16 Amendments of Marie-Christine BOUTONNET related to 2018/2009(INI)
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard with great interest and calls on the Commission to further promote this exercise in accordance with the Treaties and in consultation with the Member States;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the aim of this exchange and stresses that an effective and independent national justice system could give businesses incentives to develop and invest at national and cross-border level, while at the same time protecting consumers and workers, thus boosting their economic contribution;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the importance of judicial benchmarking for cross-border mutual trust, and for effective cooperation between national justice institutions and for the creation of a common judicial area and a European judicial culture; encourages the Commission, therefore, to continue developing concrete indicators tso assess, in practice, the upholding of EU values such as the rule of law or respect for fundamental rights to improve benchmarking;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomesTakes note of the efforts of the Commission to provide measurable data and draw concrete conclusions on how Member States have improved or may yet improve the quality and efficiency of their justice systems; regrets that there are 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 Commissioneach other by sharing relevant, up-to- date data;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of efficient and timely proceedings in 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;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Encourages Member States to invest in the continued development and use of ICT tools in their judicial systems, in an effort to make them more accessible and comprehensible to all EU Member State citizens, including 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 States;
Amendment 53 #
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 structuresequality, judicial ethics, IT skills, court management and communication with parties and the press; underlines furthermore the importance of adequate training in EU law and different EU cooperation structures, such as Eurojust;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the fact that legal aid for consumersthose below the poverty threshold remainis an essential balancing factor; underlines the role of legal aid in guaranteeing that weaker parties may also have access to justice, a fundamental right under EU lawfactor for justice;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need to address the still existing gender balance disparities and considerable ratio gaps among judges, namely in higher instance courts/supreme courts, at both national and European level; takes note with regret of the recent negative development in the proportion of female professional judges in some Member States;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. UnderlinNotes that, while over half of the Member States increased expenditure on the judicial system per inhabitant in 2015, the determination of financial resources is still mostly based too often on historical or actual costs instead of actual workload or number of court requests;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19