Activities of Heinz K. BECKER related to 2012/2024(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the Law of Administrative Procedure of the European Union
Amendments (9)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that, after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the right to good administration is a fundamental right of citizens and ‘soft law’ administrative procedures, which can be modified unilaterally by the institution concerned, cannot sufficiently protect the individual’s right to good administration; however, they will retain their importance for an overall culture of good administration as an addition to ‘hard law’ provisions;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to guarantee the right to good administration by an open, efficient and independent European administration, with the right to good administration, as defined by Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and subject to the general restrictions of Article 51, being understood as everyone’s right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the CommissionStresses the urgent need to introduce an appropriatmore extensive administrative provisregulation s for the procedure applicable under current Regulation No 1049/2001 on public access to documents held by the EU institutions adopted on the basis of Article 15 TFEU; similarly,, with particular regard to codifying the relevant case law of the European Court of Justice and extending the scope of the Regulation to the whole of the EU’s administration; similarly, more effective provisions ought to exist concerning the procedure applicable to the processing of personal data – particularly regarding implementation of the citizens’ rights guaranteed therein – under current Regulation No 45/2001, laying down rules relating to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data adopted on the basis of Article 16 TFEU; acknowledges, however, that the regulations mentioned led to the codification of two areas of general EU administrative law which has already enabled relatively clear administrative procedures to be introduced, and that the further development of these should build on what has been achieved.
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that generally applicable rules are necessary in order to guarantee the procedural rights – such as the right to be informed and the right to be heard – of natural or legal persons when a decision is taken on a matter in which they can be considered a party and which implies legal effects on the person or entity concerned, and regarding the right to access one’s own files;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to introduce a specific administrative provision for the infringement procedure based on Article 258 TFUE, in order to prevent any possibility of abuse of power and arbitrary decisions; asks forconsiders that such a provision should regulate the whole relationship between the Commission and a citizen or an undertaking who/which submits a complaint which may lead to an infringement procedure, thereby strengthening primarily the position of the individual complainant; regards it as particularly advisable that the Committee on Petitions to be provided with clear information on the stages reached in infringement procedures covered by an open petition in order to ensure parliamentary scrutiny of the fundamental right to petition the European Parliament;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that EU citizens should expect a high level of transparency, efficiency and swift execution from the Commission, regardless of whether they are making a formal complaint or exercising their right of petition under the Treaty.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to engage in sufficient consultation with all relevant actors when drawing up a regulation on the introduction of general EU administrative procedures and in particular to make use of the special knowledge and expertise of the European Ombudsman, since it is to him that public complaints about abuses in the bodies and institutions of the EU are made;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Considers that the Commission should also investigate the use of a further extension of IT-based services under the regulation; recalls in this regard systems such as EU Pilot, which are already successfully proving that not only is the potential of IT-supported administrative procedures not limited to new online information systems but can also encompass interactive ‘settlement systems’ between administrative authorities and also between the authorities and citizens;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Calls on the Commission when drawing up a general administrative act to increase public awareness of the right of EU citizens to good administration, including through its relevant information services and networks (such as Europe Direct); stresses that such information initiatives should also take into account the appeal procedures in the event of a presumed violation of the right to good administration and, in particular, the specific limits of these procedures, as laid down, for example, in Article 228 TFEU on the European Ombudsman; is convinced that constructive public pressure will result from increased knowledge and awareness of citizens concerning this right and the associated complaints procedures, and this may be conducive to the formation of an open, efficient and independent administration in everyday affairs.