582 Amendments of Auke ZIJLSTRA
Amendment 10 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas Facebook revealed the mobile phone number of its users for commercial purposes, which was a clear breach of Facebook’s data-use policy that states: “We do not share information that personally identifies you … with advertising, measurement or analytics partners unless you give us permission”; whereas Facebook has also developed a "conversion pixel" — basically a type of tracking device — within ads displayed on Facebook, which allows advertisers to target users directly with ads and then measure exactly how they respond to them;
Amendment 21 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital U
Amendment 22 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital V
Amendment 23 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital X
X. whereas the Information Commissioner’s Office of the United Kingdom has already issued 23 Information Notices to 17 different organisations and individuals, including Facebook on 23 February 2018, to request provision of information from the organisations in a structured way; while Facebook confirmed on 18 May 2018 that Aggregate IQ created and, in some cases, placed advertisements on behalf of the DUP Vote to Leave campaign, Vote Leave, BeLeave and Veterans for Britain;
Amendment 25 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital Z
Amendment 26 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Recital Z b a (new)
Z b a. whereas Facebook has been accused by political representatives, media outlets and a growing part of its employees of having a strong political liberal bias which Mark Zuckerberg did not deny during his audition in front of the US Senate;
Amendment 29 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 1
1. Expects all online platforms to ensure full compliance with Union data protection law, namely the GDPR and Directive 2002/58/EC (e-Privacy) and to help users understand how their personal information is processed in the targeted advertising model of only users that opt in for providing this data, and that effective controls are available, which includes greater transparency in relation to the privacy settings, and the design and prominence of privacy notices;
Amendment 32 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Emphasises that it is strictly forbidden for any online platforms to follow and process any non-user’s data;
Amendment 33 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Takes the view that in case the online platform is not able to guarantee a high level of security and protection of personal data, the platform should be banned;
Amendment 34 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 3
3. Takes note of Facebook's statement that itFinds it unacceptable that Facebook exclusively uses data of non- Facebook users to create aggregated datasets from which it derives conclusions about how the service is used;
Amendment 39 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the digital age requires electoral laws to be adapted to this new digital reality and suggests; it remains the sole decision of Member States whether to introduce an obligatory system of digital imprints for electronic campaigning and advertising. Any form of political advertising should include easily accessible and understandable information on the publishing organisation and who is legally responsible for spending so that it is clear who sponsored campaigns, similar to existing requirements for printed campaign materials currently in place in various Member States;
Amendment 51 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 11
Amendment 59 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 12
Amendment 81 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 24
Amendment 98 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 33
Amendment 37 #
2018/2111(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. StressNotes that Article 2 of the TEU has a duty to protect minorities and to guarantee their rights; notes that Article 2 offrames the protection of the rights of persons belonging to minorities as one of the fundamental values of the EU; points out, however, that the TEU framesTreaties, following the approtectionach of minorities as one of the fundamental values of the EUternational law, do not define the term ‘minorities’, which gives rise to legal ambiguity; further notes that Articles 21 (on non- discrimination) and 22 (on cultural, religious and linguistic diversity) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights acquired legally binding form in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU);
Amendment 69 #
2018/2111(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 12 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
Amendment 13 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
Citation 5
Amendment 18 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 29 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the FRA report entitled ‘Violence against women: an EU-wide survey’, published in March 2014, shows thatdidn’t research one of the root causes of violence against women nerelateds to be tackled in all EU Member States, including those which have not yet ratified the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention)religion or ideology such as Islam and need to be tackled in all EU Member States, given the extent of the problem, the severe consequences of violence and the impact it has on women’sEU-citizens’ lives as well as on society as a whole;
Amendment 32 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 41 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas freedom of speech and freedom of expression are the cornerstones of our societies and should remain protected at all cost;
Amendment 44 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in democratic societies, freedom of assembly is one of the instruments by which people can participate in the public debate and bring about social change; whereas media freedom, pluralism and independence are crucial components of the right to freedom of expression and are vital to the democratic functioning of the EU and its Member States; whereas journalists and other media actors in the EU face multiple attacks, threats and pressures from state and non-state actors causing possible self- censorship;
Amendment 47 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 54 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the right to freedom of expression and information, which includes the right of freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas;
Amendment 56 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas discrimination on grounds of gender is in violation with article 19 TFEU;
Amendment 58 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 71 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the arrival in Europe of illegal migrants and asylum seekers continued in 2017; whereas this reality requires real EU solidarity to put in place adequate reception structures for those most in need and most vulnerable; whereas many migrants place their lives in the hands of smugglers and criminals and are vulnerable to violations of their rights, including violence, abuse and exploitation; whereas women and children are at higher risk of being trafficked and sexually abused at the hands of traffickers and there is therefore a need to build and strengthen child protection systems to prevent and respond to violence, abuse, neglect and the exploitation of children, in line with the commitments set out in the Valletta Action Plan are due to the open border policy and Schengen, while many Member States want to be sovereign and in control of their borders as has been proven by reinforced border controls in many Member States and election results in Italy, Hungary, Austria and Bavaria;
Amendment 79 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 92 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with concern that the 2017 FRA paper entitled ‘Challenges to women’s human rights in the EU’ confirms that women and girls experience persistent gender discrimination, sexist hate speech, and genderreligious-based violence and intimidation in the EU, which severely limits their ability to enjoy their rights and to participate on an equal footing in society;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 98 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reminds that discrimination on grounds of gender is in violation with article 19 TFEU;
Amendment 100 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 102 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the signing of the EU’s accession toRegrets that the Istanbul Convention signed on 13 June 2017, despite the limitation to only two mandates; regrets that, to date, only 19 Member States have ratified the Convention and calls on the remaining Member States to do so without delay; recognises that when it comes to determining European standards for the protection of women against violence, the Istanbul Convention is the most important point of reference; calls on the Council to swiftly agree on the Code of Conduct, which will govern the implementation of the Convention by the EUoes not include religious-based induced violence;
Amendment 112 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses concern about the risk of misogyny in European societies and its impact on women’s fundamental rights in all spheres of life; calls onwelcomes Member States to address the key obstacles to gender equality in economic empowerment and political participation, including sexual harassment which hampers women’s full participation in the labour market; highlights the fact that gender stereotypes must be tackled from an early age to effectively address the under- representation of women in work, decision making and politics; calls on Member States to appropriately address this issue in school curricula;
Amendment 120 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 148 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Welcomes Member States to take adequate measures to safeguard and promote a pluralist, independent and free media landscape in the service of democratic society, including the independence and sustainability of the media, which are crucial elements of a favourable environment for freedom of expression;
Amendment 150 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that public deliberation and debate are the lifeblood of a healthy and functioning democracy and encourages, in this context, the EU and the Member States to take further steps to safeguards and protect freedom of speech and assembly as basic principles of democratic processes; strongly condemns in this regard the increasing restrictions on freedom of assembly, which the authorities have enforced in some cases with violence against protesters; reaffirms the crucial role of these fundamental freedoms in the functiassembly and freedom of speech including the right to publish all opinions in (onling of democratic societies and calls on the Commission to take an active role in promoting these rights in line with international human rights standarde)media as basic principles of democratic processes;
Amendment 155 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reminds the EU institutions that all citizens have a guaranteed right to freedom of speech; calls on the EU institutions to respect this right of EU citizens to freedom of speech in all their decisions, actions and policies, as a means to thoroughly uphold media pluralism and media freedom;
Amendment 163 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Expresses its concern that few specific legal provisions to ensure the protection of media actors from violence, threats and pressures can be identified at national level in EU Member States; expresses its concern over the precarious working conditions for journalists including non-paid reporters, bloggers or columnists and the amount of psychological violence they witness, which compromises their ability to work appropriately and thus hampers media freedoerefore could threaten media freedom and media pluralism;
Amendment 168 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the factNotes that whistle- blowing is an essential element in investigative journalism and press freedom, and in this context recalls its resolution of 24 October 2017 on legitimate measurtherefore welcomes Member States to have protection for whistle-blowers acting in the public interest when disclosing the confidential information of companies and public bodies3; __________________ 3in national law accordingly; __________________ 3 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0402. Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0402.
Amendment 172 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomDeplores the Commission’s decision to establish a High Level Expert Group on fake news and online disinformation as this leads to censorship; expresses its concern about the potential threat the notion of fake news could pose to freedom of speech and expression and to the independence of the media, while underlining the negative effects that the spreading of falske news might have on the quality of political debate and on the well-informed participation of citizens in democratic societycoming from the European Institutes;
Amendment 182 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Expresses deep concerns about the obstacles to the workmisbehaviour of human rights defenders, including civil society organisations active in the field of fundamental rights and democracy; recognises the key role of these organisations in making fundamental rights and values a reality for everyone and stresses that such as Oxfam and Save the children, as they should be able to carry out their work in a safe and well- supported environment; is concerned by the closing down of civil society space; calls on the EU and the Member States to address proactively the root caexual abuse is said to be “endemic” in the international aid sector according to the Houses of shrinking civil society space and to uphold their fundamental rightsCommons International Development Committee;
Amendment 184 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Welcomes initiatives of Member States to create and maintain, in law and in practice, a safe and secure environment for journalists and other media actors, enabling them to perform their work in full independence and without undue interference – such as the threat of violence, harassment, financial, economic and political pressure, pressure to disclose confidential sources and materials, targeted surveillance, and the opinion of the ‘EU versus disinformation’;
Amendment 201 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that all EU Member States should address adequately discriminatory or violent reactions against the schooling of migrant and refugee children, both through law enforcement and by promoting mutual understanding and social cohesion; calls on Member States to structurally address respect for diversity, intercultural understanding and human rights, including children’s rights, in regular school curricuhave laws against aggression in national law;
Amendment 223 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 230 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 282 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 289 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 303 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 312 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 316 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Points out that improving the quality, independence and efficiency of national justice systems, in particular judges, prosecutors and lawyers, remains a key priority of the European Union; stresses that there is an urgent need to introduce a gender-sensitive perspective into the Member States’ legal and judicial systems, including the development and institutionalisation of the gender component into training programmes for all judiciary staffremains part of the sovereignty of Member States;
Amendment 333 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 347 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 358 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Emphasises that the EU and the Member States should develop credible and effective systems that would make it unnecessary to detain children for asylum or return purposes; stresses the importance of taking the principle of the best interests of the child into consideration in all aspects concerning children as well as of the practical implementation of the right to be heard; recalls that Article 14 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 28 of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child guarantee the right to education to every child, including migrant and refugee children, both unaccompanied and accompanied and avoiding separated schooling and segregation; stresses that Member States should ensure that migrant and refugee children are effectively supported through linguistic, social and psychological support based on individual assessment of their nepoints out that therefore repeat asylum procedures should be prohibiteds;
Amendment 371 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 384 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 390 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Whereas the collusion between some NGOs and smuggler networks have been documented, encouraging illegal migration toward Member States;
Amendment 391 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Stresses the urgent need to restore internal border controls;
Amendment 392 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Is of the opinion that also NGO's should completely obey the law;
Amendment 396 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 402 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Points out that renaming 'illegal migrants' as 'irregular migrants' does not make the act of crossing borders legal;
Amendment 406 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Is of the opinion that family reunification is a threat to order, security, culture preservation and national identity, without complete acceptance of the norms and values of the host country;
Amendment 408 #
Amendment 409 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 412 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 413 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 415 #
2018/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 26 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas discrimination based on sex is prohibited under Article 19 TFEU;
Amendment 39 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic traditionally established European minorities are an integral part of human rights, which are universal, indivisible and independent, and whereas protecting and promoting traditionally established European minority rights is essential for peace, security and stability and for promoting tolerance, mutual respect and understanding and co-operation among all persons living on their territory;
Amendment 47 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the protection of the rights of persons belonging to traditionally established European minorities can help build a sustainable future for Europe and contribute to guaranteeing the respect of the principles of dignity, equality and non- discrimination; whereas benefits are not limited to traditionally established European minorities since this protection and promotion will bring stability, economic development and prosperity to all;
Amendment 71 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the European Union’s cultural heritage is rich and diverse; whereas cultural heritage enriches the individual lives of citizens; whereas Article 3 of the TEU affirms, that ‘the Union shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe’s cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced’; whereas traditionally established European minorities that have been living together in Europe contribute to this rich, unique and diverse heritage and are an integral part of the European identity;
Amendment 100 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – introductory part
Paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Recalls that while protection of minorities is a part of the Copenhagen criteria, both for the candidate countries and for the Member States, there is no guarantee that candidate states stick to the commitments undertaken under the Copenhagen criteria once they became Member States; recallunderlines that there is no standard for minority rights in Union policy nor a common understanding of who can be considered a member of a minority; notneed for a common Union policy on minority rights; underlines that there is no definition of minorities in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, nor in the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM); recommends that, with respect to the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and non-discrimination, such a definition should be based on the definition, laid down in Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1201(1993) for an additional protocol on the rights of minorities to the European Convention on Human Rights, of a ‘national minority’ as a group of persons in a state whounderlines that minority rights are already defined by law in the Member States and therefore a Union policy in this field is neither necessary nor justified;
Amendment 105 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 1
Paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 111 #
2018/2036(INI)
Amendment 113 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
Amendment 118 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 4
Paragraph 1 – indent 4
Amendment 122 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 5
Paragraph 1 – indent 5
Amendment 129 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 132 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses that there is ano need for a legislative proposal on minimum standards of protection of minorities in the EU, nor for improving the situation of minorities in all the Member States and to avoid double standards, while; underlines the importance of respecting the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality, and after carrying out a proper impact assessment; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that their legal systems guarantee that persons belonging to a minority are not discriminated against, and to take and implement targeted protection measures based on relevant international standards;
Amendment 141 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Member States, while to safeguarding the national citizenship, and calls on the Commission, while promoting the European identity and common values, to safeguard the right ofright of traditionally established national minorities to preserve, protect and develop their own identity, and to take the necessary steps to ensure the effective participation of traditionally established national minorities in social, economic and cultural life and in public affairs;
Amendment 148 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 152 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 158 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 187 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that traditionally established national minorities are groups of persons belonging to minorities who have been living on the same territory and sharing a common identity, in some instances as a result of border changes, in others as a result of living a long time in an area, whereby they have managed to preserve their identity; calls onwelcomes the Member States and the Commission to protect the cultural and linguistic identity of traditionally established national minorities, and to create conditions for the promotion of that identity; points to the important role that regional and local authorities in the EU can play in protecting traditionally established national minorities, and considers that administrative reorganisation and territorial districting must not have negative consequences for them;
Amendment 199 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that maintaining the European cultural heritage of the EU is a common interest of the Member States; calls on the EU institutions and its Member States to support, enhance and promote the cultural rights of natraditionally established European minorities;
Amendment 201 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 205 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 288 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that in addition to its 24 official languages, the EU is home to 60 other languages which are also part of the EUEurope’s cultural and language heritage and which are spoken in specific regions or by specific groups by 40 million people; notes that the multilingualism of the European Union is unique at the level of international organisations; notes that the principle of multilingualism is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, which obliges the EU to respect linguistic diversity and to support Europe’s rich linguistic and cultural heritage by promoting language learning and linguistic diversity;
Amendment 297 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 318 #
Amendment 319 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 323 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 – indent 1
Paragraph 30 – indent 1
Amendment 327 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 – indent 2
Paragraph 30 – indent 2
Amendment 331 #
2018/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 – indent 3
Paragraph 30 – indent 3
Amendment 1 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 3 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 5
Citation 5
Amendment 10 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas justice must be adapnational judicial systems can cooperated to meetrespond to the new challenges faced by the EUStates, in particular in the fight against terrorism;
Amendment 17 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to discontinue promoting the failed Scoreboard so that it can become a useful tool for the relevant stakeholders, boosting the efficiency and quality of the European judicial systemsin order not to waste any more of the taxpayers' money;
Amendment 25 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 37 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 45 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 51 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 55 #
2018/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 1 #
2018/0390(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) The United Kingdom grants residence rights to the inhabitants of many countries which are part of the Commonwealth under the British Nationality Act, 1981. Due to the fact that the scope of the visa exemption provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 is unclear, the Commission should carry out a complete impact and risk assessment in order to clarify the actual scope of the visa exemption.
Amendment 49 #
2018/0331(COD)
(1a) Considering that measures making it beforehand impossible to publicate on the internet, such as uploadfilters, are in violation of Article 7.3 of the Dutch Constitution.
Amendment 270 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 355 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 88
Recital 88
Amendment 369 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 101
Recital 101
Amendment 433 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
European Integrated External Border Management
Amendment 438 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 489 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
(1) The Commission and the European Border and Coast Guarduncil shall ensure the effectiveness of European Integrated Border Management through a multiannual strategic policy cycle for the European Integrated Border Management.
Amendment 501 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
(6) In order to implement the delegated actcision referred to in paragraph 4, the Member States shall establish their national strategies for integrated border management through close cooperation between all national authorities responsible for the management of borders and return. Those national strategies shall be in line with Article 3, the delegated actcision referred to in paragraph 4 and the technical and operational strategy referred to in paragraph 5.
Amendment 742 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 7
Article 33 – paragraph 7
7. When necessary the executive director shall, in consultation with the Member State concerned, make a recommendation setting outuggesting the necessary measures to be taken by the Member State concerned and the time limit within which such measures shall be implemented. The executive director shall invite the Member States concerned to take the necessary measures based on an action plan developed by the Member State in consultation with the executive director.
Amendment 814 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State may request that the Agency launch joint operations to face upcoming challengethreats, including illegal immigration, present or future threats at its external borders or cross-border crime, or to provide increased technical and operational assistance when implementing its obligations with regard to the control of the external borders.
Amendment 872 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 875 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) a Member State facing specific and disproportionate challenges at the external borders has either not requested sufficient support from the Agency under Article 38, Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or is not taking the necessary steps to implement actions under thosen imperative and urgent action is deemed indispensable as a result of the negative reply of a Member State according to Articles 42(2),
Amendment 889 #
2018/0330(COD)
Amendment 945 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 966 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1029 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to the competences of Member States concerning return decisions and without entering into the merits of returnsuch decisions, the Agency shall provide technical and operational assistance and ensure the coordination or the organisation of return operations, including through the chartering of aircraft for the purpose of such operations or organising returns on scheduled flights. The Agency may, on its own initiative coordinate or organise return operations.
Amendment 1197 #
2018/0330(COD)
Amendment 1309 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 83 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Members of the teams deployed from the Agency’s statutory operational staff or deployed following secondment for a short- and long- term duration to the Agency by the Member States shall wear, where appropriate, the uniform of the European Border and Cost Guard standing corps while performing their tasks and exercising their powers. Members of the teams deployed from Member States for a short duration shall wear, where appropriate, their own uniform while performing their tasks and exercising their powers.
Amendment 1313 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 83 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1326 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 9
Article 83 – paragraph 9
9. Decisions to refuse entry in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall be taken only by border guards of the host Member State or by the members of the teams if expressly authorised by the host Member State to act on its behalf.
Amendment 1328 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 84 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Agency shall, in cooperation with the host Member State, issue a document in the official languages of the host Member State and at least another official language of the institutions of the Union to the members of the teams for the purpose of identifying them and as proof of the holder's rights to perform tasks and exercise powers as referred to in Article 83. The document shall include the following features of each member of the teams:
Amendment 1458 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106
Article 106
Amendment 1473 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 107
Article 107
Amendment 1508 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 3
Article 108 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1511 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 4
Article 108 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1535 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 8
Article 108 – paragraph 8
Amendment 1539 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 9
Article 108 – paragraph 9
Amendment 1544 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 10
Article 108 – paragraph 10
Amendment 1565 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 118
Article 118
Amendment 1571 #
2018/0330(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – title
Annex I – title
Amendment 127 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) On 28 June 2018, in its conclusions, the European Council underlined the necessity to significantly step up the effective return of irregular migrants, and welcomed the intention of the Commission to make legislative proposals for a more effective and coherent European return policyllegal immigrants.
Amendment 140 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements, in particular when the third-country national poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security, and when he/she has been convicted for a criminal offence, even with a non- definitive sentence. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected, provided that the return procedure is suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection.
Amendment 167 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded, or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security, or they have been convicted for a criminal offence, even with a non-definitive sentence. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case.
Amendment 197 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stake, appeals against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect. The judicial authorities should be able to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a return decision in individual cases for other reasons, either upon request of the third- country national concerned or acting ex officio, where deemed necessary. Such decisions should, as a rule, be taken within 48 hours. Where justified by the complexity of the case, judicial authorities should take such decision without undue delay.
Amendment 224 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process, or when the third country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security, or when he/she has been convicted for a criminal offence, even with a non- definitive sentence.
Amendment 237 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) This Directive should not preclude Member States from laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties and criminal penalties, including imprisonment, in relation to the infringements of immigration rules, provided that such penalties are compatible with the objectives of this Directive, do not compromise the application of this Directive and are in full respect of fundamental rights.
Amendment 267 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure may be kept in detention in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, once his or her application has been rejected. To avoid that a third country national is automatically released from detention and allowed entry into the territory of the Member State despite having been denied a right to stay, a limited period of time is needed in order to try to enforce the return decision issued at the border. The third- country national concerned may be detained in the context of the border procedure for a maximum period of foursix months and as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence. That period of detention should be without prejudice to other periods of detention established by this Directive. Where it has not been possible to enforce return by the end of the former period, further detention of the third-country national may be ordered under another provision of this Directive and for the duration provided for therein.
Amendment 284 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular llegal immigration and represents an important reason of substantial public interest.
Amendment 308 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
9a. 'principle of non-refoulement' means the prohibition of expulsion or return according to Article 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
Amendment 321 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least one of the following criteria:
Amendment 351 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) existence of conviction for a criminal offence, even with a non- definitive sentence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State;
Amendment 370 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (k), (l), (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 387 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the duty to remain presenton call and available throughout the procedures;
Amendment 462 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Amendment 500 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may impose an entry or stay ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third- country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose illegal stay is detected in connection with border checks carried out at exit in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, where justified on the basis of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 567 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) the return decision is the consequence of the decision on ending the legal stay that is aggravated by at least one of the following circumstances: - risk of absconding; - application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded; - the third-country national poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 16 #
2018/0247(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the Commission proposal..
Amendment 56 #
2018/0154(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 –paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 –paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Recital 9
Recital 9
(-1) Recital 9 is replaced by the following: "(9) This Regulation does notshall cover estimates of the number of persons illegally resident in the Member States. Member States should notall provide such estimates orand data on such persons to the Commission (Eurostat), although they may be included in population stocks due to surveys. lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:199:0023:0029:en:PDF). " Or. en (https://eur-
Amendment 39 #
2018/0153(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The European Parliament rejects the Commission's proposal.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committees on Budgets and on Budgetary Control, as the committees responsible, to propose a rejection of the Commission proposal.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) The Commission´s interference in the Member States´ internal affairs is misleadingly presented as protecting the Union´s financial interests.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) The Treaty defines the Commission as an impartial referee: the Commission however sees itself as a political body, thereby jeopardizing the EU.
Amendment 62 #
2018/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8 a) Reaffirms its commitment to the overriding principles of cultural identity and national sovereignty, principles that form an indivisible whole with the principle of freedom.
Amendment 69 #
Amendment 116 #
2018/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
(2) The document title ('Identity card') shall appear in the official language or languages of the issuing Member State and at least on; the issuing Member State may add the translation of the document title in one or more other official language of the institutions of the Union.;
Amendment 159 #
2018/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the title of the document in the official language or languages of the Member State concerned; the Member State may andd at least onthe translation of the document title in one or more other official language of the institutions of the Union;
Amendment 161 #
2018/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) the sex of the holder (male or female);
Amendment 20 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the Commission proposal.
Amendment 51 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The European Union’s common short-stay visa policy has been an integral part to the establishment of an area without internal borders. Visa policy should remain an essential tool for facilitating tourism and business, while helping counter security risks and the risk of irregularillegal migration to the Union.
Amendment 54 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The Union should usealign its visa policy in its cooperation wiwith the third countries, and' willingness to cooperate to ensure a better balance between migration and security concerns, economic considerations and general external relations.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 80 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In case of lack of cooperation of certain third countries to readmit their nationals apprehended in an irregularllegal situation and failure of those third countries to cooperate effectively in the return process, a restrictive and temporary application of certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 should on the basis of a transparent mechanism based on objective criteria, be applied to enhance a given third country's cooperation on readmission of irregularllegal migrants.
Amendment 83 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The possibility of issuing of visas at the external border should remain exceptional. However, to promote short term tourism, Member States should be authorbe abolished to issue visas at the external border on the basis of temporary schemes, for which the organisational arrangements should be notified and published. Such schemes should be limited in scope and comply with the general rules for processing visa applications. The validity of the visa issued should be limited to the territory of the issuing Member State, since the temporal and territorial limitations of such visas are not enforceable at the present moment.
Amendment 99 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 2 – point 4
Article 2 – point 4
Amendment 135 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Amendment 187 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a – indent 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a – indent 3
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 24
Article 24
Amendment 240 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 36 a
Article 36 a
Amendment 241 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 36 a
Article 36 a
Amendment 242 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 36 a
Article 36 a
Amendment 5 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Schengen area is a unique arrangement and one of the greatest achievementfailures of the European Union, allowing free movement of people within the Schengen area without controls at internal borders; whereas this has been made possible through a variety of compensating measures, such as re- enforcing the exchange of information through the establishment of the Schengen Information System (SIS) and creating an evaluation mechanism to verify the implementation of the Schengen acquis by Member States and foster mutual trust in the functioning of the Schengen areaterrorists, drugs, illegal weapons and illegal migrants within the Schengen area without controls at internal borders; whereas mutual trust also demands solidarity, judicial and police cooperation in criminal matters and common views on migration, visa and asylum policierespected boundaries such as national borders;
Amendment 17 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in recent years several factors have impacted the functioning of the Schengen area; whereas these factors include a significant numbers of asylum seekers and irregularillegal migrants with related secondary movements; whereas these factors also include terrorism and a heightened threat to public policy and the internal security of the Member States; whereas several Member States have also reintroduced and subsequently prolonged controls at internal borders since 2014;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the permanent reintroduction of border controls would have serious beneficial impacts on citizens’ lives and seriously undermine their trust in European integration; whereas Schengen countries would face tremendous direct operational and investment costs, with crippling effects on their economies; whereas the estimations of those costs alone amount to more than EUR 18 billion per year for cross-border workers, tourists, road freight transporters and public administeveryday security and be the natural consequence of their lack of trust in European integrations;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 38 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 40 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. Whereas the collusion between some NGOs and smuggler networks have been documented, encouraging illegal migration toward Member States;
Amendment 47 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the effectiveness of the measures taken at the external borders, such as Hungary’s fence, and the creation of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex); notes the efforts of the Agency in implementing the new regulation, especially through joint operations in the field of border surveillance and return, and by supporting the Member States particularly affected by migratory pressure; sees the importance of the newly introduced vulnerability assessment mechanism in uncovering weaknesses at the common external borders and preventing crises; emphasises the concerted efforts and cooperation between agencies and oasks the Commission to fully use Frontex’s capacities, especially in helping Member States to send back all illegal migrants to their stakeholders in organising the ‘Hotspot’ approachhome countries or partnered third countries which agreed to accept them, based on the Australian “No Way” policy;
Amendment 62 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the support and capacity-building measures taken in the countries of origin to address the root causes of irregular migration; considers it crucial that adequate maritime search-and- rescue-and-send-back aspects and capabilities are embedded into all operational planning and execution, as provided for in Regulation (EU) No 656/2014;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 110 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the current state of Schengen and the issues it has encountered are not due to problems in the structure and construction of Schengen itself but ratherand also to the connected fields of the acquis, such as shortcomingirresponsabilities in the area of the Common European Asylum System, including the Dublin Regulation, and especially the lack of control of the external borders;
Amendment 128 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. CondemnWelcomes the continued reintroduction of internal border checks as this undermines the basic principles of the Schengen area, and expresses doubts about the lawfulness of some prolongations of controls; is also of the opinion that Member States have not taken the proper measures to ensure cooperation with other affected Member States to minimise the effects of these measures, nor have they provided enough information on the results of such controls, therefore hindering the analysis by the Commission and scrutiny by Parliament; considers the economic, political and social impacts of this practice to be detrimental to the unity of the Schengen area and harmful to the prosperity of European citizenallow Member States to protect their citizens with effectiveness; recalls that Member States have’ other tools available, namely targeted police controls, as recommended by the Commissionre not sufficient as demonstrated by the recent wave of islamic terror strikes;
Amendment 142 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. AppreciatDeplores, as part of efforts to restore the normal functioning of Schengen, the proposal to amend the Schengen Borders Code; recalls that these changes should merely reflectwill not be sufficient given the new challenges and diffuse threats to internal security and should notrather be a further avenue for prolonging interdefinitively restoring national border controls; considers that these steps are to be made carefully in order not to inflict irreversible damage on the basic idea of free movemen utopic idea of free movement is an obvious failure and should be put to rest;
Amendment 152 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that all the Member States should do their utmost to ensure a high level of control at their external borders, as enshrined in the Treaties, by allocating sufficient resources through staffing and, expertise, establishing the necessary command and control structures and formulating up-to-date risk analyses in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 for all tiers of command to facilitate effective operationsand a border fence such as the one in Hungary or a “No Way” policy based on the Australian model;
Amendment 158 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that cooperation at national level between different law enforcement services, the military, border guards and customs is often inadequate, resulting in fragmented situational awareness and low effectivenesswithout the slightest doubt the best way to ensure both national and common security while respecting each Member States’ sovereignty;
Amendment 169 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the urgent need to address the identified critical shortcomings without delay in order to return to the normal functioning of Schengen withoutrestore internal border controls;
Amendment 179 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 210 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Member States to ensure swift return procedures once a return decision has been issued; calls on the Member States to take specifevery time an illegal migrant is detected, as illegally crossing a border is a crime which steps to ensure adequate infrastructure, accommodation and living conditions for arriving asylum seekers, especially taking into consideration the needs of unaccompanied minors and families with minors; calls on hould not be taken lightly; recalls that because of Schengen any illegal migrant who successfully violates the external borders of the EU is then free to travel to another Member States to bring their detention facilities into line with the requirements so as to meet capacity demand, and to increase the use of alternative measures to detention, potentially with harmful intentions as it has been witnessed numerous times; stresses that every single successful illegal migrant gives hope to others and accentuate the whole migration crisis;
Amendment 224 #
2017/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 4 #
2017/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomDeplores the progress made in the Council in 2016 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), which led to the agreement between 20 Member States on the basis of the enhanced cooperation procedure provided for in Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; hopes that all Member States will eventually participate in this initiative; recalls that the role of the EPPO will be to investigate, prosecute and bring to court the perpetrators of criminal offences affecting the EU’s financial interests, as defined in the PIF Directive;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 14 #
2017/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 10 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
- having regard to the fact that the EU is making frightening steps towards deciding what opinions are allowed according to the EU and thereby threatening freedom of speech for EU citizens by enabling censorship and EU propaganda;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18
Citation 18
Amendment 19 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)
Citation 22 a (new)
- having regard to the fact that propaganda is spread to eliminate political incorrectness from Brussels;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)
Citation 23 a (new)
- having regard to the fact that the EU stated their plans to combat 'euroscepticism' in the Union in the EU for Citizens report and the current developments of the suggestion of an EU media quality mark where chair De Cock Buning proactively researches 'fake news' with her taskforce, is demonstrating that freedom in the EU is under serious threat;
Amendment 24 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of opinion are fundamental human rights and indispensable conditions for the full development of the person, for the realisation of the principles of transparency and, accountability and for the fulfilment of other human rights and fundamental freedomsdiscovery of truth; therefore should we safeguard these precious rights of freedom of expression and freedom of opinion at all cost and not allow the EU to judge what is the truth;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas freedom of speech and freedom of expression are the cornerstones of our societies and should remain protected at all cost;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 71 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the right to freedom of expression and information, which includes the right of freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas;
Amendment 74 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas, recalling the Council of Europe, whistleblowing is a fundamental aspect of freedom of expression and plays a central role in deterring and preventing wrongdoing, and in strengthening democratic accountability and transparency; whereas the adequate protection of whistleblowers at EU, national and international level is a precondition for ensuring the effectiveness of such a role;
Amendment 91 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls onWelcomes the Member States to take adequate measures to safeguard and promote a pluralist, independent and free media landscape in the service of democratic society, including the independence and sustainability of public service media and communitythe media, which are crucial elements of a favourable environment for freedom of expression;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls onReminds the EU institutions to guarantee full implementation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in all their decisions, actions and policies, as a means to thoroughly uphold media pluralism and media freedom; asks the Commission, in this regard, to introduce human rights impact assessments for the evaluation of its legislative proposals and to present a proposal for the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in line with the relevant Parliament resolutionhat all citizens have a guaranteed right to freedom of speech; calls on the EU institutions to respect this right of EU citizens to freedom of speech in all their decisions, actions and policies, as a means to thoroughly uphold media pluralism and media freedom;
Amendment 108 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its deep concern at the abuses, crimes and deadly attacks still being committed against journalists and media workers in the Member States; urges the Member States to do their utmost to prevent such violence, to ensure accountability and avoid impunity and to guarantee that victims and their families have access to the appropriate legal remedies; calls on the; welcomes Member States, moreover, to fully implement Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors;
Amendment 118 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on theWelcomes initiatives of Member States to create and maintain, in law and in practice, a safe and secure environment for journalists and other media actors, enabling them to perform their work in full independence and without undue interference – such as the threat of violence, harassment, financial, economic and political pressure, pressure to disclose confidential sources and materials, and targeted surveillance; highlights the importance of taking a gender-sensitive approach when considering measures to address the safety of journalists, and the opinion of the 'EU versus disinformation';
Amendment 121 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the importance of ensuring adequate working conditions for journalists and media workers, in full compliance with the requirements of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Social Charter, as a means to avoid undue internal and external pressure, dependency, vulnerability and instability, and hence the risk of self- censorship; highlights that independent journalism cannot be guaranteed and fostered by the market alone; asks the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to promote and elaborate new socially sustainable economic models aimed at financing and supporting quality and independent journalism;
Amendment 135 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the participation in democratic processes is founded, first and foremost, on effective and non- discriminatory access to information and knowledge; calls for the EU and its Member States to develop adequate policies to attain universal access to the internet and to recognise internet access – including net neutrality – as a fundamental righwelcomes initiatives of the EU Member States to guarantee freedom of access to the internet and to recognise the neutrality of the internet;
Amendment 150 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 154 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Deplores the broad and extremely imprecise scope of the Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online, promoted by the Commission, and the large margin of manoeuvre left to private companies to determine what constitutes ‘illegality’, which could potentially leads to censorship and arbitrary restrictions on freedom of expression; stresses that such censorship and attempts to limit freedom of expression are already happening in Germany and may occur in France soon too;
Amendment 173 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recognises that the new digital environment has exacerbated the problem of the spread of disinformation, or the so- called ‘fake’ or ‘false’ news; recalls, however, that this is not a new phenomenon, nor is it restricted to the online sphere; stresses the importance of effective systems of self-regulation which are based on the principles of accuracy and transparency and which provide for proper obligations and instruments regarding source verification and fact checkingnabled citizens to discover the truth about various issues that before where only to be found in newspapers and books; stresses the importance of maintaining a citizens' fundamental right of freedom of speech and free access to pluralistic and diverse media, including self-published opinions such as blogs;
Amendment 181 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Stresses the importance of media pluralism and media freedom and that by allowing the EU to judge what is the truth and what is not the truth is threatening the freedom civilians have in the Union;
Amendment 194 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 197 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Reminds the EU institutions that Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives EU citizens the right of freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers;
Amendment 216 #
2017/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Deplores the fact that the monopoly position of certain social media enterprises is being enforced by some Member States who are assigning them with a special duty to provide so-called ‘uncensored’ and ‘unbiased’ information;
Amendment 3 #
2017/2179(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the budgets of Frontex and EASO increased significantly throughout 2016; recognises that these agencies weare confronted with costly administrative and operational challenges; notes that as a result they faced problems absorbing additional Union funds granted throughout 2016 leading to considerable cancellations and/or carry-overs as well as difficulties to comply to budgetary and financial rules due to illegal migration;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2179(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges that EASO, eu- LISA and to a much lesser extend EMCDDA did not fully comply with public procurement principles and rules laid down by the Financial Regulation; notes that for EUeu-LISA, Frontex and EMCDDA the Court also identified weaknesses in monitoring contract implementations; highlights also the very significant weaknesses of EASO Internal Controls; welcomes however the commitment of these three Agencies to improve themselves and take the necessary corrective measurdeems it necessary that misconduct must result in organizational measures and personnel consequences;
Amendment 5 #
2017/2178(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is concernedDeplores that the public procurement procedure launched for the further development and maintenance of the VIS system (EUR 192 million six year contract) without precisely defining the services requested required tenderers to have access to the Biometric Matching Service technology developed by one single company with no obligations to provide commercial access to tenderers; calls on the Agency to avoid being locked- in to any vendors as this would be detrimental to its long term financial interests, damaging the cost-effectiveness of procurement procedures and limiting competition; urges the Agency to conclude agreements with multiple suppliers and to define the services required precisely;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2178(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. NotDeplores that the Agency amended the construction contract for its premises in Strasbourg (EUR 21.2 million) to proceed with advance payments in order to increase its budget consumption; points out that by November 2016 the Agency had paid the full contract amount although less than half of the work had been completed; requests the Agency to better assess the necessity of taking such financial risks as the use of financial guarantees does not cover all financial risks;
Amendment 12 #
2017/2178(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. RegretsFinds it unacceptable that in 2016 the Agency received and accepted supplies amounting to EUR 2.8 million without having budget and contracts in place for it; requests the Agency to better adhere to public procurement procedures;
Amendment 4 #
2017/2177(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that in order to cover its support to Member States of first entry, in particular for the registration and interviewing of asylum applicants and for the relocation schemeillegal migrants and for the failing relocation scheme that has not been agreed by all Member States, the budget of the European Asylum Support Office (‘the Office’) increased by an absurdly exorbitant 273 %; underlines the fact that the Office’s staff also increased by only 34 % and that34 % while far fewer experts from Member States have been deployed to Member States of first entry than actually needed;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2177(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 5 #
2017/2169(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NotDeplores the 10 % staff and budget increases of Europol in 2016 following the decision to entrust Europol with new tasks; notes the high implementation rates for commitment (99,8 %) and payment appropriations (91,0 %);
Amendment 10 #
2017/2169(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. AcknowledgeRejects the ever-increasing demand for Europol’s services from Member States; regretwelcomes, in that context, the fact that the tight ICT resources available have resulted in a re-prioritisation of core systems development activities, project delays and have also triggered an exploration of further outsourcing possibilities with the increased risks that that implies to make them more efficient and effective;
Amendment 2 #
2017/2164(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. HighlightDeplores that the mandate of Frontex was considerably extended with a budget increase of 75 % versus 18 % for its staff; notes in this context, the Court of Auditors' conclusions that the annual accounts of the Agency fairly present its financial position on 31 December 2016 and that its transactions are legal and regular;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2164(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 16 #
2017/2164(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 19 #
2017/2164(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 1 #
2017/2163(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 2 #
2017/2163(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points outDeplores that the budget and the staff of CEPOL increased by about 22% in 2016; notes in that context that carry-overs of committed appropriations were a high for Title II (expenditure for support activities) at 140 055 euro, i.e. 30 % and mainly related to IT consulting and IT related goods and services ordered late in the year;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2163(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 9 #
2017/2163(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 3 #
2017/2155(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 6 #
2017/2155(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 1 #
2017/2150(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 2 #
2017/2150(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomDeplores the high budget execution rate of the Centre, with commitment and payment appropriation reaching respectively 99.95 % and 95.64 % and consumption of carry-over credits reaching 94%; notes howeverwelcomes that the budget of the Centre decreased by 17% in 2016 compared to 2015;
Amendment 9 #
2017/2150(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StresseCondemns that the Centre did not respect the ceiling of a framework contract, which was signed in 2012 with a maximum amount for signing specific contracts of EUR 250 000, as by the end of 2015 the total payments made under this contract amounted to EUR 382 181; calls on the Centre to improve the procedure for monitoring framework contracts;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2149(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 3 #
2017/2149(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that, as in 2015, carry-overs of committed appropriations were too high for Title III (operating expenditure) at EUR 5,2 million, i.e. 68 %; acknowledges that this year, as in the previous year, this simply reflects the multi-annual nature of the Agency’s activities and stresses that these should be reduced;
Amendment 9 #
2017/2149(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 11 #
2017/2149(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 13 #
2017/2144(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. EncouragNotes the growing contribution of the EDPS to solutions driving innovation and enhancing privacy and data protection, especially by increasing transparency, user control and accountability in big data processing; calls for effective actions maximising benefits of new technologies ensuring full respect for all the fundamental rights;
Amendment 17 #
2017/2144(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomNotes the aim of the Agency, as set out in the Strategy for its mandate, to make data protection as simple and effective as possible for all involved;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2136(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 3 #
2017/2136(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 7 #
2017/2136(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reminds that special instruments were used extensively in 2015, 2016 and 2017 to respond notably to the humanitarian situation faced by asylum- seekers in the EU and that there is therefore a risk that the amounts left until the end of the current MFF may not be sufficient to respond to unexpected events that may occur before 2020; requests the Commission to solve this structural issue in the next MFFand illegal migrants in the EU;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2136(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 14 #
2017/2136(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. StressDeplores that only one third of the projects examined had a performance measurement system with output and result indicators linked to the operational programme objectives, while the majority of the projects met their output objectives at least partially; highlights that for 42 % of the projects it was not possible to identify and measure a specific contribution to the overall programme objectives since no result indicators or targets were defined at project level.
Amendment 13 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 63 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the basis for European integration is the upholding and promotion of human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the values and principles enshrined in the European treaties and international human rights instrumentnational law of the Nation States and in the European treaties;
Amendment 74 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Article 2 TEU states that the EU is founded on respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the primacy of the law and human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities – values which are shared by all the MemberNation States and which must be upheld by the EU and each MemberNation State individually in all their policies, both internally and externally; whereas Article 17 TEU states that the Commission must ensure the application of the Treaties;
Amendment 84 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 122 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the dangers faced by refugee and migrant children include separation from their families, detention, sexual and gender-based violence, exploitation and physical and psychological damagerights of children must be respected according to national law of the Nation States;
Amendment 144 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the ongoing wave of terrorist attacks across the EU has fuelled widespread mistrust of Muslim migrants, and whereas certain political parties are employing the rhetoric of cultural isolationism and hatred of those who are differenIslamization of Europe causes widespread fear of political and radical Islam; whereas the democratic European cultural concept of separation of church and state must be maintained at all cost;
Amendment 152 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the systematic use of states of emergency and border controls does very little to deter terrorists, who have all, thus far, been long-term residents of EU Member Stateose who have been long-term residents of EU Nation States but follow radical Islam, must be observed and the right to residence inside the EU must be revoked if a threat to the national security of any Nation State exists;
Amendment 160 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 170 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 188 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 208 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Asserts that neitherthe concept of national sovereignty norand subsidiarity can justify or legitimise the systematic refusal on the part of a Member State to comply with the principles of governance which inspired the introductory articles of the European Treafor all Nation States must be respected at all times;
Amendment 220 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 228 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 242 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that in its resolution of 25 October 20161 it recommends the establishment of a European mechanism for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; points out that this mechanism would be central to the coordinated European approach to governance which is currently lacking; _________________ 1_________________ 1 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0409. Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0409.
Amendment 245 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 299 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the view, therefore, that a clear distinction should be drawn between migrants who can legitimately claim refugee status and those who cannot; calls for migrants to be identified and for their requests for entry into the EU to be processed before they comebefore attaining entry into the EU;
Amendment 309 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Strongly condemns the upsurge in the trafficking of human beings in Africa and towards Europe, the perpetrators of which – including official and governmental players, as well as NGO's – should be made to feel the full force of the law;
Amendment 320 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes the view that the existing legal channels should be available for migration, including from Africa, but not for all the men and women hoping to come to Europe; takes the view that the best way to protect the rights of persons who cannot legally enter Europe would be to bring about the rapid and robust development of Africa, which Europe could promote by stepping up its involvement on the African continof Nation States that are already available for migration are sufficient;
Amendment 336 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 356 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 378 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 444 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that particular attention should be paid to the situation of women and the rights of women in the EU, be they immigrants, victims of abuse or modern slavery, alone or accompanied by children; points out that the EU and the Member States must set an example in this regard;
Amendment 462 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 480 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 510 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 596 #
2017/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 4 #
2017/2083(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that, once implemented, the EU-Africa strategy should address all aspects of migration, international protection and forced displacement, with a focus on the principles of solidarity, partnership and shared responsibility, and mutual accountability in respect of human rights starting from the necessity of assuring, as well declared by his Holiness the Pope Joseph Ratzinger, the "right to not emigrate";
Amendment 16 #
2017/2083(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that migration and mobility within Africa and between Africa and the EU are beneficialis a huge problem to both continents, and that a holistic. A concrete approach to migration and mobility is paramount for boosting sustainable development, promoting democracy, the rule of law, good governance and human righ for both continents;
Amendment 22 #
2017/2083(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that mass migration policy enforced by the EU is never the solution to solve the demographic challenges
Amendment 70 #
2017/2083(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recognises the strategic potential of the African diaspora world-wide in terms of both financial remittances ans often a trauma for the local development of African countries, the development of a country can not be based non- a financial values, as regards capacity to build and promote peace, democracy, good governance and social stabilityremittance system and Europe should not support such a development model;
Amendment 81 #
2017/2083(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recommends further efforts to implement the Valletta Action Plan for humane and sustainable management of migration on both sides of the Mediterranean.bilateral agreements between Member States and African countries in order to identify beneficiaries of international protection and those who are not entitled to it before their departure;
Amendment 2 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the structure of the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) must correspond to the top five political priorities of the EU; calls for more coherence betweebudgetary restraint in the funding of the EU budget and its objectives, if needed by breakby lowering the 1 % glass ceiling of Member State GDP contributions and/or by adapting and reducing the EU’s objectives in line with a strict interpretation of the principal of subsidiarity as enshrined in article 5.3 of the TEU;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recommends separating the asylum, border and justice programmes into three comprehensive MFF headings corresponding to clear EU objectives in the framework of ‘Solidaecurity’, ‘Security’ and ‘Respect for the Rule of LawImproved Returns’ and ‘Reintroduction of Internal Border Controls by Member States’, which are understandable and identifiable by EU citizens;
Amendment 9 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 20 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 25 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 49 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to propose clear and strict rules for financially sanctioningstop interfering with Member States "failing to comply with ‘the rule of law’".
Amendment 1 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the 2018 budget to reflect the priorities outlined in the European Semester, specifically re-launching investment, pursuing structural reforms and conducting responsible fiscal policies;fact that central spending has never been proven to be efficient.
Amendment 3 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the Draft Budget 2018 (DB 2018); regretwelcomes the reduction in both commitment appropriations (CA) and payment appropriations (PA) in Heading III compared to 2017; welcome as increased expenditures are not related to increased advancements; questions the top-up of Heading III by an additional EUR 817.1 million above its ceiling using the flexibility instrument as that seems rigid instead of flexible;
Amendment 7 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the large budget reduction (49,7 % in PA) for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) undermines the importance and urgency of the AMIF policy objectives; challenges the Commission’s assertions in DB 2018 that justify its proposed reduction in AMIF funding; stresses that security for those who seek protection in the Union should not be adversely affected by budgetary cutsreflects the leading role of Member States and the failure of the Union in this field;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the inclusion of adequate resources in the 2018 budget to support the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs); underlines that the role of the ESAs is essential in fostering the consistent application of Union law and better coordination between national authorities, and in ensuring financial stability, better integrated financial markets and consumer protection; emphasises that the ESAs must stick strictly to the tasks assigned to them by the European Parliament and the Council and must not seek to broaden their mandate beyond those assignmentsConsiders the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) to be mainly superfluous and questions therefore the exorbitant budget;
Amendment 22 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Suggests that, as the workload of the ESAs is shifting from legislative tasks to supervisory convergence and enforcement, the budget and manpower of the ESAs should be allocated accordingly; emphasises that allshould be given back to the Member States and three agencies will have to assign resources to analyse the implications of Brexit for the future of Union financial marketsuthorities should cease to exist;
Amendment 22 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. RegretWelcomes the significant budget reduction for the Internal Security Fund (ISF) (35,6 % in PA); stresses that in light of the continued security threat in the Union, ISF funding should be sufficient to aid Member States in dealing with threats to internal security; highlights the need to sufficiently fund efforts to improve information sharing and to fight cybercrimeMember States should be in control of their own borders again to stop illegal migration;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 36 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates that the financing of the ESAs should be reviewed; calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of introducing calibrated fees for market participants partly replacing the contributions of national competent authorities;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotesIs not surprised by the proposed increases in the DB 2018 for expenditure and establishment plans for all agencies in the area of Justice and Home Affairs classified as holding “new tasks”; regrets howeve since the agencies indefinitely ask for more money; is delighted to hear that the increases proposed are lower than those requested by most agencies; stwelcomes a reasses the importance of staff increases for eu-LISA and Europol; welcomsment of the necessity of Union agencies; deplores the budget increase for the European Data Protection Supervisor in view of the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation1 . _________________ 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC ( General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 45 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 50 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points outWelcomes the suggestion that considerable efficiency gains could be achieved by merging EBA with at least one of the two other ESAs with a vision of reducing resources.
Amendment 9 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 16 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 20 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 32 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 41 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 44 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 60 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 73 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 76 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 88 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern that most mainstream programmes fail to reach out to the most disadvantaged, in particular the Roma; calls on the Court of Auditors to check the performance of EUCalls on the Court of Auditors to check the performance of EU programmes and the Commission to stop investing European taxpayers' money in failing programmes;
Amendment 89 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 102 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 110 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 114 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 120 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 123 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 130 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 134 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 138 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 153 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is deeply alarmed byTakes note of the phenomenon of unlawful removal of Roma children from their parents; calls onsuggests Member States to investigate such cases without delay;
Amendment 156 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 162 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 179 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 195 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 206 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 212 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 215 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 218 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 230 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to stop continueing the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies after 2020, to place anti-Gypsyism in its focus and to introduce anti-discrimination indicators in the relevant fields; calls furthermoreforcing Member States in devising their own the Commission to treat anti-Gypsyism as a horiznationtal issue, and to develop an inventory of practical steps for Member States to combat it, and to set up a Commissioner-level project team on Roma issues to safeguard the crestrategies for dealing with the Roma integration ofis non-discriminatory and complementary EU funds and programmes;t acceptable.
Amendment 245 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 247 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 251 #
2017/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 207 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) Links between Eurodac and EES will be rare as illegal migrants are not in EES, leaving asylum authorities unable to determine multiple illegal crossings and asylum requests in various Member States.
Amendment 210 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) The interoperability proposal is insufficient for combating illegal migration as the utility of Eurodac and the use of ESP have been neglected by the proposal, because asylum authorities won't have automatic access to VIS, SIS, or EES via ESP when receiving asylum applications.
Amendment 896 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 2
Article 63 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 8(2) and 9(7) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time3 years from [the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 198 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) The Austrian and Italian governments have demonstrated to be very effective in protecting their national borders against illegal migrants.
Amendment 981 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 2
Article 63 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 8(2) and 9(7) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time3 years from [the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 52 #
2017/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The European Parliament rejects [the Commission proposal].
Amendment 47 #
2017/0144(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission proposal;
Amendment 48 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Union has set itself the objective of offering itsthe citizens of Member States an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured, in conjunction with appbut in practice has created disunity and dissatisfaction in many Member States and enabled free movement of illegal immigration with followed Islamic terropriate measures to prevent and combat crimest attacks trying to destruct our society, democracy and destroying our national cultural identities, establishing an EU that is more divided than ever.
Amendment 51 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) This objective requiresuggests that information on convictions of third country nationals and stateless persons handed down in the Member States be taken into account outside the convicting Member State, both in the course of new criminal proceedings, as laid down in Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA19, as well as in order to prevent new offences. _________________ 19 Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings (OJ L220, 15.8.2008, p. 32) as well as in order to prevent new offences.
Amendment 52 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) This objective presupposesuggests the exchange of information extracted from criminal records between the competent authorities of the Member States. Such an exchange of information is organised and facilitated by the rules set out in Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA20 and by the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) which has been established by Council Decision 2009/316/JHA21. _________________ 20 Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA of 26 February 2009 on the organisation and content of the exchange of information extracted from the criminal record between Member States (OJ L 93, 7.4.2009, p. 23). 21 Council Decision 2009/316/JHA of 6 April 2009 on the establishment of the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) in application of Article 11 of Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA (OJ L 93, 7.4.2009, p. 33).
Amendment 53 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The ECRIS legal framework, however, does not sufficiently cover the particularities of requests concerning third country nationals. Although it is now possible to exchange information on third country nationals through ECRIS, there is no procedure or mechanism in place to do so efficientlythat could take place that has proved to be efficient and cost-effective.
Amendment 57 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 58 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Such 'blanket requests' impose an administrative burden on all Member States, including those not holding information on that third country national. In practice, this burden detercauses Member States from requesting informatto contribute to an approximate waste of EUR 78 million onf third country nationals, and leads to Member States limiting the criminal record information to information stored in their national registeraxpayers' money and therefore deters Member States from requesting information on third country nationals in order to prevent further wastefulness.
Amendment 60 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 64 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) established by Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 to identify the Member State(s) holding information on previous convictions of third country nationals (ʻECRIS-TCN system’) should not be entrusted with the task of developing and operating another new inefficient centralised ECRIS-TCN system, given its lack of experience with managing other large scale systems in the area of justice and home affairs. IMoreover, its mandate should be amended to reflect these new taskrejected as it is the exclusive right of any nation state to ensure, manage and control their own justice system and national security, including their national security systems. _________________ 22 Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (OJ L 286 1.11.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 67 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 69 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The ECRIS-TCN system shouldmay contain only the identity information of third country nationals convicted by any criminal court within the Unionand any other identity information that the Member State finds important to fill the system with by own initiative to track criminals or Islamic terrorists. Such identity information shouldmay include alphanumeric data, biometric data such as fingerprint data in accordance with Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA, and facial images in as far as they are recorded in the national criminal records databases of the Member States.
Amendment 84 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Member States shouldare free to decide whether they desire to create records or not in the ECRIS-TCN system regarding convicted third country nationals as soon as possible after their conviction was entered into the national criminal record.
Amendment 85 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Member States should alsare free to decide whether they desire to create records in the ECRIS-TCN system regarding third country nationals convicted prior to the entry into force of the Regulation in order to ensure the maximum effectiveness of the system. However, for this purpose Member States should not be obliged to collect information which was not already entered into their criminal records prior to the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 89 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Improving the circulation of information on convictions should assist Member States in their implementation of Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA, which obliges the Member States to take account of previous convictionmay assist Member States in the course of new criminal proceedings.
Amendment 92 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Member States should be obligedare free to decide if they want to make use of the ECRIS-TCN system in all cases where they receive a request for information on previous convictions of third country nationals in accordance with national law, and follow up on any hits with the Member States identified through the ECRIS system. This obligation should not be limited only to requests in connection with criminal investigations.
Amendment 94 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Notwithstanding the possibility of using the Union’s financial programmes in accordance with the applicable rules, each non-obligatory participating Member State should bear its own costs arising from the implementation, administration, use and maintenance of its criminal records database and national fingerprint databases, and from the implementation, administration, use and maintenance of the technical alterations necessary to be able to use the ECRIS- TCN system, including their connections to the national central access point and therefore should be well considered before deciding to partake in the cooperation with ECRIS-TCN.
Amendment 95 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 99 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 101 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 105 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 110 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Since tThe objective of this Regulation, namely to enable the rapid and efficient exchange of criminal record information on third country nationals, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather, by reason of the necessary synergy and interoperability, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objec by own initiative.
Amendment 112 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 114 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Since the United Kingdom notified on 29 March 2017 its intention to leave the Union, pursuant to Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties will cease to apply to the United Kingdom from the date of the entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification, unless the European Council, in agreement with the United Kingdom, decides to extend that period. As a consequence, and without prejudice to any provisions of the withdrawal agreement, this above- mentioned description of the participation of the UK in proposal only applies until the United Kingdom ceases to be a Member Stateshould therefore not be required unless the UK prefers to partake until it ceases to be part of the Union.
Amendment 116 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 117 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) establishes ano new system to identify the Member State(s) holding information on previous convictions of third country nationals (’ECRIS-TCN system’);
Amendment 118 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) lays down the conditions under which the ECRIS-TCN system shallmay be used by competent authorities in order to obtain information on such previous convictions through the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) established by Decision 2009/316/JHA.
Amendment 122 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) 'central national authority' means the national authority(ies) designated in accordance with Article 3(1) of Framework Decision 2009/315/JHAby the Member States willing to participate;
Amendment 127 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Amendment 134 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point p
Amendment 136 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 137 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 138 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Interface Software shall be integrated with the ECRIS reference implementation. The Member States shallmay voluntarily use the ECRIS reference implementation to query the ECRIS-TCN system, as well as to send subsequent requests for criminal records information.
Amendment 139 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 2 – title
Chapter 2 – title
Entry and use of data by central national authorities
Amendment 151 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The convicting Member State shallmay create the data record as soon as possible after the conviction was entered into the national criminal records register.
Amendment 154 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. The convicting Member States shallmay create data records also for convictions handed down prior to [date of entry into force of this Regulation] to the extent that such data are stored in its national criminal records or national fingerprints database.
Amendment 162 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Facial images as referred to in Article 5(2) shallmay be used only to confirm the identity of a third country national who has been identified as a result of an alphanumeric search or a search using fingerprints.
Amendment 164 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. As soon as this becomes technically possible, facial images may also be used to identify a third country national on the basis of this biometric identifier. Before this functionality is implemented in the ECRIS-TCN system, the Commission shall present a report on the availability and readiness of the required technology, on which the European Parliament shall be consulted.
Amendment 168 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. When criminal records information on a third country national is requested in a Member State for the purposes of criminal proceedings against that third country national or for any purposes other than that of criminal proceedings in accordance with its national law, the central national authority of that Member State shallis free to decide if they use the ECRIS- TCN system to identify the Member State(s) holding criminal record information on that third county national in order to obtain information on previous convictions through ECRIS.
Amendment 170 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Amendment 172 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The competentNational authorities may query the ECRIS-TCN system using the data referred to in Article 5(1).
Amendment 177 #
2017/0144(COD)
4. The competentNational authorities may also query the ECRIS-TCN system using the facial images referred to in Article 5(2), provided that such functionality has been implemented in accordance with Article 6(2).
Amendment 180 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Upon expiry of the retention period referred to in paragraph 1, the central national authority of the convicting Member State shallmay erase the individual data record without delay from the Central System, and in any event no later than one month after the expiry of that retention periodhen they find this necessary from the System.
Amendment 185 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Any subsequent amendment in the national criminal records of the information which led to the creation of a data record in accordance with Article 5 shallmay entail identical amendment of the information stored in that data record in the Central System by the convicting Member State.
Amendment 187 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. If a Member State has reason to believe that the data it has recorded in the Central System are inaccurate or that data were processed in the Central System in contravention of this Regulation, it shallmay check the data concerned and, if necessary, amend them or delete them from the Central System without delay.
Amendment 192 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. If a Member State other than the Member State which entered the data has reason to believe that data recorded in the Central System are inaccurate or that data was processed in the Central System in contravention of this Regulation, it shallmay contact the central authority of the convicting Member State without delay. The convicting Member State shall check the accuracy of the data and the lawfulness of its processing within one month.
Amendment 193 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 212 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 216 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. eu-LISA shall bMember States have the fresponsible for thedom to decide on possible development and operational management of the ECRIS- TCN system. The development shall consist of the elaboration and implementation of the technical specifications, testing and overall project coordination.
Amendment 217 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. eu-LISA shall also bMember States have the freedom to decide on whether to take responsibleility for the further development and maintenance of the ECRIS reference implementation, to outsource or to not partake at all.
Amendment 218 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 220 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 223 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Amendment 228 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Amendment 229 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7
Article 11 – paragraph 7
Amendment 231 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 8
Article 11 – paragraph 8
Amendment 234 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 11
Article 11 – paragraph 11
Amendment 235 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 12
Article 11 – paragraph 12
Amendment 236 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 15
Article 11 – paragraph 15
Amendment 266 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 268 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Amendment 272 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Amendment 292 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 3
Amendment 294 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Amendment 303 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 5
Article 30 – paragraph 5
Amendment 306 #
2017/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Amendment 7 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas any forms of violence against a human being areis a direct violation of their human dignity, including religiously and religious- culturally inspired (domestic) violence, which is the very basis of allEuropean fundamental human rights and therefore must be respected and protected and can't be infringed by the right to believe in a religion that disrespects these fundamental human rights;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas 60 % of those admitted to women's refuges in the Netherlands are immigrants, many of them Muslim, compared to 10% in 1983 (Trimbos Institute),
Amendment 21 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas gender equality in all areas is a fundamental aspect of combating gender-based violence; , noting that Muslim women have no such fundamental rights according to their Islamic beliefs, the religion that condones domestic violence, sex slavery and other travesties of justice and human rights;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas, in order to reduce the estimated number of unreported cases of violence, religiously condoned domestic violence should be combated too, whereas Member States mustay put in place and reinforce instruments of protection for women to feel safe and to be able to report genderviolence, including religion-based violence;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 80 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 88 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 95 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls onWelcomes the Member States to conduct an individual assessment, with a gender-sensitive approachregardless of sex, in relation to the provision of assistance and support measures when requesting EPOs;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores that translation and interpretation services into a language the victim understands are not guaranteed by the Member States before, during and after the issuing of an EPO;deleted
Amendment 104 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 125 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 133 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 135 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 138 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 141 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 157 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to set up campaignWelcomes Member States to encourage womits citizens to report any forms of violence on the basis of gender, thereby improving the accuracy of data on gender-basedall violence;
Amendment 163 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 178 #
2016/2329(INI)
Amendment 179 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 181 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 182 #
2016/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 39 #
2016/2328(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas there is still a systematic underreporting of incidences or perpetrators of domestic violence in the EU, particularly in cases involving minorities, LGBT persons, antisemitic offences and gender-basand religiously, in particular anti-Semitic and anti-Christian motivated violence in the EU;
Amendment 59 #
2016/2328(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I – indent 4
Recital I – indent 4
- ensuring equal accessibility for all victims to victim support services, particularly in the cases of LGBT victims and victims of hate crimes and honour- related crimes;
Amendment 75 #
2016/2328(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
I a. whereas the common European approach on supporting and protecting victims was irreparably damaged by the German government and its dishonourable treatment of the victims of the Breitscheidplatz terror-act;
Amendment 201 #
2016/2328(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on all Member States to tackle impunity at all times as not doing so could have a severe impact the psychological recovery process of the victim, particularly if national legal authorities express understanding towards foreign cultures by mitigating the penalty;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2160(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with satisfactionIs surprised to note that according to the European Court of Auditors (ECA) the overall level of error in Heading 5 (Administration), including the budget of the European External Action Service (EEAS), – whose spending has to be containues to be relatively low (0,6% in 2015)ed – stayed at 0.6 % in 2015, an important fact bearing in mind the sums concerned;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2160(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the ECA found certainnoted weaknesses in recruitment procedures of local agents in delegations and in procurement procedures organised by delegations and invitesdemands that the EEAS to improve the quality of its procedures; points out the challenges of operations within a decentralised network of 139 delegations, with limited human resources and in diverse environments, and stresses the necessity to reduce the administrative burden faced by individual delegations; welcomes the pilot project on the regionalisation of the administrative support to Union delegations in Europe and calls for the centralisation of administrative tasks at Headquarters as far as possible;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2160(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls the need to ensure full respect of the staffing formula on the ratio between EEAS staff drawn from Member States and from Union institutions as set out by the Council Decision on the organisation and functioning of the EEAS; welcomes the commitment of the Vice-President/High Representative made to the Parliament to address the existing overrepresentation of national diplomats in the positions of heads of delegations, and to present in the course of 2017 a review of the EEAS human resources policy, looking at issues such as gender balance and mobility of staff between institutionscall for EEAS staff to be drawn from Member States; recalls that Member States are sovereign and that by virtue of such sovereignty 'security and diplomacy' form part of the sovereign powers of each Member State;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2160(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes ECA Special Report 07/2016 on the management of buildings by the EEAS; while recognising the challenges of building management in often complex environments; calls ondemands that the EEAS to address the individual cases of unoccupied or unnecessarily large premises that have been identified by the ECA as a matter of priority; calls for a commitment by the High Representative in this respect.
Amendment 1 #
2016/2151(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with regret that the level of error in Heading 4 for the 2015 financial year, as estimated by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) in its annual report, has not decreased compared to 2014 and amounts to 2,8%; points out, nevertheless, that this is below the level of error identified in other headings, in spite of the fact that Union external aid activities frequently take place in crisis-struck regions and politically difficult environmentsconsiders this to be unacceptable;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2151(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports all recommendations formulated by the ECA based on its findings; welcomnotes the fact that the Commission has fully, which is quick to criticise others, has not seen fit to implemented 5 out all of the 7 recommendations the ECA made in the 2012 and 2013 reports and urges the Commission to take the steps to conclude implementation of the remaining onesneeded to become a good example;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2151(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concernIs outraged to note the persisting deficiencies, year after year, in the quality of expenditure verifications carried out by auditors contracted by beneficiaries, which in some cases lead to the Commission's acceptance ofing ineligible costs, and thus acting outside the law;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2151(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned byObjects strongly to the fact revealed by the ECA's audit that DG NEAR's evaluation of the amount of payments at risk is not sufficiently accurate and expects a swiftaccurate at all and demands an immediate revision of DG NEAR's methodology;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2151(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. While welcoming the progress achieved, nNotes that 6 out of 10 civilian missions under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) have not yet been recognised by the Commission as compliant with Article 60 of the Financial Regulation; urges the Commission to step up work in order to, which means that its missions are not being conducted within a legal framework; demands that the Commission accredit all civilian CSDP missions, in line with the ECA's recommendation, allowing them to be entrusted with budget implementation tasks under indirect management;
Amendment 118 #
Amendment 189 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The European Parliament rejects [the Commission proposal].
Amendment 97 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
Amendment 111 #
Amendment 21 #
2015/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the current rise of ‘Euroscepticism’ – which culminated recently in the vote in favour of Brexit – reinforces the need to encourage civic participation and to launch an in-depth debate on European values, while highlighting the opportunities brought about by belonging todismantle the EU;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Rejects the proposal below. Considers it impossible for the European Commission to cultivate understanding of EU realism by continuing the ‘Europe for Citizens’ Programme, as the Commission has never displayed any understanding of EU realism and describes any criticism as Euroscepticism;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers it incomprehensible and indicative of a serious lack of expertise that the rapporteur has concluded that the low success rate of ‘Europe for Citizens’ projects is due to the lack of financing, without adducing any facts in support of this;
Amendment 72 #
2015/2329(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Utterly rejects the fact that the rapporteur supports the squandering of taxpayers’ money on such programmes as ‘Democratic Engagement and Civic Participation’, with ‘Understanding and Debating Euroscepticism’ as its main pillar;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees thereforDoes not agree with the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument for an amount of EUR 66,1 million in commitment appropriations;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 8 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 9 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 10 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Instructs its President to forward this resolution, including its annex, to the Council and the Commission.
Amendment 11 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that the budgetary increases violate the requirement for a unanimous vote in the Council on changes to the Multiannual Financial Framework and that the asylum crisis will not be resolved by such budgetary increases.
Amendment 23 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas prison conditions and prison management are responsibilities of the Member States but the Union also has a necessary role to play in protecting the fundamental rights of prisoners and in creating the European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice;.
Amendment 51 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 62 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas, according to Council of Europe figures for 2014, on average 20% disproportional amount of prisoners in European prisonsthe EU are foreigners and; whereas they ar EU's open border policy attracts a substantive amosunt often remanded in custody because of the greater risk of absconding associated with them criminals from third countries; whereas Schengen has greatly benefited transnational activities of organized crime;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas radicaliszation of Muslims is occurring in many prisons in the European Union;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplores the fact that overcrowding of prisons, which is in many cases related to the disproportionally high number of third country nationals present in the EU and which is very common in Europe’s prisons, particularly in Greece, France, Belgium, Italy, Slovenia and Romania, in many cases has a serious impact on the safety of prison staff and prisoners, but also with regard to the activities made available, medical care and monitoring of prisoners;
Amendment 136 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 162 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 193 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 202 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Reaffirms the importance of ensuring that children in prison are treated in a manner that takes into account their best interests, including being kept separate from adults and having the right to maintain contact with their families; recalls that Directive (EU) 2016/800 on procedural safeguards for children includes a preference for alternative measureStresses that the controlling of external and internal borders is imperative to prevent criminals entering nation states and is an effective means to prevent overcrowding of some Member States' prisons;
Amendment 239 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on Member States to combat the growing phenomenon of radicalisation of Muslims in prison;
Amendment 253 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 268 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 272 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 273 #
2015/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 9 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports, following preliminary verification of the facts, Lithuania's introduction of the euro on 1 January 2015In the interest of Lithuania, asks for a halt to the process of eurozone enlargement until economic growth is restored and unemployment levels are reduced to an acceptable level, as it was promised ahead of the introduction of the single currency;
Amendment 283 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 321 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 480 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 648 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Points equally to a possible conflict of interest between the current role of the ECB in the Troika as ‘technical advisor’ and its position as creditor of the four Member States as well as its mandate under the Treaty;
Amendment 656 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that the ECB’s role is not sufficiently defined, as it is stated in the ESM Treaty that the Commission should work ‘in liaison with the ECB’, thus reducing the ECB’s role to that of a provider of expertise; further notes that the ECB mandate is limited by the TFEU to monetary policy and that the involvement of the ECB in any matter related to budgetary, fiscal and structural policies is therefore on uncertain legal groundillegal;
Amendment 720 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
Amendment 770 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 786 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 844 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Is concerned, in particular, to improve the accountability of the Commission when it acts in its capacity as a member of the Troika; requests that the Commission representative(s) in the Troika should be heard in the European Parliament before taking up their duties and should be subject to regular reporting to the European Parliamenand regularly report to the national parliaments of the Member States which contributed financial support;
Amendment 858 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 874 #
2013/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 121 #
2013/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a . Calls for the introduction of a red card procedure in order to allow national parliaments to veto European Commission proposals which do not comply with the principle of subsidiarity; (With regard to Article 352 TFEU, which makes it possible to adopt EU measures even if the Treaties have not provided the necessary powers, and in order to counterbalance the national interest and EU legislation, each and every Commission proposal should undergo a strict subsidiarity test whether certain policy objectives could be better achieved and enforced at national or local level.)
Amendment 122 #
2013/2166(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament, by 1 July 2014, legislative proposals for the revision and, where appropriate, the merger,abrogation of Regulations (EU) No 1092/2010, (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010, (EU) No 1095/2010 and (EU) No 1096/2010, following the detailed recommendations made in the Annex hereto, based on the experience gained since the ESAs were established and on an in-depth analysis ofsince the European System of Financial Supervision has proven ineffective in tackling challenges that could be better addressed at the national level by the lregal basis and alternatives available to Article 114 TFEU, including recent case-lawulatory and supervisory authorities of the Member States;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that economic recovery in the EU is under way; believes, however, thPoints out that - according to Article 5, paragraph 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Member States did agree to coordinate the recovery is still fragile and needs to be sustained ir economic policies with a view to ensure the proper functioning order to deliver more growth and jobs in the medium termf the internal market, but that they did not agree to transfer their national sovereignty in social policy;
Amendment 29 #
2013/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. BelievStresses that the EU economy as a whole needs to further boost its competitiveness in the global economy, particularly by increasing competiscope of the European Semester for economic policy coordination goes far beyond what is allowed by Article 5, paragraph 1, as well as Article 4 of the Treaty on the Function ing of the product and services markets to enhance productivity and to lower prices, and by keeping labour costs in line with productivityEuropean Union, which states that shared competences in social policy are limited to the aspects defined in the Treaty itself, that is to say free movement of workers and employment;
Amendment 23 #
2013/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 38 #
2013/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 82 #
2013/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that, at the next revision of the Treaties, the Commission’s power to withdraw legislative proposals should be limited to those cases where, after the adoption of Parliament’s position at first reading, Parliament agrees that the proposal is no longer justified due to altered circumstances; (Justification: This proposal is limiting the Commission, the only institution having legislative initiative, in her power to withdraw her proposal which is contradictory to the Treaties.)used more frequently if the proposal is no longer justified due to altered circumstances; Or. en
Amendment 107 #
2013/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that certain provisions of the current Framework Agreement could be improved; suggests that the outgoing Parliament adopts the general line and negotiation priorities for the further negotiation of the Framework Agreement so that such proposals can be considered by the incoming Parliament;
Amendment 4 #
2013/0343(CNS)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ApproveRejects the Commission proposal as amendedsince it violates the principle of proportionality established by Article 5 (4) of the Treaty on the European Union;
Amendment 5 #
2013/0343(CNS)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance withwithdraw her proposal, since harmonisation of VAT returns goes beyond the scope of Article 293(2)113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;.
Amendment 130 #
2013/0314(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;Rejects the Commission proposal and calls on the Commission to withdraw it; points out that the way financial benchmarks are set and governed has never been detrimental to the functioning of the internal market, therefore Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union cannot be used as an appropriate legal basis.
Amendment 22 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The benefits arising from a single market for electronic communications should extend to the wider digital ecosystem that includes Union equipment manufacturers, content and application providers and the wider economy, covering sectors such as banking, automotive, logistics, retail, energy and transport, which rely on connectivity to enhance their productivity through, for example, ubiquitous cloud applications, connected objects and possibilities for integrated service provision for different parts of the company. Public administrations and the health sector should also benefit from a wider availability of e-government and e- health services. The offer of cultural content and services, and cultural diversity in general, may be also enhanced in a single market for electronic communications. The provision of connectivity through electronic communications networks and services is of such importance to the wider economy and society that unjustified sector-specific burdens, whether regulatory or otherwise, should be avoided.
Amendment 29 #
2013/0265(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission proposal since it violates Article 5 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 30 #
2013/0265(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matterwithdraw its proposal and to Pcarliament again ry out a sound impact assessment that may justify it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another textwith regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 356 #
2013/0264(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 53 a (new)
Article 53 a (new)
Article 53 a Prohibition of IBAN readability For security reasons, no IBAN readability shall be introduced by this Directive.
Amendment 187 #
Amendment 188 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 215 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
Amendment 218 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 224 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. Eurojust shall exercise its tasks at the request of the competent authorities of the Member States or on its own initiative.
Amendment 271 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Amendment 286 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 7
Article 16 – paragraph 7
Amendment 288 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 8
Article 16 – paragraph 8
Amendment 317 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 7
Article 24 – paragraph 7
Amendment 318 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 8
Article 24 – paragraph 8
Amendment 395 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2
Article 42 – paragraph 2
Amendment 396 #
2013/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Amendment 126 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital – A
Recital – A
1. whereas crime – in particular organised crime – is increasingly taking on a cross- border dimension and the only effective response can come from the EU, giving added value to the joint efforts of alltherefore come from internal border control by the Member States;
Amendment 127 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers the Commission proposal to be a further step towards the establishment of a European criminal justice area;deleted
Amendment 128 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Council to involve the European Parliament in its legislative work through a constant flow of information and ongoing consultation of Parliament to achieve an outcome that is essentially welcomed by both parties;deleted
Amendment 129 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Instructs its President to call for continued scrutiny of the proposal with the CounciRejects the proposal;
Amendment 83 #
2013/0253(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission's proposal;
Amendment 85 #
2013/0253(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union is not a proper legal basis for the adoption of the proposal;
Amendment 86 #
2013/0253(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that the proposal infringes upon national budgetary sovereignty, therefore it would require a Treaty change in order for it to be legally submitted by the European Commission to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 5 #
2013/0210(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Article 25(1), first sentence, of the Visa Code, visas issued to citizens of Kosovo shall be subject to the unilateral recognition regime,
Amendment 23 #
2013/0045(CNS)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;The European Parliament recalls that according to Article 326, par. 1, TFEU any enhanced cooperation shall comply with the Treaties and Union law. Since the proposal violates Article 327 TFEU, according to which the competences and rights of those Member States which do not participate in the enhanced cooperation shall be respected by the enhanced cooperation, the European Parliament invites the European Commission to withdraw its proposal and to conduct a new impact assessment in order to take into adequate account the effective legal and economic impact of the financial transaction tax.
Amendment 4 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that EUnational citizenship is the fundamentalprimary status and EU citizenship the secondary status of Member States’ nationals; underlines the close link between the rights inherent to EU citizenship and those enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights applicable to all persons on EU territory; calls on the EU institutions and Member States to align the rights of third-country nationals permanently residing in EU with the rights of EU citizens;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 27 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
2. Is concerned about the situation of stateless persons permanently resident in Member States; calls in this regard on the Member States to systematically bring about just solutions based on the recommendations of international organisations; believes that such persons should have the right to vote in local electionillegal status of some persons in Member States; stresses that, on account of that illegal status, the persons concerned should no longer be able to derive any rights from the legal construction of EU citizenship; observes that Member States must have the sovereign power of decision on residence rights;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned about the poor implementation of current directives, especially the FDirective on the free Mmovement Directive, which causes many problems related to free movement of persons, which has made it possible for tens of thousands other rights of EU citizens, f illegal North African, in mandy calls on all parties to correctly and fully transpose and implement the acquises criminal, fortune-seekers to enter the EU and disperse among the EU Member States;
Amendment 48 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 65 #
2011/2182(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes with regret that the Commission has not been very active in addressing infringements related to citizens’ rights; calls on the Commission to behave more proactivelyStresses that the Member States have committed themselves to Article 2 of the TEU.
Amendment 113 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Crime is as an offence against society as well as a violation of the individual rights of victims as well as an offence against society. As such, victims should be recognised and treated in a respectful, sensitive and professional manner in all contacts with any public authority, victim support service or restorative justice service taking into account their personal situation and immediate needs, age, gender, disability and level of maturity and fully respecting their physical, mental and moral integrity. They should be protected from secondary and repeat victimisation and intimidation, should receive appropriate support to facilitate their recovery and should be provided with sufficient access to justice.
Amendment 136 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Information and advice provided by public authorities, victim support services and restorative justice services should as far as possible be given through a range of media in a manner which can be understood by the victim. It should also be ensured that the victim can be understood during proceedings. In this respect, the victim’s knowledge of the language used to provide information, their age, maturity, intellectual and emotional capacities, literacy levels and any mental or physical impairment such as those related to sight or hearing, shouldmay be taken into account. Equally, limitations on a victim’s ability to communicate information shouldmay be taken into account during criminal proceedings.
Amendment 141 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Justice cannot be effectively achieved unless the victim can properly explain the circumstances of the crime they have suffered and provide their evidence in a manner understandable to the competent authorities. It is equally important to ensure the respectful treatment of the victim and to ensure they are able to access their rights. Free of charge interpretation should therefore always be available during questioning of the victim and for their participation in court hearings. For other aspects of criminal proceedings, the need of interpretation and translation can vary depending on specific issues, the status of the victim and their involvement in proceedings and any specific rights they have. As such interpretation and translation for these other cases need only be provided to the extent necessary for victims to exercise their rightsDoes not affect the English version.
Amendment 165 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Some victims are particularly vulnerable during criminal proceedings to secondary and repeat victimisation and to intimidation by the offender or his associates. Such vulnerability can broadly be identified from the personal characteristics of the victim and the type or nature of the crime. On this basis some victims such as children, persons with disabilities, victims of sexual violence and victims of human trafficking are in most cases vulnerable to further victimisation and in need of special protection measures. Only in exceptional circumstances, such as balancing the fundamental rights of the accused or suspected person, or where the victim so wishes, should access to such protection measures be limited. In the case of victims of human trafficking and victims of child sexual abuse, sexual exploitation and child pornography, where specific and more detailed provisions are already included in separate instruments adopted or in course of negotiation this Directive does not deal with those same matters.
Amendment 181 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Beyond these categories, but again based on personal characteristics and the crime, any person could be vulnerable. Only through individual assessments, carried out at the earliest opportunity by those in a position to make recommendations on protection measures, can such vulnerabilities be effectively identified. The assessment should in particularmay take into account age, gender and gender identity, ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, state of health, disability, communication difficulties, relationship to or dependence on the suspected or accused person, previous experience of crime, the type or nature of the crime such as organised crime, terrorism, or bias crimes and whether the victim is a foreign victim.
Amendment 192 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The risk of further victimisation either by the offender or as a result of participation in criminal proceedings should be limited by carrying out proceedings in a co-ordinated manner which treats victims with respect and enables them to establish trust in authorities. Interaction with authorities should be as easy as possible whilst limiting the number of unnecessary interactions the victim has with them through for example video recording of interviews and allowing its use in court proceedings. As wide a range of measures as possible should be made available to practitioners to prevent distress to the victim during court proceedings in particular as a result of visual contact with the offender, his family, associates or members of the public. To that end, Member States are encouraged to introduce, where appropriate, feasible and practical measures enabling court facilities to include separate waiting areas for victims. Protecting the privacy of the victim can be an important means of preventing further victimisation and can be achieved through a range of measures including non-disclosure or limitations on the disclosure of information concerning the identity and whereabouts of the victim. Such protection is particularlyalso important for child victims, including non- disclosure of the name of the child.
Amendment 195 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 201 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Any officials in criminal proceedings likely to come into contact with victims shouldmay be trained to identify and meet the needs of victims both through initial and ongoing training and to a level appropriate to their contact with victims. This shouldmay include specialist training as appropriate.
Amendment 206 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Member States shouldmay encourage and work closely with civil society organisations, including recognised and active non-governmental organisations working with victims of crime, in particular in policy-making initiatives, information and awareness-raising campaigns, research and education programmes and in training, as well as in monitoring and evaluating the impact of measures to support and protect victims of crime.
Amendment 210 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Since the aim of establishing common minimum standards cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States acting unilaterally, either at national, regional or local level, and could instead, due to the scale and potential effects be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as referred to in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objectiveMember States themselves can sufficiently establish minimum standards, the proposal for a directive breaches the principle of subsidiarity as referred to in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union.
Amendment 211 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Personal data processed when implementing this Directive should be protected in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and in accordance with the principles laid down in the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981 for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, which all Member States have ratifiedif this Directive is implemented should be protected in accordance with domestic legislation.
Amendment 296 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that victims who do not understand or speak the language of the criminal proceedings concerned are provided if they so wish with interpretation, free of charge, during any interviews or questioning of the victim during criminal proceedings before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, and interpretation for their participation in court hearings and any necessary interim hearings.
Amendment 303 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. In order to ensure that victims can exercise their rights in criminal proceedings, Member States shallmay ensure that in all other cases and at the request of the victim, interpretation is available, free of charge, in accordance with the victims' needs and their role in those proceedings.
Amendment 307 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shallmay ensure that a victim who does not understand or speak the language of the criminal proceedings concerned shall receive translations if they so wish, free of charge, of the following information, to the extent that such information is made available to the victim:
Amendment 313 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shallmay ensure that a procedure or mechanism is in place to ascertain whether the victim understands and speaks the language of the criminal proceedings and whether they need translation and the assistance of an interpreter.
Amendment 319 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that victims and their family members, in accordance with their needs, have access to free of charge, confidential victim support services.
Amendment 322 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. As a minimum, such services shallSuch services may, inter alia, provide:
Amendment 332 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shallmay promote the setting up or development of specialist support services, in addition to general victim support services.
Amendment 352 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall establish standards to safeguard the victim from intimidation or further victimisation, to be applied when providing mediation or other restorative justice services. Such standards should as a minimummay include the following:
Amendment 380 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Article 13
Member States shallmay, in accordance with procedures in national law, afford victims who participate in criminal proceedings the possibility of reimbursement of expenses incurred as a result of their participation in criminal proceedings, possibly including as a result of their attendance at the trial.
Amendment 383 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14
Article 14
Member States shallmay ensure that recoverable property belonging to victims which is seized in the course of criminal proceedings is returned to them without delay, unless required for the purpose of criminal proceedings.
Amendment 393 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay ensure that their competent authorities can take appropriate measures to minimise the difficulties faced where the victim is a resident of a Member State other than that where the offence occurs, particularly with regard to the organisation of the proceedings. For this purpose, the authorities of the Member State where the crime took place shallmay, in particular, be in a position:
Amendment 394 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 395 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
to have recourse to the extent possible to the provisions on video conferencing and telephone conference calls laid down in the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union of 29 May 2000 for the purpose of hearing victims resident abroad.
Amendment 396 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay ensure that victims of criminal offences in Member States other than the one where they reside may make a complaint to the competent authorities of the Member State of residence if they are unable to do so in the Member State where the offence is committed or, in the event of a serious offence determined by national law, if they do not wish to do so.
Amendment 403 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Amendment 407 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular may include: procedures for the physical protection of victims and their family members, measures to ensure that contact between offenders and victims may be avoided within premises where criminal proceedings are conducted, and measures to ensure that the risk of psychological or emotional harm to victims during questioning or when testifying is minimised and their safety and dignity are secured.
Amendment 438 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shallmay ensure that all other victims receive a timely and individual assessment, in accordance with national procedures, to determine whether they are vulnerable, due to their personal characteristics or the circumstances or the type or nature of the crime, to secondary and repeat victimisation or intimidation.
Amendment 447 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 4
Article 18 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shallmay ensure that all vulnerable victims as identified in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, receive a timely and individual assessment, in accordance with national procedures, to determine which special measures as provided in Articles 21 and 22 they should benefit from. Such an assessment shallmay take into account the wishes of the vulnerable victim including where they do not wish to benefit from special measures.
Amendment 462 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19
Article 19
Member States shall progressivelmay establish the necessary conditions to enable avoidance of contact between victims and accused or suspected persons in any venue where victims may have personal contact with public authorities due to their being a victim and in particular venues where criminal proceedings are conducted.
Amendment 464 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – introductory part
Article 20 – introductory part
Member States shallmay ensure that:
Amendment 471 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that vulnerable victims referred to in Article 18 benefit from the measures provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3 in accordance with an individual assessment as provided for in Article 18(4) and with rules of judicial discretion.
Amendment 472 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Vulnerable victims shallmay be offered the following measures during criminal investigations:
Amendment 481 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Vulnerable victims shallmay be offered the following measures during court proceedings:
Amendment 485 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 - introductory part
Article 22 - introductory part
In addition to the measures provided for in Article 21, Member States shallmay ensure that where the victim is a child:
Amendment 493 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that judicial authorities may adopt during the court proceedings, appropriate measures to protect the privacy and photographic images of victims and their family members.
Amendment 497 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay encourage the media to pursue self-regulatory measures in order to protect victims' privacy, personal integrity and personal data.
Amendment 510 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that police, prosecutors and court staff receive both general and specialist training to a level appropriate to their contact with victims to sensitise them to the needs of victims and to deal with them in an impartial, respectful and professional manner.
Amendment 516 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay ensure that members of the judiciary have access to both general and specialist training to sensitise them to the needs of victims and to deal with them in an impartial, respectful and professional manner.
Amendment 521 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shallmay take measures to ensure that those providing victim support and restorative justice services receive adequate training to a level appropriate to their contact with victims and observe professional standards to ensure such services are provided in an impartial, respectful and professional manner.
Amendment 525 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
4. In accordance with the duties involved, and the nature and level of contact the practitioner has with victims, training shall as a minimummay include matters relating to the impact that crime has on victims, the risks of intimidation, repeat and secondary victimisation and how these can be avoided and the availability and relevance of support to victims.
Amendment 528 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay co-operate to facilitate more effective protection of victims' rights and interests in criminal proceedings, whether in the form of networks, directly linked to the judicial system or by means of links between organisations which provide support to victims, including through the support of European networks dealing with victims' matters.
Amendment 530 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay ensure that those authorities working with or providing support to victims work together to ensure a co-ordinated response to victims and to minimise the negative impact of the crime, the risks of secondary and repeat victimisation and the burden on the victim due to interactions between the victim and criminal justice agencies.
Amendment 533 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26
Article 26
Amendment 534 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27
Article 27
Amendment 1 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular to Chapter 4 thereof on jhe third part, Title V, Chapter 4, entitled ‘Judicial cooperation in criminal matters’,
Amendment 2 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to the subsidiarity principle set out in Article 5 of the TFEU, which an ‘EU approach to criminal law’ violates;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) the Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal borders, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to, inter alia, the prevention and combating of crime; notes, however, that the free movement of persons is currently causing a cross-border shift in criminal activity, in particular from Central and Eastern European to Western European Member States;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 10 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereasregrets that the introduction of EU criminal law provisions is not confined to the area of freedom, security and justice but can relate to many different policies;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 14 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that proposals for EU substantive criminal law provisions must fully respect the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; emphasises that these principles are frequently violated;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 21 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – indent 1
Paragraph 3 – indent 1
– the guilt principle of individual guilt (nulla poena sine culpa), thus prescribing penalties only for acts which have been committed intentionally, or in exceptional cases, for acts involving serious negligence,
Amendment 22 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – indent 2
Paragraph 3 – indent 2
– the principle of legal certainty principle (lex certa): the description of the elements of a criminal offence must be worded precisely to the effect that an individual shall be able to predict actions that will make him/hercan be informed in respect of which actions he or she can be held criminally liable,
Amendment 27 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 30 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 33 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 37 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 38 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 40 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomNotes the existence of a Council Working Party on Substantive Criminal Law and asks the Council to provide Parliament with specific information on how it relates to other Council working groups dealing with criminal law provisions in policy areas other than justice and home affairs;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 44 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 47 #
2010/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12