9 Amendments of Maria GRAPINI related to 2022/2015(INI)
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens expressed their dissatisfaction with the lack of transparency in the EU’s decision-making process and voiced a desire for more citizen involvement and accountability, whereas the transparency of the decision-making process will increase citizens’ trust in the European Union, and in the democratic nature of the European institutions, and will ensure greater legitimacy, efficiency and accountability of the administration to the citizens;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas citizens’ expectations as regards transparency, efficiency, accountability and technical solutions have evolved in recent years; whereas this may require the adoption of new technical solutions and guidelines that increase accountability and efficiency;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas in case 1499/2021/SF16, the Ombudsman found that the Council and Commission’s refusal to give full public access to documents related to legislative negotiations constituted maladministration; _________________ 16 https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/deci sion/en/157727.
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the Union’s response to the COVID-19 crisis showed its ability to act, but also demonstrated the need for increased transparency within the Union, as well as the adoption of a better policy on tackling disinformation, in order to obtain better and more accurate information for the European citizen;
Amendment 37 #
H. whereas Parliament adopted its first-reading position on the Commission proposal for reform of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in December 2011; whereas negotiations on that regulation have been at a standstill since 2012; whereas the EU has taken on many new responsibilities since the regulation came into force; whereas increased responsibility requires increased transparency in order to uphold the EU’s credibility and legitimacy in citizens’ eyes, and their trust;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that a common problem faced in requests for access to documents is the refusal of access by institutions on the basis of insubstantial arguments; reiterates that an institution invoking one of the exceptions to access has to make an objective and individual assessment and show that the risk to the interest protected is foreseeable and genuine and not purely hypothetical, and define how access to the document would specifically and effectively undermine the interest protected18; highlights that it might be possible to disclose some parts of a document when other parts need to be protected; notes with interest the case lodged against the Council for its frequent recourse to the informal ‘working document’ predicate19; _________________ 18 Judgment of the CJEU of 22 March 2018, Emilio De Capitani v European Parliament, T-540/15, EU:T:2018:167; judgment of the CJEU of 1 July 2008, Sweden and Turco v Council of the European Union, Joined Cases C- 39/05 P and C-52/05, EU:C:2008:374. 19 Case lodged on 7 May 2021, De Capitani v Council of the European Union, T- 163/21.
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of Parliament’s Transparency Register and calls for the introduction of a mandatory requirement for all Members to make public all scheduled meetings with people external to Parliament where these meetings relate to a report or resolution of the European Parliament; the transparency and accountability of Members are essential for maintaining the trust of Union citizens in the legitimacy of the political and legislative decision-making process in the European Union.
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for a revision of the Staff Regulations, especially Article 22(c) thereof, in order to align them with the standards of the Whistleblower Directive; reiterates its call for a special committee tasked with identifying potential flaws in the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity and corruption and with making proposals for reforms; recalls its commitment to setting up a committee of inquiry to investigate cases of corruption and improper actions by non-EU countries seeking to buy influence in the European Parliament, thereby undermining the image of the Union both in the Member States and among international partners; recalls its position that the Commission should put forward a proposal to set up a new ethics body for the EU institutions as soon as possible;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes with concern that at present, citizens can only challenge the refusal of an access-to-document request by bringing court proceedings against the institution and/or by making a complaint to the Ombudsman; calls for the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to adopt more accessible, swifter and simplified procedures for handling complaints about refusals to grant access; recommends, in this context, appointing independent, senior officials with the capacity to review, without undue delay, appeals concerning access-to-documents requests;