Activities of Gilles LEBRETON related to 2020/2072(INL)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers thatRejects the proposal to establish a Union mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights; however, if established; the Union mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights should primarilynot anticipate or aim ato preventing and addressing any threat to the thought crimes or perceived threats against the declaratory Union values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) before any clear r, but be triggered only if a violation of such a value which isk arises in a Member State and Article 7 TEU should be triggeredlso enshrined in the constitutions of all Member States has established on the balance of probabilities by the Commission which must submit a reasoned report before any action may be taken;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that an independent and impartial judiciary is an indispensable cornerstone of the rule of law; highlights that the requirement that courts be independent is of the essence to the fundamental right to effective judicial protection and a fair trial and to ensure that all rights deriving from Union law are protected; stresses that every national court is also a European court when applying Union law; is worried that recent attacks on the rule of law have mainly consisted of attempts to jeopardise judicial independence;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that an independent and impartial judiciary, including independent and impartial from europhile and integrationist interests, is an indispensable cornerstone of the rule of law; highlights that the requirement that courts be independent is of the essence to the fundamental right to effective judicial protection and a fair trial and to ensure that all rights deriving from Union law are protected; stresses that every national court is also a European court when applying Union law; is worried that recent attacks on the rule of law have mainly consisted of attempts to jeopardise judicial independencethe protection of all rights guaranteed by Union legislation are protected; stresses that every national court should protect national constitutions against ultra vires interpretations of Union law;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that training of justice professionals is essential to the proper implementation and application of Union law and thus to the strengthening of a European common legal culture based on the principles of mutual trust and the rule of law; considers that the upcoming European judicial training strategy must put additional focus on promoting the rule of law and judicial independence and include training oin skills and non-legal issuocial sciences so that judges are better prepared to resist undue pressure;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes that considerable differences remain in the level of participation in training across Member States and types of legal professions; calls on the Commission to identify the reasons for those differences and address themtake them into account in the upcoming European judicial training strategy and to assess the impact of those differences on the independence, quality and efficiency of Member States’ judiciaries;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the potential of judicial training for improving the dialogue between national courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union, particularly through the uso improve the practice of references for a preliminary ruling and the interaction between the principles of subsidiarity and primacy of Union law;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 68 #
7. Calls on the Commission to assess ICT tools and other means put in place by Member States at the disposal of citizens to facilitate their access to justice, in particular citizens with disabilities or belonging to vulnerable groups, such as national minorities and migrants;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that addressing persisting gender and cultural gaps in the composition and structure of Member States’ judicial systems is necessary to enhance their quality, effectiveness and independence.
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points out that professional competence should continue to be the first recruitment criterion for judges, regardless of their ethnic origin or religious beliefs.