Activities of António MARINHO E PINTO related to 2018/2009(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard PDF (333 KB) DOC (71 KB)
Amendments (11)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard focuses mainly on civil, commercial and administrative justice, as well as on the rule of law as the basis for an effective justice system;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomNotes the efforts of the Commission to provideesent measurable data and drawput forward concrete conclusions on how Member States have improved or may yet improve the quality and efficiency of their justice systems; regrets that the, especially as re gare still instances where, though applicable or available, no data have been provided by some Member States for certain categories; calls on Member States, therefore, to fully collaborate with the Commission by sharing relevant, up-to- date datads the status and appointment of judges, their independence, and gender equality; calls on Member States, therefore, to intensify their efforts to make data comparable and to fully collaborate with the Commission by supplying the data requested; stresses that the Commission must keep reducing data differences in order to help Member States achieve their priorities;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of efficient and timely proceedings infor citizens' fundamental rights and social rights in particular, including the matters of strengthening consumer protection and safeguarding intellectual property and data privacy rights; notes with concern that such proceedings are still too lengthy in some Member States; points out in addition that a large backlog of pending cases might also make citizens and businesses less willing to trust the judicial system, trust being the cornerstone of respect for the rule of law;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Encourages Member States to invest in the use and continued development and use of ICT tools in their judicial systems, in an effort to make them more accessible and, more comprehensible to, and easier to use for all EU citizens, includingespecially those with any form of disability; emphasises the benefit of ICT systems in reducing costs for all stakeholders involved and in improving the overall efficiency and quality of justice systems,; and regrets that their full potential has not yet been reached in all Member Statesthroughout the whole of Europe;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the need to intensify and diversify the scope of training offered to judges, namely in the fields of gender structuresmainstreaming, judicial ethics, IT skills, courtjudicial management, mediation, and communication with parties and with the press; underlines furthermore the importance of adequate training in EU law and in the different EU cooperation structures, such as Eurojust;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. AsksCalls on the Commission to consideradd collective redress procedures into next year’s comparative exercise on accessibility factors of justice systems, as it is increasingly significant for facilitating access to justice and efficient dispute resolutionbelieves access to justice and efficient dispute resolution to be of prime importance; considers them a major tool for strengthening consumer, environmental, and health protection in Europe as a whole, in areas in which large numbers of applicants are directly affected;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that legal aid for consumers below the poverty threshold remains an essential balancing factor; underlines the role of legal aid in guaranteeing that weaker parties may alsocan have access to justice, a fundamental right under EU law on equal terms, which is a fundamental right in the EU; points out that legal aid should be linked to the poverty threshold in Member States; maintains that legal costs should, in general, be lowered still further, for example by making use of national electronic eJustice portals;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to introduce, duringbefore the close of next year’s exercise, a new indicator on access to justice for the LGBTI community, for example concerning access to legal aid, the length of proceedings in LGBTI discrimination cases or, where applicable, the impact of measures such as the reversed burden of proofminority groups or vulnerable people;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights that there is still much to do in terms of gender equality in the judicial professions across Europe, for examplenot least as regards access to the office of judge, and in terms of gender stereotypes, transparency in appointments, reconciliation between work and non-work responsibilities or the existence of mentoring practices; emphasises the clear discrepancy between the proportions of female professionals at lower levels of the judiciary (including non-judge staff) and that at the higicial officers) and at the higher court and prosecution levels; urges the Member States, therefore, to direct their court and prosecution levelsefforts towards learning support, especially in the field of higher education for women in the judicial professions, and to encourage a positive attitude to female judges, who should be viewed as a social asset;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on Member States to give greater consideration to the fact that a strong, independent judicial system is a key element of an effective justice system, which is in turn central to respect for the rule of law; points out that an independent judicial system relies, on the one hand, on the lack of interference or pressure from government and politics or from economic vested interests and, on the other hand, on effective guarantees provided by the status and position of judges and on their financial situation;