Activities of Balázs HIDVÉGHI related to 2017/0360R(NLE)
Plenary speeches (1)
Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law - LGBTI-free zones in Poland within the scope of the Rete Lenford case (debate)
Amendments (27)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
- having regard to the Conclusions of the Council of the European Union and the Member States meeting within the Council on ensuring respect for the rule of law of 16 December 2014;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)
Citation 9 b (new)
- having regard to the Council Legal Service’s legal opinion of 27 May 2014 on the compatibility of the Commission’s Communication on a new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law with the Treaties;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and as reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and embedded in international human rights treaties;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the scope of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is not limited to the obligations under the Treaties, as indicated in the Commission Communication of 15 October 2003, and whereas the Union can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competencesthe competences of the Union, and Union monitoring mechanisms are only possible to this extent; whereas, additionally, the Council Legal Service recalled in its legal opinion of 27 May 2014 that there is no legal basis in the Treaties empowering the institutions to create a new supervision mechanism of the respect of the rule of law by the Member States, additional to what is laid down in Article 7 TEU;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its deep concern that, despitTakes note of the three hearings of Poland having been held in the Council, alarmingthe critical reports by the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and four infringements procedures launched by the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the latest developmentsArticle 7 TEU procedure ins the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as put forward by Parliament in its resolution of 25 October 2016ly procedure available under the Treaties to safeguard the rule of law and no complementary and preventive Union mechanism can be put forward by the EU institutions; underlines that any monitoring of the rule of law shall respect the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination, equal treatment, a non-partisan and evidence-based approach;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. DeplorNotes the frequent use of expedited legislative procedures by the Polish parliament for the adoption of crucial legislation redesigning the organisation and functioning of the judiciary, without meaningful consultation with stakeholders, including the judicial community19 ; _________________ 19ENCJ, Warsaw Declaration of 3 June 2016.;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is concerned, while rRecognisinges the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, aboutnd thus the amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections whichwhich would change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 and which moreover run counter to the case law; notes that voting by postal services could be a possibility to hold elections in these difficult times, while it is important to carefully consider its circumstances and to draw conclusions from the practices of othe Polish Constitutional Tribunalr Member States holding elections by postal services; stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult to organise a genuine election campaign giving an equal share of attention and equal opportunities to all candidates and programmes and allowing for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ; _________________ 23Regulation (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). 24OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020.
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Concurs with the Commission, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Group of States against Corruption that the aforementioned separate reforms to the judicial system, considering their interaction and overall impact, amount to a serious, sustained and systemic breach of the rule of law, enabling the legislative and executive powers to influence the functioning of the judiciary in a critical manner, thereby significantly weakening the independence of the judiciary in Poland43 ; _________________ 43Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.Recalls that at this stage of the procedure it is for the Council to determine whether the aforementioned separate reforms to the judicial system amount to a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of law in Poland;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Is concerned aboutTakes note of reports alleging undue delays in court proceedings, difficulties in accessing legal assistance during arrest, and instances of insufficient respect for the confidentiality of communication between counsel and client44 ; _________________ 44UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, para. 33.
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Is concernedNotes that, since the entry into force on 14 February 2020 of the amendments to the act on the Supreme Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber can decide whether a judge or tribunal or court is independent and impartial, hence depriving citizens of an important element of judicial review at all other instances45 ; _________________ 45Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59.;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 17
Subheading 17
The right to information and freedom of expression, including academic freedom
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 21
Subheading 21
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 22
Subheading 22
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Notes in case the Council would determine that there is lack of independence of the judiciary in Poland has already starte, this could affecting mutual trust between Poland and other Member States, especially in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters; points out that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Calls upon the Council to resume the formal hearings - the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those hearings all the latest and major negative developments in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendationsadopt a final position under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50