Common use of DEFINITION OF LEGALITY Clause in Contracts

DEFINITION OF LEGALITY. Legally produced timber needs to be defined on the basis of the laws applicable in Liberia. The definition used must be unambiguous, objectively verifiable and operationally workable and, as a minimum, include those laws which cover: (a) harvesting rights: granting of legal rights to harvest timber within legally gazetted boundaries; (b) forestry operations: compliance with legal requirements regarding forest management, including compliance with relevant environmental and labour legislation; (c) fees and taxes: compliance with legal requirements concerning taxes and fees directly related to timber harvesting and harvesting rights; (d) other users: respect for other parties’ legal tenure or rights of use of land and resources that may be affected by timber harvesting rights, where such other rights exist; (e) trade and customs: compliance with legal requirements for trade and customs procedures. Is it clear which legal instrument underpins each element of the definition? Are criteria and indicators that can be used to test compliance with each element of the definition specified? Are the criteria/indicators clear, objective and operationally workable? Do the indicators and criteria clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the various parties and does verifi­ cation of legal compliance assess the performance of all relevant parties? Does the definition of legality include the main areas of existing law outlined above? If not, why were certain areas of law left out of the definition? In drawing up the definition, did the parties concerned consider all the main areas of applicable law? Does the legality assurance system incorporate the main legal provisions identified by prior discussion between the various parties involved? Does the legality definition account for all possible sources of timber that enter the supply chain intended for the Union and are appropriate indicators developed for different sources/rights allocation procedures? Have the definition of legality and the legality assurance matrix been amended since this Agreement was concluded? Have indicators and criteria been defined to ensure verification of these changes? Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these changes in a process that took adequate account of their viewpoints?

DEFINITION OF LEGALITY. Legally produced For the purposes of this Agreement, the definition of legal timber needs to be is the one given in Annex II. Legal timber is defined on the basis of the laws applicable and legal instruments in Liberiaforce in Honduras at the time of issuing the FLEGT licences. The definition used must be unambiguous, objectively verifiable and operationally workable andworkable, as a minimum, include those at least for the laws which cover: (a) regulate the following areas: Felling and harvesting rights: granting of allocating legal rights to harvest felling and harvesting/extracting timber within in a legally gazetted boundaries; determined area with an ICF (bForest Conservation Institute) forestry authorisation. Forestry operations: compliance complying with legal requirements regarding for forest management, including in particular compliance with the relevant environmental and labour legislation; (c) fees laws at all stages of the forest‑products supply chain. Fees and taxes: compliance with legal requirements concerning paying legally established fees and taxes on timber imports, at municipal and fees directly related to timber harvesting national level, as a prerequisite for obtaining felling, harvesting, transport, large‑scale production, processing and harvesting rights; (d) other marketing rights for timber. Other users: respect for respecting other parties’ legal tenure or rights of to use of land and resources that other natural resources, where such rights may be claimed by other parties who may be affected by the felling and harvesting of timber harvesting rights, where such and other rights exist; (e) trade natural resources. Trade and customs: compliance complying with legal requirements for and trade and customs procedures, including paying import tariffs on forest products and export duties. The audit of the LAS should include the following questions: 1.1 Is it clear which what legal instrument underpins each element of the definition? Legality Matrices? 1.2 Is it clear what legal instrument and specific rules support each principle, criterion and indicator in the Legality Matrices? 1.3 Are the criteria and indicators that can to be used to test check compliance with each element of the definition Legality Matrices specified? ? 1.4 Are the criteria/means used to check whether each principle, criterion and indicator in the Legality Matrices has been complied with based on documented and valid legal instruments? 1.5 Are the criteria and indicators clear, objective and operationally workable? 1.6 Do the criteria and indicators, and the methodology for establishing and checking them, clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders? Can the checks be used to assess the performance of all the stakeholders? 1.7 Do the Legality Matrices include the main areas of existing law (felling and harvesting rights, forestry operations, fees and taxes, other users, trade and customs? If not, why were certain areas of law omitted from the Legality Matrices? 1.8 Do the Legality Matrices include all possible sources of timber that enter the supply chain? Have appropriate indicators been developed for the different allocation procedures for sources or rights? 1.9 When the Legality Matrices were drawn up, did the parties concerned take into account all the main areas of applicable law? 1.10 Does the Legality Assurance System include the main legal provisions identified through discussions among the parties concerned? 1.11 Have the Legality Matrices and enforcement matrix been amended since the entry into of force of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Honduras on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber products to the European Union? Have criteria and indicators been developed to ensure these changes are checked? If the Legality Matrices are amended after the entry into force of this Agreement, the following key questions should also be asked: 1.12 Were the relevant stakeholders consulted on the amendments of the FLEGT VPA and were their comments and recommendations taken into account? 1.13 Is it clear what legal instrument underpins each new element of the Legality Matrices? Are the criteria and indicators to be used to check compliance with each element of the Legality Matrices specified? 1.14 Are the criteria and indicators clear, objective and operationally workable? 1.15 Have indicators and criteria been developed to ensure these amendments are checked? Do the indicators and criteria clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the various parties and does verifi­ cation of legal compliance assess the performance of all relevant parties? Does the definition of legality include the main areas of existing law outlined above? If not, why were certain areas of law left out of the definition? In drawing up the definition, did the parties concerned consider all the main areas of applicable law? Does the legality assurance system incorporate the main legal provisions identified by prior discussion between the various parties involved? Does the legality definition account for all possible sources of timber that enter the supply chain intended for the Union and are appropriate indicators developed for different sources/rights allocation procedures? Have the definition of legality and the legality assurance matrix been amended since this Agreement was concluded? Have indicators and criteria been defined to ensure verification of these changes? Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these changes in a process that took adequate account of their viewpointsstakeholders?

DEFINITION OF LEGALITY. Legally produced timber needs to should be defined on the basis of the laws applicable in LiberiaGuyana. The definition used must be unambiguous, objectively verifiable and operationally workable and, as a minimum, include those laws the legislation which cover: • Harvesting rights: (a) harvesting rights: the allocation of forest concessions and the granting of legal rights to harvest timber within legally gazetted boundaries; (b) forestry . • Forestry operations: :compliance with legal requirements regarding forest management, management including compliance with relevant environmental and labour employment legislation; (c) fees . • Fees and taxes: :compliance with legal requirements concerning taxes taxes, royalties, and fees directly related to timber harvesting and harvesting rights; (d) other . • Other users: :respect for other parties’ legal tenure or rights of use of land and resources that may be affected by timber harvesting rights, where such other rights exist; (e) trade . • Trade and customs: :compliance with legal requirements for trade and customs procedures. Key Questions: 1.1.1: Are the legal provisions clearly identified in the Definition? 1.1.2: Is it clear which what legal instrument underpins each element of the Definition? 1.1.3: Are principles, criteria and indicators that can be used to test compliance with each element of the Definition specified? 1.1.4: Are the Verifiers which are used to verify compliance with each Principle and Criterion of the Definition specifically based on documented legal references? 1.1.5: Are the verifiers clear, objective and operationally workable? 1.1.6: Are the roles and responsibilities of all relevant stakeholders and regulatory agencies identified clearly for each verifier? 1.1.7: Does the Definition cover the relevant sections of the related current laws and regulations in relation to the forest sector? If not, why are some of the relevant sections to the forest sector not reflected in the Definition? 1.1.8: Through the stakeholder engagement in developing the Definition have all relevant sections of all al referenced legal regulations been considered? 1.1.9: Have the relevant legal provisions which were identified during stakeholder discussions been included in the GTLAS? 1.1.10: Is the matrix on legality adjusted after the signing of FLEGT VPA Agreement? Are verifiers identified to ensure the verification of such adjustments? 1.1.11: Have the definition of legality and the legality verification standards been amended since this VPA was concluded? In the event of amendments to the Legality Definition, key questions will include: 1.2.1: Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these amendments, and were any subsequent changes to the legality verification system done through a process that took adequate account of their viewpoints? 1.2.2: Is it clear what legal instrument underpins each new element of the definition? Are criteria and indicators that can be used to test compliance with each element of the definition specified? Are the criteria/criteria and indicators clear, objective and operationally workable? ? 1.2.3: Do the criteria and indicators and criteria clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the various all relevant parties and does verifi­ cation of legal compliance the verification assess the performance of all relevant parties? their performance? 1.2.4: Does the updated definition of legality include the main areas of existing law and regulations outlined above? If not, why were certain areas of law and regulations left out of from the definition? In drawing up the definition, did the parties concerned consider all the main areas of applicable law? Does the legality assurance system incorporate the main legal provisions identified by prior discussion between the various parties involved? Does the legality definition account for all possible sources of timber that enter the supply chain intended for the Union and are appropriate indicators developed for different sources/rights allocation procedures? Have the definition of legality and the legality assurance matrix been amended since this Agreement was concluded? Have indicators and criteria been defined to ensure verification of these changes? Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these changes in a process that took adequate account of their viewpoints?

DEFINITION OF LEGALITY. Legally produced timber needs to should be defined on the basis of the laws applicable in LiberiaGuyana. The definition used must be unambiguous, objectively verifiable and operationally workable and, as a minimum, include those laws the legislaion which cover: (a) harvesting rights:  Harvesting rights:-the allocation of forest concessions and the granting of legal rights to harvest timber within legally gazetted boundaries; (b) forestry operations: compliance .  Forestry operations:-compliance with legal requirements regarding forest management, management including compliance with relevant environmental and labour employment legislation; (c) fees .  Fees and taxes: compliance taxes:-compliance with legal requirements concerning taxes and fees directly related to timber harvesting and harvesting rights; (d) other users: respect .  Other users:-respect for other parties’ legal tenure or rights of use of land and resources that may be affected by timber harvesting rights, where such other rights exist; (e) trade .  Trade and customs: compliance customs:-compliance with legal requirements for trade and customs procedures. Key Questions:  Have the definition of legality and the legality verification standards been amended since this VPA was concluded?  Has the relevant labour legislation been included in the Legality Definitions as per Xxxxx XX? In the event of amendments to the Legality Definition, key questions will include:  Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these amendments, and were any subsequent changes to the legality verification system done through a process that took adequate account of their viewpoints?  Is it clear which what legal instrument underpins each new element of the definition? Are criteria and indicators that can be used to test compliance with each element of the definition specified? Are the criteria/criteria and indicators clear, objective and operationally workable?  Do the criteria and indicators and criteria clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the various all relevant parties and does verifi­ cation of legal compliance the verification assess the performance of all relevant partiestheir performance?  Does the definition of legality include the main areas of existing law and regulations outlined above? If not, why were certain areas of law and regulations left out of from the definition? In drawing up the definition, did the parties concerned consider all the main areas of applicable law? Does the legality assurance system incorporate the main legal provisions identified by prior discussion between the various parties involved? Does the legality definition account for all possible sources of timber that enter the supply chain intended for the Union and are appropriate indicators developed for different sources/rights allocation procedures? Have the definition of legality and the legality assurance matrix been amended since this Agreement was concluded? Have indicators and criteria been defined to ensure verification of these changes? Were all relevant stakeholders consulted about these changes in a process that took adequate account of their viewpoints?