33 Amendments of Emil RADEV related to 2018/0136(COD)
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) Respect for the rule of law is essential not only for citizens of the Union but also for entrepreneurship, innovation, investment and the smooth functioning of the internal market, which need a stable legal and institutional framework to realize their full potential and in order to achieve sustainable long-term growth.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Sound financial management can only be ensured by the Member States if public authorities act in accordance with the law, and if breaches thereof are effectively pursued by investigative and prosecution services, and if decisions of public authorities can be subject to effective judicial review by independent courts and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. This applies in particular to judicial review of the legality of measures, contracts or other instruments that result in public expenditure or debts, inter alia in the context of procurement procedures in respect of which the courts may also be seized.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Generalised deficiencies in the Member States as regards the rule of law which affect in particular the proper functioning of public authorities and effective judicial review on irregularities related to the spending of the Union budget, can seriously harm the financial interests of the Union.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The identification of a generalised deficiency requires a qualitative assessn assessment by the Commission that there is a direct link between, on one hand, the malfunctioning, and on the other side, the principles of sound financial management byand the Commissprotection of the financial interests of the Union. That assessment could be based on the information, accompanied with specific evidence for such deficiencies, from all available sources and recognized institutions, including judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union, reports of the Court of Auditors, and conclusions and recommendations of relevant international organisations and networks, such as the bodies of the Council of Europe and the European networks of supreme courts and councils for the judiciary.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) The evaluation should be based on clear evidence, objective and not based on external influences, especially political ones, without discrimination of Member States, and should evaluate all Member States on an equal footing; this assessment should respect the principle of subsidiarity, necessity and proportionality; the assessment should constitute a single framework applicable to all Member States and should replace existing instruments and mechanisms such as the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism for Bulgaria and Romania.
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The possible measures to be adopted in the event of generalised deficiencies and the procedure to be followed to adopt them should be determined. Those measures should include the suspension of payments and of commitments, a reduction of funding under existing commitments, and a prohibition to conclude new commitments with recipientsenhancing cooperation between the Member State and the European Commission by providing technical support from the European Commission's Structural Reform Support Service.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure uniform implementation of this Regulation and in view of the importance of the financial effects of measures being imposed pursuant to this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council which should act on the basis of a Commission proposal. To facilitate the adoption of decisions which are required to protect the financial interests of the Union, reversed qualified majority voting should be used for a Council decision.
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) 'generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law' means a widespread or recurrent practice or omission, or measure by public authorities which affects the rule of lawconstitute a threat to the implementation of the Union budget in the respective Member State;
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the effective judicial review by independent courts of actions or omissions by the authorities referred to in points (a) and b) in cases of threat to the implementation of the Union budget;
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The following may, in particular,shall be considered generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law,
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) endangering the independence of judiciary, by limiting the possibility for judges to work without external pressure or by exerting whatever pressure on magistrates working on cases, related to irregularities with the implementation of the Union budget;
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) failing to prevent, correct and sanction arbitrary or unlawful decisions by public authorities, including by law enforcement authorities, withholding financial and human resources affecting their proper functioning or failing to ensure the absence of conflicts of interests in relation to the implementation of the Union budget;
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) limiting the availability and effectiveness of legal remedies, including through restrictive procedural rules, lack of implementation of judgments, or limiting the effective investigation, prosecution or sanctioning of breaches of law in relation to the implementation of the Union budget.
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Establishing a generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law shall be based on a quantified assessment carried out by the European Commission containing clear evidence of a threat to the implementation of the Union budget in a Member State for three consecutive years. This assessment should be carried out annually for all Member States. The evaluation criteria are described in paragraph 2 of Article 3.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. One or more of the following appropriate measures mayshall be adopted in the following order:
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
(-a) establishing a dialogue between the European Commission and the Member State for which the assessment has revealed widespread disregard for the rule of law;
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -a a (new)
(-a a) establishing cooperation between the Member State and the European Commission by providing technical support from the European Commission's Structural Reform Support Service;
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) after an independent assessment of the effect and proportionality of the measure taken, a Commission proposal for a Council decision to impose a financial penalty on the Member State, where the Commission implements the Union’s budget in direct or indirect management pursuant to points (a) and (c) of Article 62 of the Financial Regulation, and where a government entity is the recipient:
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Where the Commission finds on the basis of three consecutive assessments that it has reasonable grounds to believe that the conditions of Article 3 are fulfilled, it shall send a written notification to that Member State, setting out the grounds on which it based its finding
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. The Member State concerned shall provide all required information and may make observations within a time limit specified by the Commission, which shall not be less than 13 months from the date of notification of the finding. In its observations, the Member State may propose the adoption of remedial measures.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. If the Commission considers that the proposed remedial measures are inadequate for three consecutive years, it shall establishe cooperation by providing technical support from the Structural Reform Support Service in order to undertake reforms by the Member State which do not lead to a generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. WhereIf the Commission considers that the generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law is established, it shall submit a proposal for an implementing ac despite the cooperation dialogue and cooperation and after an independent assessment onf the appropriate measures to the Councileffect and proportionality, it shall submit a proposal for a Council decision on financial sanctions.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. After receiving the proposal for a Council decision from the European Commission, the Council shall conduct a dialogue or a series of dialogues with the Member State and shall carefully review the assessment of the effect and proportionality of the proposed financial sanction.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The decision shall be deemed to have been adopted by the Council, unless it decides, by qualified majority, to reject the Commission proposal within one month of its adoption by the CommissionCouncil shall take any decision on a financial sanction by unanimity.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 8
Article 5 – paragraph 8
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall assess on a regular basis the situation in the Member State concerned. Once the generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law which on the grounds of which the appropriate measures were adopted cease to exist in full or in part, the Commission shall submit to the Council a proposal for a decision lifting those measures in full or in part. The procedure set out in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 6, 6a and 7 of Article 5 shall apply.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Where measures concerning the suspension of the approval of one or more programmes or amendments thereof referred to in point (i) of Article 4(2)(b) or the suspension of commitments referred to in point (ii) of Article 4(2)(b) are lifted, amounts corresponding to the suspended commitments shall be entered in the budget subject to Article 7 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No XXXX (MFF Regulation). Suspended commitments of year n may not be entered in the budget beyond year n+2.