Getting their ACTA together?

So the UK, along with 21 other EU nations, has signed up to the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. At the same time the rapporteur (the MEP designated to bring the matter to the European Parliament) has resigned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16757142

The BBC highlights key issues raised by Kader Arif, a French politician and Member of the European Parliament for the south-west of France. He is a member of the Socialist Party, which is part of the Party of European Socialists, and sits on the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade. M. Arif is indignant about the lack of transparency in the process and is quoted as follows:

I condemn the whole process which led to the signature of this agreement: no consultation of the civil society, lack of transparency since the beginning of negotiations, repeated delays of the signature of the text without any explanation given, reject of Parliament's recommendations as given in several resolutions of our assembly.

M. Arif, when referring to resolutions can point to this amongst others:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:308E:0088:0089:EN:PDF

This resolution was made in 2010, but not published until 2011. The details are as follows:

The European Parliament,

— having regard to Rule 123 of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas negotiations concerning the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) are ongoing,

B. whereas Parliament’s co-decision role in commercial matters and its access to negotiation documents are guaranteed by the Lisbon Treaty,

1. Takes the view that the proposed agreement should not indirectly impose harmonisation of EU
copyright, patent or trademark law, and that the principle of subsidiarity should be respected;

2. Declares that the Commission should immediately make all documents related to the ongoing
negotiations publicly available;

3. Takes the view that the proposed agreement should not force limitations upon judicial due process or weaken fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and the right to privacy;

4. Stresses that economic and innovation risks must be evaluated prior to introducing criminal sanctions where civil measures are already in place;

5. Takes the view that internet service providers should not bear liability for the data they transmit or host through their services to an extent that would necessitate prior surveillance or filtering of such data;

6. Points out that any measure aimed at strengthening powers of cross-border inspection and seizure of goods should not harm global access to legal, affordable and safe medicines;

7. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories, to the Commission, the Council and the parliaments of the Member States.

Could the fact that the treaty is not just about the EU, but covers the following other countries have anything to do with it?

Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America

So, given that, as a member state, the UK was aware of this resolution and others like it, why did we sign?

There will be a debate in the European Parliament in June. I hope readers make their MEPs aware of the issues surrounding ACTA and push for a vote against it.