5 Amendments of Jana TOOM related to 2017/2273(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the right to petition the European Parliament is a cornerstone of European citizenship, as enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, ranking second in importance to citizens according to recent surveys; underlines the importance of petitions as a means for citizens and residents to express their concerns about instances of misapplication or violation of EU law and on potential lacunae, while at the same time highlighting these deficiencies to the Commission in recognition of its role as guardian of the Treaties;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that proper implementation of EU law is essential to achieving the EU policy goals defined in the Treaties and secondary legislation, and that lack of enforcement not only undermines the efficiency of the internal market, but alsohas a direct impact on individual rights and consequently affects the credibility and image of the Union; underlines, in this regard, that implementation and enforcement are founded on the distribution of powers conferred by the Treaties, and that the Member States and the Commission therefore have a shared responsibility to implement and enforce European law; points out, at the same time, that all EU institutions share the responsibility of ensuring implementation and enforcement of EU law, as provided for in the 2016 Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the increased transparency of, and the provision of more statistical information in, the Commission report for 2016, as compared to previous reports; regrets the fact, however, that it provides no precise information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of EU Pilot or infringement procedures; notes with regret that Parliament is not involved in these procedures; reiterates its call on the Commission to share with Parliament information on all EU Pilots opened and infringement procedures initiated in order to improve transparency, reduce the time frame for dispute settlement through the Committee on Petitions, build citizens’ trust in the EU project and, ultimately, enhance the legitimacy of the EU Pilot procedure; acknowledges the Court of Justice’s ruling on cases C-39/05 P and C- 52/05 P of May 2017, according to which documents within the EU Pilot procedure should not be disclosed publicly if there is a risk that such disclosure would affect the nature of the infringement procedure, alter its progress or undermine the objectives of that procedure;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the presentation in the report ofNotes the revised Commission strategy for monitoring the application of EU law, as this policy is outlined in the 2016 Communication ‘Better results through better application’; notobserves the intention of the Commission to direct petitioners to seek redress at national level when complaints do not concern issues of wider principle, do not raise systemic issues and can satisfactorily be dealt with by other mechanisms at EU or national level; notes the Commission’s intent to launch an EU Pilot procedure only where it could prove to be useful in a case, and to proceed with infringement procedures without relying on EU Pilots in order to expedite investigations of breaches of EU law; is concerned, however, that this approach may lead to ineffective investigation of complaints through petitions in cases where action at EU level could prove more appropriate; deplores the high number of infringement procedures in 2016; notes the distinctively decreasing trend in the number of EU Pilots launched in the same year;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Regrets the lack of commitment shown by the Commission when answering to the concerns raised in EU Pilot procedures by Members of the European Parliament; considers that as the communication in EU Pilot procedures goes through the Commission, this does not constitute a dialogue between all parties involved; encourages the Commission to take a more active approach when collecting information and answering to the concern;