Activities of Daniel FREUND related to 2024/2008(ACI)
Plenary speeches (3)
Interinstitutional Body for Ethical Standards (debate)
Interinstitutional Body for Ethical Standards (debate)
Interinstitutional Body for Ethical Standards (A9-0181/2024 - Daniel Freund) (vote)
Reports (1)
REPORT on the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of the Regions, establishing an Interinstitutional Body for Ethical Standards for Members of Institutions and advisory bodies mentioned in Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union
Amendments (10)
Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 13 July 2023 on recommendations for reform ofEuropean Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption1a, _____________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2023)0292.
Amendment 9 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Commission presented its proposal for the establishment of an interinstitutional ethics body on 8 June 2023, putting forward a standard-setting body; whereas that Commission proposal fell far short of the ambition put forward in Parliament’s resolutions, mainly lacking in capacity to examine individual cases and potential breaches of ethical rules as well as to recommend sanctions;
Amendment 14 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Agreement allowing forenabling the development of strong common ethical standards and the exchange of best practices, and allowing for individual cases to be examined by the independent experts at the request of an institution or an advisory body that is a party to the Agreement regarding any declaration of their Members;
Amendment 16 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the fact that the final decision-making power on implementation remains with the relevant authorities of the institutions or bodies; notes that any consultation of the independent experts on an individual case begins with a request as regards its own members of a party to the Agreement as regards its own membin accordance with its internal rules; underlines that the declarations of financial interests of the Commissioners- designate, as high level cases transcending the interests of the institution concerned, should as a rule be subject to examination by the independent experts;
Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reiterates, however, that Parliament remains fully committed to an independent ethics body, capable of carrying out investigations on its own initiative and issuing recommendations for sanctions to the responsible authorities of the participating institutions or bodies, composed of independent experts as full members, that covers Members of EU institutions and bodies before, during and after their term of office or service as well as staff, as envisaged in Parliament’s resolution of 16 September 2021 on strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body1a and reiterated in its resolutions of 16 February 2023 on the establishment of an independent EU ethics body1b and 12 July 2023 on the establishment of the EU ethics body1c; _____________ 1a OJ C 117, 11.3.2022, p. 159._ 1b Texts adopted, P9_(2023)0055. 1c Texts adopted, P9_TA(2023)0281.
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets the unwillingness of the Council not to allow an extension ofto extend the scope of the Agreement to at least the representatives at ministerial level of the Member State holding the Presidency of the Council, by arguing that there is no legal basis in the Treaties to adopt common minimum standards applying to the representatives of Member States; commits to use the first review of the Agreement to address this legal gap and calls, in the meantime, on the upcoming Council Presidencies to voluntarily apply its provisions; is of the opinion that Members of the Council, like Members of the European Parliament, could be bound by the rules set by the Council pursuant to its power of self- organisation, which would prevail in the event of a conflict with national rules; underlines, in this context, that representatives of the Member States gathered in the Council act in their capacity as Members of the Council when adopting EU legal acts; commits to seeking a legal clarification as to whether the Council could bind its Members by common minimum standards;
Amendment 23 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Takes the view that the resources made available must enable the proper functioning of both the actual body composed of one representative of each party to the Agreement and the five independent experts assisting the institutional representatives and joining the body as observers, as well as any necessary support therefor; regrets that according to Article 17 of the Agreement, any cost resulting from a consultation of the independent experts is to be covered by the requesting party, as this might result in a limitation of the number of such consultations;
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes the body should rely on the existing powers of institutions to ask their members for information or on the agreement of national authorities to share information; believes that the independent experts should be able to exchange information with national authorities where necessary for the performance of their tasks, while treating such information with the same confidentiality as the originating authority did; stresses in this regard that the independent experts should have access to the administrative documents of participating parties, especially the party consulting them on a case, in order to allow them to carry out well-reasoned and well-documented assessments;
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls for the interinstitutional ethics body to lead by example on transparency by publishing all recommendations, annual reports, decisions and records of spending in a machine-readable open data format available to all citizens, and in accordance with the applicable data protection rules, including, inter alia, the written opinion of the independent experts on the institutions’ self-assessments in accordance with Article 10 and the anonymised and aggregated annual account of every year which summarises in aggregated and anonymised form the consultations and questions submitted by the parties and actions to follow them up in accordance with Article 7(4); underscores the importance of protecting the privacy of the individuals concerned to an appropriate extent and the presumption of innocence; calls on the parties to the Agreement to develop common guidance for the consultation of the independent experts and the publication of their recommendations;
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Believes that, in order to be fully effective, the interinstitutional ethics body would need to combine the functions of existing organs responsible for ethics and that therefore, for cases which require specific consideration or for the purpose of developing or updating an ethical standard each participating party should consult the independent experts;