3 Amendments of Fabio Massimo CASTALDO related to 2019/2132(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission reports on monitoring the application of EU law. Stresses that ensuring compliance with the EU law is essential to create a level playing field within the Member States. Believes that the reports are crucial tools to ensure the democratic scrutiny over the correct transposition and implementation of EU law. Considers such monitoring essential to identify risks to the rule of law before they can reach a point where a formal response is required. Stresses the need to continuously improve the mechanisms designed to ensure that rule- making is in full compliance with the Treaties, notably the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU);
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights that the respect for the rule of law is a precondition for guaranteeing a healthy democratic environment and protect citizens' fundamental rights. Stresses that that ensuring the independence and impartiality of the judicial authorities, safeguarding the pluralism and independence of the media, stepping up the fight against corruption and the infiltration of organized crime into the legal economy are only some of the fundamental pre-conditions for guaranteeing a fair treatment before the law, the defence of citizens' rights, prevent abuses and ensure the accountability of those who administer public goods. Regrets that the available tools provided for by the Treaties do not represent a sufficient deterrent to Member States. Calls on the Conference on the future of Europe to address this issue and decide to overcome the unaniminity rule in Council in the context of Article 7 procedures.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Regrets that the Commission can only rely on infringment procedures to ensure the proper application and implementation of the EU law. Notes with concern that infringment procedures have the contradictory effect to place on citizens the ultimate burden of Member States failures in applying the EU law. Welcomes that the EU-Pilot mechanism is not used sistematically any longer as it has been recognised that it added an additional bureaucratic layer to the procedure without a real added value. Believes that the Conference on the Future of Europe would be an opportunity to discuss new procedures to ensure a more effective application and implementation of the EU law eventually leading to Treaty changes.