[ParlTrack]

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the European Union is bound by Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, inter alia, to the values of democracy and the rule of law;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas both Article 1 and Article 10 (3) of the Treaty on European Union stipulate that "decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen";

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas the European Ombudsman has opened, on 29 July 2014, an own- initiative inquiry concerning the European Commission's dealing with requests for information and access to documents in relation to the TTIP negotiations1 c ; whereas the case was closed on 6 January 2015; __________________ 1c Case OI/10/2014/RA

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas Members of the European Parliament depend on leaked documents when scrutinizing the negotiations for TTIP;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)

Ae. whereas there is no evidence that encryption standards cause a more compelling interoperability problem than exists in relation to other ICT-standards, while their regulation makes both businesses and citizens more vulnerable to online attacks and surveillance.

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A f (new)

Af. whereas the Union is bound by Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter to the principles of equality before the law and freedom from discrimination;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.)

~~i) to specify the role and the legal quality of th~~(i.). takes the view that the Commission’s proposal of more extensive Rregulatory Ccooperation ~~Council’s fi~~, which would grant the trade and in~~gs,~~ vestment partner and undertakings in~~to consideration that any direct application of its recommendations for the relevant EU instances would imply a breach~~ the pre-legislative or legislative phase of the EU legislation procedures, the Member States and the local and regional territorial entities a privileged right to be heard or the possibility of delaying or stopping legislation procedures through demands for impact analyses of legislation on trade and investment, would imply an inadmissible circumvention of the law-making procedures laid down in the Treaties;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Recital A g (new)

Ag. whereas regulatory cooperation could prejudice legislative prerogatives of the European Parliament as well as of national parliaments and therefore have a chilling effect on the application of the values of the Union as laid out in Article 2 TEU;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint(i.) a (new)

i.)a. confirms that all important questions of detail of the TTIP agreement should be negotiated, and there may generally be no subsequent transfer of regulatory questions to expert committees set up specifically for that purpose;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.) b (new)

i.)b. demands the inclusion of a revision clause in the agreement, in order to be able to examine the impact of the agreements reached and make amendments where appropriate, and also to be able to terminate the agreement;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.) c (new)

i.)c. considers the very high level of protective measures and standards which exist and were democratically agreed in the European Union to be an achievement which is worthy of protection to the highest degree and demands that the legal standards which exist in the EU and its Member States, for example in respect of product safety, health, social, environmental, climate, foodstuff and animal protection and consumer and data protection rights, may in no way be lowered and corresponding rules are to be established for this purpose in the TTIP; emphasises the necessity of instead guaranteeing an improvement of current standards for both partners of the TTIP, and corresponding democratic participation on both sides of the Atlantic;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.)

ii.) ~~while the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is an appropriate tool to protect investors and assure that investments are treated in a fair and non- discriminatory way, to overs~~emphasises that the continued existence of European legislation and the capacity of European, national and local authorities to legislate their own policies may not be undermined by the TTIP and is to be observed in legal action issues before national or European courts of law; firmly rejects any form of investment protection regulations and dispute settlement mechanisms in the investor and state relationship between th~~at it does not~~e EU and the USA (ISDS) which bypass ordinary jurisdiction and undermlines the capacity of European, national and local authorities to legislate their own policies, in particular social and environmental policies, and therefore respect the constitutional framework of the Member States; at democratically legitimised and constitutionally created political and administrative measures, in particular with regard to subsequent compensation claims, may not be called into question by courts of arbitration;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.) b (new)

ii.)b Requests the Commission to note the responses to the public consultation which it conducted on ISDS, which clearly showed overwhelming opposition to ISDS; refers to the extraordinary success of the European citizens’ initiative ‘Stop TTIP’, which has gathered 2 million signatures despite being rejected by the Commission;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (e) - Subpoint (iii.)

iii.) while a certain extent of confidentiality is necessary for effective negotiations on a trade agreement of such high economic and political importance, to continue its effort to render TTIP negotiations more transparent and accessible to the public, as European institutions should be at the forefront of promoting transparencyacknowledges the effort made by the Commission to render the negotiations more transparent, but, in view of the high importance of the ongoing negotiations, considers this to be insufficient for comprehensively informing the populations of the EU Member States; requests the Commission to take significant steps towards improved public access to negotiation documents;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the Commission to propose that the human rights clause should include: – Confirmation of states obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant international human rights instruments including, but not limited to, the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; – Assurance that state parties will interpret the provisions in the agreement in accordance with international human rights law; – Assurance that none of the obligations arising from the agreement will have the effect of modifying the obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil fundamental rights in the EU; – An exception permitting parties to suspend their obligations arising from the agreement if there are grounds to believe that it will result in a breach of fundamental rights; – A mechanism putting forward periodic human rights impact assessments to be conducted jointly by a designated committee of the US Congress and the European Parliament; – A mechanism to bring complaints in front of national courts in order to initiate an investigation by the designated authority into human rights disputes arising under the agreement; – Procedures to ensure that citizens have equality before the law; – Assurance that the Parties to the agreement will not in any way whatsoever relatively privilege their own citizens, or otherwise discriminate against non- citizens, merely according to their citizenship status in any matter affected by this agreement, concerning public order, national security, crime or grounds of important public interest; such as internationally recognised labour standards, environment, public health or food safety standards; – An accessible mechanism to impose sanctions when fundamental rights and standards are abused and dialogue or mediation have been exhausted;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to take immediate measures to ensure that in particular the recommendation for the development on a European strategy for IT independence and an EU cyber strategy, as included in the European Parliament resolution of 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens' fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs, are implemented;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Believes that any expansion of coordination with the USA on matters of IT-security should be contingent on the end of mass surveillance programmes and targeted intrusion against EU citizens, institutions and Member States.

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Helmut SCHOLZ, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (e) - subpoint (vi.) -f- (new)

vi)f - demands that the ongoing TTIP negotiations be suspended and requests the Commission to carry out a public consultation with regard to the objectives and content of the TTIP negotiations, in a similar manner to the procedure for ISDS;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to respect the responses to the public consultation carried out by the Commission itself, indicating an overwhelming opposition to ISDS; points to the extraordinary success of the European Citizens' Initiative "Stop TTIP" that gathered 2 million signatures, notwithstanding the rejection by the Commission of this ECI.

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls on the Commission to make sure that encryption standards, or the certification thereof, are not included in the TTIP agreement, since there is no economic benefit, but a serious potential economic and societal loss to it.

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any provisions on ISDS or regulatory cooperation will not have a chilling effect on democracy in the Union or the Member States;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6d. Calls on the Commission to oppose any mechanism regarding ISDS that could impair the fundamental right of equality before the law;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Expects the Commission to take immediate measures to implement all recommendations made by the European Ombudsman in case OI/10/2014/RA;

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

Cornelia ERNST, Barbara SPINELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Reminds the Commission that, should TTIP be considered a mixed agreement, according to the recent CJEU opinion on the EU accession to the ECHR (par 201) the Court has consistently held that an international agreement cannot affect the allocation of powers fixed by the Treaties or, consequently, the autonomy of the EU legal system, the observance of which is ensured by the Court. That principle is notably enshrined in Article 344 TFEU, according to which Member States undertake not to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Treaties to any method of settlement other than those provided by the Treaties.

2015/01/29
Committee: LIBE

24 Amendments of Barbara SPINELLI related to 2014/2228(INI)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024