalya Petrova sentenced Olga Smirnova, architect and political activist, to 6 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Olga Smirnova was arrested for publishing anti-war information on social media in a VK-group.Therefore, Natalya Petrova is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
42. Gennadi Yuvinaliyevich PILEHIN(Геннадий Ювиналиевич ПИЛЕХИН) Position: Judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint PetersburgDOB: 11.8.1972Nationality: RussianGender: maleAddress: st. Vosstaniya, 17, St. Petersburg, Russia, 191036 Apartment 2 As judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Gennadi Pilehin sentenced Viktoria Petrova, manager, to compulsory medical measures on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page.Therefore, Gennadi Pilehin is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
43. Ekaterina Feliksovna TIAMINA(Екатерина Феликсовна ТЯМИНА) Position: Judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint PetersburgNationality: RussianGender: female As judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Ekaterina Tiamina sentenced Ioann Kurmoyarov, blogger and priest, to 3 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ioann Kurmoyarov was arrested for publishing video content on different social media platforms, where he criticised Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on Christian pacifist and Orthodox theological bases.Ekaterina Tiamina also prolonged the incarceration of Viktoria Petrova, manager, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page.Therefore, Ekaterina Tiamina is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
44. Vyacheslav Vasilyevich VITUKHIN(Вячеслав Васильевич ВИТУХИН) Position: Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office in Petrozavodsk, Republic of KareliaNationality: RussianGender: male As prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office in Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Vyacheslav Vitukhin asked for a 2 year sentence of imprisonment for Sergey Drugov, blogger and activist, on politically motivated charges for so-called “rehabilitation of Nazism”. Drugov was arrested for reposting anti-war information on his Telegram-channel, which was followed by approximately 67 people.Therefore, Vyacheslav Vitukhin is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
45. Yulia Viacheslavovna SHILOVA(Юлия Вячеславовна ШИЛОВА) Position: Federal Judge at Court district Petushinsky in RussiaNationality: RussianDate of birth: 28.9.1990Place of birth (town, country): Tulaga, Gorkovskaya Oblast, USSR (Currently: Nizhegorodskaya Oblast, Russian Federation)Gender: female Yulia Shilova is a federal judge at Court district Petushinsky in Russia. She was appointed in 2022 by decree of Vladimir Putin. Yulia Shilova was the appointed judge in a politically motivated case, namely the trial concerning the three lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny: V. Kobzev, I. Sergunin and A. Liptser. Those lawyers were arrested in October 2023 while the trials against Alexei Navalny were ongoing. The court proceedings against the lawyers took place behind closed doors from September 2024 until late December 2024. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings authorised by Yulia Shilova, including hearings behind closed doors, and the making of a decision by her to sentence the lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny on arbitrary grounds. Judge Yulia Shilova has arbitrarily sentenced the three lawyers of Alexei Navalny based on their alleged “extremist activities”.Yulia Shilova is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, as well as for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
46. Andrei Valerievich KATKOV(Андрей Валерьевич КАТКОВ) Position: Head of the Department of State Prosecutors of the Vladimir RegionNationality: RussianDate of birth: 28.8.1979Place of birth (town, country): UnknownGender: male Andrei Katkov is Head of the Department of State Prosecutors of the Vladimir Region Prosecutor’s Office in Russia. Andrei Katkov was the prosecutor in the politically motivated case against the three lawyers of late Aleksei Navalny: V. Kobzev, I. Sergunin and A. Liptser. The lawyers were arrested in October 2023 while Navalny’s trial was still ongoing. The court proceedings against the lawyers took place behind closed doors from September 2024 until late December 2024.As State Prosecutor, Andrei Katkov pleaded for maximum sentences for the lawyers based on arbitrary grounds, while basing his claims on information violating attorney-client privilege. The charges were politically motivated and focused on the “extremist community” to which the lawyers of Alexei Navalny belonged, according to the reasoning of Andrei Katkov, belonged. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings and the decision to sentence the lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny was made by the appointed judge on arbitrary grounds.Andrei Katkov is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, as well as for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025
47. Natalia Vladimirovna BORISENKOVA(Наталья Владимировна БОРИСЕНКОВА) Position: Judge and Deputy Chairman at Nagatinsky District Court in Moscow, RussiaNationality: RussianDate of birth: 12.8.1979Place of birth (town, country): Unknown, Russian FederationGender: female Natalia Borisenkova is a judge and Deputy Chairman at Nagatinsky District Court in Moscow, Russia. She was appointed in 2012 by decree of President Vladimir Putin.Natalia Borisenkova was the appointed judge in a politically motivated case, namely the trial concerning four journalists, K. Gabov, S. Karelin, A. Kriger and A. Favorskaya, who wrote about the late Alexei Navalny. The court proceedings against the journalists took place behind closed doors from August 2024 until 15 April 2025. Judge Natalia Borisenkova sentenced the four journalists to terms of imprisonment of 5,5 years for their alleged “involvement in an ‘extremist’ group”, namely the Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) of late Alexei Navalny. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings authorised by Natalia Borisenkova, with hearings taking place behind closed doors. The decision to sentence the journalists was made by Natalia Borisenkova on arbitrary grounds, invoking alleged “extremist activities” which is an allegation used extensively in Russia against opposition groups.Natalia Borisenkova is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining democracy and the rule of law in Russia. 20.5.2025’
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
Whereas:
(1) On 27 May 2024, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484 (1).
(2) The Union remains unwavering in its condemnation of human rights violations and repressions in Russia.
(3) In view of the gravity of the situation, the Council considers that 28 natural persons should be added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484.
(4) Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

In the Annex to Decision (CFSP) 2024/1484,the following entries are added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies in the table under the heading ‘A. Natural persons’:

Name
Identifying information
Statement of Reasons
Date of listing
‘20. Olesya Anatoleyevna MENDELEYEVA
(Олеся Анатольевна МЕНДЕЛЕЕВА)
Position: judge of the Meshchansky Court of Moscow
DOB: 18.4.1981
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Olesya Mendeleyeva is a judge of the Meshchansky Court of Moscow. She sentenced Alexei Gorinov, local activist and municipal deputy, to 7 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the dissemination of deliberately false information about the actions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The basis for the sentencing was Gorinov’s opinion expressed during a meeting of the Council of Deputies of the Krasnoselsky municipal district that a children’s drawing competition following Russia’s aggression against Ukraine looked like a “feast during the plague”. The trial was swift and, according to independent experts, served as a tool to intimidate other dissenting Russian citizens. This sentence was one of the first sentences of imprisonment imposed by a Russian judge under Article 207.1 which was not suspended. During the trial, Judge Mendeleyeva regularly sided with the prosecution and refused almost all requests of the defence and the defendant, including a request to release him from custody due to a deteriorating health condition. Judge Mendeleyeva fully satisfied the prosecution’s demands and sentenced Gorinov to 7 years imprisonment for non-violent action. That imprisonment has led to a significant deterioration of his health condition in a penal colony and to inadequate medical care.
Therefore, Olesya Mendeleyeva is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 21. Olga Vladimirovna BALANDINA
(Ольга Владимировна БАЛАНДИНА)
Position: judge of the Sovetsky City Court of Kaliningrad Oblast
DOB: 5.6.1979
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Olga Balandina is a judge of the Sovetsky City Court of Kaliningrad Oblast. She sentenced Igor Baryshnikov, local activist, to 7,5 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges, pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for publishing posts about Russia’s bombardment of Mariupol and atrocities in Bucha. During the trial, despite an attending physician testifying under oath that imprisonment might prove fatal for Baryshnikov due to cystotomy and a catheter in his abdomen, the judge refused to conduct a forensic examination of the defendant’s health. Consequently, imprisonment has led to inadequate treatment in the penal colony and to the deterioration of Igor Baryshnikov’s health condition. The judge also refused to allow Igor Baryshnikov to attend his mother’s funeral when she passed away 1,5 months after the sentencing.
Therefore, Olga Balandina is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 22. Svetlana Fyodorovna ZHURAVLOVA
(Светлана Фёдоровна ЖУРАВЛЁВА)
Position: Senior Assistant of the Meshchansky Interdistrict Prosecutor’s Office
DOB: 8.7.1988
Nationality: Russian
Address: 1 Krasnoselsky per. 5/14, 107140 Moscow
Svetlana Zhuravlova is a Senior Assistant of the Meshchansky Interdistrict Prosecutor’s Office. She served as a prosecutor during Alexei Gorinov’s trial. Mr. Gorinov is a local activist and municipal deputy, who was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges pursuant to Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the dissemination of deliberately false information about the actions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The basis for the sentencing was Mr. Gorinov’s opinion expressed during a meeting of the Council of Deputies of the Krasnoselsky municipal district that a children’s drawing competition following Russia’s aggression against Ukraine looked like a “feast during the plague”. The trial was swift and, according to independent experts, served as a tool to intimidate other dissenting Russian citizens. This sentence was on of the first sentences of imprisonment imposed by a Russian judge under Article 207.1 which was not suspended. Prosecutor Zhuravlova opposed all defence requests which could have improved the situation of the defendant or clarified the legal situation, including a request to release Mr. Gorinov from the glass cage in which he had to stay during the trial, a request to release him from custody due to a deteriorating health condition and a request to determine whether Article 207.1 complied with the Russian constitution. The judge sided with Prosecutor Zhuravlova on all of the above-mentioned requests. Prosecutor Zhuravlova demanded that the court sentence Mr. Gorinov to 7 years imprisonment for non-violent action, which was fully satisfied by the judge. That imprisonment has led to the significant deterioration of his health condition in the penal colony and to inadequate medical care.
Therefore, Svetlana Zhuravlova is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 23. Alexey Sergeyevich KHARLAMOV
(Алексей Сергеевич ХАРЛАМОВ)
Position: Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court
DOB: 25.1.1975
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
Alexey Kharlamov is the Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court who was previously a judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and a member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court.
In his position as member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in April 2018, he upheld the verdict against the opposition politician Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg in the Yves Rocher case even though, in October 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Russia had violated the Navalny brothers’ right to a fair trial and punishment solely on the basis of the law. Consequently, Alexei Navalny was pronounced guilty and, as a result, imprisoned years later in a high-security penal colony in order to prevent him from taking part in political activities.
Therefore, Alexey Kharlamov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 24. Tatiana Alexandrovna MOLITVINA
(Татьяна Александровна МОЛИТВИНА)
Position: judge of the Moscow City Court
DOB: 28.3.1987
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Tatiana Molitvina is a judge of the Moscow City Court. Before her appointment to her present position, she was a judge of the Tverskoy District Court in the city of Moscow.
In her position as a judge of the Tverskoy District Court in the city of Moscow, she refused to accept a claim against the Prosecutor General, Yuri Chaika, and the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, made by Alexei Navalny and the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Mr. Navalny’s claim was one of several attempts to sue Yuri Chaika for defamation following the release of an investigative film by Mr. Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation that accused Chaika’s family members of involvement in illegal activities.
Therefore, Tatiana Molitvina is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 25. Tatiana Anatolevna PETROVA
(Татьяна Анатольевна ПЕТРОВА)
Position: Deputy Chairwoman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
DOB: 27.7.1961
POB: Sychevka, Smolensk region
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Tatiana Petrova is the Deputy Chairwoman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
In her position as member of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in April 2018, she upheld the verdict against the opposition politician Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg in the Yves Rocher case even though, in October 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Russia had violated the Navalny brothers’ right to a fair trial and punishment. Consequently, Alexei Navalny was pronounced guilty and, as a result, was imprisoned years later in a high-security penal colony in order to prevent him from taking part in political activity.
Therefore, Tatiana Petrova is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 26. Sergei Vladimirovich BOGDANOV
(Сергей Владимирович БОГДАНОВ)
Position: State Prosecutor of the Kirov oblast
DOB: Probably 1973
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
Sergei Bogdanov is a state prosecutor of the Kirov oblast, Russia.
He represented the state prosecutor’s office in several court hearings against Alexei Navalny and Pyotr Ofitserov in the Kirovles case.
In July 2013, he requested 6 years imprisonment in a general regime penal colony for Mr. Navalny and 5 years for Mr. Ofitserov. Moreover, the state prosecution imposed an additional punishment on the defendants of a fine of 1 million RUB each.
In December 2016, the state prosecutor, Mr. Bogdanov presented a “similar indictment” to the one filed in 2013. That happened despite the fact that, following the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation overturned the sentences against Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov and sent the case back for retrial.
In February 2017, at the retrial of the Kirovles case, Prosecutor Bogdanov delivered a speech similar to the one he delivered in 2013 and only added a comment on the decisions of the ECHR and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to overturn the sentencing of Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov. In his opinion, the reference to these decisions had no legal basis, since an independent trial was taking place and the ECHR verdict had no predetermined force. As a result, the court found Mr. Navalny and Mr. Ofitserov guilty and sentenced them to 5 and 4 years probation and a fine of 500 000 RUB each.
Therefore, Sergey Bogdanov is responsible for serious human rights violations and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 27. Ekaterina Sergeevna FROLOVA
(Екатерина Сергеевна ФРОЛОВА)
Position: State prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s Office
DOB: Around 1988
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Associated entities: Criminal Justice Department of the Moscow Prosecutor’s Office
Ekaterina Frolova is a state prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s Office.
In 2020, she was promoted from the Central Administrative District to prosecutor of the Criminal Justice Department of the Moscow Prosecutor’s Office. In that position, she acted as the prosecutor in several proceedings against Alexei Navalny. In February 2021, she supported in court the replacement of Alexei Navalny’s suspended sentence with a term of actual imprisonment in the Yves Rocher case, despite his treatment at the Charité clinic, the expiration of his probationary period and the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights. In the same month, she asked the court to find Mr. Navalny guilty of slander against WWII veteran Ignat Artemenko. After her participation in the Navalny trial, Ekaterina Frolova was promoted to state prosecutor at the Prosecutor General’s Office.
Therefore, Ekaterina Frolova is responsible for serious human rights violations and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 28. Mikhail Yurevich KAZAKOV
(Михаил Юрьевич КАЗАКОВ)
Position: Judge of the Moscow City Court
DOB: 9.2.1976
Nationality: Russian
Gender: Male
Associated entities: Moscow City Court
Mikhail Kazakov is a Russian judge working in the Moscow City Court. In the proceedings to classify the Anti-Corruption Foundation, its legal entity, the Foundation for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights, and the Navalny headquarters as extremist organisations, he classified the materials in the case, preventing access to them for Alexei Navalny and his lawyers. In December 2021, Mr. Kazakov ruled to liquidate the Memorial Human Rights Center and its structural units.
Therefore, Mikhail Kazakov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of association and freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 29. Alexander Alexandrovich KEMEROV
(Александр Александрович КЕМЕРОВ)
Position: Investigator at the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Kemerovo region
DOB: 27.9.1984
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
Alexander Kemerov is the investigator at the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Kemerovo region, Kuzbass.
In that position, he was involved in the fabrication of the “extremism case” against Alexei Navalny’s supporters, including Vadim Ostanin, the former head of the Navalny headquarters in Barnaul, as well as the fabricated fraud case against Alexei Navalny himself. Mr. Kemerov put pressure on the former employee of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, Fyodor Gorozhanko, to testify against Alexei Navalny in order to incriminate him.
Therefore, Alexander Kemerov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, arbitrary arrests or detentions. He is also responsible for violations or abuses of freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 30. Valentin Valentinovich ERSHOV
(Валентин Валентинович ЕРШОВ)
Position: Deputy Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court
DOB: 8.4.1985
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
Valentin Ershov is the Deputy Chairman of the Moscow Regional Court. In the past, he held the position of judge of the Presnensky District Court of Moscow, followed by the position of judge of the Moscow Regional Court.
In his position, in a politically motivated proceeding, he refused to process a lawsuit filed by Alexei Navalny and the Anti-Corruption Foundation against Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika and the editorial board of the electronic periodical “Ekho Moskvy” for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation.
Therefore, Valentin Ershov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 31. Ruslan Shavkyatovich NEVEROV
(Руслан Шавкатович НЕВЕРОВ)
Position: Investigator for especially important cases of the 1st control-zonal department of the procedural control and criminalistics department of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee, colonel of justice
DOB: 22.6.1979
Nationality: Russian
Phone number: +7-905-503-1997
Ruslan Neverov is the investigator for especially important cases of the 1st control-zonal department of the procedural control and criminalistics department of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee.
In his position, in March 2021 in the proceeding in the 235th Garrison Military Court, he requested the dismissal of a complaint about the inaction of the Main Military Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee regarding the poisoning of Alexei Navalny in 2020 by Novichok nerve agent. The Court agreed to reject Mr. Navalny’s claim.
Therefore, Ruslan Neverov is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 32. Elena Alekseevna KOROBKOVA
(Елена Алексеевна КОРОБКОВА)
Position: Head of the Department for the Execution of Sentences not Related to the Isolation of Convicts from Society
DOB: 4.10.1970
Gender: female
Phone number: + 7-916-456-3230
Elena Korobkova is the head of the Department for the Execution of Sentences not Related to the Isolation of Convicts from Society. In 2020, Russian opposition leader and anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny was poisoned with Novichok nerve agent and as a result was hospitalised in a serious condition in Berlin, Germany. Due to his condition, he was unable to attend the inspection ordered by the Federal Penitentiary Service (FSIN) of the Russian Federation. Following that event, on December 29, 2020, the Penitentiary Inspectorate of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia in Moscow made a submission to the court to cancel Mr. Navalny’s suspended sentence and execute the sentence imposed by the court. Elena Korobkova, as a representative of FSIN, demanded that the opposition activist’s suspended sentence be replaced with a custodial one.
Therefore, Elena Korobkova is responsible for serious human rights violations in Russia, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 33. Margarita Nikolaevna KOTOVA
(Маргарита Николаевна КОТОВА)
Position: Judge of the Moscow City Court; former Judge of the Lefortovsky District Court of Moscow
DOB: 25.6.1984
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Address: Severodvinskaya Street, 11 Bldg. 1, Moscow, Russia, 127224
ITN: 771508948129
Phone number: + 7-926-288-0049
Margarita Kotova is a judge of the Moscow City Court. She was a judge of the Lefortovsky District Court of Moscow until 2022. In her former capacity, Judge Margarita Kotova found Alexei Navalny guilty in a court inside the maximum-security prison in Pokrov, 100 km east of Moscow where he is already serving a 2,5 -year sentence for violating parole while in recovery from poisoning. She sentenced Alexei Navalny to 9 years imprisonment in a maximum-security colony with a fine of 1,2 million RUB on a trumped-up case of fraud and insult to the court. Alexei Navalny was also accused of fraud in relation to donations and of insulting a judge. She also extended pre-trial detention for a man under false motives for his pro-Ukrainian views in breach of his rights of defence.
Therefore, Margarita Kotova is responsible for serious violations of the right of defence and of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 34. Nadezhda Viktorovna TIKHONOVA
(Надежда Викторовна ТИХОНОВА)
Position: prosecutor of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation
DOB: 23.9.1974
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
Nadezhda Tikhonova is a prosecutor of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation. Nadezhda Tikhonova asked a court to find Alexei Navalny guilty and to sentence him to 13 years imprisonment and 2 years of restriction of liberty, with a fine of 1,2 million RUB in a fabricated case of fraud for collecting donations for the work of the Anti-Corruption Foundation, and of contempt of court.
Therefore, Nadezhda Tikhonova is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 35. Viktor Vladimirovich ROGOV
(Виктор Владимирович РОГОВ)
Position: Judge of the First Court of Appeal of General Jurisdiction
DOB: 26.5.1965
Phone number: + 7-919-075-0024
Viktor Rogov is a judge at the First Court of Appeal of General Jurisdiction. He upheld the sentences against politician Alexei Navalny and Daniel Kholodny, technical director of the YouTube channel “Navalny LIVE”. The Moscow City Court found Mr. Navalny guilty of creating an NGO that encroaches on the rights of citizens, financing extremism, creating an extremist community, involving minors in committing dangerous acts, and rehabilitating Nazism. Mr. Navalny was sentenced to 19 years imprisonment in a special regime colony and a fine of 500 000 RUB. Mr. Kholodny was found guilty of financing extremist activities and participation in the activities of an extremist organisation and was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment in a general regime colony. After hearing the sentence, Mr. Navalny and Mr. Kholodny appealed the court’s decision at the First Court of Appeal in Moscow where judge Rogov refused their appeal and upheld the original decision. Mr. Rogov also upheld the decision sentencing opposition leader Vladimir Kara-Murza to 25 years imprisonment in a maximum security penal colony for charges of high treason, involvement in the activities of an undesirable group, and discrediting Russia’s armed forces.
Therefore, Viktor Rogov is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 36. Denis Gennadievich POPOV
(Денис Геннадьевич ПОПОВ)
Position: Prosecutor of the city of Moscow
DOB: 12.1.1972
POB: Sverdlovsk
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
TIN: 770970517335
Denis Popov is the prosecutor of the city of Moscow. He was appointed by President Putin in 2019. Mr. Popov is responsible for organising the state prosecution of Alexei Navalny and other opposition leaders and political activists in Moscow. He directly oversaw the recognition as extremist structures of organisations created by Alexei Navalny to support his political activities.
Therefore, Denis Popov is responsible for serious violations or abuses of human rights or for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of lawin Russia.
20.5.2025 37. Alina Vladimirovna IBRAGIMOVA
(Елена Владимировна ИБРАГИМОВА)
Position: Judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint Petersburg
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
As judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint-Petersburg, Alina Ibragimova sentenced Olga Smirnova, architect and political activist, to 1 month imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Olga Smirnova was arrested for publishing anti-war information on social media in a VK-group.
Therefore, Alina Ibragimova is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 38. Olesya Igorevna KABOCHKINA
(Олеся Игоревна КАБОЧКИНА)
Position: Assistant Prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
As assistant prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg, Olesya Kabochkina asked for a 7 year sentence of imprisonment for Ioann Kurmoyarov, blogger and priest, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ioann Kurmoyarov was arrested for publishing video content on different social media platforms, where he criticised Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on Christian pacifist and Orthodox theological bases. Olesya Kabochkina also works as prosecutor in the case of Evgeny Bestuzhev who has been detained for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army.
Therefore, Olesya Kabochkina is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 39. Ulyana Andreyevna KALUGINA
(Ульяна Андреевна КАЛУГИНА)
Position: Deputy Prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
As deputy prosecutor of the Kalininsky District of Saint Petersburg, Ulyana Kalugina asked for compulsory medical measures for Viktoria Petrova, manager, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page. Ulyana Kalugina also acted as prosecutor in the beginning of Ioann Kurmoyarov’s case, asking for a prison sentence for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army.
Therefore, Ulyana Kalugina is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 40. Dmitry Alekseyevich MIHAILOV
(Дмитрий Алексеевич МИХАЙЛОВ)
Position: Judge of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
As judge of the Supreme Court of Republic of Karelia in Petrozavodsk, Dmitry Mihailov sentenced Sergey Drugov, blogger and activist, to 2 years of forced labour on politically-motivated charges for so-called “rehabilitation of Nazism”. Drugov was arrested for reposting anti-war information on his Telegram-channel, which was followed by approximately 67 people.
Therefore, Dmitry Mihailov is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 41. Natalya Vladimirovna PETROVA
(Наталья Владимировна ПЕТРОВА)
Position: Judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint Petersburg
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
As judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Natalya Petrova sentenced Olga Smirnova, architect and political activist, to 6 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Olga Smirnova was arrested for publishing anti-war information on social media in a VK-group.
Therefore, Natalya Petrova is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 42. Gennadi Yuvinaliyevich PILEHIN
(Геннадий Ювиналиевич ПИЛЕХИН)
Position: Judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg
DOB: 11.8.1972
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
Address: st. Vosstaniya, 17, St. Petersburg, Russia, 191036 Apartment 2
As judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Gennadi Pilehin sentenced Viktoria Petrova, manager, to compulsory medical measures on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page.
Therefore, Gennadi Pilehin is responsible for serious violations of human rights, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 43. Ekaterina Feliksovna TIAMINA
(Екатерина Феликсовна ТЯМИНА)
Position: Judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg
Nationality: Russian
Gender: female
As judge of the Kalininsky District Court of Saint Petersburg, Ekaterina Tiamina sentenced Ioann Kurmoyarov, blogger and priest, to 3 years imprisonment on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ioann Kurmoyarov was arrested for publishing video content on different social media platforms, where he criticised Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on Christian pacifist and Orthodox theological bases.
Ekaterina Tiamina also prolonged the incarceration of Viktoria Petrova, manager, on politically-motivated charges for spreading so-called “fake news” about the Russian army. Ms Petrova was arrested for sharing anti-war YouTube-videos such as material from Maksim Kants, Aleksandr Nevzorov and the Ukrainian president Zelensky on her personal VK-page.
Therefore, Ekaterina Tiamina is responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 44. Vyacheslav Vasilyevich VITUKHIN
(Вячеслав Васильевич ВИТУХИН)
Position: Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office in Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia
Nationality: Russian
Gender: male
As prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office in Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Vyacheslav Vitukhin asked for a 2 year sentence of imprisonment for Sergey Drugov, blogger and activist, on politically motivated charges for so-called “rehabilitation of Nazism”. Drugov was arrested for reposting anti-war information on his Telegram-channel, which was followed by approximately 67 people.
Therefore, Vyacheslav Vitukhin is responsible for serious violations of human rights, including violating freedom of opinion and expression, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 45. Yulia Viacheslavovna SHILOVA
(Юлия Вячеславовна ШИЛОВА)
Position: Federal Judge at Court district Petushinsky in Russia
Nationality: Russian
Date of birth: 28.9.1990
Place of birth (town, country): Tulaga, Gorkovskaya Oblast, USSR (Currently: Nizhegorodskaya Oblast, Russian Federation)
Gender: female
Yulia Shilova is a federal judge at Court district Petushinsky in Russia. She was appointed in 2022 by decree of Vladimir Putin. Yulia Shilova was the appointed judge in a politically motivated case, namely the trial concerning the three lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny: V. Kobzev, I. Sergunin and A. Liptser. Those lawyers were arrested in October 2023 while the trials against Alexei Navalny were ongoing. The court proceedings against the lawyers took place behind closed doors from September 2024 until late December 2024. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings authorised by Yulia Shilova, including hearings behind closed doors, and the making of a decision by her to sentence the lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny on arbitrary grounds. Judge Yulia Shilova has arbitrarily sentenced the three lawyers of Alexei Navalny based on their alleged “extremist activities”.
Yulia Shilova is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, as well as for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 46. Andrei Valerievich KATKOV
(Андрей Валерьевич КАТКОВ)
Position: Head of the Department of State Prosecutors of the Vladimir Region
Nationality: Russian
Date of birth: 28.8.1979
Place of birth (town, country): Unknown
Gender: male
Andrei Katkov is Head of the Department of State Prosecutors of the Vladimir Region Prosecutor’s Office in Russia. Andrei Katkov was the prosecutor in the politically motivated case against the three lawyers of late Aleksei Navalny: V. Kobzev, I. Sergunin and A. Liptser. The lawyers were arrested in October 2023 while Navalny’s trial was still ongoing. The court proceedings against the lawyers took place behind closed doors from September 2024 until late December 2024. As State Prosecutor, Andrei Katkov pleaded for maximum sentences for the lawyers based on arbitrary grounds, while basing his claims on information violating attorney-client privilege. The charges were politically motivated and focused on the “extremist community” to which the lawyers of Alexei Navalny belonged, according to the reasoning of Andrei Katkov, belonged. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings and the decision to sentence the lawyers of the late Alexei Navalny was made by the appointed judge on arbitrary grounds.
Andrei Katkov is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, as well as for the repression of civil society, and for activities seriously undermining the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025 47. Natalia Vladimirovna BORISENKOVA
(Наталья Владимировна БОРИСЕНКОВА)
Position: Judge and Deputy Chairman at Nagatinsky District Court in Moscow, Russia
Nationality: Russian
Date of birth: 12.8.1979
Place of birth (town, country): Unknown, Russian Federation
Gender: female
Natalia Borisenkova is a judge and Deputy Chairman at Nagatinsky District Court in Moscow, Russia. She was appointed in 2012 by decree of President Vladimir Putin.
Natalia Borisenkova was the appointed judge in a politically motivated case, namely the trial concerning four journalists, K. Gabov, S. Karelin, A. Kriger and A. Favorskaya, who wrote about the late Alexei Navalny. The court proceedings against the journalists took place behind closed doors from August 2024 until 15 April 2025. Judge Natalia Borisenkova sentenced the four journalists to terms of imprisonment of 5,5 years for their alleged “involvement in an ‘extremist’ group”, namely the Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) of late Alexei Navalny. The trial was characterised by arbitrary and unfair proceedings authorised by Natalia Borisenkova, with hearings taking place behind closed doors. The decision to sentence the journalists was made by Natalia Borisenkova on arbitrary grounds, invoking alleged “extremist activities” which is an allegation used extensively in Russia against opposition groups.
Natalia Borisenkova is therefore responsible for serious violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial, for the repression of civil society and democratic opposition, and for activities seriously undermining democracy and the rule of law in Russia.
20.5.2025’

Council Decision (EU) 2025/954 of 13 May 2025 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 13 May 2025 to 25 January 2030 and amending Decision (EU) 2025/71

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/954 22.5.2025
(1) Article 300(3) of the Treaty provides that the Committee of the Regions is to consist of representatives of regional and local bodies who either hold a regional or local authority electoral mandate or are politically accountable to an elected assembly.
(2) Article 305 of the Treaty provides for the members of the Committee of the Regions and an equal number of alternate members to be appointed by the Council for a term of five years in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State.
(3) As the term of office of the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions expired on 25 January 2025, new members and alternate members should be appointed.
(4) On 10 December 2024, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/71(2). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030, the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Estonian, Irish, Croatian, Cyprus, Latvian, Luxembourgish, Maltese, Dutch, Austrian, Portuguese, Slovenian, Slovak, Finnish and Swedish Governments. By Decision (EU) 2025/71, the Council also appointed for the same period 12 members and nine alternate members proposed by the Czech Government, seven members and nine alternate members proposed by the Danish Government, 23 members and 19 alternate members proposed by the German Government, 11 members and 12 alternate members proposed by the Greek Government, 20 members and 20 alternate members proposed by the Spanish Government, 22 members and 24 alternate members proposed by the Italian Government, 21 members and 20 alternate members proposed by the Polish Government and nine members and nine alternate members proposed by the Romanian Government. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 22 November 2024 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/71.
(5) On 21 January 2025, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/201(3). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030, the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Bulgarian, Lithuanian and Hungarian Governments, as well as 10 members and 10 alternate members proposed by the Belgian Government and 24 members and 23 alternate members proposed by the French Government. Furthermore, by Decision (EU) 2025/201, the Council appointed two members and one alternate member proposed by the Danish Government, one of the members having initially been appointed as an alternate member by Decision (EU) 2025/71. It also appointed one alternate member proposed by the Italian Government following the resignation of an alternate member appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 31 December 2024 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/201.
(6) On 18 February 2025, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/378(4). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 18 February 2025 to 25 January 2030, two members and two alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Belgian Government, two alternate members proposed by the German Government, one member proposed by the Greek Government, one member and one alternate member proposed by the Spanish Government, two members proposed by the Italian Government, six members and six alternate members proposed by the Romanian Government, and one alternate member proposed by the Polish Government. Furthermore, by Decision (EU) 2025/378, the Council appointed one member proposed by the German Government following the resignation of a member appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 7 February 2025 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/378.
(7) By 30 April 2025, further lists were submitted to the Council, namely a list containing three alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Czech Government, and a list containing one member and one alternate member proposed by the German Government. Those member and alternate members should be appointed for the period from 13 May 2025 to 25 January 2030.
(8) Mr Malte Krückels was appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71 as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030. However, the mandate on the basis of which he was proposed for appointment to the Committee of the Regions came to an end on 14 December 2024. Following the end of that mandate, the German Government proposed that Mr André KNAPP be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions. Therefore, Mr André KNAPP should be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions and the list of members for Germany in Decision (EU) 2025/71 should be adapted accordingly.
(9) Mr Werner AMON was appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71 as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030. However, the mandate on the basis of which he was proposed for appointment to the Committee of the Regions came to an end on 18 December 2024. Following the end of that mandate, the Austrian Government proposed that Ms Manuela KHOM be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions. Therefore, Ms Manuela KHOM should be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions and the list of members for Austria in Decision (EU) 2025/71 should be adapted accordingly.
(10) The appointment of the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions by this Decision will be followed at a later date by the appointment of other alternate members, in relation to whom the proposals for appointment were not communicated to the Council by 30 April 2025,
— as members, the persons listed by Member State in Annex I,
— as alternate members, the persons listed by Member State in Annex II.
(1) in the list for Germany, the following entry is deleted:‘Mr Malte KRÜCKELSStaatssekretär für Medien und Europa, Bevollmächtigter Thüringens beim Bund(State Secretary for Media and Europe, Representative of the Free State of Thuringia to the Federal Government)’;
(2) in the list for Austria, the following entry is deleted:‘Mr Werner AMONLandesrat der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung(Member of the State Government of Styria)’.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 300(3) and Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2019/852 of 21 May 2019 determining the composition of the Committee of the Regions (1),
Having regard to the proposals made by the Czech, German and Austrian Governments,
Whereas:
(1) Article 300(3) of the Treaty provides that the Committee of the Regions is to consist of representatives of regional and local bodies who either hold a regional or local authority electoral mandate or are politically accountable to an elected assembly.
(2) Article 305 of the Treaty provides for the members of the Committee of the Regions and an equal number of alternate members to be appointed by the Council for a term of five years in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State.
(3) As the term of office of the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions expired on 25 January 2025, new members and alternate members should be appointed.
(4) On 10 December 2024, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/71 (2). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030, the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Estonian, Irish, Croatian, Cyprus, Latvian, Luxembourgish, Maltese, Dutch, Austrian, Portuguese, Slovenian, Slovak, Finnish and Swedish Governments. By Decision (EU) 2025/71, the Council also appointed for the same period 12 members and nine alternate members proposed by the Czech Government, seven members and nine alternate members proposed by the Danish Government, 23 members and 19 alternate members proposed by the German Government, 11 members and 12 alternate members proposed by the Greek Government, 20 members and 20 alternate members proposed by the Spanish Government, 22 members and 24 alternate members proposed by the Italian Government, 21 members and 20 alternate members proposed by the Polish Government and nine members and nine alternate members proposed by the Romanian Government. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 22 November 2024 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/71.
(5) On 21 January 2025, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/201 (3). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030, the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Bulgarian, Lithuanian and Hungarian Governments, as well as 10 members and 10 alternate members proposed by the Belgian Government and 24 members and 23 alternate members proposed by the French Government. Furthermore, by Decision (EU) 2025/201, the Council appointed two members and one alternate member proposed by the Danish Government, one of the members having initially been appointed as an alternate member by Decision (EU) 2025/71. It also appointed one alternate member proposed by the Italian Government following the resignation of an alternate member appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 31 December 2024 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/201.
(6) On 18 February 2025, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2025/378 (4). By that Decision, it appointed, for the period from 18 February 2025 to 25 January 2030, two members and two alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Belgian Government, two alternate members proposed by the German Government, one member proposed by the Greek Government, one member and one alternate member proposed by the Spanish Government, two members proposed by the Italian Government, six members and six alternate members proposed by the Romanian Government, and one alternate member proposed by the Polish Government. Furthermore, by Decision (EU) 2025/378, the Council appointed one member proposed by the German Government following the resignation of a member appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71. Members and alternate members in relation to whom the proposals for appointment had not been communicated to the Council before 7 February 2025 could not be included in Decision (EU) 2025/378.
(7) By 30 April 2025, further lists were submitted to the Council, namely a list containing three alternate members of the Committee of the Regions proposed by the Czech Government, and a list containing one member and one alternate member proposed by the German Government. Those member and alternate members should be appointed for the period from 13 May 2025 to 25 January 2030.
(8) Mr Malte Krückels was appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71 as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030. However, the mandate on the basis of which he was proposed for appointment to the Committee of the Regions came to an end on 14 December 2024. Following the end of that mandate, the German Government proposed that Mr André KNAPP be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions. Therefore, Mr André KNAPP should be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions and the list of members for Germany in Decision (EU) 2025/71 should be adapted accordingly.
(9) Mr Werner AMON was appointed by Decision (EU) 2025/71 as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2025 to 25 January 2030. However, the mandate on the basis of which he was proposed for appointment to the Committee of the Regions came to an end on 18 December 2024. Following the end of that mandate, the Austrian Government proposed that Ms Manuela KHOM be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions. Therefore, Ms Manuela KHOM should be appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions and the list of members for Austria in Decision (EU) 2025/71 should be adapted accordingly.
(10) The appointment of the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions by this Decision will be followed at a later date by the appointment of other alternate members, in relation to whom the proposals for appointment were not communicated to the Council by 30 April 2025,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The following are hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions for the period from 13 May 2025 to 25 January 2030:

—
as members, the persons listed by Member State in Annex I,
—
as alternate members, the persons listed by Member State in Annex II.

Annex I to Decision (EU) 2025/71 is amended as follows:

(1) in the list for Germany, the following entry is deleted:
‘Mr Malte KRÜCKELS
Staatssekretär für Medien und Europa, Bevollmächtigter Thüringens beim Bund (State Secretary for Media and Europe, Representative of the Free State of Thuringia to the Federal Government)’
;
(2) in the list for Austria, the following entry is deleted:
‘Mr Werner AMON
Landesrat der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung (Member of the State Government of Styria)’.

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Членове / Miembros / Členové / Medlemmer / Mitglieder / Liikmed / Μέλη / Members / Membres / Comhaltaí / Članovi / Membri / Locekļi / Nariai / Tagok / Membri / Leden / Członkowie / Membros / Membri / Členovia / Člani / Jäsenet / Ledamöter

DEUTSCHLAND

Mr André KNAPP

Oberbürgermeister der kreisfreien Stadt Suhl (Lord Mayor of the City of Suhl)
Mr Volker-Gerd WESTPHAL

Staatssekretär im Ministerium der Finanzen und für Europa des Landes Brandenburg (State Secretary at the Ministry of Finance and for European Affairs of the State of Brandenburg)

ÖSTERREICH

Ms Manuela KHOM

Landeshauptmann-Stellvertreterin der Steiermark, Steiermärkische Landesregierung (Deputy Governor of Styria, State Government of Styria)

Заместник-членове / Suplentes / Náhradníci / Suppleanter / Stellvertreter / Asendusliikmed / Αναπληρωτές / Alternate members / Suppléants / Comhaltaí malartacha / Zamjenici članova / Supplenti / Aizstājēji / Pakaitiniai nariai / Póttagok / Membri Supplenti / Plaatsvervangers / Zastępcy członków / Suplentes / Supleanți / Náhradníci / Nadomestni člani / Varajäsenet / Suppleanter

ČESKO

Mr Martin HURAJČÍK

Člen zastupitelstva Karlovarského kraje (Member of the Regional Assembly of the Karlovy Vary Region)
Mr Martin NETOLICKÝ

Člen zastupitelstva Pardubického kraje (Member of the Regional Assembly of the Pardubice Region)
Ms Radka VLADYKOVÁ

Zastupitelka za město Jesenice (Member of the Local Assembly of the Town of Jesenice)

DEUTSCHLAND

Mr Robert CZAPLINSKI

Bürgermeister der Stadt Beeskow (Mayor of the city of Beeskow)

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/953 of 23 May 2025 postponing the expiry date of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/953 23.5.2025
(1) Medetomidine was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1731(2)until 31 December 2022 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) On 27 June 2021, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 (‘the application’).
(3) On 10 December 2021, the evaluating competent authority of Norway informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Agency’) is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1495(3)postponed the expiry date of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 to 30 June 2025, in order to allow sufficient time for the examination of the application.
(7) On 18 August 2023, the evaluating competent authority submitted the renewal assessment report and the conclusions of its evaluation to the Agency.
(8) On 28 May 2024, the Agency adopted its opinion(4)on renewal of the approval of medetomidine in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 and submitted it to the Commission.
(9) Medetomidine is considered as having endocrine disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects in humans, and therefore meets the exclusion criterion set out in Article 5(1), point (d), of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. While the examination by the Commission whether at least one of the conditions of Article 5(2), first subparagraph, of that Regulation is fulfilled, and whether the approval of medetomidine may therefore be renewed, is ongoing, it will not be possible to complete this examination before the current expiry of approval.
(10) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to further postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to complete the examination of the application. Taking into account the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21, the expiry date should be postponed to 30 June 2026.
(11) After the further postponement of the expiry date of the approval, medetomidine remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1731,
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
After consulting the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
Whereas:
(1) Medetomidine was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1731 (2) until 31 December 2022 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) On 27 June 2021, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 (‘the application’).
(3) On 10 December 2021, the evaluating competent authority of Norway informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Agency’) is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1495 (3) postponed the expiry date of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 to 30 June 2025, in order to allow sufficient time for the examination of the application.
(7) On 18 August 2023, the evaluating competent authority submitted the renewal assessment report and the conclusions of its evaluation to the Agency.
(8) On 28 May 2024, the Agency adopted its opinion (4) on renewal of the approval of medetomidine in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 and submitted it to the Commission.
(9) Medetomidine is considered as having endocrine disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects in humans, and therefore meets the exclusion criterion set out in Article 5(1), point (d), of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. While the examination by the Commission whether at least one of the conditions of Article 5(2), first subparagraph, of that Regulation is fulfilled, and whether the approval of medetomidine may therefore be renewed, is ongoing, it will not be possible to complete this examination before the current expiry of approval.
(10) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to further postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to complete the examination of the application. Taking into account the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21, the expiry date should be postponed to 30 June 2026.
(11) After the further postponement of the expiry date of the approval, medetomidine remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1731,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The expiry date of the approval of medetomidine for use in biocidal products of product-type 21 set out in Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1495 is postponed to 30 June 2026.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/952 of 22 May 2025 postponing the expiry date of the approval of S-methoprene for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/952 23.5.2025
(1) S-methoprene was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 91/2014(2)subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of S-methoprene for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 28 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval (‘the application’).
(3) On 19 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Ireland informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, S-methoprene remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 91/2014,
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
After consulting the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
Whereas:
(1) S-methoprene was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 91/2014 (2) subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of S-methoprene for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 28 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval (‘the application’).
(3) On 19 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Ireland informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, S-methoprene remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 91/2014,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The expiry date of the approval of S-methoprene for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 91/2014, is postponed to 29 February 2028.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/951 of 22 May 2025 postponing the expiry date of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/951 26.5.2025
(1) Polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 3, 4 and 22 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 94/2014(2)subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 3, 4 and 22 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 28 February 2024, two applications were submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for product-types 1 and 3 (‘the applications’), while there was no application submitted for the renewal of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for product-types 4 and 22.
(3) On 19 April 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Sweden informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the applications was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the applications. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinions and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 94/2014,
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
After consulting the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
Whereas:
(1) Polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 3, 4 and 22 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 94/2014 (2) subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 3, 4 and 22 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 28 February 2024, two applications were submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for product-types 1 and 3 (‘the applications’), while there was no application submitted for the renewal of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for product-types 4 and 22.
(3) On 19 April 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Sweden informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the applications was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the applications. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinions and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 94/2014,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The expiry date of the approval of polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine for use in biocidal products of product-types 1 and 3 set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 94/2014, is postponed to 29 February 2028.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/950 of 22 May 2025 postponing the expiry date of the approval of 1R-trans phenothrin for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/950 26.5.2025
(1) 1R-trans phenothrin was included in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(2)as an active substance for use in biocidal products for product-type 18. Pursuant to Article 86 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, it is therefore considered approved under that Regulation subject to the conditions set out in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC.
(2) The approval of 1R-trans phenothrin for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 27 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval (‘the application’).
(3) On 19 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Ireland informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, 1R-trans phenothrin remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 subject to the conditions set out in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC,
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
After consulting the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
Whereas:
(1) 1R-trans phenothrin was included in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) as an active substance for use in biocidal products for product-type 18. Pursuant to Article 86 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, it is therefore considered approved under that Regulation subject to the conditions set out in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC.
(2) The approval of 1R-trans phenothrin for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 (‘the approval’) is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 27 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval (‘the application’).
(3) On 19 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Ireland informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, 1R-trans phenothrin remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 subject to the conditions set out in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The expiry date of the approval of 1R-trans phenothrin for use in biocidal products of product-type 18 set out in Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC is postponed to 29 February 2028.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/949 of 22 May 2025 postponing the expiry date of the approval of decanoic acid for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/949 26.5.2025
(1) Decanoic acid was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 4, 18 and 19 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 90/2014(2)subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of decanoic acid for use in biocidal products of product-types 4, 18 and 19 is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 27 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of decanoic acid for product-type 4 (‘the application’), while there was no application submitted for the renewal of the approval of decanoic acid for product-types 18 and 19.
(3) On 12 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Austria informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, decanoic acid remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 90/2014,
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
After consulting the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
Whereas:
(1) Decanoic acid was approved as an active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 4, 18 and 19 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 90/2014 (2) subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2) The approval of decanoic acid for use in biocidal products of product-types 4, 18 and 19 is to expire on 31 August 2025. On 27 February 2024, an application was submitted in accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the renewal of the approval of decanoic acid for product-type 4 (‘the application’), while there was no application submitted for the renewal of the approval of decanoic acid for product-types 18 and 19.
(3) On 12 June 2024, the evaluating competent authority of Austria informed the Commission that it had decided, pursuant to Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, that a full evaluation of the application was necessary. Pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Regulation, the evaluating competent authority is to perform a full evaluation of the application within 365 days of its validation.
(4) The evaluating competent authority may, as appropriate, require the applicant to provide sufficient data to carry out the evaluation, in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012. In that event, the 365-day period is suspended for a period that may not exceed 180 days in total unless a longer suspension is justified by the nature of the data requested or by exceptional circumstances.
(5) Within 270 days of receipt of a recommendation from the evaluating competent authority, the European Chemicals Agency is to prepare and submit to the Commission an opinion on renewal of the approval of the active substance in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.
(6) Consequently, for reasons beyond the control of the applicant, the approval is likely to expire before a decision has been taken on its renewal. It is therefore appropriate to postpone the expiry date of the approval for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 for a period of time sufficient to enable the examination of the application. Taking into account the time-limits for evaluation by the evaluating competent authority, for preparation and submission by the European Chemicals Agency of its opinion and the time needed for the Commission to decide whether to renew the approval, the expiry date for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 should be postponed to 29 February 2028.
(7) After the postponement of the expiry date of the approval, decanoic acid remains approved for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 90/2014,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The expiry date of the approval of decanoic acid for use in biocidal products of product-type 4 set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 90/2014, is postponed to 29 February 2028.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.