BETA

Activities of Laura FERRARA

Plenary speeches (113)

Humanitarian assistance in the Mediterranean (debate)
2019/07/17
State of implementation of anti-money laundering legislation (debate)
2019/09/18
Dossiers: 2019/2820(RSP)
Taking forward the Horizontal anti-discrimination Directive (debate)
2019/10/22
The Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences (debate)
2019/10/23
Dossiers: 2019/2886(RSP)
Climate and ecological emergency (topical debate)
2019/10/23
Children rights in occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (debate)
2019/11/13
Situation in the hotspots on the Greek islands, in particular the case of Moria (debate)
2019/11/14
Public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones (debate)
2019/11/26
Gender pay gap (debate)
2020/01/13
Ongoing hearings under article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Hungary (debate)
2020/01/15
Dossiers: 2020/2513(RSP)
Urgent humanitarian situation on Greek Islands, especially of children - ensuring protection, relocation and family reunification (debate)
2020/01/29
Fighting against antisemitism, racism and hatred across Europe (debate)
2020/02/11
Gender Equality Strategy (debate)
2020/02/12
Coronavirus outbreak, state of play and ensuring a coordinated European response to the health, economic and social impact (debate)
2020/03/10
European coordinated response to the COVID-19 outbreak (debate)
2020/03/26
EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences (continuation of debate)
2020/04/16
Dossiers: 2020/2616(RSP)
Use of contact tracing apps in the fight against the coronavirus (debate)
2020/05/14
EU Recovery package (debate)
2020/05/27
The Anti-racism protests following the death of George Floyd (debate)
2020/06/17
Tackling Covid-19 disinformation and the impact on freedom of expression (debate)
2020/06/18
A comprehensive Union policy on preventing money laundering and terrorist financing – Commission's Action plan and other recent developments (debate)
2020/07/08
Dossiers: 2020/2686(RSP)
The 2019 Human Rights Annual report - Stability and Security in the Mediterranean and the negative role of Turkey - Situation in Belarus (debate)
2020/07/09
State of the Union (topical debate) (debate)
2020/09/16
Combatting the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children (debate)
2020/09/17
The need for an immediate and humanitarian EU response to the current situation in the refugee camp in Moria (debate)
2020/09/17
The establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (debate)
2020/10/05
Dossiers: 2020/2072(INI)
Fight against money laundering, following the FinCEN files (debate)
2020/10/08
Serious security threats through the sale of EU passports and visas to criminals (debate)
2020/10/22
Fighting terrorism and the right to freedom of expression and education (debate)
2020/11/11
Situation of Fundamental Rights in the European Union – Annual Report for the years 2018-2019 (debate)
2020/11/24
Dossiers: 2019/2199(INI)
The need for a dedicated Council configuration on gender equality (debate)
2020/12/16
Dossiers: 2020/2896(RSP)
European Arrest Warrant and surrender procedures between Member States (debate)
2021/01/18
Dossiers: 2019/2207(INI)
Humanitarian situation of refugees and migrants at the EU's external borders (debate)
2021/01/19
Lack of transparency on Council appointments to the EPPO (debate)
2021/01/20
Implementation of the Anti-Trafficking Directive (debate)
2021/02/08
Dossiers: 2020/2029(INI)
Democratic scrutiny of social media and the protection of fundamental rights (debate)
2021/02/10
Rwanda, the case of Paul Rusesabagina
2021/02/11
Dossiers: 2021/2543(RSP)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 25 and 26 March 2021 - The outcome of the high level meeting between the EU and Turkey of the 6th of April (continuation of debate)
2021/04/26
Justice programme 2021-2027 (continuation of debate)
2021/04/27
Dossiers: 2018/0208(COD)
Digital Green Certificate - Union citizens - Digital Green Certificate - third country nationals - The accessibility and affordability of Covid-testing (debate)
2021/04/28
Dossiers: 2021/2654(RSP)
Recent deaths in the Mediterranean and search and rescue at sea (debate)
2021/05/18
Meeting the Global COVID-19 challenge: effects of waiver of the WTO TRIPS agreement on COVID-19 vaccines, treatment, equipment and increasing production and manufacturing capacity in developing countries (debate)
2021/05/19
EU Digital COVID Certificate - Union citizens – EU Digital COVID Certificate - third-country nationals (debate)
2021/06/08
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 24-25 June 2021 – Relaunch of the Malta Declaration and the use of an effective solidarity mechanism (debate)
2021/06/23
Dossiers: 2020/2118(INI)
Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund 2021-2027 - Integrated Border Management Fund: Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy 2021-2027 (debate)
2021/07/06
Identifying gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU (debate)
2021/09/15
Dossiers: 2021/2035(INL)
Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters (debate)
2021/10/04
Dossiers: 2020/2016(INI)
European Union Agency for Asylum (debate)
2021/10/07
Dossiers: 2016/0131(COD)
The rise of right-wing extremism and racism in Europe (in light of recent events in Rome) (debate)
2021/10/20
Increased efforts to fight money laundering (debate)
2021/10/20
Situation in Belarus and at its border with the EU and the security and humanitarian consequences (debate)
2021/11/23
The International Day of Elimination of Violence Against Women and the State of play on the ratification of the Istanbul Convention (continuation of debate)
2021/11/25
Plans to undermine further fundamental rights in Poland, in particular regarding the standards of the European Convention of Human Rights and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (debate)
2021/12/15
The proposed Council decision on provisional emergency measures for the external border with Belarus based on article 78(3) TFEU (continuation of debate)
2021/12/15
EU response to the transport poverty (debate)
2021/12/15
Empowering European Youth: post-pandemic employment and social recovery (debate)
2022/01/20
Dossiers: 2021/2952(RSP)
The surveillance of politicians, prosecutors, lawyers and journalists, and other persons and entities in EU Member States using cyber surveillance software(debate)
2022/02/15
One youth, one Europe (topical debate)
2022/02/16
The EU priorities for the 66th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (continuation of debate)
2022/02/16
Dossiers: 2022/2536(RSP)
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the EU (debate)
2022/03/08
Dossiers: 2020/2268(INI)
International Women’s Day – Address by Oksana Zabuzhko
2022/03/08
The deterioration of the situation of refugees as a consequence of the Russian aggression against Ukraine (debate)
2022/03/08
Sixth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (debate)
2022/04/04
The Schengen evaluation mechanism (debate)
2022/04/06
Dossiers: 2021/0140(CNS)
Question Time (Commission) Europe’s Energy Autonomy: The strategic importance of renewables and energy interconnections and efficiency
2022/05/03
Question Time (Commission) Europe’s Energy Autonomy: The strategic importance of renewables and energy interconnections and efficiency
2022/05/03
Use of the Pegasus Software by EU Member States against individuals including MEPs and the violation of fundamental rights (topical debate)
2022/05/04
Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report (debate)
2022/05/18
Dossiers: 2021/2180(INI)
Revision of the EU Emissions Trading System - Social Climate Fund - Carbon border adjustment mechanism - Revision of the EU Emissions Trading System for aviation - Notification under the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) (joint debate – Fit for 55 (part 1))
2022/06/07
Dossiers: 2021/0204(COD)
The rule of law and the potential approval of the Polish national Recovery Plan (RRF) (debate)
2022/06/07
US Supreme Court decision to overturn abortion rights in the United States and the need to safeguard abortion rights and Women’s health in the EU (debate)
2022/07/04
EU initiatives to address the rising cost of living, including the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights (debate)
2022/07/05
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act (debate)
2022/07/05
Dossiers: 2021/2245(INI)
Recent heat wave and drought in the EU (debate)
2022/07/07
Surveillance and predator spyware systems in Greece (debate)
2022/09/12
Consequences of drought, fire, and other extreme weather phenomena: increasing EU's efforts to fight climate change (debate)
2022/09/13
The urgent need for action at EU level to ensure humane treatment of migrants in Europe, including at the borders (debate)
2022/09/13
Situation of fundamental rights in the EU in 2020 and 2021 (debate)
2022/09/14
Dossiers: 2021/2186(INI)
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control - Serious cross-border threats to health (debate)
2022/10/03
Dossiers: 2020/0322(COD)
Question Time (Commission) Tackling depopulation through cohesion policy instrument
2022/10/04
Countering the anti-European and anti-Ukrainian propaganda of Putin’s European cronies (topical debate)
2022/10/05
The urgent need for an EU strategy on fertilisers to ensure food security in Europe (debate)
2022/10/06
International Day for the Eradication of Poverty (debate)
2022/10/17
Impact of Russian invasion of Ukraine on migration flows to the EU (debate)
2022/10/18
Racial justice, non-discrimination and anti-racism in the EU (debate)
2022/11/10
Dossiers: 2022/2005(INI)
The need for a European solution on asylum and migration including search and rescue (debate)
2022/11/23
Eliminating violence against Women (debate)
2022/11/23
A need for a dedicated budget to turn the Child Guarantee into reality - an urgency in times of energy and food crisis (debate)
2022/12/13
Suspicions of corruption from Qatar and the broader need for transparency and accountability in the European institutions (debate) (debate)
2022/12/13
Defending democracy from foreign interference (debate)
2022/12/14
Dossiers: 2022/2910(RSP)
Surge of respiratory infections and the shortage of medication in Europe (debate)
2023/01/17
Preparation of the Special European Council meeting of February, in particular the need to develop sustainable solutions in the area of asylum and migration (debate)
2023/02/01
CO2 emission standards for cars and vans (debate)
2023/02/14
Dossiers: 2021/0197(COD)
Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence: EU accession (continuation of debate)
2023/02/14
Dossiers: 2016/0062R(NLE)
Adequate minimum income ensuring active inclusion (debate)
2023/03/14
Dossiers: 2022/2840(RSP)
Deaths at sea: a common EU response to save lives and action to ensure safe and legal pathways (debate)
2023/03/15
Strengthening the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work or work of equal value between men and women (debate)
2023/03/30
Dossiers: 2021/0050(COD)
The need for European solidarity in saving lives in the Mediterranean, in particular in Italy (debate)
2023/04/18
Keeping people healthy, water drinkable and soil liveable: getting rid of forever pollutants and strengthening EU chemical legislation now (topical debate)
2023/04/19
Dieselgate: suspected widespread use of defeat devices in cars to reduce effectiveness of pollution control systems (debate)
2023/04/19
Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence – EU accession: institutions and public administration of the Union - Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence - EU accession: judicial cooperation in criminal matters, asylum and non-refoulement (debate)
2023/05/09
Dossiers: 2016/0062A(NLE)
Externalising asylum applications and making funding to third countries conditional on the implementation of return agreements (topical debate)
2023/05/10
Update of the anti-corruption legislative framework (debate)
2023/05/10
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation - Election integrity and resilience build-up towards European elections 2024 (debate)
2023/06/01
Dossiers: 2022/2075(INI)
Investigation of the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware - Investigation of the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (draft recommendation) (debate)
2023/06/14
Dossiers: 2022/2077(INI)
Tax the rich (topical debate)
2023/07/12
Recommendations for reform of the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption (debate)
2023/07/12
Dossiers: 2023/2034(INI)
Geographical indication protection for craft and industrial products (debate)
2023/09/11
Dossiers: 2022/0115(COD)
EU-Tunisia Agreement - aspects related to external migration policy (debate)
2023/09/12
Need for a speedy adoption of the asylum and migration package (debate)
2023/10/04
Urban wastewater treatment (debate)
2023/10/05
Dossiers: 2022/0345(COD)
European Citizens' Initiative 'Fur Free Europe' (debate)
2023/10/19
International day for the elimination of violence against women (debate)
2023/11/23

Institutional motions (9)

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the state of implementation of the Union’s anti-money laundering legislation
2019/09/16
Dossiers: 2019/2820(RSP)
Documents: PDF(152 KB) DOC(53 KB)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION On Uganda, notably the proposed bill to impose capital punishment of homosexual acts
2019/10/21
Dossiers: 2019/2879(RSP)
Documents: PDF(192 KB) DOC(48 KB)
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Egypt
2019/10/23
Dossiers: 2019/2880(RSP)
Documents: PDF(160 KB) DOC(57 KB)
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation of LGBTI people in Uganda
2019/10/23
Dossiers: 2019/2879(RSP)
Documents: PDF(159 KB) DOC(51 KB)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on children’s rights on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
2019/11/20
Dossiers: 2019/2876(RSP)
Documents: PDF(205 KB) DOC(64 KB)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Commission delegated regulation of 31 October 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the Union list of projects of common interest
2020/02/05
Dossiers: 2019/2907(DEA)
Documents: PDF(142 KB) DOC(46 KB)
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the deteriorating situation of human rights in Egypt, in particular the case of the activists of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR)
2020/12/16
Dossiers: 2020/2912(RSP)
Documents: PDF(159 KB) DOC(57 KB)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta
2021/04/21
Dossiers: 2021/2611(RSP)
Documents: PDF(155 KB) DOC(55 KB)
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Pandora Papers: implications for the efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance
2021/10/20
Dossiers: 2021/2922(RSP)
Documents: PDF(205 KB) DOC(65 KB)

Oral questions (4)

Waiver of patent protection to speed up vaccine production in the EU
2021/03/01
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
2022/01/10
Documents: PDF(56 KB) DOC(12 KB)
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
2022/04/28
Documents: PDF(59 KB) DOC(12 KB)
Prohibiting chick and duckling killing in EU law
2023/03/10
Documents: PDF(51 KB) DOC(10 KB)

Written explanations (59)

Eurojust and Serbia Cooperation Agreement (A9-0009/2019 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)

La cooperazione giudiziaria in materia penale ha un ruolo fondamentale per la lotta in Europa contro reati gravi come criminalità organizzata e terrorismo, il cui carattere transfrontaliero è aumentato esponenzialmente.La stipulazione di questo accordo con la Serbia, insieme a quelli riguardanti la cooperazione di polizia, sono rilevanti per un efficace scambio di informazioni concernenti anche procedure penali, metodi di contrasto e prevenzione del crimine.Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2019/10/10
Employment and social policies of the euro area (A9-0016/2019 - Yana Toom)

Se nell'Unione europea bisogna rafforzare la protezione dei lavoratori e dei diritti sociali, richiedendo anche proposte legislative per istituire un salario minimo, contrastare fenomeni come la disoccupazione giovanile e di lungo periodo, il divario retributivo di genere, la povertà infantile, le problematiche occupazionali e sociali che affliggono i diversamente abili, è necessario che ciò debba essere fatto senza ipocrisie. Pertanto, anche se possono essere condivise alcune analisi e richieste contenute nella relazione, altrettanto non può essere fatto per quella parte in cui si esorta la Commissione europea ad esercitare pressione sugli Stati membri, affinché implementino delle Raccomandazioni Specifiche per Paese (RSP) che prevedono tagli alla spesa pubblica e riforme sul solco delle politiche di austerità. Non possiamo consentire il ricorso a politiche che rischiano di sortire effetti devastanti per milioni di famiglie e cittadini europei.
2019/10/10
Children rights in occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (B9-0178/2019, B9-0179/2019, B9-0180/2019)

Assicurare la piena attuazione della Convenzione sui diritti del fanciullo nell'UE significa innanzitutto porre i diritti dei minori al centro delle politiche europee.C'è ancora molto lavoro da compiere per porre fine, nei confronti dei minori, a violenze fisiche, sessuali e verbali online e offline , matrimoni forzati, lavoro minorile, prostituzione, tratta, traffico di organi, tortura, trattamenti o punizioni crudeli, mutilazioni genitali femminili, reclutamento, coscrizione e utilizzo di bambini in conflitti armati, privazioni, abbandono e malnutrizione, violenza psicologica e forme di bullismo.A queste emergenze vanno ad aggiungersi nuove minacce legate ai cambiamenti globali, così come ribadito nelle diverse testimonianze ascoltate pochi giorni fa durante la Conferenza organizzata al Parlamento europeo per celebrare la Giornata internazionale dei diritti del fanciullo. I cambiamenti climatici, i rischi legati al web e nuove vulnerabilità richiedono ulteriori impegni da parte dell'UE e degli Stati membri. La tutela dei diritti dell'infanzia e dell'adolescenza è un obiettivo primario, una sfida che richiede investimenti importanti, una battaglia di civiltà per l'affermazione dei diritti fondamentali di ogni minore.
2019/11/26
Climate and environmental emergency (RC-B9-0209/2019, B9-0209/2019, B9-0211/2019, B9-0212/2019, B9-0215/2019, B9-0216/2019, B9-0218/2019, B9-0220/2019)

Nel corso dell'anno, le proteste guidate dai giovani hanno mobilitato milioni di persone nell'UE e nel mondo, per sollecitare una risposta globale ai cambiamenti climatici. Sono state molteplici, sia le manifestazioni e le richieste provenienti dalla società civile, per ulteriori azioni sul clima, sia le posizioni assunte da diversi governi che hanno annunciato nuovi obiettivi e misure ambientali. Una strategia europea per un'economia prospera, moderna, competitiva e climaticamente neutra, in conformità dell'accordo di Parigi, dovrà ispirare l'agenda politica dei prossimi decenni. Questa è la strada da seguire se vorremo impegnarci per ridurre inquinamento e contenere le conseguenze del cambiamento climatico. Nella direzione giusta va l'esortazione alla nuova Commissione europea al fine di effettuare una valutazione completa dell'impatto climatico e ambientale di tutte le proposte legislative e di bilancio, le quali dovranno essere in linea con l'obiettivo di contenere il riscaldamento globale e non contribuire alla perdita di biodiversità. Un accordo su una sede unica per il Parlamento europeo, sarebbe un segnale importante per contribuire alla riduzione di emissioni che si realizza anche attraverso esempi coerenti da parte delle Istituzioni europee nell'ambito delle politiche perseguite.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2019/11/28
2019 UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) (B9-0174/2019)

Le conferenze delle Nazioni Unite sui cambiamenti climatici sono diventate tra i più grandi incontri internazionali al mondo su questo tema. In vista della COP25 di Madrid, anche il Parlamento europeo sarà chiamato a dare il proprio contributo per cambiare l'approccio al problema climatico e fronteggiare quella che è diventata un'emergenza planetaria. L'UE deve dare seguito con i fatti al proposito di voler ridurre del 55% le emissioni di gas a effetto serra entro il 2030, per arrivare alla neutralità climatica entro il 2050. Il carbone, gli inceneritori, la plastica non biodegradabile e tutto ciò che altera gravemente il clima sono il passato. L'economia verde, le fonti rinnovabili, il rispetto del pianeta in cui viviamo, dovranno dettare l'agenda politica ed economica del futuro. Abbiamo bisogno di un cambiamento radicale del nostro modello produttivo ed economico e lavorare insieme per cogliere le nuove opportunità di questo percorso, accompagnandolo con misure sociali e inclusive che assicurino una transizione equa e giusta, salvaguardando la necessità di disporre di un elevato livello di protezione sociale, di posti di lavoro e di formazione di qualità.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2019/11/28
EU accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures to combat gender-based violence (B9-0224/2019, B9-0225/2019, B9-0226/2019)

Nell'UE sono allarmanti i dati sulle donne che hanno subito molestie sessuali, violenza fisica e/o sessuale, da un partner o che hanno sperimentato una qualche forma di comportamento psicologicamente violento e/o di controllo, nell'ambito di una relazione. La violenza contro le donne spesso arriva da persone a loro più vicine. Ogni essere umano ha il diritto di vivere libero dalla violenza nella sfera pubblica e in quella privata. La Convenzione di Istanbul è uno strumento internazionale diretto a prevenire la violenza di genere, proteggere le vittime e punire i responsabili. L'UE ha firmato la Convenzione nel 2017, ma sette Stati membri, non l'hanno ancora ratificata: Bulgaria, Repubblica Ceca, Ungheria, Lituania, Lettonia, Slovacchia, Lettonia, Slovacchia e Regno Unito. Tutti gli Stati membri dovrebbero garantire che la Convenzione sia attuata e applicata correttamente, prevedendo finanziamenti e risorse adeguate per realizzare lo scopo che si prefigge, soprattutto sul piano della formazione e dei servizi riguardanti i soggetti che si occupano delle vittime.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole
2019/11/28
Annual report 2018 on the human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter (A9-0051/2019 - Isabel Wiseler-Lima)

La promozione e la difesa dell'universalità dei diritti umani, dei valori del rispetto della democrazia, dell'uguaglianza, dello Stato di diritto, della libertà e della dignità umana, devono qualificare sia le politiche europee, sia l'azione esterna dell'UE. Trovo pertanto condivisibile evidenziare nella risoluzione un'ampia diversità di temi che vanno dalla condanna della compressione delle libertà civili e della politicizzazione della giustizia, al collegamento tra il diritto alla vita, alla salute, al cibo, all'acqua potabile e la protezione ambientale, rimarcando i pericoli del surriscaldamento globale e della deforestazione, i quali danno luogo all'emergere di violazioni contro le biodiversità e l'umanità intera.Sul fronte immigrazione ed asilo rimane ancora aperta la sfida su come contrastare le cause profonde dei flussi irregolari anche con la previsione di vie sicure e legali di accesso nonché con programmi di rimpatri volontari. Si auspica l'adozione di un nuovo ed efficace piano d'azione per i diritti umani, che sia ambizioso, completo e vincolante, con un funzionante meccanismo di monitoraggio per valutarne l'attuazione e l'impatto. Dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2020/01/15
European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0036/2020, B9-0037/2020, B9-0038/2020)

Dalla sua nascita, il M5S, ha agito affinché la voce dei cittadini non rimanesse inascoltata, nella definizione dell'azione delle istituzioni nazionali ed europee. Va nella giusta direzione la proposta del Parlamento, di prevedere il coinvolgimento dei cittadini di ogni estrazione sociale, nel delineare le priorità dell'UE ed istituire delle agorà tematiche, in vista della Conferenza sul futuro dell'Europa. L' approccio dal basso verso l'alto, trasparente, partecipativo ed inclusivo, anche in considerazione di una possibile revisione dei trattati, e l'introduzione di un meccanismo permanente di dialogo con i cittadini, sarebbe un valore aggiunto e fondamentale per rendere le istituzioni europee al servizio di tutti e non di pochi.
2020/01/15
An EU strategy to put an end to female genital mutilation around the world (B9-0090/2020, B9-0092/2020)

Le mutilazioni genitali femminili rappresentano un crimine barbaro, di cui sono ancora vittime troppe bambine e ragazze in tutto il mondo, compresa l'Europa. È una forma di violenza e di violazione dei diritti umani nei confronti delle donne, che non poggia su alcuna motivazione medica, ma solo su ragioni culturali e religiose. La condanna e la prevenzione di ogni tipo di violenza di genere, così come il sostegno alle vittime, devono essere priorità nella strategia dell'UE per porre fine alle mutilazioni genitali femminili. Non posso che condividere la previsione di includere clausole sui diritti umani, negli accordi commerciali e di cooperazione dell'UE con i paesi terzi, al fine di estirpare queste esecrabili pratiche che nessuna tradizione, cultura o religione potrà mai giustificare.Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/02/12
Automated decision-making processes: Ensuring consumer protection, and free movement of goods and services (B9-0094/2020)

In un numero crescente di settori, privati e pubblici (banche e finanza, assistenza sanitaria, trasporti, fiscalità, assicurazioni, marketing, ecc.) sono utilizzati profilazioni e processi decisionali automatizzati. Se da un lato emergono valutazioni positive, nel fornire ai consumatori servizi innovativi e migliori, la creazione di profili e l'adozione di decisioni automatizzate, ha un significativo impatto sui diritti e sulle libertà delle persone fisiche. Tali processi possono infatti essere poco trasparenti o minare la libertà di scegliere determinati prodotti o servizi. È pertanto condivisibile il contenuto della risoluzione, laddove si mira ad aggiornare concetti e norme, riadattare il quadro normativo in materia di sicurezza e responsabilità per i prodotti, in materia di servizi, nonchè sotto l'aspetto della qualità e trasparenza nella governance dei dati. In tal modo si agirà per avere una forte tutela per i consumatori, salvaguardare la libertà dei cittadini e tutelare la vita privata delle persone.Dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2020/02/12
The illegal trade in companion animals in the EU (B9-0088/2020)

Il commercio illegale di animali da compagnia è un fenomeno in crescita. Esso reca pregiudizio al benessere degli animali ed incide negativamente anche sulla protezione dei consumatori e sul corretto funzionamento del mercato interno dell'Unione europea. Va nella giusta direzione la richiesta di un Piano d'azione dell'UE, per contrastare tale attività illegale, così come il miglioramento dei controlli e dell'applicazione della legislazione esistente. Un valido contributo a questa battaglia può giungere dall'organizzazione di un maggior numero di campagne di informazione e sensibilizzazione, in merito agli effetti negativi del commercio illegale di animali da compagnia, affinchè vengano acquistati solo quelli detenuti e commercializzati in modo responsabile e nel rispetto del loro benessere.Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/02/12
False and Authentic Documents Online (FADO) system (A9-0022/2019 - Roberta Metsola)

Il sistema FADO è un database a sostegno degli Stati membri e delle autorità di controllo che agevola lo scambio di informazioni per il riconoscimento della falsità o autenticità di documenti di identità e di viaggio. Il ricorso a documenti falsi è strumentale alla commissione di una variegata tipologia di reati. Il FADO verrà gestito dall'Agenzia europea della Guardia di frontiera e costiera (Frontex) e rappresenta un utile strumento non solo nella lotta contro la tratta di esseri umani o il traffico di migranti, ma anche contro la criminalità organizzata, compresi in particolare il terrorismo e il traffico di stupefacenti. Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/02/13
The EU priorities for the 64th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (B9-0093/2020, B9-0095/2020)

Sono pienamente condivisibili le priorità dell'UE di cui si discuterà in vista della 64a sessione della Commissione delle Nazioni Unite sulla condizione femminile. Uno sviluppo sociale ed economico che riesce a ridurre la povertà all'insegna della pace e della sostenibilità non può che passare attraverso misure che promuovano l'emancipazione economica e politica delle donne. Emergono ancora una volta i principali fenomeni da contrastare come le disparità economiche, gli svantaggi nel mercato del lavoro che vivono le donne provenienti dai contesti meno abbienti, i divari retributivi e pensionistici, le diverse forme di violenza, la mancanza di rappresentanza nel processo decisionale in diversi contesti sociali e lavorativi. Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/02/13
Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0170/2020, B9-0179/2020)

Nel dibattito riguardante il futuro da costruire per l'Europa, la voce dei cittadini deve assumere un ruolo centrale attraverso un percorso di coinvolgimento dal basso verso l'alto, trasparente ed inclusivo. Tale metodo è pienamente condivisibile per tutte quelle riforme istituzionali e politiche finalizzate ad affrontare le sfide presenti e future dell'Unione europea. Sollecito in particolare il Consiglio a trovare al più presto una posizione sul formato e sull'organizzazione della conferenza, auspicando il suo inizio per il prossimo autunno.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/06/18
Tourism and transport in 2020 and beyond (RC-B9-0166/2020, B9-0166/2020, B9-0175/2020, B9-0177/2020, B9-0178/2020, B9-0180/2020, B9-0182/2020, B9-0184/2020)

Il comparto del turismo e dei trasporti è stato tra quelli più colpiti dalla pandemia da COVID-19. È pienamente condivisibile la risoluzione nell'attribuire la dovuta importanza ad un settore che in Europa impiega 23 milioni di persone, tra cui molti under 35, e che rappresenta il 10% del PIL UE, così come nello stimolare un urgente sostegno a breve e lungo termine. Vi sono migliaia di PMI che hanno bisogno immediato di semplificazioni amministrative, accesso ad aiuti finanziari per ottenere liquidità e mantenere stabili i livelli occupazionali. Nella ferma convinzione che la revoca graduale delle restrizioni debba avvenire senza il ricorso ai cosiddetti "corridoi turistici" che discriminerebbero l'economia degli Stati maggiormente colpiti dalla crisi sanitaria, si rende indispensabile sviluppare una strategia per un turismo sostenibile, competitivo e sicuro. In tale contesto auspico una maggiore promozione e rafforzamento dell'agriturismo, dell'ecoturismo e del turismo rurale, finalizzato a creare opportunità di lavoro e sviluppo, ad evitare lo spopolamento in aree periferiche, ad aumentare i benefici sociali e diversificare le fonti di reddito di agricoltori ed aziende di piccole dimensioni.Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/06/19
Situation in the Schengen area following the Covid-19 outbreak (B9-0165/2020)

Pur essendo consapevole della necessità delle misure sanitarie introdotte, per limitare la diffusione della COVID-19, con l'inizio dell'allentamento dei controlli e delle restrizioni di viaggio, ogni sforzo deve essere compiuto per ripristinare uno spazio Schengen funzionante. Il ritorno coordinato della libertà di circolazione all'interno dell'Unione europea è fondamentale per garantire la ripresa economica dopo la pandemia. Pienamente condivisibile è la posizione di ferma opposizione a qualsiasi accordo, che violi il principio di non discriminazione, nella riapertura delle frontiere.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/06/19
Amending Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 as regards the resources for the specific allocation for the Youth Employment Initiative (A9-0111/2020 - Younous Omarjee)

Con una modifica del regolamento (UE) n. 1303/2013 è possibile aumentare lo stanziamento specifico destinato all'iniziativa a favore dell'occupazione giovanile (IOG). L'IOG fornisce un sostegno per il contrasto alla disoccupazione giovanile laddove si presenta a livelli molto elevati e si rivolge soprattutto ai giovani che non studiano, non lavorano e non seguono un corso di istruzione o formazione, inclusi i disoccupati di lunga durata e quelli che non sono iscritti presso i servizi per l'impiego, in modo che possano beneficiare di un sostegno mirato. L'Iniziativa sostiene generalmente l'offerta di apprendistati, tirocini, inserimenti professionali e ulteriori studi volti al conseguimento di una qualifica. Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/07/08
Ειδικοί κανόνες για την απόσπαση οδηγών στον τομέα των οδικών μεταφορών και απαιτήσεις επιβολής (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná) (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná)

Per rendere il settore del trasporto su strada più sicuro, efficiente e socialmente responsabile, è indispensabile assicurare condizioni di lavoro adeguate e protezione sociale per i conducenti nonché condizioni eque per le imprese, affinché non vi siano distorsioni della concorrenza. I problemi e le lacune del quadro legislativo, soprattutto per ciò che riguarda le differenze salariali ed in generale l'interpretazione e l'applicazione di norme, hanno determinato, per esempio, notevoli difficoltà per alcune imprese italiane, costrette a chiudere le proprie attività o a delocalizzare in Paesi con minori costi e minori tutele per i lavoratori. Nonostante i difficili negoziati, le modifiche vanno nella direzione di miglioramenti apprezzabili, pertanto il mio voto sarà diretto a preservare i risultati raggiunti, respingendo il tentativo di fermare le nuove norme.
2020/07/08
Daily and weekly driving times, minimum breaks and rest periods and positioning by means of tachographs (A9-0115/2020 - Henna Virkkunen)

L'accordo raggiunto dal Parlamento europeo, dal Consiglio e dalla Commissione, è volto a migliorare le attuali norme del mercato interno nel settore dei trasporti su strada, in particolare per quanto riguarda l'organizzazione dei periodi di guida, interruzione, riposo e ritorno dei conducenti al loro domicilio. Come le altre proposte del Pacchetto Mobilità anche questa ha avuto un percorso di negoziato interistituzionale particolarmente complesso, al fine di colmare le lacune nell'interpretazione ed attuazione del quadro giuridico di riferimento. Apprezzabili sono gli sforzi e i progressi fatti per garantire migliori condizioni di lavoro, sicurezza stradale, e il riconoscimento del ruolo di tecnologie e prassi innovative. Il mio voto sarà diretto a preservare i risultati raggiunti, respingendo il tentativo di fermare le nuove norme.
2020/07/08
Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (B9-0229/2020)

La pandemia da COVID-19, determinando in Europa e nel mondo una crisi senza precedenti per persone, famiglie, lavoratori e imprese, va affrontata con una risposta straordinaria, ambiziosa e all'insegna della solidarietà. Nell'accordo sul Recovery Fund, ottenuto con una negoziazione complessa, il ruolo svolto dal Governo italiano e dal Presidente del Consiglio Conte è stato fondamentale per non mettere in pericolo il raggiungimento di soluzioni comuni di interesse generale. Anche se l'Italia, il Paese più colpito dal virus, ha ottenuto la quota maggiore del fondo, questo risultato è un successo anche per quell'Europa che vuole essere una vera comunità. La sfida futura sarà ora quella di vigilare sui fondi che arriveranno affinché siano spesi tempestivamente e con efficienza, stimolando la ripresa e dando ai cittadini le risposte che stanno attendendo. Tutto questo dovrà avvenire senza penalizzare gli obiettivi nel campo dell'innovazione e della transizione verso un'economia verde capace di raggiungere la neutralità climatica, salvaguardare i livelli occupazionali e creare nuove opportunità nel mercato del lavoro. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/07/23
Arms export: implementation of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (A9-0137/2020 - Hannah Neumann)

La ricerca di una maggiore convergenza nelle politiche e nel processo decisionale legato all'export di armi e il rafforzamento della capacità degli Stati membri nell'attuazione di procedure rigorose per il rispetto degli embarghi sulle armi, sono obiettivi rilevanti per sostenere la pace e la stabilità nelle aree dove si registrano conflitti. Trovo condivisibile la proposta di creare un duplice meccanismo relativo al rispetto degli 8 criteri della posizione comune del 2008, sia sotto il profilo del monitoraggio e controllo, sia sotto quello sanzionatorio in caso di violazione.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/09/16
European Climate Law (A9-0162/2020 - Jytte Guteland)

Sono pienamente condivisibili le priorità dell'UE di fare dell'Europa il primo continente in grado di raggiungere la neutralità climatica, al più tardi nel 2050. La legge europea sul clima, pietra angolare dell'European Green Deal, risponde all'urgente necessità di una strategia per limitare il riscaldamento globale al di sotto di 1,5º C, al fine di evitare danni irreparabili per le economie, gli ecosistemi e le società europee. A tal proposito, e in linea con l'ambizione delle richieste dell'M5S per il raggiungimento di obiettivi intermedi lungo questo percorso, la proposta di regolamento rafforza la credibilità dell'impegno per la neutralità climatica, anche con la previsione della coerenza delle iniziative della Commissione (in materia legislativa e di bilancio) con gli obiettivi climatici del 2030 e 2050. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/10/07
The European Forest Strategy - The Way Forward (A9-0154/2020 - Petri Sarvamaa)

La revisione della strategia forestale dell'UE è fondamentale per raggiungere gli obiettivi del Green Deal europeo, preservando il ruolo multifunzionale delle foreste attraverso un modello comune di gestione sostenibile che rafforzi la sostenibilità ambientale, economica e sociale. In considerazione dei crescenti danni alle foreste dell'UE e delle minacce derivanti dai cambiamenti climatici e dalle attività umane, sono necessari meccanismi per prevenire la distruzione degli ecosistemi e per promuovere la resilienza delle foreste. A questo proposito, e in linea con il parere del Comitato ENVI, un impegno più ambizioso per un uso veramente sostenibile della biomassa legnosa è essenziale per preservare il ruolo delle foreste nell'assorbire le emissioni di carbonio. Inoltre, in una visione in cui un ruolo cruciale è svolto dalla tutela della biodiversità forestale, soprattutto in alcune aree europee, non dovrebbero trovare spazio forme di attività umane particolarmente invasive, come quella venatoria, che rischiano di mettere in pericolo il delicato equilibrio degli ecosistemi.
2020/10/07
Organic production: date of application and certain other dates (C9-0286/2020)

L'agricoltura biologica dovrebbe rappresentare un alleato fondamentale nella transizione verso un sistema alimentare più sostenibile e una migliore protezione della biodiversità. Consapevole della sua importanza, la sfida senza precedenti della pandemia di COVID-19 ha esercitato un'ulteriore pressione sulla transizione degli Stati membri verso il nuovo quadro normativo per la produzione biologica. Si è reso necessario un adattamento sostanziale in questo settore in termini di produzione, commercializzazione, controlli e scambi internazionali, in modo che gli Stati membri abbiano il tempo necessario per modernizzare le proprie legislazioni in materia. Pertanto dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2020/10/08
The rule of law and fundamental rights in Bulgaria (B9-0309/2020)

Sostengo la proposta di risoluzione sulla questione del rispetto dello Stato di diritto e diritti fondamentali in Bulgaria, così come il popolo bulgaro nelle sue legittime richieste e aspirazioni di giustizia, trasparenza e democrazia. Recentemente sono state sollevate preoccupazioni riguardo all'indipendenza del potere giudiziario, all'uso improprio dei fondi UE, agli ostacoli al diritto di voto e alla libertà di espressione, ai risultati insufficienti e ai maggiori sforzi da compiere nella lotta alla corruzione e alla criminalità organizzata. Considerando che le minacce allo stato di diritto in uno Stato membro sono dannose per la fiducia e la cooperazione tra Stati, minando la credibilità dell'UE nel suo complesso, ritengo condivisibile il percorso indicato nella risoluzione per il perseguimento e il rispetto dei valori comuni su cui l'UE si fonda. Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2020/10/08
Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence (A9-0178/2020 - Axel Voss)

L'Intelligenza Artificiale guiderà la rivoluzione tecnologica dei prossimi anni e trasformerà radicalmente il nostro presente e futuro. Se implementata con responsabilità e con le adeguate salvaguardie, l'IA genererebbe un sostanziale valore aggiunto economico e sociale entro il 2030. Sostengo la proposta di istituire un regime di responsabilità extracontrattuale per le applicazioni di IA, che, in linea con le ambizioni di M5S, riduca gli attuali rischi associati all'incertezza giuridica e aumenti gli standard di sicurezza, prevedendo al contempo un diritto al risarcimento per coloro che potrebbero subire un danno alla vita, alla salute, all'integrità fisica e al patrimonio da parte dei sistemi di IA. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/10/20
Economic policies of the euro area 2020 (A9-0193/2020 - Joachim Schuster)

La pandemia da Covid-19 ha determinato una crisi economica senza precedenti e nonostante lo shock sia simmetrico, l'impatto varia notevolmente tra gli Stati membri, in base alla gravità della situazione epidemiologica, la severità delle misure di contenimento, le condizioni iniziali ecc.. Anche dopo la crisi per molti Paesi sarà difficile affrontare le conseguenze legate ad austere regole riguardanti stabilità e crescita. Bisognerà evitare il ritiro prematuro di tutte quelle misure a sostegno della ripresa e prevedere maggiori tutele per le categorie lavorative più vulnerabili. Anche se condivido la necessità di una revisione dell'attuale quadro finanziario ed economico per migliorare la convergenza economica e sociale, il testo presentato è in contraddizione con l'austerità di determinate politiche europee e non fornisce una risposta solida alle sfide del periodo post-crisi per quanto riguarda sviluppo sostenibile, diritti sociali e obiettivi del Green Deal. Per questo motivo, dichiaro il mio voto contrario.
2020/10/21
Deforestation (A9-0179/2020 - Delara Burkhardt)

Ritengo questa relazione meritevole di sostegno in quanto prevede un progresso importante verso il contenimento e l'inversione del processo di deforestazione globale, fondamentale per proteggere la biodiversità, per l'assorbimento del carbonio e per lo sviluppo sostenibile delle comunità locali. I consumi dell'UE contribuiscono per circa il 10% alla deforestazione globale. Questa iniziativa fornisce valide raccomandazioni per la definizione di un quadro giuridico europeo che preveda obblighi di tracciabilità e obiettivi diretti a garantire che le catene di approvvigionamento del mercato europeo non includano prodotti che possano mettere in pericolo le foreste, gli ecosistemi, popolazioni indigene e i diritti umani in generale. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/10/22
Tackling homelessness rates in the European Union (B9-0363/2020)

La precaria situazione di circa 4 milioni di cittadini europei che vivono in alloggi temporanei, insicuri o di scarsa qualità, riguarda una delle forme più gravi di povertà e deprivazione, causata da una combinazione di fattori strutturali, istituzionali e personali. Il numero di persone senza fissa dimora è aumentato nel tempo e include minori, anziani, donne e categorie sociali vulnerabili e svantaggiate. L'eradicazione dell'esclusione abitativa dovrebbe essere una priorità delle politiche sociali dell'UE e degli Stati membri, rendendo disponibili maggiori finanziamenti, depenalizzando il fenomeno dei senzatetto, agevolando l'accesso all'assistenza sanitaria, alla giustizia, all'istruzione, all'integrazione nel mercato del lavoro. L'alloggio è un diritto umano fondamentale, garantirlo a chi ne ha bisogno è indispensabile per consentire il pieno sviluppo della persona umana ed eliminare gli ostacoli che impediscono inclusione e partecipazione sociale. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/11/23
Strengthening media freedom: the protection of journalists in Europe, hate speech, disinformation and the role of platforms (A9-0205/2020 - Magdalena Adamowicz)

La difesa della libertà di espressione e di stampa si garantisce anche permettendo al giornalismo investigativo di svolgere il proprio ruolo nel contribuire a salvaguardare il sistema democratico e lo stato di diritto. Molte inchieste sono utili a contrastare il crimine organizzato e a tutelare i diritti fondamentali. Alcuni gravi omicidi avvenuti nell'UE sono un allarmante segnale del rischio di violenze, minacce e intimidazioni di cui alcuni giornalisti possono essere vittime. Ritengo necessaria l'istituzione di un quadro giuridico idoneo a fornire un'adeguata protezione a questa categoria. Trovo condivisibile ritenere che un sistema pluralistico, libero ed indipendente dei media si realizzi anche con la diversificazione dei contenuti ed evitando l'eccessiva concentrazione della proprietà. Una sempre maggiore collaborazione tra le piattaforme digitali e le autorità di contrasto è fondamentale nel combattere la diffusione della disinformazione e dei messaggi di odio. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/11/25
Implementation of the Dublin III Regulation (A9-0245/2020 - Fabienne Keller)

Condivido pienamente questa relazione, sull'attuazione del regolamento Dublino III, considerando che le numerose critiche in essa contenute, evidenziano ancora una volta, l'inefficienza di un pilastro intorno a cui, ruota il funzionamento del sistema europeo comune di asilo. Mentre attendiamo la riforma del CEAS come ridisegnata dal Nuovo Patto sulla migrazione e l'asilo, gli Stati membri di primo ingresso, continuano ad assumersi una responsabilità sproporzionata per quanto riguarda la gestione dei flussi migratori. Sin dall'inizio del suo ingresso nel Parlamento europeo, il M5S ha condannato non solo la mancanza di solidarietà e di equa ripartizione di responsabilità tra gli Stati membri, ma anche le negative conseguenze del sistema di Dublino, sui diritti umani dei richiedenti asilo e sull'uso delle risorse.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole
2020/12/16
EU Security Union Strategy (B9-0421/2020)

La Strategia dell'UE per l'unione della sicurezza, ben si adatta ai tempi che viviamo e cerca di fornire risposte alle minacce online e offline che pongono nuove sfide presenti e future da affrontare. Ritengo sia meritevole di approvazione questa proposta di risoluzione, riguardante una migliore protezione delle nostre società dal cybercrime, dalla disinformazione, dal terrorismo e dalla criminalità organizzata, salvaguardando al contempo i diritti fondamentali. Particolarmente condivisibili sono gli aspetti concernenti la lotta agli abusi sessuali sui minori online e alle interferenze straniere, fenomeni per i quali è necessaria una cooperazione rafforzata giudiziaria e di polizia. Un ruolo significativo può essere svolto dall'interoperabilità, prevedendo adeguate tutele per la protezione dei dati.Inoltre, affinché la politica di sicurezza dell'Unione sia efficace, dobbiamo garantire una corretta implementazione degli strumenti giuridici a nostra disposizione e preservare il rispetto dello stato di diritto.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2020/12/17
Reforming the EU list of tax havens (B9-0052/2021)

. – L'esistenza dei paradisi fiscali, anche nell'UE, determina una grave perdita finanziaria per gli Stati membri e la riduzione di risorse necessarie per la ripresa dalla crisi sociale, economica e sanitaria, dovuta alla pandemia del COVID-19. Ritengo questa risoluzione sulla riforma dell'elenco UE dei paradisi fiscali, meritevole di sostegno, in quanto si rende necessario contrastare le pratiche fiscali dannose con maggiore efficacia. L'introduzione di criteri più trasparenti, coerenti, rigorosi e imparziali è necessaria non solo per rafforzare la lotta contro evasione fiscale e riciclaggio, ma anche perché è in gioco la fiducia tra Stati membri e da parte dei cittadini nelle istituzioni europee.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/01/21
Implementation of Article 43 of the Asylum Procedures Directive (A9-0005/2021 - Erik Marquardt)

Nell'ambito del funzionamento del Sistema europeo comune di asilo, l'attuazione delle procedure di frontiera da parte degli Stati membri ha sempre rappresentato un aspetto problematico, come ben evidenzia questa relazione. La disciplina poco chiara e definita delle procedure di frontiera, applicata in modo divergente negli Stati membri, caratterizzata spesso da trattenimento e brevi termini, solleva serie preoccupazioni in merito ai diritti fondamentali, alle garanzie procedurali, alla valutazione delle vulnerabilità. A ciò si aggiunge il fatto che la Commissione non ha ancora pubblicato una relazione sull'attuazione della direttiva sulle procedure di asilo e valutazioni di impatto, riguardanti le proposte di riforma del 2016 e nel contesto del nuovo patto per la migrazione e l'asilo.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/02/09
Public access to documents for the years 2016-2018 (A9-0004/2021 - Ioan-Rareş Bogdan)

La salvaguardia del diritto fondamentale di accesso del pubblico ai documenti delle Istituzioni europee, è inestricabilmente legata al controllo democratico, al coinvolgimento dei cittadini nei processi decisionali e alla fiducia nelle attività politiche, legislative e amministrative dell'UE. Condivido pienamente la presente risoluzione, in quanto si esprime la necessità di ottenere trasparenza da una prospettiva più ampia. Facilitare comunicazioni e accessibilità di documenti ed informazioni, compreso tutto ciò che riguarda la procedura dei triloghi, contribuirà ad una maggiore partecipazione democratica e al buon governo nelle istituzioni dell'UE.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/02/09
Declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone (B9-0166/2021, B9-0167/2021)

Sostengo pienamente la proposta di dichiarare l'Unione europea "Zona di Libertà LGBTIQ", così come la condanna di qualsiasi tipo di discriminazione o attacco contro le persone LGBTIQ. Non è tollerabile alcuna violazione dei valori comuni europei sui quali l'Unione si fonda. Questa dichiarazione arriva in risposta all'istituzione delle aree "libere dall'ideologia LGBTI" in Polonia e qualsiasi tentativo di regressione nel campo del rispetto dei diritti fondamentali, poiché ancora oggi troppe persone LGBTIQ non si sentono libere di essere ciò che sono. Inoltre, gli attacchi ai diritti delle persone LGBTIQ possono rappresentare un grave campanello di allarme di un più ampio deterioramento della situazione della democrazia, dello stato di diritto e dei diritti fondamentali. Confido che questa iniziativa, insieme alla prima strategia dell'UE per l'uguaglianza LGBTIQ, segni l'inizio di una nuova fase negli sforzi per combattere la discriminazione strutturale e l'emarginazione delle persone LGBTIQ.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/03/11
Children's Rights (B9-0164/2021)

L'elaborazione di una nuova strategia globale sui diritti dei minori è una importante opportunità, per meglio affrontare le sfide riguardanti la loro ulteriore promozione e tutela. Condivido il contenuto di questa proposta di risoluzione che evidenzia l'impatto della crisi del COVID-19 e la minaccia che essa rappresenta per lo sviluppo e il benessere dei minori, in convergenza con altre questioni legate al cambiamento climatico e ai progressi tecnologici dell'era digitale. Si verificano fenomeni che aumentano il rischio di povertà infantile, compromettendo gravemente l'accesso all'istruzione e aumentando il rischio di violenze e abusi. Sono necessarie sia misure concrete per proteggere i minori da ogni forma di discriminazione e violenza, online e offline, sia maggiori investimenti per la scuola, l'assistenza sanitaria, alloggi, sostegno alle famiglie svantaggiate e alle categorie più vulnerabili, come quelle dei minori non accompagnati e con disabilità.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/03/11
EU Strategy for Sustainable Tourism (A9-0033/2021 - Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar)

Il turismo è il settore maggiormente colpito dalla pandemia COVID-19, pertanto è un momento cruciale, per ripensare come renderlo resiliente nelle crisi future, più competitivo e sostenibile. Sostengo l'orientamento di questa relazione verso una governance più forte del turismo europeo, in grado di ricostruire la fiducia dei cittadini attraverso regole comuni di sicurezza sanitaria che facilitino i viaggi e contribuiscano alla transizione verde e alla digitalizzazione. Per plasmare il futuro della nuova strategia dell'UE per il turismo, in linea con le richieste del M5S, è necessario un maggiore sostegno finanziario per le imprese e i trasporti. Una importante sfida è rappresentata dalla capacità di ideare soluzioni sostenibili e flessibili per il trasporto multimodale e sviluppare politiche per preservare il patrimonio naturale e la biodiversità, promuovendo forme alternative di turismo dirette a rispettare maggiormente l'ambiente e a valorizzare il patrimonio culturale, al fine di contrastare gli effetti più deleteri dell'overtourism.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/03/25
Soil protection (B9-0221/2021)

Ritengo questa relazione meritevole di sostegno, in quanto una protezione efficace del suolo è fondamentale per affrontare il degrado del territorio e l'erosione, preservando e migliorando nel contempo la qualità dell'ambiente, la salute umana e le risorse naturali. Nonostante il suolo sia una risorsa comune non rinnovabile, con un ruolo multifunzionale che è vitale per la vita sul pianeta, attualmente non esiste un quadro giuridico comunitario coerente e integrato per la protezione del suolo europeo. I cittadini europei non possono permettersi il costo dell'inazione riguardo alla desertificazione, al degrado del suolo e alle sue principali minacce. I suoli sani, sono essenziali per la mitigazione del cambiamento climatico, la sicurezza alimentare e fondamentali per raggiungere gli obiettivi del Green Deal europeo.Dichiaro pertanto il mio voto favorevole.
2021/04/28
European Child Guarantee (B9-0220/2021)

La povertà infantile è una delle peggiori piaghe della nostra società. L'attuale pandemia ha esacerbato le disuguaglianze preesistenti e il rischio di povertà ed esclusione sociale dei minori, influenzando il loro accesso all'istruzione e all'apprendimento a distanza, compromettendo la loro salute fisica e mentale, aumentando il rischio di esposizione alla violenza e agli abusi. Sostengo fermamente la proposta di creare una Garanzia europea per l'infanzia, complementare alla Strategia dell'UE sui diritti dei minori, al fine di garantire che tutti i minori bisognosi, abbiano un accesso effettivo all'assistenza sanitaria gratuita e di qualità, all'istruzione e alle necessarie infrastrutture digitali, all'istruzione e alla cura della prima infanzia, a un alloggio decente e a un'alimentazione adeguata. Affinché questi servizi raggiungano tutti i minori interrompendo il ciclo intergenerazionale della povertà e dell'esclusione sociale, sono essenziali piani d'azione nazionali adeguatamente finanziati, che attivino riforme concrete e ambiziose.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/04/29
Liability of companies for environmental damage (A9-0112/2021 - Antonius Manders)

Condivido pienamente questa proposta per rafforzare e armonizzare le norme UE esistenti sulla responsabilità ambientale delle imprese, al fine di prevenire e riparare i danni ambientali.Nonostante una delle attività criminali più redditizie al mondo riguardi la commissione di ecoreati, non abbiamo ancora una loro classificazione armonizzata a livello europeo e i tassi di individuazione, indagine, perseguimento e condanna sono molto bassi.Inoltre, è imperativo introdurre un sistema di garanzia finanziaria obbligatoria per salvaguardare il principio "chi inquina paga" in caso di insolvenza dell'operatore, e, quindi, per assicurare che i contribuenti non sostengano il costo della riparazione del danno ambientale.D'altra parte, la trasformazione dell'attuale direttiva 2004/35/CE (ELD) in un regolamento renderebbe più efficace l'armonizzazione delle legislazioni nazionali in tutta l'UE, mentre la creazione di una task force potrebbe aiutare nella sua attuazione e offrire maggiore sostegno alle vittime di danni ambientali.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/05/20
New Avenues for Legal Labour Migration (A9-0143/2021 - Sylvie Guillaume)

L'attuale quadro normativo dell'UE sulla migrazione legale del lavoro si presenta frammentato, focalizzandosi esclusivamente su specifiche categorie di lavoratori e consentendo che molti migranti siano assoggettati a sfruttamento e a un trattamento lavorativo iniquo.Il M5S chiede da tempo un aumento dei canali legali per una migrazione sicura, regolare e ordinata, che faciliterebbe l'integrazione contrastando al contempo il modello di business di trafficanti di esseri umani e le reti criminali.Infine, la revisione del quadro comunitario deve mirare a realizzare una maggiore cooperazione con i paesi terzi per affrontare le carenze del mercato del lavoro, in modo che possa trarne vantaggio l'economia europea, che venga ridotta la migrazione irregolare e che sia assicurato il rispetto dei diritti fondamentali.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/05/20
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (A9-0179/2021 - César Luena)

La biodiversità è alla base del funzionamento degli ecosistemi e della vita sul nostro pianeta. Purtroppo la natura si sta deteriorando globalmente ad un livello senza precedenti, con un milione di specie su otto milioni stimate, minacciate di estinzione. Condivido pienamente l'ambizione della nuova strategia dell'UE per la biodiversità 2030, al fine di affrontare le principali cause della perdita di biodiversità: i cambiamenti dell'uso del suolo e del mare, lo sfruttamento diretto degli organismi, i cambiamenti climatici, l'inquinamento e le specie esotiche invasive. Per contrastare queste minacce, è fondamentale avere aree marine e terrestri dell'UE protette, e tra queste, fissare obiettivi vincolanti. Il diritto a un ambiente sano deve essere riconosciuto come un diritto fondamentale.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/06/08
European Citizens' Initiative "End the cage age" (B9-0296/2021, B9-0302/2021)

Sostengo pienamente la volontà dei cittadini europei di eliminare gradualmente le gabbie negli allevamenti animali, così come la necessità evidenziata da questa iniziativa dei cittadini europei, di migliorare il benessere degli animali. La fine dell'allevamento in gabbia dovrebbe segnare maggiore attenzione e sostegno all'organizzazione della filiera alimentare, secondo un approccio diretto a rafforzare i piccoli stabilimenti di trasformazione locali e promuovere la filiera corta. Parallelamente è necessario investire in sistemi di produzione zootecnica alternativi, che tengano conto delle interrelazioni tra la nostra salute, le catene di approvvigionamento, i modelli di consumo, l'ambiente e i limiti del pianeta. A questo proposito, la revisione della legislazione sul benessere degli animali è cruciale e deve essere in linea con il Green Deal e la strategia Farm to Fork.Dichiaro pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/06/10
Citizens’ dialogues and citizens’ participation in EU decision-making (A9-0213/2021 - Helmut Scholz)

Una delle priorità politiche del M5S è da sempre quella di rendere più forte la voce dei cittadini nei processi decisionali dell'UE e più accessibile, inclusivo e costruttivo il loro coinvolgimento, intervenendo sulle carenze che presentano gli strumenti e i meccanismi di dialogo e di partecipazione esistenti, nonché favorendone di nuovi.Ritengo condivisibile il tentativo delle proposte contenute nella relazione di andare in questa direzione e, in particolare, verso la creazione di un meccanismo permanente per la partecipazione dei cittadini con un processo di follow-up formalmente vincolante per le istituzioni europee. Inoltre, viene evidenziata la necessità di individuare nuovi mezzi di comunicazione e interazione adeguati agli interessi delle generazioni più giovani per promuovere una loro maggiore partecipazione alla vita democratica europea e fornire migliori risposte alle loro aspettative.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/07/07
Annual Report on the functioning of the Schengen area (A9-0183/2021 - Tanja Fajon)

Il ricorso indiscriminato a misure unilaterali e non coordinate di reintroduzione dei controlli alle frontiere interne, dovute anche alla pandemia di COVID-19, ha messo in luce i pericoli per lo spazio Schengen, una delle maggiori conquiste dell'UE, essenziale per un'ulteriore integrazione politica, economica e sociale. Il suo buon funzionamento rafforza la fiducia reciproca tra gli Stati membri favorendo solidarietà, sicurezza, cooperazione giudiziaria e di polizia in materia penale, protezione congiunta delle frontiere esterne dell'UE nonché comunanza di vedute e politiche comuni in diversi settori.Chiarezza delle norme, rispetto dei diritti fondamentali e dei principi di necessità e di proporzionalità nell'adozione di misure coordinate sono essenziali per evitare ogni impatto negativo sulla libera circolazione delle merci, dei capitali, dei servizi e delle persone nell'Unione europea.Sostengo, pertanto, il contenuto della relazione e dichiaro favorevole il mio voto.
2021/07/07
Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola)

Il ricorso ad azioni legali, avviate con il solo scopo di vessare, intimidire o screditare giornalisti, membri del mondo accademico, società civile e ONG, si pone come obiettivo ultimo, di costringerli al silenzio e limitarne la partecipazione a questioni di interesse pubblico, soprattutto nel campo dei diritti umani, tutela dell'ambiente e della salute, lotta alla criminalità organizzata e corruzione. Questa pratica costituisce un attacco diretto all'esercizio dei diritti e delle libertà fondamental,i quali la libertà di espressione, la libertà e l'indipendenza dei media, nonchè una minaccia allo stato di diritto e alla democrazia. Condivido pienamente il contenuto della relazione e la necessità di un intervento legislativo da parte della Commissione che dia maggior protezione al lavoro dei giornalisti d'inchiesta e dei difensori dei diritti, garantendo un attento equilibrio tra libertà di pensiero e di parola, da un lato, e accesso alla giustizia per tutti, dall'altro.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/11/11
Legal migration policy and law (A9-0314/2021 - Abir Al-Sahlani)

La definizione di canali sicuri e legali nel contesto di politiche migratorie ben concepite e correttamente gestite, può rivelarsi vantaggiosa sia per i paesi ospitanti, sia per quelli di origine. Nell'ambito delle sfide presenti e future che l'UE dovrà affrontare, riguardanti sviluppo economico, demografia e rispetto dei diritti fondamentali, avremo bisogno anche di un quadro legislativo non frammentato che contribuisca a contrastare i flussi migratori irregolari, il business criminale su questo fenomeno, la condizione di sfruttamento e precarietà dei lavoratori dei paesi terzi. Questi ultimi danno un contributo significativo al mercato del lavoro e all'economia europea, diventato ancora più evidente durante la pandemia.Condivido il contenuto di questa relazione, pertanto dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2021/11/25
Combating gender-based violence: cyberviolence (A9-0338/2021 - Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Sylwia Spurek)

La violenza online nei confronti delle donne, in quanto forma di violenza di genere, incide notevolmente sui diritti e sulle libertà fondamentali, sulla salute fisica, emotiva e mentale, sullo sviluppo sociale, economico e professionale. La dimensione online non esclude molestie, minacce, atti persecutori, abusi di immagini e video, incitamento all'odio e altre forme di violenza che richiedono un quadro giuridico comune a livello europeo. Alcune categorie risultano particolarmente colpite dalla "cyber-violenza" di genere, come le donne attive nella difesa dei diritti umani, in politica, nel giornalismo d'inchiesta, appartenenti a minoranze etniche, con disabilità e le persone LGBTIQ.Condivido pienamente il contenuto della relazione e le raccomandazioni riguardanti prevenzione, perseguibilità e configurazione come reato della violenza di genere online, protezione e meccanismi di sostegno per le vittime.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2021/12/14
Protection of animals during transport (Recommendation) (B9-0057/2022)

L'indagine della commissione ANIT, ha evidenziato come le disposizioni europee in relazione alla protezione degli animali durante il trasporto all'interno e all'esterno dell'Unione, non siano sempre rispettate negli Stati membri. Molti dei problemi dipendono da un quadro normativo poco chiaro e lacunoso che contribuisce alla "corsa al ribasso" negli standard del benessere animale, durante il trasporto. Le violazioni più evidenti riguardano la mancanza di spazio, di acqua o di cibo, l'impiego di veicoli inadeguati, condizioni estreme in viaggi prolungati.Condivido il lavoro svolto e gli sforzi nel definire delle raccomandazioni dirette, a migliorare la legislazione in materia e avere regole, controlli e sistemi sanzionatori più armonizzati.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2022/01/20
EU Protection of children and young people fleeing the war against Ukraine (B9-0207/2022, B9-0212/2022, B9-0213/2022)

Zoryana, Makar, Viktoria. Sono solo alcuni dei bambini ucraini malati di tumore ospitati in Italia per continuare in sicurezza le proprie cure. Questi piccoli pazienti in fuga sono uno dei volti più tristi e drammatici della guerra in Ucraina . Ma sono anche il volto della solidarietà che tutta l'Unione europea deve mostrare. Secondo l'Unicef quasi la metà degli oltre 4 milioni di rifugiati sono minori. La condizione di vulnerabilità richiede per la loro accoglienza e protezione un grande sforzo di coordinamento tra Stati membri. Quasi tutti vivono il dramma della separazione familiare. Non hanno solo bisogni primari da soddisfare, come un tetto, cibo, acqua e beni di prima necessità, occorre anche un'adeguata tutela contro rischi di abusi, tratta e sfruttamento, di servizi di assistenza medica, psicologica, legale e di mediazione culturale. L'accesso all'istruzione sarà ugualmente prioritario non solo per l'opportunità di iniziare o continuare l' apprendimento, ma anche per garantire più stabilità e meno incertezze alla propria crescita. L'UE ha oggi una grande responsabilità. Dimostriamo con i fatti di essere l'Europa dell'accoglienza e della solidarietà.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2022/04/07
Parliament’s right of initiative (A9-0142/2022 - Paulo Rangel)

I parlamenti degli Stati Membri hanno in comune, una tradizione costituzionale che prevede per essi l'elezione a suffragio universale diretto e il godimento di un diritto generale di iniziativa legislativa.È giunto il momento che anche il Parlamento europeo, come unica istituzione direttamente eletta dell'UE, disponga di un diritto generale diretto di iniziativa legislativa. Sostengo fortemente una modifica dei Trattati in questo senso, al fine di promuovere la revisione del processo legislativo dell'UE e rafforzare la democrazia europea, come richiesto anche dai cittadini nel corso della Conferenza sul futuro dell'Europa.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2022/06/09
A new trade instrument to ban products made by forced labour (B9-0291/2022)

Secondo le stime dell'OIL, sarebbero 25 milioni le persone sottoposte a lavoro forzato nel mondo e di questi, 20,8 milioni sono soggetti a lavoro forzato imposto privatamente e 4,1 milioni a lavoro forzato imposto dallo Stato. La maggior parte di queste persone sono donne. Preoccupanti sono i dati riguardanti il lavoro minorile svolto in condizioni di pericolo per la salute e la sicurezza. Vietare l'importazione e l'esportazione di prodotti realizzati o trasportati con tali modalità lavorative dovrebbe essere una priorità dell'UE. Prevenire gravi violazioni di diritti umani e danni ambientali dovrebbe essere una regola ineludibile per ogni attività commerciale e obiettivo di ogni accordo internazionale dell'UE, riguardante il commercio e lo sviluppo sostenibile. Trovo condivisibile la necessità di una nuova legislazione che si applichi a tutto il processo produttivo, e non solo ai prodotti finali, in grado di contrastare forme di lavoro che calpestano la dignità umana, che alterano la concorrenza e che, purtroppo, sono spesso correlate a circostanze economiche, sociali, politiche o culturali.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2022/06/09
Adequate minimum wages in the European Union (A9-0325/2021 - Dennis Radtke, Agnes Jongerius)

La direttiva UE sui salari minimi è un importante provvedimento che obbliga a garantire retribuzioni adeguate ed eque e a promuovere progressi in ambito economico e sociale.Questo strumento assume maggiore rilevanza in un momento in cui il rincaro dei prezzi dell'energia e il generale aumento dell'inflazione falcidiano il potere d'acquisto dei cittadini.Bisogna dare immediate risposte ai lavoratori il cui reddito è inferiore alla soglia di povertà relativa pur essendo regolarmente occupati se si vuole porre un argine alle disuguaglianze e alle disparità di trattamento lavorativo, un fenomeno che raggiunge livelli intollerabili, soprattutto per donne e giovani.La direttiva contribuirà inoltre al contrasto del dumping salariale e della concorrenza sleale nel mercato interno e ad aumentare la copertura della contrattazione collettiva, molto bassa in alcuni Stati membri.Come M5S, da anni in Italia stiamo portando avanti la battaglia per l'introduzione di una normativa sul salario minimo che aiuti chiunque lavori e la propria famiglia a realizzare un'esistenza libera e dignitosa.Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2022/09/14
Access to water as a human right – the external dimension (A9-0231/2022 - Miguel Urbán Crespo)

Il M5S ha sempre sostenuto l'accesso all'acqua come diritto umano, guidato non da logiche di profitto e speculazioni finanziarie ma di interesse pubblico e beni comuni.Il diritto all'acqua, in quanto universale, deve essere riconosciuto, promosso e applicato in modo giusto, equo e non discriminatorio. Esso rappresenta una condizione fondamentale per il godimento di altri diritti poichè è indispensabile ad assicurare una vita sana e dignitosa.Poichè l'accesso all'acqua mira a soddisfare un bisogno primario per piante, animali ed esseri umani esso deve essere diretto anche a realizzare maggiore giustizia sociale e tutela ambientale. Ecosistemi sani consentono di migliorare la quantità e la qualità delle acque, aumentando al contempo la resilienza ai cambiamenti climatici.Sono necessari sforzi comuni per una migliore gestione integrata delle risorse idriche ed investimenti in soluzioni sostenibili riguardanti il ripristino degli ecosistemi acquatici, sistemi fognari e depurazione, irrigazione e pratiche agricole. Nel condividere le preoccupazioni e le priorità delineate nella relazione, dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2022/10/05
Towards equal rights for persons with disabilities (A9-0284/2022 - Anne-Sophie Pelletier)

Nell'UE vi sono circa 87 milioni di persone che presentano una qualche forma di disabilità, di cui oltre 24 milioni con disabilità grave. Molte di loro subiscono discriminazioni in tutti gli ambiti della vita, svantaggi socioeconomici, esclusione sociale, maltrattamenti e violenza, mancanza di accesso ai servizi di comunità e ad alloggi di qualità, assistenza sanitaria inadeguata e negazione di pari opportunità.Nonostante siano trascorsi sedici anni dall'adozione della Convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sui diritti delle persone con disabilità, le disposizioni in essa contenute non sono state ancora pienamente attuate negli ordinamenti giuridici degli Stati membri.La direttiva orizzontale antidiscriminazione è bloccata in Consiglio da quattordici anni e rimane molto lavoro da compiere per promuovere, proteggere e assicurare il pieno ed uguale godimento di tutti i diritti e di tutte le libertà.Bisogna passare dalle parole ai fatti affinchè politiche e legislazioni incentrate sull'inclusione e sull'accessibilità consentano la piena partecipazione alla vita sociale, politica e al mercato del lavoro.Nel condividere lo spirito e il contenuto della relazione, dichiaro il mio voto favorevole.
2022/12/13
EU/New Zealand Agreement: exchange of personal data between Europol and New Zealand (A9-0003/2023 - Annalisa Tardino)

La cooperazione internazionale svolge un ruolo fondamentale nell'attività di contrasto nei settori della lotta al terrorismo, della prevenzione e del contrasto della criminalità organizzata e della corruzione, del traffico di stupefacenti, della criminalità informatica, del riciclaggio di denaro, del finanziamento del terrorismo e della migrazione illegale.In tale contesto le sfide che la Nuova Zelanda e l'Unione europea devono affrontare sono molto simili e la conclusione di un accordo faciliterà l'azione e la cooperazione delle reciproche autorità competenti, assicurando nel contempo garanzie adeguate per quanto riguarda il pieno rispetto dei diritti umani e delle libertà fondamentali delle persone, compreso il diritto alla vita privata e alla protezione dei dati. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2023/01/17
Shipments of waste (A9-0290/2022 - Pernille Weiss)

Solo nel 2020 i rifiuti esportati dall'UE verso paesi terzi sono stati ben 32,7 milioni di tonnellate. Sono circa 67 milioni di tonnellate i rifiuti spediti ogni anno tra i paesi dell'UE.Condivido ogni sforzo al fine di migliorare il quadro normativo sullo scambio di informazioni, tracciabilità e trasparenza di questo genere di spedizioni, sulla gestione dei rifiuti europei in modo sostenibile salvaguardando ambiente, salute e favorendo nuove opportunità di crescita dell'economia circolare.I traffici illeciti che riguardano i rifiuti sono fonte di immensi profitti per i gruppi criminali e, molto altro, deve essere ancora fatto per contrastare le attività illegali di trattamento e smaltimento. Migliorare le regole del settore cercando di far crescere i rifiuti utilizzati e riciclati in Europa è sicuramente un passo in avanti nel raggiungimento degli obiettivi di neutralità climatica, tutela dell'ambiente e della salute pubblica. Dichiaro, pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2023/01/17
Artificial Intelligence Act (A9-0188/2023 - Brando Benifei, Dragoş Tudorache)

Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'Artificial Intelligence Act rappresenta un passo importante nella direzione di regolamentare l'uso sicuro dei sistemi di intelligenza artificiale e proteggere i diritti fondamentali.Le implicazioni culturali e sociali dell'IA, soprattutto nel mondo del lavoro, stanno determinando cambiamenti complessi e nuove sfide da affrontare. I risultati prodotti dall'IA dipendono essenzialmente da come viene progettata e da quali dati vengono usati.Mitigare i rischi potenziali derivanti da questo processo, evitare abusi e discriminazioni, migliorare la trasparenza, tutelare i dati personali, garantire un controllo e una supervisione umana adeguata, deve essere un comune impegno per cogliere le opportunità dell'innovazione e dell'evoluzione tecnologica in un contesto responsabile ed etico, in linea con i valori dell'UE. Dichiaro pertanto, il mio voto favorevole.
2023/06/14

Written questions (193)

Calabria regional operational programme (ROP) 2014-2020: contradictory data and lack of transparency
2019/07/04
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(20 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme 2007-2013: risk of final-balance cut
2019/07/05
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Calabria Regional Waste Management Plan: problems and delays
2019/07/09
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(20 KB)
Regional operational programme (ROP) for Calabria 2014-2020 - state of play of urban development strategies
2019/07/19
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Directive 2004/35/EC and updating penalties for environmental damage
2019/07/25
Documents: PDF(45 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Completion of the San Lorenzo Marina seafront promenade - landscape and environmental issues
2019/08/19
Documents: PDF(49 KB) DOC(20 KB)
Delays in setting up the wastewater database for Calabria
2019/09/09
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Major project for an overground light railway link between Cosenza-Rende and the University of Calabria: delays and possible rescheduling of resources
2019/09/12
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Samos hotspot
2019/09/12
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Infringement of rules concerning effluent
2019/09/12
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(20 KB)
Urgent Order No 246 issued by the Calabria Region on 7 September 2019 and its compatibility with EU law
2019/09/20
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(18 KB)
Fraud in the use of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI) in Calabria, 2007-2013 and 2014-2020
2019/10/03
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Prison conditions in the EU and follow-up to the own-initiative report on prison systems and conditions (2015/2062 (INI))
2019/10/03
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Suspension of Calabria 2014-2020 ROP fund payments
2019/10/08
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
ERDF Regional Operational Programme for Calabria 2007-2013: final outcome regarding the 'Piazza Bilotti Cosenza' and 'Lorica Hamata in Sila Amena' projects
2019/10/10
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme 2014-2020: delays in the implementation of the strategy for the development of rural inland areas
2019/10/10
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme 2014-2020: projected multimodal system linking Lamezia Terme Airport with the Central Station, Germaneto and Catanzaro Lido
2019/10/17
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Lack of recognition for the Italian sign language
2019/10/24
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Common agricultural policy (CAP): risk of substantial funding cuts affecting Italian agriculture
2019/11/06
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Crisis in the citrus fruit sector of Calabrian clementines
2019/11/06
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Progress regarding cycle paths in Magna Grecia nature parks
2019/11/06
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme (ROP) 2014-2020: serious delays in social inclusion policies
2019/11/06
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Huge price rises for travel between northern and southern Italy
2019/11/08
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
EU-China agreement on the protection of PGI and PDO products; better protection of products from southern Italy
2019/11/18
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Germany’s request that the European Union suspend import duties on Turkish hazelnuts to the detriment of Italian producers
2019/11/27
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
EU funds for SCI Laghi La Vota – Gizzeria
2019/12/02
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Thematic objective of the Calabria 2014-2020 Regional operational programme (ROP): mitigation of erosion of Calabrian coastline
2020/01/07
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Products derived from industrial hemp plants
2020/01/14
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Abuses of transhumance in order to secure EU funding
2020/01/14
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Revitalising the development of rail infrastructure along the Adriatic coast
2020/01/15
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Accessibility of food product labels to visually impaired people
2020/01/15
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme (ROP) 2007-2013: non-operational projects and financial corrections
2020/01/21
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Child abduction in Japan affecting European citizens
2020/01/22
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Permanent ban on bathing in Reggio Calabria
2020/01/31
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Failure to suspend the zero-duty import regime for rice from Cambodia
2020/02/04
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Habitat conservation risk for the ‘Isola di Dino’ (Dino Island) SCI/SAC IT9310034 area in Praia a Mare
2020/02/04
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Day nurseries in Calabria
2020/02/07
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Crisis in the olive sector in Calabria
2020/02/13
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Water treatment in Calabria: progress made with Calabrian water treatment programme
2020/02/17
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Waste water treatment plant in Calabria
2020/02/20
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Sustainable urban development strategies: measures and time frame
2020/02/21
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Poor conservation of the SCI/SAC area ‘Dune dell’Angitola’
2020/02/21
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
ROP Calabria 2014-2020: financial corrections and possible expenditure cuts
2020/02/28
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Failure to apply conservation measures in SACs in Calabria
2020/03/05
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Migration crisis at the border between Greece and Turkey
2020/03/06
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Coronavirus: appeal for extraordinary measures
2020/03/09
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
New Lamezia Terme air terminal
2020/03/11
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Urgent measures to protect businesses and jobs in the face of the Coronavirus crisis
2020/03/13
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Reprogramming of resources for the major Metrotranvia project, linking Cosenza, Rende and the University of Calabria
2020/04/01
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Failure to carry out an assessment of the implications of a plan to build small hydro power plants along the River Abatemarco in the municipality of Verbicaro
2020/04/15
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria regional operational programme (ROP) for 2014-2020: extraordinary measures for the COVID-19 emergency
2020/04/22
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
New European tourism programme and ad hoc funds
2020/04/28
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Impact of sanctions on third countries during the COVID-19 crisis
2020/05/04
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Unfair competition caused by European tax havens
2020/05/08
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Suspension of the Services Directive in the beach resort sector
2020/05/08
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Extension of Grant Agreement INEA/CEF/TRAN/M2014/1057372 until 31 December 2022
2020/05/14
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Waste crisis in Calabria
2020/05/15
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
No to the introduction of ‘unfair’ European tourist corridors
2020/05/18
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Calabria 2014-2020 regional development programme (RDP): delays in disbursement of funds for Measure 8
2020/05/30
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Fraudulent use of European funding for bogus tendering procedures in Calabria
2020/05/30
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Relocation and honouring of international obligations on provision of assistance in the Mediterranean
2020/06/04
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Regional operational programme for Calabria 2007-2013: Cosenza – solar cogeneration plants not in operation
2020/06/05
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Urban Generation project in Cosenza
2020/06/05
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Risk of financial adjustment affecting Arcea paying agency in Calabria
2020/06/13
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
European Court of Auditors report on the Turin-Lyon high-speed rail link
2020/06/20
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
‘Diagonale del Mediterraneo per il Sud’ rail network
2020/06/22
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Loopholes in the law on noise pollution as regards race tracks and Commission initiative
2020/06/26
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(11 KB)
Waste crisis in Reggio Calabria
2020/06/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Delays in building the new wastewater treatment plant in Bova Marina
2020/07/04
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Procedural delays in the implementation of calls for the 2014-2020 Calabria ROP
2020/07/15
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Waste water treatment in Calabria
2020/07/28
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
State of play with the Gallico-Gambarie highway
2020/08/05
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Problems regarding the projected Vetrano landfill extension in San Giovanni in Fiore
2020/09/01
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Calabria Water Authority: delay in sawarding the management of the integrated water service
2020/09/05
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Human rights infringements in Belarus:
2020/09/08
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Latest developments as regards certified expenditure in relation to the 2014-2020 Calabria regional operational programme (ROP)
2020/09/17
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Progress made in the implementation of the Calabria Regional Strategy for Inland Areas
2020/10/02
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Work in southern Italy and tax incentives
2020/10/07
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
2014-2020 regional operational programme (ROP) for Calabria: results of urban development strategies
2020/10/15
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Commission action plan on corporate taxation for a fairer taxation of multinationals
2020/10/29
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Freedom to provide services as a sworn private security guard
2020/10/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
SS 283 ‘Strada delle Terme’ highway: impossible to call 112 (single European emergency number)
2020/10/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Human rights violations in Poland
2020/10/31
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
European centre for the supply of medicines and vaccines
2020/11/06
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
State of play on the major project for an overground light railway link between Cosenza, Rende and the University of Calabria
2020/11/11
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
The dispute between Treofan and Jindal
2020/11/12
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
European coordination of anti-COVID measures and impact on ski resorts
2020/11/25
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Readjustment of EU funds for the COVID-19 emergency
2020/12/02
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
New waste management plan in Calabria
2020/12/09
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Inclusion of the Ionian coastal corridor in Calabria in the review of the implementation of the TEN-T core network
2020/12/16
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
‘Vaccine passport’ in order to travel
2021/01/15
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Educational inequalities due to the physical closure of schools
2021/01/18
Documents: PDF(50 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Allocation of EAFRD funding over the two transitional years 2021 and 2022
2021/01/26
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Commission guarantee of fair treatment for Italian and Austrian road hauliers
2021/01/28
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Rosarno: an EU project which has never been officially approved
2021/01/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Individualised academic learning pathways for students with disabilities
2021/02/01
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Commission measures to support the transport industry and maritime transport in particular
2021/02/09
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: governance and implementation
2021/02/12
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Parallel market in vaccines
2021/02/23
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Role of private strategy consulting firms in supporting the drafting of national recovery and resilience plans
2021/03/10
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Improvements to the Calabrian water treatment system
2021/03/16
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Status of the projected multimodal system linking Lamezia Terme Airport with the Central Station, Germaneto and Catanzaro Lido
2021/03/18
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
AstraZeneca vaccine production and black market in vaccines
2021/03/30
Documents: PDF(51 KB) DOC(11 KB)
ROP Calabria 2014-2020: spending on the COVID-19 health crisis
2021/04/01
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Regulation (EU) 2020/2220 and breakdown of EAFRD financial resources for 2021 and 2022
2021/04/13
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Italian Su.Pr.Eme programme
2021/04/16
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Zolgensma gene therapy for SMA
2021/04/19
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Regional operational plan (ROP) for Calabria 2021-2027 and failure to reform the water and waste sector
2021/05/11
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Calabria 2007-2013 regional operational programme – Prometeo project
2021/05/19
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
New crisis in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine
2021/05/19
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Integration into the labour market of people with autistic spectrum disorders
2021/05/21
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Solar power plant next to protected area SCI 9310008 La Petrosa
2021/05/26
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Situation in Tigray
2021/05/27
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders
2021/06/11
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Delays in developing inland areas of Calabria
2021/06/17
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Rule of law and freedom of the press in Italy
2021/06/23
Documents: PDF(52 KB) DOC(10 KB)
New regional waste management plan for Calabria
2021/06/30
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Problems in services for the voluntary termination of pregnancy in certain regions of Italy
2021/07/03
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Attempts to forge the Digital Green Pass
2021/07/08
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Discontinuity in care and services for adults with autism spectrum disorder
2021/07/16
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Mass slaughter of dolphins and whales in the Faroe Islands and the role of Danish authorities
2021/09/28
Documents: PDF(58 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Revision of the regulation on the TEN-T Core Network and the Calabrian Ionian area
2021/09/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Hydrocarbon exploration along the Crotone coast
2021/10/14
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Suspension of ESF payments to the Calabria Region
2021/10/19
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Extension of tax relief measures in southern Italy
2021/10/21
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Monitoring intensive amberjack fishing using gillnets
2021/11/10
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Risks relating to the implementation of the 2014-2020 Regional Operational Programme (ROP) for Calabria
2021/11/11
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
San Sago di Tortora waste disposal facility and possible infringement of the procedure in Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC (‘Habitats Directive’)
2021/11/15
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Latest developments in the activities of day nurseries and early childhood education and care (ECEC) policies in Calabria
2021/11/18
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Russia’s interference in the freedom of the press
2021/11/26
Documents: PDF(58 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Revision of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 and the EU legal framework for air navigation and cabin crew
2021/12/20
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Climate crisis and ghost flights
2022/01/12
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Updating of the Calabria regional waste plan
2022/01/21
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Self-determination of the individual in the European Union
2022/01/25
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Effectiveness of the EURES platform for the specific needs of people with disabilities and their carers
2022/01/25
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Expansion of a landfill for non-hazardous waste in the municipality of Scala Coeli
2022/01/26
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Objectives of the Italian Su.Pr.Eme. programme in the Sibari and Gioia Tauro plains
2022/02/08
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Upgrade of the Calabrian water treatment system
2022/02/17
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Nutrinform Battery and accurate information for consumers
2022/02/25
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Request for an extraordinary fund to be set up to protect European SMEs affected by the sanctions against Russia
2022/02/28
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
ROP Calabria 2014-2020: progress in implementing the Urban Agenda programme
2022/03/03
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Zero tolerance of child labour in EU trade
2022/03/17
Documents: PDF(50 KB) DOC(11 KB)
Adaptation of the Social Climate Fund following the war in Ukraine
2022/03/23
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Erasmus4Ukraine
2022/04/09
Documents: PDF(55 KB) DOC(11 KB)
Delays in reforming Directive 2009/128/EC on sustainable use of pesticides
2022/05/11
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Green transition and ‘Superbonus 110 %’
2022/05/13
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Recognition of domestic work and of the role of households as employers
2022/05/17
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Discrimination between EU countries in the issue and renewal of licences for Rally H drivers with disabilities
2022/05/18
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Decontamination by JSW of Piombino site of national interest
2022/06/01
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Possible violation of the Habitats Directive and of Directive 2004/35/EC in Vulture (Potenza)
2022/06/13
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Latest on the update to Calabria’s regional waste plan
2022/06/30
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
State of implementation of the regional operational programme (ROP) for Calabria 2014-2020
2022/07/14
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
TEN-T review and Ionian coast of Calabria
2022/09/14
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Directive 2006/126/EC and the failure to protect the right to mobility of persons with disabilities
2022/10/05
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
State aid rules and Germany’s 200-billion-euro defence shield against energy prices
2022/10/13
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)
State of play as regards the implementation of Italy’s NRRP
2022/10/18
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Free provision of security guard services on board merchant ships flying the Italian flag
2022/10/28
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
District heating market irregularities
2022/11/24
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria ROP for 2014-2020: progress on urban agenda and completed operations
2022/12/05
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Rights of rainbow families in Italy
2022/12/07
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria ROP 2014-2020: programme progress and risk of automatic decommitment
2022/12/13
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Abolition of guaranteed minimum income in Italy
2023/01/10
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Lack of generic medicines in Europe
2023/01/12
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
San Vittore del Lazio incineration plant and its breaches of applicable EU rules
2023/02/01
Documents: PDF(38 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Current state of the fight against endometriosis in the EU
2023/02/07
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Italian decree-law on urgent provisions for the management of migratory flows
2023/02/20
Documents: PDF(47 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Syrian regime forces blockade of aid convoys of the Kurdish Red Crescent (KRC) directed to the North-West
2023/02/22
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Migrant boat wreck in Calabria
2023/03/01
Documents: PDF(51 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Question regarding via Cagni, Milan
2023/03/08
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Information on infringement proceedings against Italy in relation to permanent employment contracts in the public sector
2023/03/20
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Drought in Oromia Region, southern Ethiopia
2023/03/24
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Commission considering taxing credit institutions’ excess profits
2023/03/28
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Need to amend the provisions on paternity leave under Directive (EU) 2019/1158
2023/04/19
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Prolongation of the bonus for the recruitment of under 36s
2023/04/19
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Steps towards recognising 'digital content creator' as a profession
2023/04/25
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(9 KB)
The rights of Rainbow families in Italy
2023/05/02
Documents: PDF(49 KB) DOC(11 KB)
Illegal expulsions by Greece
2023/06/05
Documents: PDF(58 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Illegal pushbacks in Greece
2023/06/05
Documents: PDF(58 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Is the Commission ready to act after the Crotone cover-up?
2023/06/14
Documents: PDF(50 KB) DOC(10 KB)
State of the art in planning and upgrading Calabria's water purification and sewage systems
2023/06/26
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Calabria’s ERDF regional programme for 2021-2027: delays and failure to meet enabling conditions
2023/06/29
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Italian NRRP and student housing
2023/07/10
Documents: PDF(52 KB) DOC(10 KB)
2014-2020 Regional Operational Programme (ROP) for Calabria: reprogramming proposal or a rush to spend money?
2023/07/12
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(9 KB)
Law on the culling of wolves in the province of Bolzano
2023/07/18
Documents: PDF(47 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Fight against corruption in Italy risks being undermined
2023/07/24
Documents: PDF(42 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Italy’s failure to implement Directives 89/391/EEC and 2003/88/EC and CJEU Judgment C-55/18
2023/07/28
Documents: PDF(43 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Arrest and pre-trial detention of Azerbaijani economist and government critic Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu
2023/09/08
Documents: PDF(48 KB) DOC(11 KB)
Misuse of NextGenerationEU funds and felling of almost century-old trees in Pordenone
2023/09/21
Documents: PDF(45 KB) DOC(10 KB)
ETS and possible harm to European and Italian maritime transport
2023/09/26
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Rescheduling of Calabria's operational programme for 2014-2020 and certified expenditure
2023/10/03
Documents: PDF(41 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Damage caused by the pointless high-speed railway project between Verona and Padua
2023/10/04
Documents: PDF(44 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Incompatibility of EU law with national rules on international protection and unaccompanied foreign minors
2023/10/11
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(10 KB)
Expensive flights during the Christmas holidays
2023/11/23
Documents: PDF(40 KB) DOC(10 KB)

Amendments (2311)

Amendment 137 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) Corruption remains a significant problem at the Union level, threatening the stability and security of societies, including by enabling organised and other serious crime. Corruption undermines democratic institutions and universal values on which the Union is founded, particularly the rule of law, democracy, equality and the protection of fundamental rights. It jeopardises development, prosperity and the sustainability and inclusiveness of our economies by facilitating the infiltration of the licit economy by organised crime, including through the award of public procurement contracts and public concessions, and by undermining the proper functioning of the market, underpinned by competition. In order to effectively prevent and combat corruption, a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach is required. The purpose of this Directive is to tackle corruption by means of criminal law, allowing for better cross- border cooperation between competent authorities.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 156 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) With a view to further strengthening the European anti- corruption framework and to effectively preventing corruption offences, the notion of conflict of interest needs to be clearly defined and as broadly as possible. This notion should cover all situations in which the impartial and objective exercise of the duties of a person involved in the performance of public functions is compromised for reasons of family, emotional, political or national affinity, economic interest or any other direct or indirect personal interest, whether real or potential, which conflicts with the public functions that the official is entrusted to perform.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) It is also necessary to strengthen transparency and to avoid the phenomenon of the 'revolving door' between the public and private sectors, by imposing restrictions on the exercise of professional activities by former public officials, whether appointed, elected or employed under contract, and on the employment by the private sector of public officials after their resignation or retirement, when such activities or employment are directly related to the duties that they had performed or overseen during their term in office.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 164 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 c (new)
(9c) This Directive should lay down minimum standards to increase transparency and bring the laws of the Member States in line with reporting obligations concerning the income and assets of public officials.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 178 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) Corruption feeds off the motivation for undue economic and other advantages. ÌIn order to reduce the incentive for individuals and criminal organisations to commit new criminal acts and deter individuals from consenting to becoming fake property owners enrichment by corruption offences should be criminalised. This should, in turn, complicate the concealment of illicitly acquired property and reduce the spread of corruption as well as the damage done to society. Transparency helps competent authorities to detect possible illicit enrichment. For example, in jurisdictions whereIt is necessary to ensure maximum transparency as this is crucial to enable the competent authorities to detect possible illicit enrichment. To enable the authorities to assess whether declared assets match declared income, public officials are required tomust declare their assets at regular intervals, including particular when taking up and completing duties, authorities can assess whether the declared assets correspond to declared incomesleaving office.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) The competent authorities should be able to impose, in addition or as an alternative to imprisonment, supplementary sanctions or measures, that are not necessarily of a criminal nature, such as the temporary or permanent disqualification from holding public office or the exclusion from public procurement, a ban on holding elected or governmental office or the exclusion from public procurement and the voiding of contracts and appointments awarded in breach of anti-corruption rules. Such measures have a general dissuasive effect and may reduce the recidivism of convicted offenders. Member States should also consider establishing procedures for the suspension or temporary reassignment of a public official accused of a criminal offence as referred to in this Directive, bearing in mind the need to respect the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to an effective remedy.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) In order to ensure that the competent authorities have sufficient time to conduct complex investigations and prosecutions, this Directive provides for a minimum limitation period that enables the detection, investigation, prosecution and judicial decision of corruption offences for a sufficient period of time after the commission of such offences, without affecting those Member States which do not set limitation periods for investigation, prosecution and enforcement. That limitation period should in any event be suspended from the date of issuance of the conviction concluding the first instance of the proceedings or of the conviction order, until the effective date of the judgment concluding the proceedings or the date on which the criminal decree becomes final.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 187 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Corruption offences are a difficult category of crime to identify and investigate, as they mostly occur as part of a conspiracy between two or more willing parties and lack an immediate and obvious victim who could complain. Thus, a significant proportion of corruption crime remains undetected, and the criminal parties are able to benefit from the proceeds of their corruption. The longer it takes to detect a corruption offence, the more difficult it is to uncover evidence. Therefore, it should be ensured that law enforcement and prosecutors have appropriate investigative tools to gather relevant evidence of corruption offences which often affect more than one Member State, including wiretaps and evidence collected by undercover agents. Furthermore, Member States should allocate sufficient training, in close coordination with the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL), also on the use investigative tools to successfully carry out proceedings and the identification and quantification of proceeds of corruption in the context of freezing and confiscation. In addition, this Directive facilitates the gathering of information and evidence by setting out mitigating circumstances for offenders that help the authorities.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 215 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
(b) any other person assigned and exercising a public service function or providing a public service in Member States or third countries, for an international organisation or for an international court.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) any other individual entrusted with public powers or a public service mission or holding an elected public office,
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 234 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
8a. ‘Conflict of interest' shall mean any situation in which situation the impartial and objective exercise of the functions of a public official is compromised for reasons of family, emotional, political or national affinity, economic interest or any other direct or indirect, potential or actual personal interest in conflict with the public interest the official is entrusted to serve.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 b (new)
8b. ‘The revolving door’ shall mean the taking-up, receipt or holding, directly or indirectly, by a public official of any interest in an undertaking or transaction for which, at the time of the act, he or she is wholly or partly responsible for the monitoring, administration, liquidation or payment.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 245 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall take measures to ensure the highest degree of transparency and accountability in public administration and public decision-making with a view to prevent corruption. These measures include a system of staff recruitment and promotion or assignment based on transparent and meritocratic procedures.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 248 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to limit the use of trustee assignments for personnel entrusted with responsibility for oversight or verification of compliance with the law.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 270 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) Effective rules addressing the interaction between the public and private sectors, including the regulation of lobbying and the revolving door. In particular the setting of minimum standards concerning lobbying, including: (i) the concepts of lobbying, lobbyists and public officials subject to the law; (ii) common minimum information to be disclosed regarding lobbyists' meetings with officials; (iii) common minimum requirements to ensure that such information is publicly available.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 286 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a specialised body as defined in Article 4 or another competent authority regularly examines public officials' declarations of assets and financial interests and compares these declarations with what they have declared to the tax authorities. If these examinations reveal the existence of assets undeclared by the public official, Member States shall take the appropriate measures to identify their origin.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 287 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that cash contributions in excess of EUR 500 per year per donor, or other forms of support of equivalent value, made to political parties and movements are made public and include the identity of the donor, the size of the contribution or the value of the benefit or other form of support and the date of payment by means of an entry in a special register maintained at the registered office of the political party or movement, inclusion in financial statements and publication on the official website of the political party or movement.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 297 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) are functionally independent ofrom the government in accordance with the fundamental principles of the legal system of the Member State and have a sufficient number of qualified staff and the financial, technical and technological resources, as well as the powers and tools necessary to ensure the proper administration of their tasks and to implement the provisions necessary to comply with Articles 3 to 6;
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 329 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) The fact that a public official takes up, receives or retains, directly or indirectly, an interest in an undertaking or transaction undermining his or her impartiality, independence or objectivity for which, at the time of the event, he or she is wholly or partly responsible for the supervision, administration, liquidation or payment.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 330 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) The fact that a public official, in the course of his or her duties relating either to the supervision and/or control of a private undertaking, or to the conclusion of contracts of any kind with a private undertaking or to the giving of an opinion on such contracts, or to having proposed directly to the competent authority decisions relating to the operations carried out by a private undertaking or to having given an opinion on such decisions, acquired or received an interest by way of employment, advice or capital in one of those undertakings before the expiry of a period of three years from the date on which those duties ceased.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 384 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) deprivation of the right to stand for elections, proportionate to the seriousness of the offence committed; and;
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 395 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the possibility for public authorities to annul or rescind a contractannulment or rescinding of the contract concluded and the assignments conferred with them, in the context of which the offence was committed;
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 425 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the limitation period referred to in paragraph 1 is suspended from the date of issuance of the conviction concluding the first instance of the proceedings or of the conviction order, until the effective date of the judgment concluding the proceedings or the date on which the sentencing order becomes final.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that effective investigative tools, such as those used in countering organised crime or other serious crimes, are available to persons, units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting the criminal offences referred to in this Directive. These tools shall also include the use of wiretapping or electronic devices and the possibility of conducting undercover police operations.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 465 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall collect disaggregated statistical data on each of the criminal offences as referred to in Articles 7 to 14 of this Directive.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 504 #

2023/0135(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The provisions of this Directive shall not affect the right of Member States to apply or introduce more stringent laws, regulations or administrative provisions with regard to transparency requirements and applicable penalties than those laid down in this Directive.
2023/10/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 227 #

2021/2180(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Is deeply concerned by the increasing level of corruption in certain Member States and the infiltration of organised crimes in the economy and public sector; reiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, European funds and the rule of law; calls on the Commission to support and encourage appropriate instruments to the Member States in order to repress corruption and corruption-related crimes in a more consistent and effective manner;
2022/03/01
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 233 #

2021/2180(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Underlines that corruption is a powerful ally of organised crime and the COVID-19 pandemic significantly increased the risk of corruption and corruption-related crimes being committed to further infiltrate the legal economy; therefore urges the Commission to create stronger legislation to counter organised crime, especially the more aggressive type such as mafia-style crime;
2022/03/01
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 269 #

2021/2180(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Urges the Commission to provide an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the national frameworks for the protection of media freedom and media pluralism; it’s concerned for the political independence of the media as editorial lines reflect the strong polarization of the political scene in some Member States; stresses the importance to prevent the risk of further fostering the concentration of information in the hands of a few and preventing the spread of free and independent information;
2022/03/01
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 270 #

2021/2180(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. It’s concern about the persisting, and in some case increasing, number of acts of intimidation against journalists - including Slapp - in several Member States and that often lead to self- censorship and undermine freedom of expression; recalls on this regards that the growing deterioration of media freedom have so far resulted in the murder of investigative journalist in some Member States; urges the Commission to act swiftly with anti-Slapp legislation, as also requested by this Parliament;
2022/03/01
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 271 #

2021/2180(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls the Commission to monitor the protection scheme for whistleblowers who report organised crime, corruption and money laundering offences; to adapt appropriate instruments, procedures and encourage effective protection of whistleblowers for both public and private sector; welcomes the initiation of infringement procedures against countries that do not protect adequately;
2022/03/01
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2021/2048(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 214 – interpretation – paragraph 2
In all cases, in order to guarantee that non-attached Members must be guaranteedhave access to information, in accordance with the principle of non- discrimination, through the supply of information and the presence of a member ofey may appoint one non-attached member as an observer. The Chair can give the non- attached Members’ secretariat at coordinator meetings acting as an observer the opportunity to express his or her view.
2021/06/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 367 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make further efforts to enhance collective and shared mobility to make it a viable alternative to private vehicle use; recalls that electric mobility has a key role to play and is based on two pillars that require rapid and harmonised action, namely a widespread and uniform charging network and the uptake of electric vehicles to create a virtuous circle;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 379 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need to consider completeing missing cross-border links to improve interurban cross-country connectionslinks in the light of impact assessments that take account of transport and market developments; believes that the Commission’s priorities should be reviewed, taking into account the conclusions of the Court of Auditors in its Special Report 10/2020;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 406 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Member States to significantly increase their efforts to increase the share of walking and cycling in urban and rural areas; considers it essential, in this regard, to make provision in town plans for further development of dedicated lanes and calls on the Commission to provide further support for cycling mobility by comprehensively promoting combined forms of transport, such as rail and bicycle;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 454 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to prioritise investments with the greatest benefit in terms of road safety, especially investments to maintain existing infrastructure and, where necessary, build new infrastructure; takes the view that an in-depth analysis of the environmental situation is essential in order to ensure maximum infrastructure safety, especially where the impact of construction has fundamentally altered the hydrogeological stability of the land;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 489 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers it necessary to work on strengthening the logistics nodes of rail and port infrastructures, as well as rail links between cities and rail routes, minimising land consumption as much as possible; stresses the need, in this regard, for an assessment of the costs of the infrastructure work needed to construct new logistics nodes, and a genuine reorganisation of logistics management itself that will yield results in the years to come;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 570 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Insists on the phasing-outtotal removal of direct and indirect fossil fuel subsidies by 2022 in the Union and in each Member State, and considers the revision of the Energy Taxation Directive as the best possibility to achieve a stable and predictable carbon price;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 804 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Recalls that, in 2019, the number of crimes reported directly to TAPA’s Incident Information Service (IIS) in the EMEA region increased by 114.7% year- on-year, with total losses exceeding EUR 137 million; urges the Commission to adopt a proactive policy to improve the security of truck parking areas to reduce the incidence of theft and crime against heavy goods vehicles;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 810 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Calls on the Commission to promote the GNSS system for tracing heavy goods transport by establishing an EU-GNSS portal and appropriate software; considers that a GNSS-based monitoring system is an effective tool for constant truck monitoring and real-time goods tracing; points out that such a portal would serve as a reference for the costs of carrying out roadside checks, providing greater safeguards in terms of road safety while ensuring the processing of data in real time, such as the remote weighing of lorries; emphasises, moreover, that the GNSS system could be a means of restoring legality, ensuring law enforcement and preventing illegal operations from the outset, as well as enabling monitoring to combat social dumping and unfair market conditions;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 815 #

2021/2046(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32c. Considers it essential that the Commission and the Member States apply a policy of making guard rails safe on the road sections most at risk and calls on the Commission to provide incentives to increase the number of so-called ‘motorcycle-friendly’ barriers on the European road network;
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 158 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that SLAPPs constitute a misuse of Member States’ justice systems and legal frameworks, especially for successfully addressing ongoing common challenges outlined in the Justice Scoreboard, such as caseload administration and case backlogs; recalls that a properly functioning justice system delivers judgements without undue delay, and manages judicial resources so as to maximise efficiency, and that this is only possible where judges and judicial bodies are not burdened with the handling of claims that are later on dismissed as abusive and lacking in legal merit; calls on the Member States, in order to reduce the risk of abuse of process, shorten waiting times and reduce caseloads for prosecutors and/or courts, to introduce the option for judicial authorities to carry out a prior assessment of SLAPP cases in order to declare them inadmissible if they take the view that the legal action is manifestly unfounded or abusive; considers that such prior assessment could be based on objective criteria, such as the number and nature of lawsuits or actions brought by the claimant, the choice of jurisdiction and law applicable to the case, or the existence of a clear imbalance of power between the claimant and the defendant;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 198 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that SLAPPs are often meritless, frivolous or based on exaggerated claims, and that they are not initiated for the purposes of obtaining a favourable judicial outcome but rather only to intimidate, professionally discredit, harass, tire out, put psychological pressure on or consume the financial resources of journalists, academics, civil society and NGOs, with the ultimate objective of blackmailing and forcing them into silence through the judicial procedure itself; points out that this chilling effect can lead to self- censorship, suppressing participation in democratic life, and also discourages others from similar actions, from entering into these professions or from proceeding with relevant associated activities;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 206 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that litigants that resort to SLAPPs use and abuse criminal defamation laws, civil lawsuits for libel, protection of one’s reputation - including so-called reputational damage - or based on intellectual property rights such as copyright, but also that a variety of other instruments is used to silence public participation, such as labour sanctions (dismissal), criminal charges of tax fraud, tax audit procedures and abuse of data protection rules;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 233 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets that no Member State has so far enacted targeted legislation to provide protection against SLAPPs; notes however that anti-SLAPP legislation is particularly well-developed in the states of the United States, in Australia and Canada; encourages the Commission to analyse anti-SLAPP best practices currently applied outside the EU which could provide valuable inspiration for Union legislative and non-legislative measures on the matter; underlines the importance of committing to the most ambitious legislation and- in order to discourage and put an end to the use of SLAPPs in the Union - of taking an integrated approach that should include the adoption of the most ambitious legislative act possible and the promotion of measures to support the exchange of the best- practices currently in force which would discourage the use of SLAPPs in the Union; , to promote training for judicial authorities for the purpose of raising awareness among judges and prosecutors of SLAPP- related risks, to provide resources for the moral and financial support of SLAPP victims;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 245 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Agrees with the numerous academics, legal practitioners and victims who point to the need for legislative action against the growing problem of SLAPPs; urgently calls, therefore, for the Brussels I and Rome II Regulations to be amendmentsed in order to prevent ‘libel tourism’ or ‘forum shopping’; urgently calls for the introduction of a uniform choice of law rule for defamation by establishing that the court having jurisdiction and the law applicable to criminal or civil lawsuits concerning defamation, reputational damage and protection of an individual's reputation should be that of the place in which the defendant is habitually resident, as well as for proposals for binding Union legislation on harmonised and effective safeguards for victims of SLAPPs across the Union, including through a directive; argues that without such legislative action, SLAPPs will continue to threaten the rule of law and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, association and information in the Union; is concerned that if measures only address lawsuits regarding information, actions based on other civil matters or criminal procedures may still be used;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 282 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Is of the view that such legislation should also include a ban on searches of journalists' homes or offices in connection with their work and should fully protect journalists' professional secrecy with regard to their news sources, even where the disclosure of sources is the subject of indirect requests;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 284 #

2021/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Considers it important for such a legislative measure to include also provisions, in the event of conviction, to protect the real estate of journalists in order to protect the interests of their families;
2021/07/15
Committee: JURILIBE
Amendment 30 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the Commission’s first Rule of Law Report (2020 report) is limited in scope, as it does not cover all Union values as provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union became a fully-fledged component of the Treaties when the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, and is therefore now legally binding on the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the EU and on the Member States when EU legislation is applied; whereas a genuine fundamental rights culture must be developed, fostered and strengthened in the EU institutions, but also in the Member States, in particular when they apply EU law domestically and in their relations with non-EU countries;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 42 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas without effective follow- up under an annual monitoring cycle, the 2020 report may fail tothe report is an integral part of an annual monitoring cycle which has to be followed up in order to prevent and effectively address systemic challenges and backsliding on the rule of law as witnessed in several EU Member States in recent years;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 55 #

2021/2025(INI)

1. Welcomes the Commission’s first annual Rule of Law Report as part of the wider; considers it vital to establish European rule of law monitoring and enforcement architecture, as it adds an important, potentially preventive tool to the Union’s rule of law toolbox in the EU; reiterates the importance of identifying in advance and preventing violations of fundamental rights and the rule of law instead of reacting ex post when such violations are repeated;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 59 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that Article 6 TEU requires the EU to accede to the ECHR; calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the aforementioned obligation is met as quickly as possible, on the basis of full transparency and with the aim of enhancing the protection of individuals and making the European institutions more accountable for their actions or failings regarding fundamental rights;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the monitoring of the independence, quality and efficiency of the Member States’ justice systems; considers that the enabling environment to ensure access to justice for all should also be monitored, including access to justice at Union level; points out that the right to access to justice is vital for the protection of all fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law; calls for direct, easily accessible instruments to be made available to individuals to counter violations of their fundamental rights by Member States, without giving the national courts or the EU institutions any margin of discretion; considers that the reports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chapters;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Welcomes the fact that appointment methods, in addition to mechanisms governing career advancement, disciplinary procedures and sanctions, have also been identified as indicators of judicial independence; stresses that the monitoring of these parameters must be constant in order to verify the real autonomy of the judiciary;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Reiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and fair treatment for all citizens; stresses that, by diverting public funds away from their intended public use, corruption detracts from the level and quality of public services, thereby undermining fundamental rights; calls on the Member States and institutions to devise effective ways of combating corruption, regularly monitoring the use made of both European and national public funds;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has recognised that corruption is a powerful ally of organised crime and therefore urges the Commission to create stronger legislation to counter organised crime, especially the more aggressive type such as mafia-style crime;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 146 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Calls on the Commission to provide for and adapt appropriate instruments and procedures to encourage and protect whistleblowers who report organised crime, corruption and money laundering offences, while providing the necessary security and confidentiality safeguards for citizens and public and private sector operators;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the inclusion in the report of a specific chapter on monitoring media freedom and pluralism; urges the Commission to provide an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the national frameworks for the protection of media freedom and media pluralism; stresses the importance of monitoring the situation of the media in the Member States in order to prevent the risk of further fostering the concentration of information in the hands of a few and preventing the spread of free and independent information;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Deplores the lack of assessment as regards the public media sector at national level and its degree of independence from government or any other interference and an assessment of transparency of media ownership; stresses how important it is for the Commission to monitor the existence of conflict-of-interest laws in the Member States, urging those without such laws to introduce them; believes that proper implementation of Article 30 of the 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive19 should be closely monitored; _________________ 19OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69.
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Is alarmed by the growing deterioration of media freedom and media pluralism in some Member States since the publication of the 2020 report; observes with concern that challenges to media freedom are interlinked with the undermining of artistic freedom and academic freedom; calls, therefore, for this pillar to be expanded to all aspects of freedom of expression and for the title of the pillar to be adapted accordingly; is concerned about the disinformation campaigns and uncontrolled spread of fake news in Europe during the COVID- 19 pandemic, which was primarily targeted at the governments of certain EU countries;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 168 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Expresses concern about the threats and physical attacks against journalists in several Member States, as well as the growing practice of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP), against which the Commission should urge Member States to legislate in order to protect journalists from this practice, for the purpose of effectively defending the freedom of journalists to inform and the right of citizens to be informed;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 217 #

2021/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Reiterates its insistence on the need for a single monitoring mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, as proposed by Parliament, to cover the full scope of Article 2 TEU values; expresses regret and concern about the Commission's reluctance to initiate infringement proceedings with regard to the violations of the Charter;
2021/04/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Court of Auditors’ special report no 1/2015: Inland Waterway Transport in Europe: no significant improvements in modal share and navigability conditions since 2001
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 45 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, for the same level of energy expenditure, an inland waterway vessel can carry 1 tonne of cargo almost four times as far as a lorry and, owing to its vast cargo capacity, can carry the equivalent of hundreds of articulated lorries;
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 61 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Criticises the fact that, so far, there has been no significant increase in the modal share of freight transport by inland waterways; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give priority to inland waterway projects involving the corridors, rivers or river segments which offer the most substantial and most immediate benefits for the improvement of inland waterway transport;
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 71 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. notes with concern that much of Europe's river infrastructure was built in the post-war period and is often too dated to accommodate larger, newer vessels; notes that the Member States believe that EUR 13 billion would be needed just to clear bottlenecks by 2030; Stresses that more investment in updating river and canal infrastructure (for example, locks, bridges, the width and depth of canals, and interoperable deployment of digital technologies across borders) is key, while respecting the applicable environmental law;
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 101 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the importance of further encouraging and supporting initiatives aimed at the use of alternative fuels and propulsion methods for shipping in accordance with the principle of technological neutrality; points out, in this regard, the value of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a purely transitional solution to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in inland waterway transport; note, short-term solution; recalls that methane emissions from LNG-powered ships that the existing, technically mature vessels and distribution infrastructure now based on LNG could be used for biogas and will therefore be essential in scaling up Bio- LNG as a marine fuelve a significant impact on pollution levels and climate change and are detrimental to the EU’s 2050 climate targets;
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 203 #

2021/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. criticises the fact that there has so far been a general lack of strategic vision for waterway systems, at regulatory, administrative and planning level, particularly with regard to infrastructure measures; calls on the Commission to improve coordination in the implementation of the core TEN-T network, taking into account the potential to develop inland waterway freight corridors; stresses the cardinal importance of coordination between Member States during the implementation of corridors, with a view to the establishment of specific and achievable goals and the setting of milestones for the removal of bottlenecks along corridors within the framework of the Connecting Europe Facility;
2021/04/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 46 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to prioritise investments with the greatest benefit in terms of road safety, includingabove all investments in maintaining existing infrastructure and, where necessary, in the construction of new infrastructure; takes the view that an in- depth analysis of the environmental situation is essential in order to ensure maximum infrastructure safety, especially where the impact of construction has fundamentally altered the hydrogeological stability of the land; welcomes, in this regard, the launch of the Safer Transport Platform initiative and calls on all interested parties to consider its use;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 53 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 has required all Member States to adopt new procedures and references, with a view to standardising material specifications for construction products, in particular with regard to road materials; notes that sensibilities continue to differ among construction operators in the various Member States, however, with regard to the suitability of products and the adoption of voluntary standards, in addition to the mandatory ones; considers it important to promote the use of innovative high-performance materials and calls on the Commission to actively monitor the use of new materials and to provide information that is easily accessible to operators;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 104 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that new personal mobility devices also raise a number of serious concerns related not only to the safety of the devices themselves, but also to their safe use in traffic; regrets that only a few Member States have introduced legislation on this issue and that the lack of harmonisation in the EU can create confusion and make it difficult for visitors to abide by local rules; calls on the Commission to consider a type approval framework for these new mobility devices and to issue guidelines for Members States on traffic rules for the use of such devices; considers it essential, in this regard, to make provision in town plans for further development of dedicated lanes and calls on the Commission to provide further support for cycling policies by comprehensively promoting combined forms of transport, such as rail and bicycle;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 107 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to promote the GNSS system for the tracing of heavy goods transport through the establishment of an EU-GNSS portal and appropriate software; is of the view that a GNSS-based monitoring system is an effective tool for monitoring lorries and goods traceability in real time, on an ongoing basis; points out that such a portal would serve as a reference for the costs of carrying out roadside checks, providing greater safeguards in terms of road safety while ensuring the processing of data in real time, such as the remote weighing of lorries; points out, moreover, that the GNSS system could be a means of restoring legality, ensuring law enforcement and preventing illegal operations from the outset, as well as enabling monitoring to combat social dumping and unfair market conditions;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 111 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Regrets that the provisions in the Roadworthiness Package relating to the inspection of cargo securing are not mandatory; calls on the Commission to propose a reinforcement of these provisions in the next revision, with a view to harmonising the rules;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 127 #

2021/2014(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Points out that a study by the European Transport Safety Council has found that the number of pedestrians and cyclists killed in road accidents has fallen more slowly than the number of casualties among car occupants; notes, in particular, that mortality has remained constant among the most vulnerable groups, namely children and the elderly; calls on the Commission to promote the improvement of pedestrian crossings and to foster a culture of respect for pedestrians;
2021/04/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 260 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) The accuracy of data included in the beneficial ownership registers is fundamental for all of the relevant authorities and other persons allowed access to that data, and to make valid, lawful decisions based on that data. Therefore, where sufficient reasons arise, after careful analysis by the registrars, to doubt the accuracy of the beneficial ownership information held by the registers, legal entities and legal arrangements should be required to provide additional information on a risk-sensitive basis. In addition, it is important that Member States entrust the entity in charge of managing the registers with sufficient powersthe obligation to verify beneficial ownership and the veracity of information provided to it, and to report any suspicion to their FIU. Such powThe powers of entities in charge of managing the registers should extend to the conduct of inspections at the premises of the legal entities.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 270 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Public access to beneficial ownership information can allow greater scrutiny of information by civil society, including by the press or civil society organisations, and contributes to preserving trust in the integrity of the financial system. It can contribute to combating the misuse of corporate and other legal entities and legal arrangements for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, both by helping investigations and through reputational effects, given that anyone who could enter into a business relationship is aware of the identity of the beneficial owners. It may also facilitate the timely and efficient availability of information for obliged entities as well as authorities of third countries involved in combating such offences. The access to that information would also help investigations on money laundering, associated predicate offences and terrorist financing. Therefore, Member States need to provide free access to the public in a readily usable, machine- readable format, to the beneficial ownership registers for companies, trusts, and other legal arrangements.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 274 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) Confidence in financial markets from investors and the general public depends in large part on the existence of an accurate disclosure regime that provides transparency in the beneficial ownership and control structures of corporate and other legal entities as well as certain types of trusts and similar legal arrangements. Member States should therefore allow access to beneficial ownership information in a sufficiently coherent and coordinated way, by establishing confidence rules of access by the public, so that third parties are able to ascertain, throughout the Union, who are the beneficial owners of corporate and other legal entities as well as, provided that there is a legitimate interest, of certain types of trusts and similar legal arrangements.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 422 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) Identify the typical ownership and control structure of local legal persons, considering, at least: the number of layers, the type of legal vehicle in each layer (e.g., company, trust, partnership, etc.), the nationality of layers, the number of legal owners and beneficial owners and their nationality and residence;
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 446 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) data measuring the reporting, investigation and judicial phases of the national AML/CFT regime, including the number ofand value of transactions involved in suspicious transaction reports made to the FIU, the follow-up given to those reports, the information on cross- border physical transfers of cash submitted to the FIU in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1672 together with the follow-up given to the information submitted and, on an annual basis, the number of cases investigated, the number of persons prosecuted, the number of persons convicted for money laundering or terrorist financing offences, the types of predicate offences identified in accordance with Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2018/1673 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 where such information is available, and the value in euro of property that has been frozen, seized or confiscated; _________________ 45 Directive (EU) 2018/1673 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on combating money laundering by criminal law (OJ L 284, 12.11.2018, p. 22).
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 455 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)
(ha) Number of discrepancies reported to the Central Register pursuant to Article 10, including measures or sanctions imposed by the entity in charge of the central register pursuant to Article 10 (9).
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 456 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall ensure that the statistics referred to in paragraph 2 are collected and transmitted to the Commission on an annual basis. The statistics referred to in paragraph 2, points (a), (c), (d) and (f), shall also be transmitted to AMLA.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 472 #

2021/0250(COD)

2. Where there are reasons to doubt the accuracy of the beneficial ownership information held by the central registers, Member States shall ensure that legal entities and legal arrangements are required to provide additional information on a risk-sensitive basis, including resolutions of the board of directors and minutes of their meetings, partnership agreements, trust deeds, power of attorney or other contractual agreements and documentation.deleted
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 475 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Where no person is identified as beneficial owner pursuant to Article 45(2) and (3) of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final], the central register shall include: (a) justification, that there is no beneficial owner or that the beneficial owner(s) could not be identified and verified; (b) who hold the position of senior managing official(s) in the corporate or legal entity equivalent to the information required under Article 44(1), point (a), of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final].deleted a statement accompanied by a the details of the natural person(s)
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 488 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission is empowered to adopt, by means of implementing acts, the format for the submission of beneficial ownership information to the central register. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 54(2). By [1 year after the date of transposition of this Directive] the Commission shall adopt an implementing act.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 495 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) obliged entities shall report to the entity in charge of the central registers any discrepancies they find between the beneficial ownership information available in the central registers and the beneficial ownership information available to them pursuant to Article 18 of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation].deleted
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 569 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) in case of express trusts or similar legal arrangements, the name, the month and year of birth and the country of residence and nationality of the beneficial owner as well as the nature and extent of the beneficial interest held, provided that a legitimate interest can be demonstrated.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 572 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may choose to make beneficial ownership information held in their central registers available to the public on the condition of authentication using electronic identification means and relevant trust services as set out in Regulation (EU) 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 and the payment of a fee, which shall not exceed the administrative costs of making the information available, including costs of maintenance and developments of the register. _________________ 46 Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014, p. 73).deleted
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 610 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the common criteria according to which beneficial ownership information is available through the system of interconnection of registers, depending on the level of access granted by Member States;
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 616 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the technical modalities to implement the different types of access to information on beneficial ownership in accordance with Articles 11 and 12 of this Directive, including the authentication of users through the use of electronic identification means and relevant trust services as set out in Regulation (EU) 910/2014; this should not prevent users from other Member States to access information;
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 618 #

2021/0250(COD)

(f) the payment modalities where access to beneficial ownership information is subject to the payment of a fee according to Article 12(2) taking into account available payment facilities such as remote payment transactions.deleted
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 631 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide competent authorities with access to information which allows the identification in a timely manner, direct, unrestricted, and free access to the information of any natural or legal person owning real estate and the beneficial owners of thereof, including through registers or electronic data retrieval systems where such registers or systems are available. Competent authorities shall also have access to information allowing the identification and analysis of transactions involving real estate, including their economic value and details of the natural or legal persons involved in those transactions including, where available, whether the natural or legal person owns, sells or acquires real estate on behalf of a legal arrangement.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 639 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. By [3 years after the date of transposition of this Directive], Member States shall ensure that information referred to in paragraph 1 is held in a register in machine-readable format. Information may be collected in accordance with national systems.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 882 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) issue instructions to a self- regulatory body for the purpose of remedying a failure to perform its functions under Article 29(1) or to comply with the requirements of paragraph 5 and 6 of that Article, or to prevent any such failures. When issuing such instructions, the authority shall consider any relevant guidance it provided or that has been provided by AMLA.
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 895 #

2021/0250(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) Section 1 of Chapter II (internal controlpolicies, controls and procedures).
2022/06/27
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 248 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) In the process of directly supervising selected obliged entities, the Authority’s aim shall be to improve the ability of obliged entities as well as supervisors to better understand, manage and mitigate the risks identified. The assessment process may consider different types of risks, with the understanding that some of them might be inherent to the types or products, services or geographical location of customers. To that end, the aim shall not be necessarily a reduction of all types of risks, which could lead to de-risking and severe unintended consequences, including financial exclusion and discriminatory policies.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 263 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) The Authority should have the opportunity to request a transfer of supervisory tasks and powers relating to a specific obliged entity on its own initiative, after exhausting other options in case of inaction or failure to follow its instructions within the provided deadline. Since the transfer of tasks and powers over an obliged entity without the specific request of the financiAuthority has the necessary technical suexpervtisor to the Authority would require a discretionary decision on the part of the Authority, the Authority should address a specific request to that end to the Commission. In order for the Commisse for AML/CFT supervisory framework and its supervisory tasks and powers are delegated by this Regulation, to be able to take a decision coherent with the framework of the tasks allocated to the Authority within the AML/CFT framework, the request of the Authority should enclose an appropriate justification, and should indicate a precise duration of the reallocation of tasks and powers towards the Authorityhe Executive Board shall take a decision with an appropriate justification. The timeframe for the reallocation of powers should correspond to the time the Authority requires to deal with the risks at entity level, and should not exceed three years. The Commission should adopt a decision transferring powers and tasks for supervising the entity to the Authority swiftly, and in any case within a month.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 320 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘selected obliged entity’ means a credit institution, a financial institution, or a group of credit or financial institutions at the highest level of consolidation in the Union, , or a crypto-asset service provider, or a non-financial institution, which is under direct supervision by the Authority pursuant to Article 13;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 326 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘non-selected obliged entity’ means a credit institution, a financial institution or a non-financial institution, or a group of credit institutions or financial institutions at the highest level of consolidation in the Union, , or a crypto-asset service provider other than a selected obliged entity;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 365 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) establish and maintain an interoperational interface to access to registers of certain movable and immovable assets providing information on a minimum set of information, in a predefined format, including beneficial ownership information available at least to competent authorities.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 369 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) monitor and support the implementation of asset freezes under the Union restrictive measures across the internal market and publish data sets on asset freezes and confiscations;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 479 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Authority shall publish the information collected pursuant paragraph 2 point (a), (b), (g) and (h). A summary of non-confidential findings regarding the information collected pursuant paragraph 2 point (c), (d), (e) and (f) shall be made available to obliged entities and to the public.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 482 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Competent authorities may share, in accordance with national law, any additional information that they deem relevant to the prevention and countering of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing with the central database referred to in paragraph 1.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 487 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Authority may request supervisory authorities and other competent authorities to provide other information in addition to that referred to in paragraph 2this article, provided that they have legal access to the relevant information. The information shall be accurate, coherent, complete and timely. Before requesting information in accordance with this Article, and in order to avoid the duplication of reporting obligations, the Authority shall take account of any existing and relevant statistics produced and disseminated by other authorities. The supervisory authorities shall update any provided information.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 490 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Authority shall collect information from competent authorities relating to weaknesses identified during ongoing supervision and authorisation procedures in the processes and procedures, governance arrangements, business models and activities of financial sector operators and obliged entities from non-financial sector in relation to preventing and countering money laundering and terrorist financing as well as measures taken by competent authorities, in response to the following material weaknesses with regard to the prevention and countering the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or of terrorist financing;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 491 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Where information is not available or is not made available by the competent authorities in a timely fashion, the Authority may address a duly justified and reasoned request to other supervisory authorities, to the responsible ministry, to the national central bank or to the statistical office of the Member State concerned.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 554 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. For each category of obliged 4. entities referred to in paragraph 43, the benchmarks in the assessment methodology shall be based on the risk factor categories related to customer, products, services, transactions, delivery channels and geographical areas and relevant prudential information, including ownership concentration and liquidity. The benchmarks shall be established for at least the following indicators of inherent risk in any Member State they operate in:
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 564 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) with respect to customer-related risk: the share of non-resident customers, the presence and share of customers identified as Politically Exposed persons (‘PEPs’); and the presence and share of customers located in jurisdictions listed in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 574 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – point c – point i
(i) the annual volume of correspondent and cross-border banking services provided by Union financial sector entities in third countries;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 676 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point i a (new)
(ia) impose a temporary or definitive ban on any person performing managerial duties in a selected obliged entity, or any other natural person, held responsible for the breach, from performing managerial duties in the selected obliged entities.
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 715 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 8
8. The Authority shall refer matters for criminal prosecution to the relevant national authorities where, in carrying out its duties under this Regulation, it finds that there are serious indications of the possible existence of facts liable to constitute criminal offences. In such event, the information communicated to the relevant national authorities shall also be transmitted to Europol when two or more Member States are involved in the facts liable to constitute criminal offences; or where the criminal offence is inherently of a cross-border nature. The Authority shall also transmit evidence to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office where such evidence concerns offences in respect of which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office exercises or is permitted to exercise competence in accordance with Council Regulation (EU)2017/1939. In addition, the Authority shall refrain from imposing administrative pecuniary sanctions or periodic penalty payments where a prior acquittal or conviction arising from identical facts, or from facts which are substantially the same, has acquired the force of res judicata as the result of criminal proceedings under national law.
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 722 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The Authority shall perform periodic assessments of some or all of the activities of one, several, or all financial supervisors, including the assessment of their tools and resources to ensure high level supervisory standards and practices. The assessments shall include a review of the application of the AML/CFT supervisory methodology developed pursuant to Article 8 and shall cover all financial supervisors in a single assessment cycle. The length of each assessment cycle shall be determined by the Authority and shall not exceed seven years. At the end of each assessment cycle, the Authority shall present its findings to the European Parliament.
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 740 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Financial supervisors shall make every effort to comply with the specific follow-up measures addressed to them as a result of the assessment. Supervisors shall document the steps taken in order to comply with the follow-up measures addressed to them. Each consecutive assessment shall reflect on the compliance of previously addressed follow-up measures. At the end of each assessment cycle the Authority shall present its findings to the European Parliament.
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 767 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4
4. Where the financial supervisor concerned does not comply with the request referred to in paragraph 2 and does not inform the Authority of the steps it has taken or intends to take to comply with the request within ten days from the day of the notification of the request, the Authority may request the Commission to grant permisExecutive Board can adopt a reasoned decision to transfer the relevant tasks and powers referred to in Article 5(2) and Article 6(1) related to direct supervision of the non- selected obliged entity from the financial supervisor concerned to the Authority. The Authority shall immediately inform the financial supervisor and the non-selected obliged entity thereof. The decision shall also be communicated to the European Parliament and to the Council.
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 1041 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 81 – paragraph 4
4. The Authority shall, within its powers pursuant to this Regulation and to the legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2), contribute to the united, common, consistent and effective representation of the Union’s interests in international fora, including by assisting the Commission in its tasks relating to Commission’s membership of the Financial Action Task Force and by supporting the work and objectives of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. Member states shall fully inform the authority of their bilateral agreements with third countries
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 1055 #

2021/0240(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 87 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The seat of the Agency shall be Rome, Italy
2022/06/29
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 220 #

2021/0239(COD)

(65) Detailed rules should be laid down to identify the beneficial owners of corporate and other legal entities and to harmonise definitions of beneficial ownership. While a specified percentage shareholding or ownership interest does not automatically determine the beneficial owners, it should be one factor among others to be taken into account. Member States should be able, however, to decide that a percentage lower than 25% may beThe Commission or Member States shall define based on the assessment of risks the type of sectors and types of legal entities where a lower threshold shall apply as an indication of ownership or control. Control through ownership interest of 25% plus one of the sharesas a defined percentage or voting rights or other ownership interest should be assessed on every level of ownership, meaning that this threshold should apply to every link in the ownership structure and that every link in the ownership structure and the combination of them should be properly examined.
2022/07/04
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 361 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point l
(l) investment migration operators permitted to represent or offer intermediation services to third country nationals seeking to obtain residence or citizenship rights in a Member State in exchange of any kind of investment, including capital transfers, purchase or renting of property, investment in government bonds, investment in corporate entities, donation or endowment of an activity to the public good and contributions to the state budget; as well as government agencies directly operating residency by investment or citizenship by investment schemes.
2022/07/04
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 404 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. By [2 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], AMLA shall issue guidelines on the elements that obliged entities should take into account when deciding on the extent of their internal policies, controls and procedures based on their assessed level of risk, including further guidance on how to define the number of staff entrusted with compliance functions as defined by Article 9, taking into account the size and type of obliged entities and the risk of the sector in which they operate. Considering the specificities of different types of obliged entities covered by Article 3, specific guidelines may be issued.
2022/07/04
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 457 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. By [2 years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], AMLA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify the type of additional measures referred to in paragraph 2, including the minimum action to be taken by obliged entities where the law of a third country does not permit the implementation of the measures required under Article 13 and the additional supervisory actions required in such cases. The draft regulatory technical standards shall include a list of third countries where the minimum AML/CFT requirement are deemed equivalent to those set out in this regulation. This list shall be regularly updated.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 464 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In addition to the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1, credit and financial institutions and crypto-asset service providers shall apply customer due diligence when either initiating or executing an occasional transaction that constitutes a transfer of funds as defined in Article 3, point (9) of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for a recast of Regulation (EU) 2015/847 - COM/2021/422 final], or a transfer of crypto-assets as defined in Article 3, point (10) of that Regulation, exceeding EUR 1 000 or the equivalent in national currency.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 486 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) Obliged entities shall identify and record the name of individuals or entities acting as nominee directors or nominee shareholders and record their status as such.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 606 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) the criminalisation of money laundering and terrorist financing, including predicate offences;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 662 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 6
6. Enhanced customer due diligence measures shall not be invoked automatically with respect to branches or subsidiaries of obliged entities established in the Union which are located third countries referred to in Articles 23, 24 and 25 where those branches or subsidiaries fully comply with the group- wide policies, controls and procedures in accordance with Article 14.deleted
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 753 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of this Article, when ‘control through an ownership interest’ shall meanis based on a threshold it shall be determined based on the Member States’ assessment of risk with a maximum of an ownership of 25% plus one of the shares or voting rights or other ownership interest in the corporate entity, including through bearer shareholdings, on every level of ownership.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 778 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Obliged entities shall report to the entity in charge of the central registers any discrepancies they find between the beneficial ownership information available in the central registers and the beneficial ownership information available to them pursuant to Article 18 of this Regulation, whilst ensuring that banking secrecy laws do not inhibit the implementation of this provision.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 784 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall make recommendations to Member States ondefine, when applicable the specific rules and criteria to identitfy the beneficial owner(s) of legal entities other than corporate entities by [1 year from the date of application of this Regulation]. In the event that Member States decide not to apply any of the recommendations, they shall notify the Commission thereof and provide a justification for such a decision.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 820 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a statement, accompanied by a justification, that there is no beneficial owner or that the beneficial owner(s) could not be identified and verifiedWhere there are reasons to doubt the accuracy of the beneficial ownership information or no beneficial owner is identified, legal entities and legal arrangements are required to provide additional information on a risk-sensitive basis, including resolutions of the board of directors and minutes of their meetings, partnership agreements, trust deeds, power of attorney or other contractual agreements and documentation;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 822 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) tWhe details on the natural person(s) who hold the position of senior managing official(s) in the corporate or legal entity equivalent to the information required under Article 44(1), point (a).re no person is identified as beneficial owner pursuant to paragraph (2) and (3), the central register shall include:
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 824 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) a statement accompanied by a justification, that there is no beneficial owner or that the beneficial owner(s) could not be identified and verified; such statement shall be recorded in the register;
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 825 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b b (new)
(bb) the details of the natural person(s) who hold the position of senior managing official(s) in the corporate or legal entity equivalent to the information required under Article 44(1), point (a), of this Regulation. Senior managers shall not be recorded in the register as a beneficial owner.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 833 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) own or acquire real estate in their territory.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 871 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from Article 50(1), Member States may allow obliged entities referred to in Article 3, point (3)(a), (b) and (d) to transmit the information referred to in Article 50(1) to a self- regulatory body designated by the Member State or directly to the FIU.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 915 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Companies shall be prohibited from issuing bearer shares, and shall convert all existing bearer shares into registered shares by [2 years after the date of application of this Regulation]. However, companies with securities listed on a regulated market or whose shares are issued as intermediated securities shall be permitted to maintain bearer shares.
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 945 #

2021/0239(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
By [32 years from the date of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall present reports to the European Parliament and to the Council assessing the need and proportionality of:
2022/07/05
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 7 #

2020/2140(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Draws attention to the conclusions of European Court of Auditors' Special Report 10/2020, which raise serious doubts about the economic and environmental benefits of the Lyon-Turin rail link project and emphasise that the traffic forecasts have been shown not to reflect the real situation; calls on the Commission to review the project and suspend the funding earmarked for it;
2020/12/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 31 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)
- having regard to the Annual Reports of the European Commission on monitoring the application of EU law;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 32 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 b (new)
- having regard to the EU Justice Scoreboard 2020 published by the European Commission;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 42 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 a (new)
- having regard to the workings of the OHCHR of United Nations as well as the UN's WGAD (Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions) resolutions on Member States,
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 b (new)
- having regard to the resolutions of the Council of Europe on the situation of the rule of law, democracy and human rights among Member States, as well as its 2019 report on the "Establishment of a European Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights";
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 44 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 c (new)
- having regard to the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights regarding human rights cases inside the Union and its Member States;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 d (new)
- having regard to the results of the 44th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the concept of rule of law must be understood as a democratic rule of law, i.e. a rule of law which is primarily based on the respect for democratic procedures and fundamental rights;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the preceding decade has seen brazen attacks against Union values in several Member States; whereas international comparisons and Parliament resolutions have evidenced considerable democratic backsliding in particular in Hungary and Poland in particular, but also in other Member States; whereas Parliament has been calling since 2016 for a comprehensive, preventive and evidence- based monitoring in this field via an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 83 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas corruption poses a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and the fair treatment of all citizens; whereas corruption, by diverting public funds from the purposes of public utility for which they are intended, reduces the level and quality of public services, and therefore of fundamental rights;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the results of the Annual report on the monitoring the application of EU law should be taken in account regarding the number of infringements, gravity and their impact on the rule of law for European citizens and companies;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas any monitoring mechanism must closely involve stakeholders active in the protection and promotion of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, including civil society, Council of Europe and United Nations bodies, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, national and regional human rights institutions, national and regional parliaments and local authorities; however, the resolutions on the state of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights of international institutions must have a differentiated treatment during the process
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 104 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the new EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights must be based on clear and objective indicators in order to ensure an equal treatment to all Member States;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas formal independence of the justice system can be undermined through political means if governments try to influence decisions and actions, both privately or through the media;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the accession by the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is an obligation under Article 6(2) TEU;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 110 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. emphasises the urgent need for the Union to develop a robust and positive agenda for protecting and reinforcing democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights for all its citizens; insists that the Union must remain a champion of freedom and justice in Europe and the world but stresses that in order to be so, the Union needs to have a much higher standard on the defence of democracy and human rights inside the Union and regrets that some Member States refuse to comply with human rights resolutions issued by international bodies;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. warns that the Union is facing an unprecedented and escalating crisis of its founding values, which threatens its long- term survival as a democratic peace project; is gravely concerned by the rise and entrenchment of autocratic and illiberal tendencies, further compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic and economic recession, as well as corruption and state capture, in several Member States; underlines the dangers of this trend for the cohesion of the Union’s legal order, the functioning of its single market, the effectiveness of its common policies and its international credibility; notes with concern that the COVID-19 pandemic has been used to limit citizens’ rights and fundamental freedoms as embedded in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including by means of unjustified censorship, fuelling discrimination, disinformation and hate speech; recalls in particular the importance of promoting and defending the rule of law as a precondition for any sound democratic systems as well as for ensuring the protection of fundamental rights and Union values and a prerequisite for upholding all rights and obligations deriving from the Treaties;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. recognises that the Union remains structurally ill-equipped to tackle democratic and rule of law backsliding in the Member States; regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningat the procedure provided for in Article 7 TEU cannot be used to its full progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes with concern the disjointed natureotential as the unanimity requirement in the European Council - de facto - hampers its application; regrets in this regard, the lack of progress made in the European Council ofn the Union’s toolkit in that fielcurrent Article 7 procedures against Hungary and Poland;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. recognises that the Union remains structurally ill-equipped to tackle democratic and rule of law backsliding in the Member States; regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes with concern the disjointed nature of the Union’s toolkit in that field and believes that a new instrument must be put in place which does not depend on the unanimity of Member States;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the Union still has no effective mechanisms to monitor, prevent and put an end to systemic threats to the rule of law and democracy in the Member States; welcomes as a meaningful first step the Commission communication on further strengthening the Rule of Law within the Union and the actions set out therein; calls on the Commission to implement the proposed rule of law framework without undue delay; considers it necessary to put in place sanctions that could be effective, dissuasive and proportionate to effectively prevent breaches of rule of law within the Union;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 144 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recalls that the accession of the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a legal obligation under Article 6(2) TEU; recalls that the accession to that convention would constitute a further step in the process of European integration and would enhance the coherence between the Union and the Council of Europe’s further strengthening the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms within the Union; regrets the lack of progress made so far to fulfil this Treaty obligation; calls on the Commission to step up efforts to respect the Treaties and conclude the negotiations without undue delay;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. proposes the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (the ‘Mechanism’), building on Parliament’s 2016 proposal and the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report, to be governed by an interinstitutional agreement between Parliament, the Council and the Commission, consisting of an Annual Monitoring Cycle on Union values, covering all aspects of Article 2 TEU, and applying equally, objectively and fairly to all Member States to ensure there are no double standards due to political interests;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. underlines that the Annual Monitoring Cycle must contain country- specific recommendations, with timelines and targets for implementation, to be followed up in subsequent annual or urgent reports; stresses that failures to implement the recommendations must be linked to concrete Union enforcement measures that the Commission would need to apply automatically as the violations occur; highlights, the importance of the annual monitoring cycle in order to prevent possible violations of the rule of law and democracy within the Union before they actually occur;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. underlines that the Annual Monitoring Cycle must contain country- specific recommendations, with timelines and targets for implementation, to be followed up in subsequent annual or urgent reports; stresses that failures to implement the recommendations must be linked to concrete Union enforcement measures; notes that in such cases in particular, the lack of implementation of the recommendations from international institutions other than the Union, such as the United Nations, the European Court of Human Rights or the Council of Europe, must be fully taken into account;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 180 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. points out that the Mechanism should consolidate and supersede existing instruments, avoiding unnecessary duplication of existing structures and instruments; calls for the integration and incorporation of existing tools, in particular the Annual Rule of Law Report, the Commission’s Rule of Law Framework, the Council’s Rule of Law Dialogue and the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM), while increasing complementarity and coherence with other available tools, including infringement procedures under Article 7 TEU, budgetary conditionality once in force, and the European Semester; is of the opinion that the Annual Monitoring Cycle can fulfil the objectives of the CVM for Bulgaria and Romania, thus contributing to equal treatment of all Member States; considers that the three institutions should use the findings from the Annual Monitoring Cycle in their assessment for the purposes of triggering Article 7 TEU and Regulation (EU) 2020/xxxx of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States11 ; _________________ 11[instead of xxxx insert final number of 2018/136(COD) in the text and correct OJ reference in footnote] OJ C ..., ....., p. ....
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. recalls the indispensable role played by civil society, national and regional human rights institutions and other relevant actors in all stages of the Annual Monitoring Cycle, from providing input to facilitating implementation; points out that the accreditation status of national human rights institutions and the space for civil society may themselves serve as indicators for assessment purposes; considers that national and regional parliaments must hold public debates and adopt positions on the outcome of the monitoring cycle; points out that to ensure that the respect for the rights of persons belonging to national minorities is fairly assessed, institutions and civil society organisations in this communities must also play an important role;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. is of the view that, in the long-term, strengthening the Union’s ability to promote and defend its constitutional core will require Treaty change; looks forward to the reflection and conclusions ofnotes in particular, that an urgent revision of the Article 7 TEU is needed in order to overcome the unanimity requirement in the European Council; calls for the Conference on the Future of Europe to come up with a meaningful proposal in that regard;
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 227 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 4 – point 4
(4) The three institutions recognise the need for streamlining and strengthening the effectiveness of existing tools designed to foster compliance with Union values. A comprehensive interinstitutional mechanism should therefore be established in order to improve coordination between the three institutions and consolidate initiatives taken previously. In accordance with the Conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council of 6 and 7 June 2013, such a mechanism should operate in 'a transparent manner, on the basis of well defined and measurable criteria and evidence objectively compiled, compared and analysed and on the basis of equality of treatment as between all Member States'.
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 238 #

2020/2072(INL)

(6) The Annual Monitoring Cycle should consist of a preparatory stage, the publication of an annual monitoring report on Union values including country-specific reporting and recommendations, and a follow-up stage. The Annual Monitoring Cycle should be conducted in a spirit of transparency and openness.
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 283 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 2 – point 9
9. The CommissionA group of experts selected both by the Commission and the European Parliament shall draft the Annual Report based on information gathered during the preparatory stage. The Annual Report should cover both positive and negative developments relating to Union values in the Member States. The Annual Report shall be impartial, based on objectively compiled evidence and respect equality of treatment between all Member States. The depth of reporting should reflect the gravity of the situation in question.
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 313 #

2020/2072(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 3 – point 16
16. The three institutions acknowledge the complementary nature of the Annual Monitoring Cycle and other mechanisms for the protection and promotion of Union values, in particular the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU and Regulation (EU) 2020/xxxx. The three institutions commit to avoid unnecessary duplication of existing instruments and integrate and incorporate existing instruments into the Annual Monitoring Cycle as the preferred option. The three institutions commit to take account of the objectives of this Interinstitutional Agreement in Union policies.
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 314 #

2020/2072(INL)

16. The three institutions acknowledge the complementary nature of the Annual Monitoring Cycle and other mechanisms for the protection and promotion of Union values, in particular the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU and Regulation (EU) 2020/xxxx. The three institutions commit to avoid unnecessary duplication of existing instruments and integrate and incorporate existing instruments into the Annual Monitoring Cycle as the preferred option. The three institutions commit to take account of the objectives of this Interinstitutional Agreement in Union policies.
2020/07/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 33 #

2020/2058(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses the necessity to improve the climate objectives in line with a target of climate neutrality by 2040; in order to ensure continuous progress towards the achievement of climate neutrality, any transport infrastructure projects financed by the EU budget must, upon independent assessment, be deemed consistent with the 2030, 2050 and possibly 2040 climate objectives and coherent with the EU objective of building a fully renewables- based, highly resource and energy- efficient, climate-neutral and circular economy; in this view, the assessment of the effects of projects must take in account the green house gas emissions during their whole life cycle, such as those occurring in the construction and operational phase and including indirect emissions in a project’s value chain;
2020/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 25 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the ELD established ‘a framework of environmental liability based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, to prevent and remedy environmental damage; whereas the ELD complements main pieces of EU environmental legislation, to which it is directly or indirectly linked, in particular the Habitat Directive9 , the Birds Directive10 , the Water Framework Directive11 , the Marine Strategy Framework Directive12 and the Offshore Safety Directive13 ; _________________ 10Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7. 11Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 12Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 13Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66. 9Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 32 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas operator insolvency as a consequence of major accidents remains a problem in the EU, thereby resulting in the disregard for the “’polluter pays’ principle;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. ObservesPoints out that the discretionary powers set out in the ELD, the lack of awareness and information about the ELD, insufficient resources and expertise and the weak mechanisms for securing compliance and effective governance at national, regional and local level have led to implementation deficiencies, considerable variability between Member States in the number of cases, and an uneven playing field for operators; is therefore of the opinion that additional efforts are required to ensure regulatory standardisation in the EU and increased public confidence in the effectiveness of EU laws;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 51 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that in many Member States, the budgets of environmental inspectorates have stagnated or decreased due to the financial crisis and that even large, well-resourced authorities can find it difficult to independently develop knowledge of the best ways to ensure compliance; is thus of the opinion that stronger support at EU level is needed and, therefore, calls on the Commission to support Member States in the development of tools for operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers, for example through accessible information portals, commonly used networks (EU networks for practitioners), best practice information and guidance, additional training programmes, training materials and guidance on skills, as this could increase the pressure on ‘black sheep’ companies and, benefit companies that respect the law and would enable stakeholders, operators and the public to become more aware of the existence of the ELD regime and its enforcement and thus contribute to better prevention and remediation of environmental damages;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Points outreiterates that reliable data on environmental incidents giving rise to the application of the ELD or other administrative, civil or criminal instruments should be collected and should be made public in order to establish whether a combination of different legal instruments could adequately respond to environmental harm, or whether serious gaps still exist that need to be remedied; asks for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD and calls the Commission and all the Member States to develop public available databases for reporting on ELD cases in order to create better trust in the ELD system and better implementation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 68 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the ELD to be revised as soon as possible and to be transformed into a fully harmonised regulation in order to achieve a level playing field for EU industry; emphasises that EU rules for liability of companies for environmental damage are currently not providing a level playing field , thereby distorting the proper functioning of the EU’s internal market;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 85 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that most definitions in the ELD should be further clarified and broaden, to make the directive fair and clear to all stakeholders, such as operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers and to keep pace with the rapid evolution of pollutants; welcomes therefore the current efforts to develop a common understanding document (CUD) on key ELD definitions and concepts; regrets, however, that the Commission and the ELD government expert groups did not reach an agreement on its format, meaning that the CUD remains a document produced by the consultancy which was hired by the Commission to support the implementation of the 2017-2020 Multi- annual ELD Work Programme;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 88 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Points out that the different interpretations and application of the “significance threshold” for environmental damage has been identified as a main reason for the uneven application of the ELD; calls, therefore, for a more consistent application and better clarification and guidance of the threshold of “significant damage” in the context of the ELD; calls for the clarification and harmonisation of the “significant” damage to biodiversity threshold and the criteria for its definition, and the alignment of the environmental liability regime to the Habitats Directive Article 6(2);
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 94 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. AskCalls the Commission to undertake a study to establish whether extending the scope of the ELD to align it with other pieces of EU legislation, including the ECD, could limit short- and long-term damage to the environment, human health and air qualityextend the scope of the ELD strict liability to non- Annex III activities to cover all environmental damage, as well as to human health, such as air pollution by cars violating EU car emissions legislation so as to improve the effectiveness of the legislation in implementing the ‘polluter pays’ principle; considers that such extension of scope would streamline the ELD with other pieces of EU legislation on protecting human health and environment, including the ECD, and would facilitate adding provisions to the ELD, such as including a requirement to carry out preventive measures and emergency remedial action, either in the directive itself or in national law implementing it; asks the Commission, furthermore, to assess wthether the precautionary principle approach properly presupposes potentially dangerous risks or effects; potential damage that the so-called industry-led ‘innovation principle’ can have on the short and long term, and the danger it poses to the established precautionary principle and its ability to limit liability in environmental damage;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 95 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes that the activities listed in Annex III do not sufficiently cover the sectors that could potentially give rise to environmental damage; points out that there are activities with potential negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment, such as the pipeline of transport of hazardous substances outside of industrial establishments covered by Annex III, mining, the introduction of invasive alien species and shale gas operations, that are currently not covered by the requirement for strict liability;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 116 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to assess whether it would be appropriate to introduceintroduce a secondary liability regime, that is parental and chain liability for damage caused to human health and the environment20 ; _________________ 20See, for instance, Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 September 2009, Akzo Nobel NV and Others v Commission of the European Communities, C-97/08 B, ECLI:EU:C:2009:536.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 117 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. believes that Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) and Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER) could play a complementary role to environmental liability, as duly compliance with CSR and CER can reduce the likelihood of environmental harm; considers important in this sense that these commitments should be connected to mandatory obligations towards sustainable value creation, including the enforcing of non-financial reporting obligations;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 119 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. considers that a new legislation is urgently needed in order to establish clear, robust and enforceable cross- sectoral requirements on business enterprises to respect human rights, good governance and the environment and to carry out due diligence; stresses that such legislation should follow a cross- commodity approach, apply to all economic sectors in the supply chain, including the financial sector, both upstream and downstream, be accompanied by a robust reporting, disclosure and enforcement mechanism, including effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions for non-compliance;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 129 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. AsksCalls on the Commission to look into the possibility of introducinge a mandatory financial security system (covering insurance, bank guarantees, company pools and bonds or funds) with a maximum threshold per case, aiming to prevent taxpayers from having to bear the costs resulting from remediation of environmental damage; asks the Commission, in addition, to develop a harmonised EU methodology for calculating the maximum liability threshold, taking into account the activity and the impact on the environmenthighlights that insurance cannot be designed to limit liability, but only to address costs of clean-up;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 137 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Reiterates that according to the ELD, persons adversely affected by environmental damage should be entitled to ask the competent authorities to take action; believes in this regard that a compensatory collective redress mechanism should be available to any individual or organisation that has suffered due to environmental damage or impairment of right within the scope of the ELD;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 138 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Welcomes the Commission legislative proposal amending the Aarhus Regulation1367/2006 (COM(2020) 642 final) to allow for better public scrutiny of EU acts affecting the environment; taking into account that the European law stipulates that European citizens should be guaranteed effective and timely access to justice(Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Regulation, Article 6 TEU and relevant provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights) and that the costs of the environmental harm should be borne by the polluter (Article 191TFEU), calls on the Council in its capacity as a co-legislator for the effective implementation of the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention to guarantee access to courts for natural persons and NGOs for representative action to directly file a lawsuit against an operator potentially liable for environmental harm;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 143 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that in cases of extremely widespread pollution, not just environmental liability instruments, but a multitude of instruments, including administrative measures, financial penalties and in some cases criminal prosecution, should be applied to remedy the problem; notes that criminal penalties alone are often ineffective as they may lead to large dismissals of environmental cases especially in Member States where there is no criminal liability of the corporate entity; also notes that in many Member States administrative financial penalties are increasingly used; calls therefore on the Commission to facilitate, and on Member States to use, administrative fines as a complementary tool alongside criminal sanctions;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 150 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Calls for the scope of the ECD to be reviewed to ensure that it covers all relevant environmental legislation taking into account new types and patterns of environmental crime, including illegal logging and timber trade, illegal fishing, human-made fires and carbon credit fraud and all activities that contribute to cover-up environmental crimes;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 152 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Calls for minimum rules under the ECD with regard to the definition of sanctions and on the Commission to issue guidance on what constitutes effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions and a uniform application of sanctions in the EU and minimum standards for national authorities on the frequency and quality of checks on operators; the ECD should include requirements for Member States on data collection, publication and reporting, while using synergies with existing reporting obligations for Member States under the EU sectoral legislation listed in the annexes to the Directive;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 155 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Calls for further clarification and guidance on the interpretation of some legal terms of the ECD, such as “substantial damage”, “non-negligible quantity”, “negligible quantity” and “negligible impact”, “dangerous activity” and “significant deterioration” to ensure consistent application in individual Member States and facilitate cross-border cooperation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 156 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of a legislative proposal for the crime of ecocide and calls on the EU and Member States to work in order to extend the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to the ecocide as well; this extension would make it possible to recognize that large- scale environmental crimes are comparable to voluntary violations of human rights or to outright warlike actions;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 159 #

2020/2027(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of establishing a European Environmental Criminal Court with powers similar to those of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which enforces the 'polluter pays' principle, including compensation for victims;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the amount of user- generated content, including harmful and illegal content, such as images depicting Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) online, shared via cloud services or online platforms has increased exponentially at an unprecedented pace;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that illegal content and cyber-enabled crimes, such as child sexual exploitation online, should be tackled with the same rigour as illegal content and behaviour offline;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Deems it necessary that illegal content is removed swiftly and consistently in order to address crimes, especially those relating to children and fundamental rights violations; considers that voluntary codes of conduct only partially address the issue;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Calls, to this end, for legislative proposals that keep the digital single market open and competitive by requiring digital service providers to apply effective, coherent, transparent and fair procedures and procedural safeguards to premovent by actively detecting and reporting reliably identified child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online and removing illegal content in line with European values; firmly believes that this should be harmonised within the digital single market;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that this should include rules on the notice-and-action mechanisms and requirements for platforms to take proactive measures that are proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities in order to address and prevent the appearance of illegal content on their services, considers that this should entail an obligation for platforms to detect and remove reliably identified Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM); supports a balanced duty-of-care approach and a clear chain of responsibility to avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens for the platforms and unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on fundamental rights, including the freedom of expression;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 173 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Supports limited liability for content and the country of origin principle, but considers improved coordination for removal requests between national competent authorities to be essential; emphasises that such orders should be subject to legal safeguards in order to prevent abuse and ensure full respect of fundamental rights; stresses that sanctions should apply to those service providers that fail to comply with legitimate orders; calls for the creation of an EU Centre for Preventing and Combating child sexual abuse that would ensure an effective and coordinated response to child sexual abuse cases online, as requested in the European Parliament Resolution on children's rights in the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 26 November 2019;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 212 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Deems that accountability- and evidence-based policy making requires robust data on the prevalence and removal of illegal content online, as well as the incidence and prevention of illegal activity online, particularly against children and other vulnerable groups;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2020/2022(INI)

17. Calls, in this regard, for a regular public reporting obligation for platforms, proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities; in the case of child sexual abuse, the reporting should be done to the EU Centre for Preventing and Combating child sexual abuse;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 240 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that the transparency reports drawn up by platforms and national competent authorities should be made available to this EU body, which should be tasked with drawing up yearly reports that provide a structured analysis of illegal content, detection, removal and blocking at EU level;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 253 #

2020/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines the importance of empowering users to enforce their own fundamental rights online, including by means of easily accessible complaint procedures, legal remedies, educational measures and awareness-raising on data protection issureporting mechanisms for illegal content and criminal behaviour for individuals and companies, legal remedies, educational measures, , including the sharing of advice on child online safety, awareness-raising on data protection issues and online safety and the provision of access to cost-free child helplines and age-appropriate services;
2020/06/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the 'European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment', adopted by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe on 3 December 20181 a, _________________ 1a https://rm.coe.int/ethical-charter-en- for-publication-4-december- 2018/16808f699c
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment, adopted by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe, lays down some fundamental guidelines to which public and private entities responsible for the design and development of AI tools and services should adhere; whereas, in particular, the Ethical Charter consists of the following principles: 1) principle of respect for fundamental rights; 2) principle of non- discrimination; 3) principle of quality and security; 4) principle of transparency, impartiality and fairness; 5) principle 'under user control';
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 53 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the use of AI applications in use by law enforcement includconnection with law enforcement is already a reality and is expected to grow and intensify, at various levels, over the coming years; whereas law enforcement authorities in various Member States already make extensive use of those technologies; whereas these applications such asinclude facial recognition technologies,and biometric identification software, analysis software and videos and images, including automated number plate recognition, speakerech identification, speech identification technologies, lip- reading technologies, aural surveillance (i.e. gunshot detection algorithms), autonomous research and analysis of identified databases, forecasting (predictive policing and crime hotspot analytics), behaviour detection tools, autonomous tools to identify financial fraud and terrorist financing, social media monitoring (scraping and data harvesting for mining connections), international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) catchers, and automated surveillance systems incorporating different detection capabilities (such as heartbeat detection and thermal cameras); whereas the aforementioned applications have vastly varying degrees of reliability and accuracy;
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of non- discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in addition to addressing any ethical and professional conduct-related issues stemming from a possible disengagement of judicial bodies;
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of non- discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in addition to taking into account the principle of the rehabilitative role of the penalty;
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 122 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the potential for bias and discrimination arising from the use of machine learning and AI applications; notes that biases can be inherent in underlying datasets, especially when historical data is being used, introduced by the developers of the algorithms, or generated when the systems are implemented in real world settings; points out that the result provided by AI applications is necessarily influenced by the quality of the data used by the applications themselves, and calls for the introduction of mechanisms to ensure the quality of the data, the independence of their source, the independence of the authority collecting them and the accessibility of all data used by AI applications;
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 155 #

2020/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines that in judicial and law enforcement contexts, the final decision always needs to be taken by a human, who can be held accountable for the decisions made, and include the possibility of a recourse for a remedy; refers, in this regard, to Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation which stipulates that a person has the right not to be subject to a decision which produces legal effects concerning him or her or significantly affects him or her and is based solely on automated data processing designed to evaluate certain aspects of that person's personality;
2020/07/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 28 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 33 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken (final report) (2013/2107(INI)),
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas according to the 2020 World Press Freedom Index, the situation concerning the independence of the press differs significantly between Member States, with some Member States ranking among the top 5 best performers, while the worst entry ranking as low as 111th out of 180;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the spreading, on a massive scale, of news from different sources which are difficult to verify, with the ever growing role of social media and messaging platforms, is having a negative impact on the fundamental rights of citizens in Europe; whereas the global COVID-19 pandemic has made the need to ensure free and independent information even clearer, in order to protect the fundamental rights of citizens; whereas the lack of a coordinated communication strategy at EU level has facilitated the wave of disinformation concerning the pandemic, especially on social media and messaging platforms;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas the global COVID-19 crisis is having a devastating social and economic impact on the media sector; whereas this involves a serious risk of further fostering the concentration of information in the hands of a few and preventing the spread of free and independent information;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the stigmatisation, through the media, of some particularly vulnerable individuals, fostering the polarisation of European society and the proliferation of hate speech;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the internet and social media play a major role in spreading hate speech and fostering radicalisation leading to violent extremism, through the circulation of illegal contentinformation swiftly and it is therefore necessary to make it easier for digital service providers to be vigilant and cooperate with the courts of the Member States in order to promptly remove all illegal content that could lead to a large- scale, rapid dissemination of hate speech and incitement to discrimination or violence, while encouraging violent extremism; whereas digital service providers must not become privatised censors and their removal of content must be done while fully respecting the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and be subject to effective judicial review;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas the spread of false news and disinformation available via social media or search websites poses a threat to freedom of speech and expression and the independence of the media, and has strongly impaired the credibility of the traditional media;deleted
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 115 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Is deeply shattered by the murders of Daphne Caruana Galizia in Malta and Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová in Slovakia due to their investigative work, and reiterates the importance of an; recalls the essential role that investigative journalism holds in fighting organised crime by collecting and connecting relevant information, exposing criminal networks and illicit activities; highlights the fact that these activities expose them to an increased personal risk level; calls on national law enforcement authorities to fully cooperate with Europol and other relevant international organisations in order to conduct independent investigation to brs, identifying and bringing to justice the perpetrators of and masterminds behind these crimes;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 144 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points to the final recommendations of the CRIM special committee set out in its resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering, according to which defamation and libel laws dissuade possible reporting of corruption; reiterates the call it issued to all the Member States to de-penalise defamation and libel laws in their legal systems, at least for cases involving allegations of organised crime, corruption and money laundering in Member States and abroad;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 156 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its concern that few specific legal or policy frameworks protecting journalists and media workers from violence, threats and intimidation can be identified at national level within the EU; calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure the effective protection and safety of journalists and other media actors as well as of their sources, including in a cross-border context; strongly reiterates its call on the Commission to present proposals to prevent so-called ‘Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation’ (SLAPP); highlights that there are significant differences with respect to the freedom of the press and protection of journalists situations between Member States; calls on the Commission to come forward with a comprehensive Directive proposal aiming to establish minimum standards against SLAPP practices, across the EU;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 179 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Expresses concern over the disinformation campaigns and uncontrolled spread of fake news in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic, the main targets of which have been the governments of several EU countries, including Italy; takes the view that these disinformation campaigns seek to undermine the democratic process and citizens' trust in the democratic institutions of the Member States; regrets, in this regard, the failure to conduct a coordinated communication campaign at EU level in order properly to inform EU citizens of the risks relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for action by the governments of the Member States to contain the spread of the pandemic;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 204 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Condemns all types of incidents of hate crime and hate speech that occur regularly within the EU; expresses particular concern over hate crimes and crimes relating to incitement to discrimination or violence which have become widespread during the global COVID-19 pandemic, leading to the stigmatisation of some particularly vulnerable individuals;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 231 #

2020/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the new digital environment has exacerbated the problem of the spread of disinformation and has resulted in online platforms playing an influential role in publishing, disseminating and promoting news and other media content; reiterates its concern about the potential threat disinformation poses to freedom of expression and the independence of the media; calls for greater collaboration between online platforms and law-enforcement authorities to limit the spread of fake news and messages that incite hatred or instigate discrimination and violence; is of the view that the prompt removal of illegal content is an effective way to curb the uncontrolled spread of fake news; notes, however, that online platforms cannot and must not become private censors and that any removal of illegal content by online platforms must always be subject to review by the courts of the Member States, in order to protect freedom of expression, the right to free and independent information and the fundamental rights of citizens in general;
2020/07/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Recital B
B. Whereas transport will be key to achieving climate neutrality by 2050at the earliest and by 2050 at the latest and any significant contribution from the transport sector to this goal will require enormous financial investments;
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 17 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. [02 03 01] Reiterates the crucial role of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) in fostering the development of a high-performance trans-European network (TEN-T) that is sustainable and interconnected across the areas of transport, energy and digital services infrastructure and in achieving the goals of the Green Deal; asks that the planned revision of TEN-T projects must take in consideration the ECA special report 10/2020 and the budget will be set accordingly; Considers unacceptable the drastic reductions in commitments for the Energy and Digital branches of the CEF and the global reduction of the CEF budget resulting from these cutes; Considers that the increase in the CEF transport budget is the step in the right direction but insufficient in view of the needs of the sector; Therefore requests a budget in line with the European Parliament position on MFF1 ; _________________ 117,746 bn euros for 2021-2027 in 2018 prices (an average of 2,542 billion euros per year).
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 18 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the proposal to increase the appropriations of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) by 11.5% while leaving the number of statutory staff unchanged; in particular, it is concerned by the lack of increase of human resources for Europol, which will undermine Europol’s development and operational activities in 2021; reminds that the Agency is requested to provide increased operational support to Member States and, upon request, has recently launched new initiatives such as the European Financial and Economic Crime Centre and the Innovation Lab which require additional funding; expects Agency’s tasks to be further extended in 2021 with the upcoming revision of the Agency mandate; considers, therefore, that EUR 184 900 000 should be provided to the Agency in line with its request; requests to add further 63 posts to the Agency establishment plan;
2020/08/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Asks that, in order to ensure continuous progress towards the achievement of climate neutrality, any transport infrastructure projects financed by the EU budget must, upon independent assessment, be deemed consistent with the 2030, 2050 and possibly 2040 climate objectives and coherent with the EU objective of building a fully renewables- based, highly resource and energy- efficient, climate-neutral and circular economy;
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 25 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Deeply regrets thatTakes note of the new commission’s proposal for MFF foresees a 75 % reduction in commitments for military mobility under the transport pillar, limiting de facto this new policy objective of the Union to merely symbolic actions ; requests the initial level to be restored and the level of commitments for 2021 to be set accordingly;
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Highlights the crucial role played by Europol to ensure the security of EU citizens and the support to national law enforcement authorities in fighting ever evolving security threats; notes the impact of the COVID 19 crisis on the European organised crime landscape and the surge of criminal activities in specific areas, such as child sexual abuse online and goods counterfeiting. Underlines that post-COVID economic recovery efforts calls for the highest level of vigilance to prevent and fight criminal infiltrations in the legal economy; believes that, as part of an EU coordinated approach, the EU agencies and bodies, such as Europol, EPPO, Eurojsut and OLAF, can contribute to combat organised crime activates and potential fraud of the EU recovery budget.
2020/08/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 32 #

2020/1998(BUD)

7. Reiterates the importance of a simpler, more efficient own resources system able to bring a substantial reduction in the proportion of GNI-based contributions and to guarantee the adequate funding of Union spending; in particular stresses the importance to introduce a new own resource for the EU budget based on the European Union emissions trading system to promote mitigation and adaptation efforts in the Member States and to incentivize the reduction of emissions in line with the proposals of the Green Deal and the Paris accords;
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 39 #

2020/1998(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. [02 10 03] RegretsTakes note of the decrease in the budget 2021 of the European Union Agency for Railways (ERA) whose role is crucial to achieving a lasting shift from road to rail; notes that such a decrease is particularly unfortunate sincerecalls that 2021 will be the European year of Rail; Therefore requests that the ERA budget be re- established in its 2020 level and that the percentage increase planned in the Draft budget for the following years apply from that limit;
2020/09/03
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 260 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure that the necessary tools are in place to assist Member States in dealing with challenges that may arise due to the presence on their territory of third-country nationals that are vulnerable applicants for international protection, regardless of how they crossed the external borders, the Report should also indicate whether the said Member States are faced with such challenges. Those Member States should also be able to rely on the use of the ‘solidarity pool’ for the relocation of vulnerable persons.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 300 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) In order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States, an automatic solidarity mechanism should be established which is effective and ensures that applicants have swift access to the procedures for granting international protection. Such a mechanism should provide for different types of solidarity measureprimarily for the relocation of asylum applicants and should be flexible and able to adapt to the evolving nature of the migratory challenges facing a Member State.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 301 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) Given the need to ensure the smooth functioning of the solidarity mechanism established in this Regulation, a Solidarity Forum comprising the representatives of all Member States should be established and convened by the Commission.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 318 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Given the specific characteristics ofThe solidarity mechanism should also apply to disembarkations arising in the context of search and rescue operations conducted by Member States or private organisations whether under instruction from Member States or autonomously in the context of migration, this Regulation should provide for a specific process applicable to people disembarked following those operations irrespective of whether there is a situation of migratory pressure.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 334 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Given the recurring nature of disembarkations from search and rescue operations on the different migratory routes, the annual Migration Management Report should set out the short-term projections of disembarkations anticipated for such operations and the solidarity response that would be required to contribute to the needs of the Member States of disembarkation. The Commission should adopt an implementing act establishing a pool of solidarity measures (‘the solidarity pool’) with the aim of assisting the Member State of disembarkation to address the challenges of such disembarkations. Such measures should comprise applicants for international protection that are not in the border procedure orand measures in the field of strengthening of capacity in the field of asylum, reception and return, orand operational support, orand measures in the external dimension.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 361 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) The overall contribution of each Member State to the solidarity pool should be determined through indications by Member States of the measures by which they wish to contribute. Where Member States contributions are insufficient to provide for a sustainable solidarity response the Commission should be empowered to adopt an implementing act setting out the total number of third- country nationals to be covered by relocation and the share of this number for each Member State calculated according to a distribution key based on the population and the GDP of each Member State. Where the indications from Member States to take measures in the field of capacity or the external dimension would lead to a shortfall of greater than 30% of the total number of relocations identified in the Migration Management Report, the Commission should be able to adjust the contributions of these Member States which should then contribute half of their share identified according to the distribution key either by way or relocation, or when so indicated, through return sponsorship.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 373 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure that support measures are available at all times to address the specific situation of disembarkations from search and rescue operations, where the number of disembarkations following search and rescue operation have reached 80% of the solidarity pools for one or more of the benefitting Member States, the Commission should adopt amended implementing acts increasing the total number of contributions by 50%.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 375 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) The solidarity mechanism should also address situations of migratory pressure in particular for those Member States which due to their geographical location are exposed to or likely to be exposed to migratory pressure. For this purpose, the Commission should adopt a report identifying whether a Member State is under migratory pressure and setting out the measures that could support that Member State in addressing the situation of migratory pressure.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 387 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) When assessing whether a Member State is under migratory pressure the Commission, based on a broad qualitative assessment, should take account of a broad range of factors, including the number of asylum applicants, irregular border crossings, return decisions issued and enforced, and relations with relevant third countries. The solidarity response should be designed on a case-by-case basis in order to be tailor-made to the needs of the Member State in question.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 402 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) Only persons who are more likely to have a right to stay in the Union should be relocated. Therefore, the scope of relocation of applicants for international protection should be limited to those who are not subject to the border procedure set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation].deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 409 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) The solidarity mechanism should include measures to promote a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States also in the area of return. Through return sponsorship, a Member State should commit to support a Member State under migratory pressure in carrying out the necessary activities to return illegally staying third-country nationals, bearing in mind that the benefitting Member State remains responsible for carrying out the return while the individuals are present on its territory. Where such activities have been unsuccessful after a period of 8 months, the sponsoring Member States should transfer these persons in line with the procedures set out in this Regulation and apply Directive 2008/115/EC; if relevant, Member States may recognise the return decision issued by the benefitting Member State in application of Council Directive 2001/4039. Return sponsorship should form part of the common EU system of returns, including operational support provided through the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the application of the coordination mechanism to promote effective cooperation with third countries in the area of return and readmission. _________________ 39Council Directive 2001/40/EC of 28 May 2001 on the mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third country nationals, OJ L 149, 2.6.2001, p. 34.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 423 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) Member States should notify the type of solidarity contributions that they will take through the completion of a solidarity response plan. Where Member States are themselves benefitting Member States they should not be obliged to make solidarity contributions to other Member States. At the same time, where a Member State has incurred a heavy migratory burden in previous years, due to a high number of applications for international protection it should be possible for a Member State to request a reduction of its share of the solidarity contribution to Member States under migratory pressure where such contribution consists of relocation or return sponsorship. That reduction should be shared proportionately among the other Member States taking such measures.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 442 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) Where the Migration Management Report identifies needs in a Member State under migratory pressure in the field of capacity measures in asylum, reception and return or in the external dimension, contributingthe other Member States should be able to make contributions to these needs instead of relocation or return sponsorship. In order to ensure that such contributions are in proportion to the share of the contributing Member State the Commission should be able to increase or decrease of such contributions in the implementing act. Where the indications from Member States to take measures in the field of capacity or the external dimension would lead to a shortfall greater than 30% of the required number of persons to be relocated or subject to return sponsorship, the Commission should be able to adjust the contributions of these Member States in order to ensure that they contribute half of their share to relocation or return sponsorship. Such contributions may not replace contributions to relocation.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 448 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure a comprehensive and effective solidarity response and in order to give clarity to Member States receiving support, the Commission should adopt an implementing act specifying the contributions to be made by each Member State. Such contributions should always be based on the type of contributions indicated by the Member State concerned in the solidarity response plan, except where that Member State failed to submit one. In such cases, the measures set out in the implementing act for the Member State concerned should be determined by the Commission.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 456 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) A distribution key based on the size of the population and of the economy of the Member States should be applied as a point of reference for the operation of the solidarity mechanism enabling the determination of the overall contribution of each Member State.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 599 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
(51) Considering that a Member State should remain responsible for a person who has irregularly entered its territory, it is also necessary to include the situation when the person enters the territory following a search and rescue operation. A derogation from this responsibility criterion should be laid down for the situation where a Member State has relocated persons having crossed the external border of another Member State irregularly orit is also necessary to include the situation when the person enters the territory following a search and rescue operation. In such a situation, the Member State of relocation should be responsible if the person applies for international protection.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1180 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was registered shall be responsible for examining it.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1201 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where a Member State cannot carry out the transfer pursuant to the first subparagraph to any Member State designated on the basis of the criteria set out in Chapter II of Part III or to the first Member State with which the application was registered, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1230 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Where a third-country national or stateless person intends to make an application for international protection, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State of first where the applicant is presentry.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1498 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When it is not possible to determine the Member State responsible on the basis of the other criteria set out in this Chapter, the Member State responsible shall be determined on the basis of the automatic solidarity mechanism set out in Chapter I of Part IV.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1565 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21
1. basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that an applicant has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the first Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease if the application is registered more than 3 years after the date on which that border crossing took place. 2. shall also apply where the applicant was disembarked on the territory following a search and rescue operation. 3. if it can be established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that the applicant was relocated pursuant to Article 57 of this Regulation to another Member State after having crossed the border. In that case, that other Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection.Article 21 deleted Entry Where it is established, on the The rule set out in paragraph 1 Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1694 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within twohree months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1699 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Articles 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, the request to take charge shall be sent within onetwo months of receiving that hit.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1738 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title
Submitting a take back notificationrequest
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1754 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. A take back notificationrequest shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1760 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. The notified Member State to which the request is made shall confirm receipt of the notificationrequest to the Member State which made the notificationrequest within one week, unless the notified Member State to which the request is made can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1765 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1772 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2014 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Solidarity contributions for the benefit of a Member State under migratory pressure or subject to disembarkations following search and rescue operations shall consist of the following types:
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2023 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) relocation of applicants who are not subject to the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection established by Article 41 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation];
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2029 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) return sponsorship of illegally staying third-country nationals;deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2042 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) relocation of illegally staying third-country nationals.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2060 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The measures set out in paragraph 1, point (c) are offered in addition to the measure provided for in paragraph 1, point (a).
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2064 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2
2. Such contributions may, pursuant to Article 56, also consist of: (a) international protection subject to the border procedure in accordance with Article 41 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation]; (b) relocation of illegally staying third-country nationals.deleted relocation of applicants for
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2078 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 a (new)
Article 45a Automatic solidarity mechanism 1. The solidarity mechanism set out in this article shall apply automatically for the benefit of a Member State where the redistribution criteria set out in Chapter II cannot be applied. 2. The solidarity mechanism shall include the measures set out in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 45. 3. The mechanism set out in paragraph 1 shall be binding upon all Member States. 4. The number of applicants to be relocated for each Member State shall be determined by the Commission in an implementing act by applying the key indicated in Article 54 in the preceding 12 months.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2080 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46 deleted Solidarity Forum shall comprise all Member States. The Commission shall convene and preside the Solidarity Forum in order to ensure the smooth functioning of this Part.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2088 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
A Solidarity Forum shall comprise all Member States. The Commission shall convene and preside the Solidarity Forum in order to ensure the smooth functioning of this Part.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2097 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2146 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Within two weeks from the submisspresentation of the SAR Solidarity Response Plans referred to in Article 47(4) or two weeks from the end of the Solidarity Forum referred to in Article 47(5), and where the total solidarity contributions indicated by all the Member States in their Plans corresponds to, or is considered by the Commission to be sufficiently close to the total solidarity contributions set out in the Migration Management Report, the Commission shall adopt an implementing act setting out the solidarity measures indicated by Member States pursuant to Article 47(4) or Article 47(5). Such measures shall constitute a solidarity pool for each Member State expected to be faced with disembarkations in the short term, the Commission shall adopt an implementing act setting out the solidarity measures.
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2148 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where the Asylum Agency notifies the Commission and the Member States that 80% of the solidarity pool in the first subparagraph has been used for one or more of the benefitting Member States, the Commission shall convene the Solidarity Forum to inform the Member States of the situation and request Member States to increase their contributions. Following the end of the Solidary Forum, where Member States have indicated their readiness to make increased contributions the Commission shall amend the implementing act establishing a solidarity pool referred to in the first subparagraph in relation to the benefitting Member State concerned to increase the contributions indicated by Member States.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2149 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2153 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the total number of third-country nationals to be covered by relocation to contribute to the needs of the Member States referred to in Article 47(2) as identified in the Migration Management Report;deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2157 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the number and share referred to in point (a) for each Member State, including the benefitting Member States calculated according to the distribution key set out in Article 54;deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2159 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the measures indicated by Member States as set out in Article 45(1), point (d).deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2161 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where Member States have indicated measures set out in Article 45(1), point (d), those measures shall be in proportion to the contributions that the Member States would have made by means of the relocations referred to in Article 45(1), point (a) as a result of the application of the distribution key set out in Article 54. They shall be set out in the implementing act except where the indications by Member States would lead to a shortfall of greater than 30% of the total number of relocations identified in the Migration Management Report. In those cases, the contributions set out in the implementing act shall be adjusted so that those Member States indicating such measures are required to cover 50% of their share calculated in accordance with the distribution key set out in Article 54 through relocation or return sponsorship as referred to in Article 45(1) point (b) or a combination of both. The Member States concerned shall immediately indicate to the Commission how they intend to cover their share in this regard. The Commission shall adjust the contributions set out in the implementing act regarding relocation, return sponsorship and the measures referred to in Article 45(1), point (d) for those Member States accordingly.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2166 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Where one or more Member States have not submitted an SAR Solidarity Response Plan within the time limits set out in Article 47(4) and Article 47(5), the Commission shall determine the amount and type of contributions to be made by those Member States.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2170 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where the Asylum Agency notifies the Commission and the Member States that 80% of the solidarity pool in the first subparagraph has been used for one or more of the benefitting Member States, the Commission shall convene the Solidarity Forum to inform the Member States of the situation and the additional needs of the Member States. Following the Solidary Forum the Commission shall adopt an amendment to the implementing act establishing a solidarity pool referred to in the first subparagraph in relation to the benefitting Member State concerned to increase the total number of third- country nationals covered by the solidarity measures referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph by a maximum of 50%. The share of each Member State referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be amended accordingly. Where the provisions of the second subparagraph are applied and Member States have indicated that they shall contribute through return sponsorship, the share of these measures shall be increased by 50%. The measures referred to in Article 45(1), point (d) shall also be increased by a share that is in proportion to a 50% increase of that Member States share calculated according to the distribution key set out in Article 54.deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2176 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2200 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2271 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51
Report on migratory pressure 1. Member State concerned during its assessment undertaken pursuant to Article 50(1). The Commission shall submit the report on migratory pressure to the European Parliament and to the Council within one month aftArticle 51 deleted The Commission shall consult the In the report, the Commission Where the Commission informed them that it was carrying out an assessment pursuant to Article 50(2). 2. shall state whether the Member State concerned is under migratory pressure. 3. that the Member State concerned is under migratory pressure, the report shall identify: (a) the capacity of the Member State under migratory pressure in the field of migration management,concludes measures that the Member State measures referred to in paArticular asylum and return as well as its overall needs in managing its asylum and return caseload; (b) measures that are appropriate to address the situation and the expected timeframe for their implementation consisting, as appropriate, of: (i) under migratory pressure should take in the field of migration management, and in particular in the field of asylum and return; (ii) 45(1), points (a), (b) and (c) to be taken by other Member States; (iii) 45(1), point (d) to be taken by other Member States. 4. that a rapid response is required due to a developing situation in a Member State, it shall submit its report within two weeks at the latest from the date on which it informed the European Parliament, the Council and the Member States pursuant to Article 50(2) that it was carrying out an assessment.le measures referred to in Article Where the Commission considers
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2302 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2348 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53
[...]deleted
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2385 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the size of the population (540% weighting);
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2389 #

2020/0279(COD)

(b) the total GDP (540% weighting).
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2397 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the unemployment rate (20% weighting)
2021/12/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2401 #

2020/0279(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55
[...]deleted
2021/12/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 352 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title
Subject matter and scope
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 355 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes a procedure for the screening at the external borders of the Member States of all third-country nationals who have crossedare present on the external border in an unauthorised manner, of those who have applied for international protection during border checks without fulfilling entry conditions, as well as those disembarked after a search and rescue operation, before they are referred to the appropriate procedureritory of Member States and were not subject to checks at the Member States' external border.
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 372 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
The object of the screening shall be the identification of all third-country nationals subject to it and the verification against relevant databases that the persons subject to it do not pose a threat to internalrisk to security. The screening shall also entail health checks, where appropriate, to identify persons vulnerable and in the need of health care as wellnd the ones posing a threat to public health, along with checks to identify vulnerable persons. Those checks shall contribute to referring such persons to the appropriate procedure.
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 399 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Screening at the external borderArea of Application
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 402 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation shall apply to all third-country nationals, irrespective of whether they have applied for international protection, who:
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 410 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) are disembarked in the territory of a Member State following a search and rescue operation and do not meet the entry conditions laid down in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 412 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The screening shall apply to those persons regardless of whether they have applied for international protection.deleted
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 414 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The screening shall also apply to all third-country nationals who apply for international protection at external border crossing points or in transit zones and who do not fulfil the entry conditions set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.deleted
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 425 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. During the screening, the persons referred to in Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not be authorised to enter the territory of a Member StateThird-country citizens subject to screening shall, for the duration of the procedure, remain at the disposal of the determining authorities in the places referred to in Article 6(1). Member States shall lay down provisions to this effect in their national legislation with a view to completing the necessary checks.
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 435 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Where it becomes apparent during the screening that the third-country national concerned fulfils the entry conditions set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the screening shall be discontinued and the third- country national concerned shall be authorised to enter the territory, without prejudice to the application of penalties as referred to in Article 5(3) of that Regulation.deleted
2022/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 446 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the cases referred to in Article 3, the screening shall be conducted at locations situated at or in proximity to the external borderThe screening shall be conducted in the Member States' respective appropriate forums.
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 459 #

2020/0278(COD)

2. In the cases referred to in Article 5, the screening shall be conducted at any appropriate location within the territory of a Member State.deleted
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 466 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. In the cases referred to in Article 3, tThe screening shall be carried out without delay and shall in any case be completed within 5 days from the apprehension in the external border area,or the disembarkation in the territory of the Member State concerned or the presentation at the border crossing point. In exceptional circumstances, where a disproportionate number of third-country nationals needs to be subject to the screening at the same time, making it impossible in practice to conclude the screening within that time-limit, the period of 5 days may be extended by a maximum of an additional 5 days.
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 738 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – title
14 The third country nationals referred to in Article 3(1) point (a) and (b) of this Regulation whoFinalisation of the screening
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 742 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The third country nationals referred to in Article 3(1) point (a) and (b) of this Regulation who
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 750 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
— with regard to whom the screening has not revealed that they fulfil entry conditions set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399,deleted
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 785 #

2020/0278(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 7
7. Where the third country nationals referred to in Article(s) 3(1) and Article 5 are referred to an appropriate procedure regarding asylum or return, the screening ends. Where not all the checks have been completed within the deadlines referred to in Article 6(3) and (5), the screening shall nevertheless end with regard to that person, who shall be referred to a relevant procedure.
2022/01/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 421 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an exceptional situation of mass influx of third-country nationals or stateless persons arriving irregularly in a Member State or disembarked on its territory following search and rescue operations, being of such a scale, in proportion to the population and GDP, GDP and unemployment rate of the Member State concerned, and nature, that it renders the Member State’s asylum, reception or return system non-functional and can have serious consequences for the functioning the Common European Asylum System or the Common Framework as set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management], or
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 442 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of providing solidarity contributions for the benefit of a Member State in situations of crisis as set out in Article 1(2)(a), Part IV of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] shall apply mutatis mutandis, with the exception of Article 45(1), point (d)s (b) and (d), Article 46, Article 47, Article 48, Article 49, Article 51(3)(b)(iii) and (4), Article 52(2) and (5) and Article 53(2), second and third subparagraphs.
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 454 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5
5. By way of derogation from Article 51(3)(b)(ii), Article 52(1) and 52(3) first sub-paragraph and Article 53(3)(a) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management], relocation shall include not only persons referred to in points (a) and (c) of Article 45(1) of that Regulation, but also persons referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 45(2) and persons referred to in Article 47(1).
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 531 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) By way of derogation from Article 41(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], Member States may in a border procedure take decisions on the merits of an application in cases where the applicant is of a nationality, or, in the case of stateless persons, a former habitual resident of a third country, for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection by the determining authority is, according to the latest available yearly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75% or lower, in addition to the cases referred to in Article 40(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation];deleted
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 538 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) By way of derogation from Article 41(11) and (13) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], the maximum duration of the border procedure for the examination of applications set out in that Article may be prolonged by an additional period of maximum eightfour weeks. Following this period, the applicant shall be authorised to enter the Member State’s territory for the completion of the procedure for international protection.
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 551 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) By way of derogation from Article 41a(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], the maximum period during which third- country nationals or stateless persons shall be kept at the locations referred to in that Article may be prolonged by an additional period of maximum eightfour weeks;
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 555 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) In addition to the cases provided for by Article 6(2) of Directive XXX [recast Return Directive], Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when the criterion referred to in Article 6(1), point (f) of Directive XXX [recast Return Directive] is fulfilled or when the applicant, third- country national or stateless person concerned is manifestly and persistently not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate established by Article 7 of that Directive.deleted
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 592 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Extension of the timeframes for solidarity 1. Where a Member State is facing a situation of force majeure which renders it impossible to comply with the obligation to undertake solidarity measures within the timeframes established in Articles 47 and 53(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] and Article 2 of this Regulation, it shall notify the Commission and the other Member States without delay. The Member State concerned shall indicate the precise reasons for which it considers that it is facing a situation of force majeure and provide all necessary information for that effect. After such notification, by way of derogation from the timeframes established by those Articles, the timeframe for undertaking solidarity measures established in those Articles shall be suspended for a maximum period of six months. 2. Where a Member State is no longer facing a situation of force majeure, that Member State shall immediately notify the Commission and the other Member States of the cessation of the situation. After such notification, the extended timeframe set out in paragraph 1 shall cease to apply.Article 9 deleted measures
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 666 #

2020/0277(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10a Measures to ensure respect for solidarity requirements 1. Where a Member State does not comply with the solidarity requirements under this Regulation, thereby violating the principles enshrined in Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Commission may adopt one or more of the following appropriate measures. The procedure referred to in Article 6 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget shall apply mutatis mutandis: (a) where the Commission implements the Union budget in direct or indirect management pursuant to points (a) and (c) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation, and where a government entity is the recipient: (i) a suspension of payments or of the implementation of the legal commitment or a termination of the legal commitment pursuant to Article 131(3) of the Financial Regulation; (ii) a prohibition on entering into new legal commitments; (iii) a suspension of disbursement of instalments in full or in part or a early repayment of loans guaranteed by the Union budget; (iv) a suspension or reduction of the economic advantage under an instrument guaranteed by the Union budget; (v) a prohibition to enter into new agreements on loans or other instruments guaranteed by the Union budget; (b) where the Commission implements the Union budget under shared management with Member States pursuant to point (b) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation: (i) a suspension of the approval of one or more programmes or an amendment thereof; (ii) a suspension of commitments; (iii) a reduction of commitments, including through financial corrections or transfers to other spending programmes; (iv) a reduction of pre-financing; (v) an interruption of payment deadlines; (vi) a suspension of payments.
2022/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 373 #

2020/0036(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. In order to ensure continuous progress towards the achievement of climate neutrality set out in Articles 1 and 2, the Commission and the Member States shall fully take into account the obligations set out in the Article 3(b) of the Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment as with a view to address the green house gas emissions of public and private projects during their whole life cycle, such as those occurring in the construction and operational phase and including indirect emissions in a project’s value chain. In addition, any energy and transport infrastructure projects shall, upon independent assessment, be deemed consistent with the 2030, 2050 and possibly 2040 climate objectives and coherent with the EU objective of building a fully renewables-based, highly resource and energy-efficient, climate-neutral and circular economy.
2020/06/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 41 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 4
(4) In line with the objectives set out in the Commission Communication on the European Green Deal, there is a need to transform the Union economy and to rethink policies, in particular in the field of transport and mobility, which implies accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility. Transport accounts for a quarter of the Union’s greenhouse gas emissions, and still growing. To achieve climate neutrality, a 90% reduction in transport emissions is needed by 20540. Achieving sustainable transport means putting users first and providing them with more affordable, accessible, healthier and cleaner alternatives to their current mobility habits. The European Green Deal implies to accelerate the shift to sustainable and smart mobility to address these challenges. In particular, a substantial part of the 75% of inland freight carried today by road should shift onto rail and inland waterways.
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 47 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 5
(5) Rail has a significant role to play as a game changer to achieve the climate neutrality objective by 20540. It is one of the most environmentally friendly and energy-efficient transport modes. Rail is largely electrified and emits far less CO2 than equivalent travel by road or air, and is the only mode that has consistently reduced its greenhouse gas emissions and CO2 emissions since 1990. In addition, rail has decreased its energy consumption between 1990-201618 and increasingly uses renewable energy sources. _________________ 18DG MOVE Statistical Pocketbook 2019 “EU transport in figures” (source: Eurostat);
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 70 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 7
(7) While the share of passenger rail in the Union land transport has only slightly increased since 2007, the share of freight has decreased. Many obstacles remain to achieve a true Single European Rail Area, including in respect of the need to minimise noise. Overcoming these obstacles together with cost reduction and accelerated innovation will allow rail to realise its full potential. Rail therefore needs a further boost to become more attractive to travellers and businesses alike. In particular, under-used suburban and regional lines need to be modernised and renovated, in order to encourage, as much as possible, urban mobility with a low environmental impact and connection to neighbouring disadvantaged areas, while promoting sustainable intermodality, enabling bicycles to be taken on trains and encouraging the use of rail for medium-length journeys on night trains in Europe;
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 106 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promote rail as a sustainable, intermodal, innovative and safe mode of transport, in particular by highlighting the role of rail as a game changer to help reaching the Union’s climate neutrality objective by 20540 and by reaching out to the wider public, especially youth;
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 161 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) the promotion of a study on under- used and/or abandoned rail routes in order to assess whether they could be modernised and renovated.
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission has only assessed the implementation of the Return Directive once (in 2014), despite the legal obligation under Article 19 of the directive to report on its application every three years, starting from 2013; whereas in 2015 the Commission published a communication setting out an action plan on returns; whereas in 2017 it issued a recommendation on making returns more effective when implementing Directive 2008/115/EC and published a Return Handbook;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Commission, in its action plan on return published in 2015, expressed the view that voluntary returns were the preferred option whenever possible; whereas - again, as stated by the Commission in its action plan - 'it is estimated that around 40% of returns were voluntary departures, from just 14% in 2009';
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the evaluations carried out by the Commission when publishing its recommendation on making returns more effective indicated that 'the margins of discretion left to the Member States by Directive 2008/115/EC led to an inconsistent transposition in national legislations, with a negative impact on the effectiveness of the Union return policy' and that 'a more effective implementation of that Directive would reduce possibilities of misuse of procedures and remove inefficiencies, while ensuring the protection of fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union';
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 65 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. StressesAgrees with the Commission about the importance of improving the effective implementation of the directive; highlights that such effectiveness should not only be measured in quantitative terms by referring to the return rate, but also in qualitative terms, such as the sustainability of returns and fundamental rights;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to harmonise the rules on return, including through the adoption of a regulation, in order to eliminate differences between Member States' systems and to increase the implementation of return decisions, with the support also of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Regrets that Member States do not systematically issue a return decision for irregular migrants apprehended on their territory or for persons whose asylum applications have been rejected; calls on the Commission to introduce this obligation in a proposal to revise Directive 2018/115/EC;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to continue considering voluntary returns as the preferred option over forced returns and to encourage Member States to develop an effective framework in order to give irregular migrants easy access to voluntary return programmes;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers it vital that assisted voluntary return programmes are designed in such a way as to avoid encouraging migrants to travel to Europe irregularly in order to benefit from such programmes; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to fulfil its commitments and assess whether differences between Member States' voluntary return and reintegration programmes might not lead to a situation where migrants cherry-pick the Member States offering the best conditions;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Commission to continue to fund and increase the resources available to Member States and governmental and non-governmental partners, in order to encourage assisted voluntary return programmes with the ultimate aim of ensuring sustainable returns and reintegration;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 184 #

2019/2208(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that the detention of irregular migrants to be returned should always be considered a measure of last resort and should always be subject to time limits and safeguards for those being deprived of their personal freedom; calls on the Member States to implement alternative measures to detention that are less coercive and radical;
2020/07/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 29 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the lack of an automatic mandatory redistribution mechanism for applicants for international protection within the European Union has meant that one-third of the Member States currentlyhave played host to 90% of asylum seekers;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 61 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas there have been significant shortcomings in the implementation of the Dublin III Reg implementation of the Dublin III Regulation has been a total failure because of rules that have proven themselves to be inappropriate for dealing with substantial influxes of migrants, resulation, including during the COVID- 19 crisis,ng in a system that places excessive responsibility and burdens upon a few Member States, and has seriously undermininged the right to international protection and, leading to violations of fundamental rights;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Dublin system places a significant burden on a minority of Member States, in particular when influxes of migrants occur; takes the view that the EU therefore needs a solidarity mechanism which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of objective criteria of asylum seekers who are manifestly eligible for asylum; in- depth changes are needed to the rules and criteria for assigning responsibility, moving beyond the principle of first country of irregular entry, broadening the concept of family unit and adding other connecting factors to determine responsibility for examining an application for international protection; considers it vital to establish a mandatory solidarity mechanism that is automatically applicable to all Member States; the mechanism should have no application thresholds and be constantly updated, making for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States on the basis of objective criteria such as Gross Domestic Product, population and unemployment rate in the various Member States; considers it essential to relocate to the various EU Member States - directly at the time of irregular entry into the territory of the Union, and without prior screening of any kind - all those seeking international protection in the Union; considers, in this regard, that any prior screening has the sole effect of imposing excessive burdens on the Member States of first arrival and can under no circumstances replace a thorough individual examination of an application for international protection; is of the view that provision should also be made for an ad hoc redistribution mechanism for all those who are rescued in the course of a search and rescue operation and who request international protection; considers, furthermore, that the Dublin system should always be able to ensure flexibility of application, in particular by avoiding the laying down of rules that involve the sole, permanent responsibility of one Member State;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 104 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that ad hoc agreements are no substitute for a harmonised and sustainable policy at EU level; deplores the fact that efforts to overhaul the Dublin III Regulation have been blocked in the Council; finds it particularly regrettable that the Union is currently faced with the same set of rules which have helped exacerbate divisions between Member States and have proven to be totally ineffective in managing a large influx of refugees, such as that which the Union had to deal with in 2015-2016;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 133 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to make use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional circumstances so warrant, for example to relocate asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decent reception conditions;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 203 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the number of transfer procedures has increased significantly, generating considerable human, material and financial costs; deplores, however, the fact that in only 11% of cases are transfers actually carried out, a further factor in the permanent overloading of asylum systems; stresses the lack of cooperation and information-sharing between Member States; regards efforts to combat secondary movements as essential in order to reduce the number of transfer requests; proposes that the conditions which trigger transfer procedures be clarified and harmonised;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 220 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that in some cases the rules on transfer of responsibility under Dublin III undermine the efficiency of asylum procedures and the carrying-out of transfers and contribute to the increase in the number of secondary movements by encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the systemby encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the system; deplores the often spurious reasons put forward by Member States for refusing transfers; calls on the Commission to revise the rules, in order to give Member States sufficient time to carry out transfers, and dto away with transfer of responsibility in cases where an asylum seeker abscondmonitor the situation and, where necessary, impose penalties on Member States which refuse transfers;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 246 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the rate of protection for asylum seekers varies greatly between Member States for certain nationalities; considers that a harmonisation of procedures, which should include also a common list of safe countries of origin and a shared country-risk analysis, or at least greater convergence, would reduce these disparities, and thus also the number of secondary movement in order to determine whether a given third country can be considered a safe country, would reduce these disparities; stresses that the return of persons not eligible for asylum is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of the Dublin III Regulation and that voluntary return mechanisms should be encouraged;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 264 #

2019/2206(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that some two-thirds of asylum applications are submitted by nationals of safethird countries who have arrived in the EU on a visa or visa waiver; considers that these applications may, in such cases, prove to be manifestly unfounded applications, while contributeing to the overloading of asylum systems in the Member States, lengthening the time needed to examine applications and, ultimately, may have an adverse effect on the right to international protection in the Union; calls on the Commission and the Member States to make asylum and visa policies more consistent;
2020/07/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 3 May 2018 on the protection of children in migration1a, __________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0201
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 40 a (new)
– having regard to the resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of October 2014 on the alternatives to immigration detention of children (RES 2020),
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. Whereas women and children are at higher risk of being trafficked, exploited and sexually abused, both online and offline, including at the hands of traffickers and therefore there is a need for Member States to build and strengthen child protection systems to prevent and respond to violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of children;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas according to Eurostat, 21 Member States have a national minimum wage; whereas, however, in some cases the minimum wage is so low compared to the average that many workers are forced to live virtually on the poverty threshold and there is a risk of social dumping and exploitation in other Member States;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas income poverty is only a part of the overall concept of poverty, and therefore poverty does not refer only to material resources, but also to social resources, notably education, health and access to services;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas corruption constitutes a serious threat to rule of law in the EU, as citizens are burdened and discriminated against in regard to equal enjoyment of their civic, political, economic, social and cultural fundamental rights; whereas corruption distorts the size and composition of public expenditure, seriously jeopardising the state’s capacity to make maximum use of the resources at its disposal in order to enable its citizens to enjoy to the full their rights;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 258 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. States that the minimum wage shall be a tool employed to combat social decline by restoring people’s dignity; asks the Commission to comply with the European Trade Union Confederation’s call for a minimum wage, which, in the latter’s view, cannot be set any lower than 60 % of the national median wage, so as to put an end to the precarious circumstances and semi-poverty people in full-time work find themselves and to avoid unfair competition within the internal market;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 260 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the importance for the EU and its Member States to work out specific programmes aimed at ending child poverty;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Acknowledges the importance for Member States to adopt laws to safeguard and strengthen maternity and paternity rights in order to provide a healthy, stable environment for children, in particular during the first months of their lives;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 266 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the effects of austerity measures have deeply impacted the social fabric of the EU in many Member States and that this continues today – preventing the development of an approach to social investment by Member States and thereby exacerbating already widening inequalities and breaching fundamental rights – and affects women, migrants, Roma, Travellers and other disadvantaged groups with a particular ferocity;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 273 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reasserts the right of Member States to derogate from the budget austerity principle when income support measures are introduced to protect a right guaranteed by the Charter; asks in this regard that investments fostering social inclusion and income support measures be deducted when calculating the deficit under the Stability and Growth Pact;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 397 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Takes the view that Member States should put in place an intersectional approach to combat all forms of discrimination affecting children, taking into in consideration their vulnerabilities, in particular - but not limited to - those of children with disabilities, migrant children, children of migrant background, children from minorities and religious groups, LGBTI children, children of LGBTI parents and stateless or undocumented children, who are disproportionately exposed to discrimination on multiple grounds and therefore require a specialised approach to address their specific needs;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 460 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Condemns the attacks on media freedom and freedom of expression in the EU; recalls the work by investigative journalists such as Daphne Caruana Galizia and Jan Kuckiack, who were brutally murdered because they were investigating corruption in the Maltese and Slovak Governments, fraudulent use of EU funds, and the infiltration of organised crime right up to the highest levels of state; recalls the necessity of guaranteeing freedom of expression, media pluralism and the key role independent journalism has in a democracy; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to make sufficient funds available to support independent investigative journalism in the EU;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 499 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that children of LGBTI families, as well as their parents, are victims of human rights violations in the EU and are subject to restrictions of their freedom of movement in the EU, as a result of the refusal of some Member States to recognise same-sex parenthood; urges therefore the Member States and the Commission to adopt laws that recognise the free movement of public documents and mutual recognition of the effects of civil status records in the European Union;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 524 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement the Recommendation of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights of June 2019 entitled ‘Lives saved. Rights protected. Bridging the protection gap for refugees and migrants in the Mediterranean’27; recalls that the right to asylum is expressly protected under Article 18 of the Charter; condemns Member States which, in a clear breach of the solidarity requirement of the Treaties, refuse to receive asylum seekers on their territory; __________________ 27https://rm.coe.int/lives-saved-rights- protected-bridging-the-protection-gap-for- refugees-/168094eb87
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 547 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Reiterates that immigration detention of children is never in the child’s best interest in line with the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, that children shall not be detained in the context of migration, and therefore calls on Member States to work out community-based alternatives to detention, as well as prioritising integration, education and psychological support;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 557 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Stresses the importance for Member States to put in place specific measures to grant all migrant children, swiftly after their arrival, access to education, language learning, healthcare, good living conditions and, when unaccompanied or separated, to have a guardian;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 597 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Reiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and fair treatment for all citizens; stresses that, by diverting public funds away from their intended public use, corruption detracts from the level and quality of public services, thereby undermining fundamental rights; calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to devise effective ways of combating corruption and to monitor regularly how public funds are used;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 602 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Believes that the fight against organised crime needs to be viewed as a priority throughout this parliamentary term; stresses in this regard that resources purloined from the legal economy adversely impact the full enjoyment by EU citizens of their fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 605 #

2019/2199(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls on all Member States and the European Union to develop tangible strategies that will promote transparency, make citizens aware of their responsibilities, and fight corruption and the infiltration of organised crime into the real economy of Member States;
2020/02/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas according to the ILO, for over 60 % of platform workers this work constitutes their sole source of income, and yet many EU Member States obstinately continue to treat these professions as non-standard jobs, opening the way to exploitation, discrimination and poverty;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 32 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the 'casualisation' of employment relationships is creating new forms of piecework that bolster an army of the new poor with extremely insecure prospects;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 38 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas rating mechanisms, often based on unclear algorithms, create disparities in how workers are treated and discriminate between them, to the detriment especially of more vulnerable categories such as women, immigrants and persons with disabilities;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 44 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas the distorted relationship between internet multinationals and workers is so one-sided that it allows contracts to be imposed unilaterally, without any form of trade union protection or collective bargaining;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 66 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Calls as a matter of urgency on the Commission to come up with a strategydirective to align the working conditions of platform workers with those of regulaall other employees, with full respect for the diversity of national labour market models and the autonomy of social partners on the condition that this does not create forms of exploitation or unfair competition on the internal market, it clarifies the status of workers and it gives them access to fundamental rights such as holiday leave and sick leave, social security and health care, wages and decent working conditions, not to mention the right to union representation and collective bargaining;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 110 #

2019/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises the need for maximum transparency and non-discrimination in transport and tourism platforms, specifically regarding algorithms that affectby platform algorithms, particularly with regard to the transport and tourism sectors to ensure a level playing field in services, allocation of tasks, pricing, and advertising;
2021/02/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 5 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the overall reduction of AMIF commitment appropriations by 15,4 % (-172 million euros) compared to 2019; regrets the decrease of commitment appropriations aimed at strengthening and developing the CEAS and enhancing responsibility-sharing between Member States (-29,5 %) compared to 2019; recalls the importance of providing adequate financial capacity to support the reception of asylum seekers in the Member States, effective return strategies, resettlement programmes, improve the integration of migrants as well as the re- integration of migrants who forcibly or voluntarily returned to a third country, and to respond to emergency assistance needs of Member States under migratory pressure; expresses its disappointment at the fact that the AMIF budget does not include some financial reserves to finance the reformed Dublin legislation and the new Union Resettlement schemes in case of adoption during 2020; proposes to foresee an amount in the reserve for temporary arrangements for disembarkation in the Union and relocation of people rescued in the Mediterranean; requests, in order to free financial resources, that the EU Trust Fund for Africa and the Regional development protection programmes for North Africa that primarily supportcalls the need to ensure better coordination between funds engaged to address the issue of migration under Heading III (Security and Citizenship) and the external policies of the Union are funded by Heading IV of the Union budget (Global Europe) instead of by AMIF under Heading III (Security and Citizenship);
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes the overall increase of the funds available through the Justice Programme; regrets, however, the decrease in commitments for the component Facilitating and supporting judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters (-23,6 %); reiterates the importance of judicial cooperation, especially in criminal matters, for reaching the objectives of establishing a Security Union and stresses the need for adequate financing of this area;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Stresses the importance of ensuring adequate funding, staffing and staff training for all JHA agencies, the importance of cooperation among them, the need for technological innovations and adaptation, with adequate financial and human resources for them to properly perform their vital role in reinforcing cooperation and coordination among the Member States;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that the budget of the EBCG has increased by 34,8 % (+108 million euros) in 2020 which is by far the largest increase among all JHA agencies; recalls that the Court of Auditors identified as part of the discharge of the 2017 Budget that Member States overestimated the financial need of the EBCG in 2017; underlines that when the objective of providing the EBCG with more human resources (10.000 border guards by 2027), the number of migrants arriving irregularly over sea or land in the Union has substantially decreased compared to previous yearsconsistent with the objective of providing the EBCG with more human resources (10.000 border guards by 2027); suggests that suchthis boost in resources should also be used for rescuing lives at sea; regrets the remarkablnotes the difference between the commitment appropriations assigned to EBCG (420 million euros) in 2020 and the amount accorded to EASO (133 million euros); suggests that the budget and staffing of EASO should be increased for a bettertter reflect the increased needs in order to ensure an optimal performance of the duties entrusted to the Agency;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 40 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that the Commission did not follow the budgetary request of Europol and proposed to underfund the Agency by 303,5 million euros in 2020; notes that the decrease of the eu-LISA commitment appropriations by 18,7 % (- 55 million euros) corresponds to the end of the development of the Entry Exit System; reiterates the need to ensure adequate financial support for JHA Agencies to deliver the tasks assignedis concerned that, coupled with the reduction envisaged by the Commission regarding Europol personnel, this would affect the ability of the Agency to deliver on its priorities, as set out in the Europol Strategy 2020+; points out that Europol would thus face short-term restrictions in the two them in full transparency and to fight against cross-border serious crime in full compliance with fundamental rightcore pillars of its strategy, operational support and technical innovation; calls for an appropriate level of human and financial resources;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Welcomes the proposal from the Commission regarding the budget for eu- LISA, as well as the proposal concerning the allocation of additional staff, which is highly relevant taking in account all the new tasks assigned to the Agency and its operational needs; emphasises the importance of timely implementation of the Entry-Exit System, ETIAS and Interoperability Regulations and the role of eu-LISA for its achievement; notes that the decrease of the eu-LISA commitment appropriations by 18,7% (-55 million euros) in 2020, compared with previous year, corresponds to the planning for implementation of the Entry-Exit System; reiterates the need to ensure adequate financial support for JHA Agencies to deliver the tasks assigned to them in full transparency and to fight against cross- border serious crime in full compliance with fundamental rights;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to strengthen support for investigative journalism, including cross- border investigative journalism, and media freedom through dedicated funds as a measure contributing to revealing and combatting crime, as well as raising awareness among Union citizens;
2066/01/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Citation 12
— having regard to the more than 30very large number of petitions received on the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) in cross-border family disputes,
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 8 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A
A. whereas the Committee on Petitions has received a large number ofof the European Parliament has been receiving, since more than 10 years ago, petitions oin the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) denouncing alleged systematic discrimination of non-German parents in cross-border dispuwhich a very large amount of non-German parents denounce systematic discriminations and arbitrary measures taken against them by the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) in family disputes with cross-border implications involving children, on matters con cerning, inter alia, parental responsibility and child custody;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 10 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the Jugendamt plays a central role in the German family law system as it is one of the parties in all family disputes involving children;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 11 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas in family disputes involving children the Jugendamt delivers a recommendation to the judges, whose nature is practically binding, and can adopt temporary measures, such as the ‘Beistandschaft’, which cannot be challenged;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 12 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas the Jugendamt is responsible for the implementation of the decisions taken by the German courts; whereas the broad interpretation of these decisions by the Jugendamt often resulted detrimental to the effective protection of the rights of non-German parents;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 13 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A d (new)
A d. whereas the German family law system, and in particular the role of the Jugendamt, must be carefully assessed taking duly into account its unique legal, administrative and cultural background in order to put forward effective solutions to all issues experienced by non-German parents in family disputes having cross- border implications involving children;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 14 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A e (new)
A e. whereas non-recognition and non- enforcement by German competent authorities of decisions and judgements taken by other EU Member States’ judicial authorities, in family disputes having cross-border implications, can represent a breach of the principle of mutual recognition and mutual trust amongst Member States, thus jeopardising the effective protection of the best interest of the child;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 15 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A f (new)
A f. whereas petitioners denounced that in family disputes having cross- border implications the protection of the best interest of the child is systematically interpreted by the competent German authorities with the need to ensure that children remain in the German territory, even in cases where abuses and domestic violence against the non-German parent were reported;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 16 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A g (new)
A g. whereas the procedures adopted by the Jugendamt officials in cases of supervised parental access implied for the non-German parents the prohibition of the use of their mother tongue in their communication with their children; whereas conversations between non- German parents and their children held in a language, other than German, were harshly interrupted by the Jugendamt officials and contacts between parents and children were banned;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital A h (new)
A h. whereas non-German parents denounced in their petitions the insufficient or lack of counselling and legal support by national authorities of their country of origin in cases where discriminatory or disadvantaged judicial and administrative procedures were adopted against them by German authorities, including the Jugendamt, in family disputes involving children;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 18 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital B
B. whereas all the EU institutions and all EU countries must fully guarantee the protection of the rights of the child as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU; whereas the best interest of the child is a fundamental principle that should be respected as guiding rule for all decisions related to childcare issues at all levels;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 20 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital C
C. whereas increased mobility within the EU has led to a growing number of cross-border disputes on parental responsibility and child custody; whereas the Commission must step up its efforts to promote in all Member States, including Germany, the consistent and concrete implementation of the principles set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by all EU countries;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 21 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital D
D. whereas scope and objectives of the Brussels IIa Regulation are based on the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality between citizens of the Union and on the principle of mutual trust between the Member States’ legal systems;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 24 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the absence of accurate and detailed checks on the non- discriminatory nature of procedures and practices adopted by the German competent authorities in family disputes having cross-border implications involving children, can have detrimental effects on children’s welfare and lead to increased violation of rights for non- German parents;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 25 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Recital E b (new)
E b. whereas the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that a court can ask to hear a child who is almost 3 years old at the time of the decision; whereas in other EU countries children of this age are considered too young and not mature enough to be consulted in disputes involving their parents;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 27 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 1
1. Notes with great concern that the Committee on Petitions problems concerning the last decade has received more than 30 petitions on parental responsibility or child custody in cross-border family disputes and the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), many of them involving the alleged discrimination of the non-German parentGerman family law system, including the controversial role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), denounced through petitions by non-German parents continue to remain unsolved; underlines that the Committee on Petitions continuously receives petitions by non-German parents in which serious discriminations are reported as a result of the procedures and practices concretely adopted by the competent German authorities in cross- border family disputes involving children;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 33 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 2
2. Points to the long standing work of the Committee on Petitions treatingon the treatment of petitions concerning the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt); acknowledges the detailedtakes note of the responses given by the competent German ministry on the functioning of the German family law system but underlines that the Committee on Petitions continuously receives petitions concerning alleged discrimination of the non-German parentstrongly regrets that German competent authorities failed to ensure a proper follow-up to the recommendations and requests by the Committee on Petitions, thus worsening all problems encountered by non-German parents in the framework of family disputes having cross-border implications;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 35 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the obligation, as provided in the Council Regulation Brussels IIa, for national authorities to recognise and enforce judgements delivered in another Member State in child related cases; is concerned of the fact that in family disputes having cross-border implications German authorities can systematically refuse to recognise judicial decisions taken in other Member States in cases where children, who are almost 3 years old, have not been heard; underlines that this aspect undermines the principle of mutual trust with other Member States whose legal systems set different age limits for the hearing of a child;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 36 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that the Commission did not implement for years accurate checks on the procedures and practices used in the German family law system, including the Jugendamt, in the framework of family disputes having cross-border implications, thus failing to effectively protect the best interest of the child and all other related rights;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 39 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Calls on the Commission to effectively monitor temporary measures, irreversible decisions and the execution of judicial decisions adopted by the German competent authorities, including the Jugendamt, in family disputes having cross-border implications involving children, with the view to adequately protect the best interests of the children and prevent any potential breach of rights of non-German parents;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 41 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Strongly criticises the absence of statistical data on the number of cases in Germany in which court rulings were not in line with the recommendations of the Jugendamt and on the outcomes of family disputes involving children of bi-national couples, despite the repeated requests for years to collect data and make them publicly available;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 43 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. Condemns the fact that, in cases of supervised parental access, failure by non-German parents to comply with the Jugendamt officials procedure to adopt German as language during conversations with their children, led to the harsh interruption of conversations and to a ban on contact between the non- German parents and their children; believes that such procedure adopted by the Jugendamt officials constituted a clear discrimination based on origin and language against non-German parents;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 44 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 e (new)
3 e. Is firmly convinced that in cases of supervised parental access, German authorities must permit all parental languages during conversations between parents and their children; asks for mechanisms to be put in place to guarantee that non-German parents and their children can have communication in their common language as its use plays a crucial role to keep strong emotional bonds between parents and their children and ensure the effective protection of children’s cultural heritage and welfare;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 45 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 f (new)
3 f. Firmly believes that a consistent and effective follow-up must be given to the recommendations of the final report of the Committee on Petitions’ Working Group on “Child welfare issues” of 3 May 2017 and notably on those related directly or indirectly to the role of the Jugendamt and to the German family law system;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 46 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 3 g (new)
3 g. Reminds Germany of its international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, including Article 8 thereof; believes that major improvements must be made by all German competent authorities to adequately safeguard the right of the children of bi-national couples to preserve his or her identity, including family relations, as recognised by law without unlawful interference;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 54 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the CouncilStresses the need to improve themutual judicial and administrative cooperation and cross-border dialogues between German authorities like the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) and authorities of other Member Statbetween German authorities and other EU Member States authorities in order to ensure mutual trust in matters concerning the recognition and enforcement in Germany of decisions and judgements adopted by other EU Member States' authorities in family disputes withhaving cross-border elements involving children;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 55 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 8
8. Recalls the importance to provide parentswithout delay non-German parents from the outset and at every stage of child- related proceedings with complete and clear information on the proceedings and on the possible consequences thereof; calls on the Member States to inform parents about the rules on legal support and aid; notes in this context that the competent German ministries at federal level have established the German Central Contact Point for Cross-border Family Conflicts in order to provide counselling and information, in a language that the concerned parents fully understand in order to avoid cases where parents give their consent without fully understanding the implications of their commitments; calls on the Member States to implement targeted measures aimed at improving legal support, aid, counselling and information for their nationals in cases where they denounce discriminatory or disadvantaged judicial and administrative procedures adopted against them by German authorities in cross- border family disputes involving parental responsibilitychildren;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 58 #

2018/2856(RSP)


Paragraph 9
9. Expresses its concern on cases raised by petitioners about short deadlines set by the German competent authorities and about documents sent by the German competent authorities not provided in the language of the non-German petitioner; stresses the right of citizens to refuse acceptances of documents if not written or translated into a language the person understands as laid down in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) 1393/2007; calls on the Commission to thoroughly assess the implementation in Germany of the provisions of Regulation (EC) 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) in order to properly address all possible violations;
2018/10/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 1 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the woeful lack of rigour displayed by the Commission in pursuing serious and systematic infringements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 directly brought to its attention in almost 200 specific and detailed NGO reports forwarded to it since 2007;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 2 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Draws attention to the multitude of parliamentary questions and letters of complaint submitted by Members of the European Parliament and addressed to the Commission, highlighting the systematic infringements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 which result in severe suffering and hardship for animals during transport; strongly criticises the statistics provided by the Commission on compliance with Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 as regards the transport of live animals to third countries, which have been drawn up without any systematic checks on animal transport vehicles;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 3 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Points out that the most frequent infringements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 concern the insufficient space given to animals in transport vehicles and overcrowding, the failure to respect drinking and feeding intervals and journey times and resting periods for animals, the inadequacy of ventilation and watering devices, transport in extreme temperatures, transport of unsuitable animals and insufficiency of bedding and feed;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 4 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Notes with great concern that during long journeys animals are watered with contaminated water that is unfit for consumption and often have no access to water because of malfunctioning or badly located watering devices, or insufficient water that is not commensurate with the species and size of the animals being transported;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 8 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the reported infringements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 concerning inadequate ventilation systems in animal transport vehicles for long journeys attest the presence of extreme temperatures inside the vehicles, far exceeding the legal limits, causing terrible suffering to the animals; points out that, in some cases, the sensors monitoring the temperatures inside the animal transport vehicles have been found to have been tampered with; calls on the competent authorities to refrain from approving a journey log when temperatures in the places of departure or destination, or along the route, are forecast to exceed 30°C;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 12 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for Member States, when detecting infringements of the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, to provide the notifications laid down in Article 26 in a detailed and systematic manner; calls on the Member States receiving such notifications to act effectively and in a consistent and timely manner to prevent the repetition of such infringements; takes the view that, where feasible, the competent authorities of the Member States should attach to the notifications photos of the relevant infringements;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 15 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Regrets that, in breach of the provisions of Annex I, Chapter II, point 1.2 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, during transport, animals are given insufficient space, forcing them to stand in unnatural positions for long periods of time and with inadequate ventilation;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 16 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Is of the opinion that where Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 stipulates that animals should be unloaded at a control post, before approving a journey log the competent authorities should verify, and receive confirmation, that the organiser has made a reservation at the control post;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Calls on the competent authorities of the Member States to carry out systematic inspections on intra-EU consignments of animals and on all consignments destined for third countries upon loading; stresses that, at the time of loading, the competent authorities should check that the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 concerning the health conditions of animals and the space and height of the compartment have been complied with, that ventilation and water systems work properly and are appropriate for the size and species transported, and that sufficient feed and bedding are transported;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 18 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Takes the view that the competent authorities, in cases in which Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 requires that animals be unloaded for a 24-hour rest in a third country, should only approve journey logs if they can establish whether the organiser has found a place for such a rest that provides facilities equivalent to those of a control post and, in any case, that is able to respect the welfare of the animals in full; calls for official veterinarians at EU exit points to check whether the vehicles provide enough space for animals, and that there is no overcrowding, that sufficient bedding, water and feed is provided and that the ventilation and watering devices work properly;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 23 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its call for the transport time of animals destined for slaughter and fattening to be limited to eight hours, with due consideration for loading and unloading times, and waiting times at borders; takes the view that many of the severe problems related to the lengthy transport of live animals, in particular from the EU to third countries, would be solved by a shift to the transport of meat or carcasses;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 27 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Strongly deplores the uneven and poor enforcement of the regulation in many Member States, which are failing to effectively and uniformly monitor and sanction persistent violations of EU law, thereby allowing some transporters to operate illegally; greatly concerned at the failure of many Member States to make proper and effective use of the powers conferred on them under Article 26 of Regulation No 1/2005, including the power to call on the transporter in question to introduce arrangements to avoid any recurrence of the irregularities detected, carry out additional inspections and, in particular, require the presence of a veterinarian when the animals are being loaded and suspend or revoke the transporter's permit or the type-approval certificate for the form of transport used; calls on the Commission, in view of the lack of harmonisation of controls and sanctions across the Member States, to consider revising the current provisions in order to ensure that effective and dissuasive sanctioning mechanisms are uniformly introduced and imposed across the EU;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 29 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that ineffective coordination between the authorities at border inspection posts, coupled with the inadequacy of operational structures and procedures have led to unjustified waiting times for animal transport vehicles which, given the extreme internal temperatures and lack of ventilation, have had a devastating impact on animal welfare, in clear violation of the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 34 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for consistent and full compliance with the case law established by the EU Court of Justice, Including Case C-424/13 of 23 April 2015, in which the Court ruled that, for the transport of animals involving a long journey commencing in EU territory and continuing outside it to be authorised at the place of departure, the transporter shall be required to submit a true and accurate travel log for the purpose of verifying compliance with Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 in the territory of the EU and of the third countries in question; if this is not the case, the authorities responsible shall be empowered to require modification of the transport arrangements to ensure compliance with the Regulation for the duration of the journey;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 40 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that the Commission, while aware of the fact that certain Member States are failing to report cases where the internal temperatures of vehicles used for animal transport exceed 35°C, has officially stated that it does not perform systematic checks on internal vehicle temperatures, making it impossible obtain an accurate picture of animal transport conditions;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 43 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Considers it of the utmost importance that the authorities issuing type-approval certificates for animal transport vessels adhere consistently and in full to Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005; calls for the competent authorities to scrupulously and systematically inspect animal transport vessels prior to loading to ensure that they are suitable for the type and number of animals to be transported and provide all necessary guarantees to ensure their welfare;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 45 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Expresses its serious concern about failure by the authorities to comply with their obligation to inspect the animals prior to loading to ensure that they are fit to continue their journey on the transport vessel; considers that the authorities must not approve travel logs if they indicate the use of ports that do not have the necessary facilities for systematic inspection of the animals;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 46 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Deeply regrets that the loading of animals onto ships frequently involves great cruelty such as the use of electric sticks and prods, as well as loading facilities that fail to provide full guarantees regarding animal welfare.
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 47 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Believes that the presence of qualified and independent veterinarians should be mandatory during the transport of animals by ship, that the deaths of any animals en route should be reported and registered and that specific and detailed action plans should be drawn up to deal with any emergencies that adversely affecting the animals' wellbeing;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 48 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Expresses its concern at non- compliance with Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 regarding the transport of unweaned animals; considers it necessary to adopt more detailed and incisive measures to ensure that all specific needs regarding this type of transport are met;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 49 #

2018/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)
7g. Deplores the failure to set up a European Parliament committee of inquiry into the wellbeing of animals during transport inside and outside the EU, as requested by 223 MEPs, the decision having been taken without plenary vote in Parliament, thus infringing the basic principles of democracy, openness and transparency that regarding EU decision-making processes;
2018/09/21
Committee: PETI
Amendment 3 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights,
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to the Report on minimum income policies as a tool for fighting poverty (A8-0292/2017),
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 22 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas poverty and social exclusion are an infringement of human dignity and the fundamental rights recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; whereas poverty and social exclusion are not just matters of personal responsibility but problems that need to be addressed in common through income policies; whereas Principle 14, Minimum Income, of the European Pillar of Social Rights states that, ‘Everyone lacking sufficient resources has the right to adequate minimum income benefits ensuring a life in dignity at all stages of life, and effective access to enabling goods and services.’
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)
-Aa. whereas income poverty is only a part of the overall concept of poverty, and therefore poverty does not refer only to material resources, but also to social resources, notably education, health and access to services;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A b (new)
-Ab. whereas recent figures on income poverty show that poverty and severe material deprivation are on the rise in Europe; whereas this situation calls for measures promoting national minimum income schemes enabling all those with insufficient income to enjoy decent living conditions, while also improving social and labour market inclusion and guaranteeing equal opportunities in enjoying fundamental rights; whereas in implementing such measures it should be possible to disregard the constraints currently imposed by the Stability and Growth Pact;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A c (new)
-Ac. whereas on 5 October 2015 the Council adopted conclusions on the adequacy of pensions, considering it essential that public pension schemes and other social protection schemes contain appropriate safeguards for people whose employment opportunities do or did not allow them to build up sufficient pension entitlements, and that such safeguards should notably include minimum pensions or other minimum income provisions for older people;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 62 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas corruption constitutes a serious threat to rule of law in the EU, as citizens are burdened and discriminated against in regard to equal enjoyment of their civic, political, economic, social and cultural fundamental rights; whereas corruption distorts the size and composition of public expenditure, seriously jeopardising the state’s capacity to make maximum use of the resources at its disposal in order to enable its citizens to enjoy to the full their rights;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 a (new)
Guaranteed basic income
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Calls on all Member States to introduce adequate minimum income schemes, accompanied by back-to-work support measures for those who can work and education and training programmes adapted to the personal and family situation of the beneficiary, in order to support households with inadequate income and enable them to have a decent standard of living; highlights in this regard that the right to social assistance is a fundamental right and that adequate minimum income schemes help people to live a life in dignity, support their full participation in society and ensure their autonomy across the life cycle; recalls to mind, in this regard, Principle 14, Minimum Income, of the European Pillar of Social Rights adopted on 17 November 2017;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Stresses that a political context dominated by austerity holds back development of an approach to social investment by Member States; reasserts the right of Member States to derogate from the budget austerity principle when income support measures are introduced to protect a right guaranteed by the Charter; points out in this regard that recent experience of reforms based on tax exemptions shows that it is preferable to finance minimum income policies using budget support rather than through tax incentives; asks in this regard that investments fostering social inclusion and income support measures be deducted when calculating the deficit under the Stability and Growth Pact;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 90 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b (new)
-1b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote policies ensuring that social protection systems, including pensions, are sufficient, appropriate, effective and of good quality; calls on Member States to introduce a minimum basic pension, increasing the amount of the pension for those who are under the poverty threshold set by Eurostat at 60 % of average national income, in order to enable all citizens to live a life in dignity fully compliant with the obligations imposed by the Charter;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 279 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Reiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and fair treatment for all citizens; stresses that, by diverting public funds from their intended public use, corruption detracts from the level and quality of public services and hence undermines our fundamental rights; calls on the Member States and European institutions to devise effective ways of combating corruption, regularly monitoring the use made of public funds;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 281 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Urges the European Commission to adopt an anti-corruption strategy backed up by effective instruments; regrets the Commission’s decision not to publish the second biannual report on corruption in the EU; calls on all Member States and the European Union to develop concrete strategies to promote transparency, empower citizens and fight corruption;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 338 #

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Expresses concern about persistent fundamental rights challenges in the area of migration, with regard to access to territory, reception conditions, asylum procedures, immigration detention and protection of unaccompanied children; recalls that the right to asylum is expressly protected under Article 18 of the Charter; condemns those Member States that refuse to receive asylum seekers on their territory in clear breach of the solidarity requirement of the Treaties;
2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2018/2009(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. WReiterates its request to extend the EU Justice Scoreboard to criminal justice, too; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to assess, for the first time, certain aspects of criminal justice relating to the fight against money laundering, but deplores the fact that this assessment will last only as long as the relevant judicial proceedings;
2018/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2018/2009(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regrets that the Commission has decided not to continue to publish its biennial EU anti-corruption report; believes it is necessary to have a clear picture of the corruption situation in each Member State; considers it a matter of priority that the EU Justice Scoreboard in future should include also corruption;
2018/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 128 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) The objective of Union policy in the field of external border management is to develop and implement European Integrated Border Management at national and Union level, which is a necessary corollary to the free movement of persons within the Union and is a fundamental component of an area of freedom, security and justice. European Integrated Border Management is central to improving migration management. The aim is to manage the crossing of the external borders efficiently and address migratory challenges and potential future threats at those borders, therebyshall be implemented in full compliance with the principle of subsidiarity and national prerogatives concerning the management of national external borders. The aim is to manage the external borders efficiently, contributing to addressing serious crime with a cross- border dimension and ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union. At the same time, it is necessary to act in full respect for fundamental rights and in a manner that safeguards the free movement of persons within the Union.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Since the beginning of the migratory crisis in 2015, the Commission has taken up important initiatives to strengthen the protection of the Union borders. A proposal for significantly enhancing the mandate of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders was presented in December 2015 and negotiated in a record time during 2016. The Regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard Agency has entered into forced on 6 October 2016.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) However, the Union’s framework in the area of control of external borders, returns and asylum. still needs to be further improved. To that end and to further underpin the current and future envisaged operational efforts, the European Border and Coast Guard should be reformed by giving the European Border and Coast Guard Agency a stronger mandate and, in particular, by providing it with the necessary capabilities in the form of a European Border and Coast Guard standing corps of 10 000 operational staff with executive powers to effectively support Member States on the ground in their efforts to protect the external borders, fight secondary movements and significantly step up the effective return of irregular migrants.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) It is necessary to monitor the crossing of the external borders efficiently, address migratory challenges and potential future threats at the external borders, ensure a high level of internal security within the Union, safeguard the functioning of the Schengen area and respect the overarching principle of solidarity. That should be accompanied by the proactive management of migration, including the necessary measures in third countries. In view of what has been stated, it is necessary to consolidate the European Border and Coast Guard and to further expand the mandate of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. The Agency should be constituted principallyThe Agency should be assisted by a European Border and Coast Guard standing corps consisting of 10,0500 operational staff made available on a voluntary basis by Member States.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) In order to reflect the further qualitative enhancement of its mandate, in particular by providing it with its own operational arm, the European Border and Cost Guard standing corps of 10,000 operational staff, the Agency formerly known as Frontex should from now on be referred to as and operate exclusively under the name "the European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG) Agency". This change should be reflected in all relevant instances, including its visualisation in the external communication materials.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) European Integrated Border Management should be implemented as a shared responsibility of the Agency and the national authorities responsible for border management, including coast guards to the extent that they carry out maritime border surveillance operations and any other border control tasks, and those responsible for returns. While Member States retain the primary responsibility for the management of their external borders in their interest and in the interest of all Member States and are responsible for issuing return decisions, the Agency should support the application of Union measures relating to the management of the external borders and returns by reinforcing, assessing and coordinating the actions of Member States which implement those measures.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 171 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) The effective implementation of the European Integrated Border Management by the European Border and Coast Guard should be ensured through a multiannual strategic policy cycle for European Integrated Border Management. The multiannual cycle should set an integrated, unified and continuous process to provide strategic guidelines to all the relevant actors at Union level and in Member States in the area of border management and returns in order for those actors to implement the European Integrated Border Management in a coherent manner and in full compliance with fundamental rights. It shall also address all the relevant interactions of the European Border and Coast Guard with the Commission, other institutions and bodies as well as cooperation with other relevant partners, including third countries and third parties as appropriate.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 178 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The implementation of this Regulation does not affect the division of competence between the Union and the Member States or the obligations of Member States under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and other relevant international instruments.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 184 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The Agency should carry out its tasks without prejudice tohile fully respecting the responsibilities and competence of the Member States with regard to maintaining law and order and safeguarding internal security.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 185 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The Agency should carry out its tasks without prejudice to thehile fully respecting the responsibilities and competence of the Member States as regards defence.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 210 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) The Agency should prepare general and tailored risk analyses based on a common integrated risk analysis model, to be applied by the Agency itself and by Member States. The Agency should, based also on information provided by Member States, provide adequate information covering all aspects relevant to European integrated border management, especially border control, return, irregular secondary movements of third-country nationals within the Union, prevention of cross- border crime including facilitation of unauthorised border crossings, trafficking in human beings, terrorism and threats of a hybrid nature, as well as the situation in relevant third countries, so as to allow for appropriate measures to be taken or to tackle identified threats and risks with a view to improving the integrated management of the external borders.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 214 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
(34) Given its activities at the external borders, the Agency should contribute to preventing and detecting serious crime with a cross-border dimension, such as migrant smuggling, trafficking in human beings and terrorism, where it is appropriate for it to act and where it has obtained relevant information through its activities. It should coordinate its activities with Europol as the agency responsible for supporting and strengthening Member States' actions and their cooperation in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States. Cross-border crimes necessarily entail a cross-border dimension. Such a cross- border dimension is characterised by crimes directly linked to unauthorised crossings of the external borders, including trafficking in human beings or smuggling of migrants. That said,In line with Article 1(2) of Council Directive 2002/90/EC19 allows Member States not to impose, the Agency shall remind Member States of potential fundamental rights implications when they consider imposing sanctions where the aim of the behaviour is to provide humanitarian assistance to migrants. _________________ 19 Council Directive 2002/90/EC of 28 November 2002 defining the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence (OJ L 328, 5.12.2002, p. 17).
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 223 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) The Agency should carry out a vulnerability assessment based on objective criteria, to assess the capacity and readiness of the Member States to face challenges at their external borders and to contribute to the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps and technical equipment pool. The vulnerability assessment should include an assessment of the equipment, infrastructure, staff, budget and financial resources of Member States as well as their contingency plans to address possible crises at the external borders. Member States should take measures to address any deficiencies identified in that assessment. The executive director should identify the measures to be taken and recommend them to the Member State concerned. The executive director should also set a time- limit within whichThe executive director, in agreement with the competent authorities of the Member State concerned, shall identify those measures should be taken andand shall closely monitor their timely implementation. Where the necessary measures are not taken within the set time-limit, the matter should be referred to the management board for a further decision.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 229 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
(39) Given that the Member States establish border sections, to which the Agency attributes impact levels, and that the reaction capabilities of the Member States and of the Agency should be linked to those impact levels, a fourth impact level should be established, corresponding to a situation where the Schengen area is at risk and where the Agency should intervene.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) The Agency should organisbe able to provide the appropriate technical and operational assistance to Member States in order to reinforce their capacity to implement their obligationtasks with regard to the control of the external borders and to face challenges at the external borders resulting from illegal immigration or cross-border crime. Such assistance should be without prejudice to the relevant national authorities' competence to initiate criminal investigations. In that respect, the Agency should, at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, organise and, coordinate joint operations for one or more Member States and deploy teams from the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps as well as provide the necessary technical equipment.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 239 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) In cases where there is a specific and disproportionate challenge at the external borders, the Agency should, at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, organise and, coordinate rapid border interventions and deploy both teams from the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps and technical equipment, including from the Rapid Reaction Equipment Pool. Rapid border interventions should provide reinforcement for a limited period of time in situations where an immediate response is required and where such an intervention would provide an effective response. To ensure the effective operation of such intervention, Member States should make operational staff of the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps available to form relevant teams and provide the necessary technical equipment. The Agency and the Member State concerned should agree upon an operational plan.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 253 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
(44) In June 2018, the European Council reconfirmed the importance of relying on a comprehensive approach to migration and considered that migration is a challenge not only for one Member State but for Europe as a whole. In that respect, it highlighted the importance for the Union to provide full support to ensure an orderly management of migration flows. That support is possible through the establishment of controlled centres where third-country nationals disembarked in the Union could be rapidly processed to ensure access to protection and assistance of those in need, with swift returns for those who are not. Whereas controlled centres are to be established on a voluntary basis, it should be possible for the Union to provide the Member States in question with full financial and operational support through the relevant Union Agencies including the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. The Commission, in cooperation with the relevant Union agencies, should ensure that activities in controlled centres comply with relevant Union law.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 256 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
(45) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the [European Union Agency for Asylum] should cooperate closely in order to address effectively the migratory challenges, in particular at the external borders characterised by large inward mixed migratory flows. In particular, both Agencies should coordinate their activities and support Member States to facilitate the procedure for international protection and the return procedure with regard to third country nationals whose application for international protection is rejected and who are not entitled to other grounds to stay under EU and international law. The Agency and [the European Union Agency for Asylum] should also cooperate in other common operational activities such as shared risk analysis, collection of statistical data, training and support to Member States on contingency planning.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) Member States should be able to rely on increased operational and technical reinforcement by migration management support teams in particular at hotspot areas or controlled centres. The migration management support teams should be composed of experts from the staff of the Agency and experts seconded by the Member States, and experts of the staff of/or Member States' experts deployed by, the [European Agency for Asylum], Europol, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights or other relevant Union agencies. The Commission should ensure the necessary coordination in the assessment of needs and operations on the ground in view of the involvement of various Union agencies.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 272 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) In controlled centres, Union agencies should, at the request of the Member State hosting such centres and under the coordination of the Commission, act in support of the host Member State to apply rapid procedures for international protection and/or return. In such centres, it should be possible to distinguish quickly between third-country nationals in need of international protection and those who are not in need of such protection, to carry out security checks and to carry out the entire or part of the procedure for return. Asylum seekers shall be admitted to the Member State’s territory for consideration of the request for international protection and/or return.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 276 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
(49) When justified by the results of the vulnerability assessment, or risk analysis or when a critical impact is attributed to one or more border sections, the executive Director of the Agency should recommendpropose to the Member State concerned tohat it initiate and carry out joint operations or rapid border interventions. The Member State concerned shall decide whether to accept the Agency’s support.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 277 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
(50) Where control of the external border is rendered ineffective to such an extent that it risks jeopardising the functioning of the Schengen area, either because a Member State does not take the necessary measures in line with a vulnerability assessment or because a Member State facing specific and disproportionate challenges at the external borders has not requested sufficient support from the Agency or is not implementing such support, a unified, rapid and effective response should be delivered at Union level. For the purpose of mitigating these risks, and to ensure better coordination at Union level, the Commission should identify the measures to be implemented by the Agency and require the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. The Agency should then determine the actions to be taken for the practical execution of the measures indicated in the Commission decision. An operational plan should be drawn up by the Agency together with the Member State concerned. The Member State concerned should facilitate the implementation of the Commission decision and the operational plan by implementing among others its obligations provided for in Articles 44, 83 and 84. If a Member State does not comply within 30 days with that Commission decision and does not cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of the measures contained in that decision, the Commission should be able to trigger the specific procedure provided for in Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council21 to face exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the area without internal border control at risk. _________________ 21 Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders, OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p.1.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 285 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
(51) The European Border and Coast Guard standing corps should be a standing corps composed of 10,0500 operational staff being border guards, return escorts, return specialists and other relevant staff. The standing corps should be composed of three categories of operational staff, namely statutory staff members employed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, staff seconded to the Agency by the Member States for long term durations and staff provided by Member States for short term deployments. The European Border and Coast Guard standing corps should be deployed in the framework of border management teams, migration management support teams or return teams.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 290 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
(53) Member States should ensure their respective contributions to the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps in accordance with Annexe III for long term secondments and Annex IV for short term deployments. The individual cContributions ofby Member States have been established based on the distribution key agreed during the negotiations in 2016 for the Rapid Reaction Pool and set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1624. This distribution key was proportionally adapted to the size of the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps. These contributions were also set up in a proportionate way for the Schengen associated countriesto the standing corps should be considered to be voluntary.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 294 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
(55) The long-term development of human resources to secure the contributions of the Member States to the European and Border Guard standing corps should be supported by a financial support system. For this purpose, it is appropriate to authorise the Agency to use the award of grants to the Member States without a call for proposals under 'financing not linked to costs' in accordance with Article 125 (1) (a) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046. The financial support should enable Member States to hire and train additional staff to provide them with the necessary flexibility to comply with the mandatory contribution to the European and Border Guard standing corps. The dedicated financing system should strike a right balance between the risks of irregularities and fraud and costs of control. The Regulation sets the essential conditions triggering the financial support, namely the recruitment and training of the adequate number of border guards or other specialists corresponding to the number of officers seconded to the Agency for long term or the effective deployment of officers during the Agency's operational activities for at least 4 months. Given the lack of relevant and comparable data on actual costs across Member States, the development of a cost- based financing scheme would be overly complex and would not address the need for a simple, fast, efficient and effective financing scheme. For this purpose, it is appropriate to authorise the Agency to award grants to the Member States without a call for proposals in the form of 'financing not linked to costs' subject to the fulfilment of conditions in accordance with Article 125 (1) (a) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046. For the purpose of fixing the amount of such financing to different Member States, it is appropriate to use as as a reference amount the annual salary of contractual agent Function Group III grade 8 step 1 of the European Institutions modulated by a corrective coefficient per Member State in line with the sound financial management principle and in the spirit of equal treatment. When implementing this financial support, the Agency and Member States shall ensure the compliance with the principles of co- financing and no double funding.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 320 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
(69) The Agency should, in full respect for fundamental rights and without prejudice for the Member States’ responsibility for issuing return decisions, provide technical and operational assistance to Member States in the return process, including the preparation of return decisions, identification of third country nationals and other pre-return and return-related activities of the Member States. In addition, the Agency should assist Member States in the acquisition of travel documents for return, in cooperation with the authorities of the relevant third countries.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 330 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
(73) Member States should be able to cooperate at operational level with other Member States and/or third countries at the external borders, including military operations with a law enforcement purpose, to the extent that that cooperation is compatible with the actions of the Agency.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 336 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
(75) Cooperation with third countries, following the conclusion of a status agreement between the Union and the third country concerned, is an element of European Integrated Border Management. It should serve to promote European border management and return standards, to exchange information and risk analysis, to facilitate the implementation of returns with a view to increasing their efficiency and to support third countries in the area of border management and migration, including the deployment of the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps when such support is required to protect external borders and the effective management of the Union’s migration policy.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 362 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 92
(92) The Agency is expected to face challenging circumstances in the coming years to fulfil exceptional needs for recruiting and retaining qualified staff from the broadest possible geographical basis.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 364 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 93
(93) In view of the Agency's mandate and the important mobility of its staff members on the one hand, and, in order to prevent differences of treatment within the Agency's staff on the other hand, whereas staff's place of employment should in principle be set as Warsaw, the Agency's management board should, for a period of five years following the entry into force of this Regulation, be given the possibility to grant a "differential" monthly payment to Agency's staff members, taking due account of the overall remuneration received by individual staff members, including reimbursements of mission expenses. The modalities for granting such payment should be subject to prior approval by the Commission that should ensure that they remain proportionate to the importance of the objectives pursued and do not give rise to unequal treatment among staff of EU institutions, agencies and other bodies. Those modalities should be reviewed by 2024 to assess the payment's contribution to the objectives pursued.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 376 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes a European Border and Coast Guard to ensure European Integrated Border Management at the external borders with a view to managing the crossing of those external borders efficiently, as well as increasing the efficiency of the common return policy as a key component of sustainable migration management.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 383 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
The Regulation addresses migratory challenges, including return,challenges at external borders and potential future threats at those borders, thereby contributing to addressing serious crime with a cross-border dimension, to ensure a high level of internal security within the Union in full respect for fundamental rights, while safeguarding the free movement of persons within it.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 401 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19
(19) ‘migration management support team’ means a team of experts which provide technical and operational reinforcement to Member States, including at hotspot areas or in controlled centres, composed of operational staff from the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps, experts deployed by the [the European Union Agency for Asylum], and from Europol, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights or other relevant Union agencies as well as from Member States;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) inter-agency cooperation among the national authorities in each Member State which are responsible for border control or for other tasks carried out at the border including national bodies in charge of protecting fundamental rights, as well as between authorities responsible for return in each Member State, including the regular exchange of information through existing information exchange tools;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 459 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
(2) The Agency shall include the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps of 10 0500 operational staff as referred to in Article 55.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 465 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
(4) The Agency shall contribute to the continuous and uniform application of Union law, including the Union acquis on fundamental rights, and ensure the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in all its activities at all external borders. Its contribution shall include the exchange of good practices.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 479 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
(4) The Agency shall support the application of Union measures relating to the management of the external borders and the enforcement of return decisions by reinforcing, assessing and coordinating the actions of Member States, as well as providing direct technical and operational assistance, in the implementation of those measures and in return matters.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 491 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
(2) The multiannual strategic policy for the European Integrated Border Management shall define how the challenges in the area of border management and return are to be addressed in a coherent, integrated and systematic manner in line with Union law and the instruments laid down in Recital 16.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 497 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
(4) Based on the strategic risk analysisThe multiannual strategic policy for European Integrated Border Management referred to in Article 30(2), the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 118 developing a multiannual strategic policy for European Integrated Border Management. That delegated acis decided by the Council and by the European Parliament. To this end, the Commission shall present, based on the strategic risk analysis for European Integrated Border Management referred to in Article 30(2), a multiannual strategic policy that shall define policy priorities and provide the strategic guidelines for the following four years in relation to the components set out in Article 3. This strategic framework shall be approved by the Council and the European Parliament.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 498 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
(5) In order to implement the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4, the Agency shall, by decision of the management board, based on a proposal of the executive director, establish a technical and operational strategy for European integrated border management. The Agency shall take into account, where justified, the specific situation of the Member States, in particular their geographical location. This strategy shall be in line with Article 3 and the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4. It shall promote and support the implementation of European Integrated Border Management in all Member States.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 500 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
(6) In order to implement the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4, the Member States shall establish their national strategies for integrated border management through close cooperation between all national authorities responsible for the management of borders and return. Those national strategies shall be in line with Article 3, the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4 and the technical and operational strategy referred to in paragraph 5.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 503 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7
(7) Forty-two months after the adoption of the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4, the Commission shall carry out, with the support of the Agency, a thorough evaluation of its implementation. The results of the evaluation shall be taken into account for the preparation of the following cycle.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 506 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 8
(8) Where the situation at the external borders or in the area of return requires a change of the policy priorities, the Commission shall amend the multiannual strategic policy for European Integrated Border Management in accordance with the procedure set out in paragraph 4. Also the strategies mentioned in paragraph 5 and 6 shall be adapted where needed.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 569 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point 20 a (new)
20 a. cooperate with the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, to ensure the continuous and uniform application of the Union acquis on fundamental rights;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 604 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. In order to perform the tasks conferred on them by this Regulation, in particular for the Agency to monitor the migratory flows towards and within the Union, to carry out risk analysis and to perform the vulnerability assessment, as well as to provide technical and operational assistance in the field of return, the Agency and the national authorities responsible for border management and return, including coast guards to the extent that they carry out border control tasks, shall, in accordance with this Regulation and other relevant Union and national law regarding the exchange of information, share in a timely and accurate manner all necessary information.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 627 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
(1) EUROSUR shall apply to border checks at authorised border crossing points, and to the surveillance of external land, sea and air borders, including the monitoring, detection, identification, tracking, prevention and interception of unauthorised external border crossings for the purpose of detecting, preventing and combating illegal immigration and cross- border crime and contributing to ensuring the protection and saving the lives of migrants.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 690 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall monitor migratory flows towards and within the Union, trends and other possible challenges at the external borders of the Union and with regard to return. For this purpose, the Agency shall, by a decision of the management board based on a proposal of the executive director, establish a common integrated risk analysis model, which shall be applied by the Agency and the Member States. The common integrated risk analysis model shall be updated based on the outcome of the evaluation of the multiannual Strategic policy cycle for European Integrated Border Management referred to in Article 8 (7). The Agency shall also carry out the vulnerability assessment in accordance with Article 33.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 720 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall, by decision of the management board, based on a proposal of the executive director, establish a common vulnerability assessment methodology. That methodology shall include objective criteria against which the Agency shall carry out the vulnerability assessment, the frequency of such assessments, and how consecutive vulnerability assessments are to be carried out and the modalities for an effective system for monitoring the implementation of the recommendations.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 721 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall monitor and assess the availability of the technical equipment, systems, capabilities, resources, infrastructure, adequately skilled and trained staff of Member States necessary for border control as defined in Article 3(1)(a). In this context, the Agency shall assess the capability development plans referred to in Article 67 (4) as regards their feasibility and implementation. For future planning it shall do so as a preventive measure on the basis of a risk analysis prepared in accordance with Article 30 (2). The Agency shall carry out such monitoring and assessment at least once a year, unless the executive director, based on risk assessments or a previous vulnerability assessment, decides otherwiseevery two years.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 731 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4
4. The aim of the vulnerability assessment is for the Agency to assess the capacity and readiness of Member States to face upcoming challenges, including present and future threats and challenges at the external borders; to identify, especially for those Member States facing specific and disproportionate challenges, possible immediate consequences at the external borders and subsequent consequences on the functioning of the Schengen area; and to assess their capacity to contribute to the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps and Technical Equipment Pool, including the Rapid Reaction Equipment Pool. That assessment is without prejudice to the Schengen evaluation mechanism.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 739 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 7
7. When necessary the executive director shall, in consultation with the Member State concerned, make a recommendation setting out the necessary measures to be taken by the Member State concerned and the time limit within which such measures shall be implemented. The executive director shall invite the Member States concerned to take the necessary measures based on an action plan developed by the Member State in consultation with the executive director.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 745 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
The executive director shall recommend measures to the Member States concerned on the basis of the results of the vulnerability assessment, taking into account the Agency's risk analysis, the comments of the Member State concerned and the results of the Schengen evaluation mechanism.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 750 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 9
9. The Executive Director shall monitor the implementation of the recommendations by means of regular reports submitted by the Member States based on the action plans referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article. In case of a risk of delay in the implementation of a recommendation by a Member State within the set time-limit, the Executive Director shall immediately inform the member of the Management Board from the Member State concerned and the Commission and enquire with the relevant authorities of that Member State on the reasons for the delay and offer support by the Agency to facilitate the implementation of the measure.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 752 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1
The Executive Director shall monitor the implementation of the recommendations by means of regular reports submitted by the Member States based on the action plans referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 756 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
In case of a risk of delay in the implementation of a recommendation by a Member State within the set time-limit, the Executive Director shall immediately inform the member of the Management Board from the Member State concerned and the Commission and enquire with the relevant authorities of that Member State on the reasons for the delay and offer support by the Agency to facilitate the implementation of the measure.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 759 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 10
10. Where a Member State does not implement the necessary measures of the recommendation within the time limit referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article, the executive director shall refer the matter to the management board and notify the Commission. The management board shall adopt a decision on a proposal of the executive director setting out the necessary measures to be taken by the Member State concerned and the time limit within which such measures shall be implemented. The decision of the management board shall be binding on the Member State. If the Member State does not implement the measures within the time limit foreseen in that decision, the management board shall notify the Council and the Commission and further action may be taken in accordance with Article 43.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 776 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) critical impact level where the incidents related to illegal immigration or cross-border crime occurring at the relevant border section have a decisive impact on border security to such an extent that they risk jeopardising the functioning of the Schengen Area.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 782 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) where a critical impact level is attributed to an external border section, the Agency shall notify it to the Commission. The Member State concerned and the Agency shall, in addition to the measures taken under point (c), implement the recommendation issued by the executive director of the Agency in accordance with Article 42.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 784 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. The national coordination centre shall regularly inform the Agency of the measures taken at national level pursuant to points (b), (c) and (dc) of paragraph 1.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 787 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. Where a medium or high or critical impact level is attributed to an external border section which is adjacent to the border section of another Member State or of a third country with which there are agreements or regional networks, as referred to in Article 73 and Article 74, the national coordination centre shall contact the national coordination centre of the neighbouring Member State or the competent authority of the neighbouring country and shall endeavour to coordinate together with the Agency the necessary cross-border measures.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 790 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State may request the Agency's assistance in implementing its obligations with regard to the control of the external borders. The Agency shall also carry out measures in accordance with Article 42 and Article 43.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 807 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency shall finance or co- finance the activities referred to in paragraph 2 from its budget in accordance with the financial rules applicable to the Agency.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 820 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The operational plan shall be binding on the Agency, the host Member State and the participating Member States. It shall cover all aspects considered necessary for carrying out the joint operation, also in the case of cooperation with third countries, including the following:
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 835 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Migration management support teams may be deployed, at the request of a Member State, or upon the initiative of the Agency and with the agreement of the Member State concerned, to provide technical and operational reinforcement to that Member State, in particular at hotspot areas and controlled centres.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 840 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The Member State referred to in first paragraph shall submit a request for reinforcement by migration management support teams and an assessment of its needs to the Commission. The Commission shall, based on the assessment of needs of that Member State, transmit the request to the Agency, to [the European Union Agency for Asylum], Europol, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights or other relevant Union agencies, as appropriate.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 849 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) initial information to persons who wish to apply for international protection, victims of trafficking in human beings, unaccompanied minors and persons in a vulnerable situation, and their referral to the competent national authorities of the Member State concerned or to the experts deployed by [the European Union Agency for Asylum];
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 855 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) technical and operational assistance in the return process, including in the preparation of return decisions, acquisition of travel documents, preparation and organisation of return operations, including with regard to voluntary returns;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 858 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5
5. The Agency shall cooperate with the [the European Union Agency for Asylum] to facilitate measures for the referral to the procedure for international protection and, for third country nationals whose application for international protection has been rejected by means of a final decision and who are not entitled to other grounds to stay in line with EU and international law, to the return procedure.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 860 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42
Proposed actions at the external borders 1. The executive director shall, based on the results of the vulnerability assessment or when a critical impact is attributed to one or more external border sections and taking into account the relevant elements in the Member State’s contingency plans, the Agency's risk analysis and the analysis layer of the European situational picture, recommend to the Member State concerned to initiate and carry out joint operations or rapid border interventions or any other relevant actions by the Agency as defined in Article 37. 2. The Member State concerned shall respond to the recommendation of the Executive director within five working days. In case of a negative reply on the proposed actions, the Member State shall also provide the justifications underlying this reply. The Executive Director shall without delay notify the Commission on the proposed actions and the justifications for the negative reply in view of assessing whether urgent action may be required in accordance with Article 43.Article 42 deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 866 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43
[...]deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 869 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
1. Where control of the external borders is rendered ineffective to such an extent that it risks jeopardising the functioning of the Schengen area because: (a) a Member State does not take the necessary measures in accordance with a decision of the management board referred to in Article 33 (10); or (b) a Member State facing specific and disproportionate challenges at the external borders has either not requested sufficient support from the Agency under Article 38, Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or is not taking the necessary steps to implement actions under those Articles, the Commission, after consulting the Agency, may adopt without delay a decision by means of an implementing act in accordance with the procedure as referred to in Article 117(3), identifying measures to mitigate those risks to be implemented by the Agency and requiring the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to the functioning of the Schengen area, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 117(4).deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 870 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where control of the external borders is rendered ineffective to such an extent that it risks jeopardising the functioning of the Schengen area because: (a) a Member State does not take the necessary measures in accordance with a decision of the management board referred to in Article 33 (10); or (b) a Member State facing specific and disproportionate challenges at the external borders has either not requested sufficient support from the Agency under Article 38, Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or is not taking the necessary steps to implement actions under those Articles,deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 871 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) a Member State does not take the necessary measures in accordance with a decision of the management board referred to in Article 33 (10); ordeleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 874 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) a Member State facing specific and disproportionate challenges at the external borders has either not requested sufficient support from the Agency under Article 38, Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or is not taking the necessary steps to implement actions under those Articles,deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 877 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
the Commission, after consulting the Agency, may adopt without delay a decision by means of an implementing act in accordance with the procedure as referred to in Article 117(3), identifying measures to mitigate those risks to be implemented by the Agency and requiring the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 886 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to the functioning of the Schengen area, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 117(4).deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 892 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. Where a situation requiring urgent action arises, the European Parliament and the Council shall be informed of that situation without delay as well as of all subsequent measures and decisions taken in response.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 894 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3
3. To mitigate the risk of putting in jeopardy the Schengen area, the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall provide for one or more of the following measures to be taken by the Agency: (a) organise and coordinate rapid border interventions and deploy the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps; (b) deploy the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps in the framework of the migration management support teams in particular at hotspot areas; (c) coordinate activities for one or more Member States and third countries at the external borders, including joint operations with third countries; (d) deploy technical equipment; (e) organise return interventions.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 900 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) organise and coordinate rapid border interventions and deploy the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 901 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) deploy the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps in the framework of the migration management support teams in particular at hotspot areas;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 903 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) coordinate activities for one or more Member States and third countries at the external borders, including joint operations with third countries;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 906 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) deploy technical equipment;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 907 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) organise return interventions.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 910 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4
4. The executive director shall, within two working days from the date of adoption of the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1, (a) determine the actions to be taken for the practical execution of the measures identified in that decision, including the technical equipment and the number and profiles of the operational staff needed to meet the objectives of that decision; (b) submit the draft operational plan to the Member States concerned.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 917 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) determine the actions to be taken for the practical execution of the measures identified in that decision, including the technical equipment and the number and profiles of the operational staff needed to meet the objectives of that decision;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 919 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) submit the draft operational plan to the Member States concerned.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 922 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 5
5. The executive director and the Member State concerned shall draw up the operational plan within two working days from the date of its submission.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 927 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 6
6. The Agency shall, without delay and in any case within five working days from establishment of the operational plan, deploy the necessary operational staff from the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps referred to in Article 55 for the practical execution of the measures identified in the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. Additional teams shall be deployed as necessary at a second stage and in any case within seven working days from the deployment of the first teams deployed in the operational area.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 932 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 7
7. The Agency shall, without delay and in any case within 10 working days from establishment of the operational plan, deploy the necessary technical equipment for practical execution of the measures identified in the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1. Additional technical equipment shall be deployed as necessary at a second stage in accordance with Article 64.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 936 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 8
8. The Member State concerned shall comply with the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1. For that purpose it shall immediately cooperate with the Agency and take the necessary action, in particular by implementing the obligations provided in Articles 44, 83 and 84, to facilitate the implementation of that decision and the practical execution of the measures set out in that decision and in the operational plan.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 943 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 9
9. In accordance with Article 58 and, where relevant Article 40, the Member States shall make available the operational staff determined by the executive director in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article. If the Member State concerned does not comply with the Commission decision referred to in paragraph 1 within 30 days and does not cooperate with the Agency pursuant to paragraph 8 of this article, the Commission may trigger the procedure provided for in Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 950 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1
1. During deployment of border management teams, return teams and migration management support teams, including when cooperating with third countries, the host Member State shall issue instructions to the teams in accordance with the operational plan.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 954 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 4
4. Members of the teams shall, in the performance of their tasks and in the exercise of their powers, fully respect fundamental rights, including access to asylum procedures, and human dignity and shall pay particular attention to vulnerable persons. Any measures taken in the performance of their tasks and in the exercise of their powers shall be proportionate to the objectives pursued by such measures. While performing their tasks and exercising their powers, they shall not discriminate against persons onbased on any grounds ofsuch as sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in line with provisions stipulated in Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 960 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. The eExecutive dDirector shall terminate activities of the Agency, including when cooperating with third countries, if the conditions to conduct those activities are no longer fulfilled. The eExecutive dDirector shall inform the Member State concerned prior to such termination.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 962 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. The executive director shall terminate activities of the Agency iIf the conditions to conduct thosee Agency’s activities are no longer fulfilled. T, the executive director shall inform the Member State concerned prior to such terminationterminate those activities.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 986 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) provide technical and operational assistance to Member States in the return of third country nationals, including the preparation of return decisions, the identification of third country nationals and other pre-return and return-related activities of the Member States, including voluntary departures, to achieve an integrated system of return management among competent authorities of the Member States, with the participation of relevant authorities of third countries and other relevant stakeholders;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 995 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) develop a non-binding reference model for a return case management system prescribing the structure of national return management systems, as well as provide technical and operational assistance to Member States wishing to use this model, in developing national return management systems aligned with the model;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 998 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) develop and operate a central system and a communication infrastructure betweenlinking the national return management systems of the Member States andwith the central system, as well as provide technical and operational assistance to Member States in connecting to the communication structure;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1000 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) provide technical and operational assistance to the Member States which expressly request it in the identification of third-country nationals and the acquisition of travel documents, including by means of consular cooperation, without disclosing information relating to the fact that an application for international protection has been made; organise and coordinate return operations and provide support with voluntary departures in cooperation with the Member States;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1001 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2
2. The technical and operational assistance referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 shall include activities to help Member States carry out return procedures by the competent national authorities by providing, in particular: (a) interpreting services; (b) practical information, analysis and recommendations on third countries of return relevant for the implementation of this Regulation, in cooperation, where appropriate, with other Union bodies, offices and agencies, including EASO; (c) advice on and technical and operational assistance in the implementation and management of return procedures in compliance with Directive 2008/115/EC, including in the preparation of return decisions, in identification and in the acquisition of travel documents; (d) advice on and assistance in measures necessary to ensure the availability of returnees for return purposes and to prevent returnees from absconding, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC and international law; (e) equipment, capacities and expertise for the implementation of return decisions and for the identification of third-country nationals.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1003 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) providing interpreting services;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1006 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) providing practical information, analysis and recommendations on third countries of return relevant for the implementation of this Regulation, in cooperation, where appropriate, with other Union bodies, offices and agencies, including EASO;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1008 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) advice on and technical and operational assistance in the implementation and management of return procedures in compliance with Directive 2008/115/EC, including in the preparation of return decisions, in identification and in the acquisition of travel documents;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1013 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) providing advice on and assistance in measures taken by Member States that are necessary to ensure the availability of returnees for return purposes and to prevent returnees from absconding, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC and international law;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1016 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) providing equipment, capacities and expertise for the implementation of return decisions and for the identification of third-country nationals.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1028 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
1. Without entering into the merits of return decisions, the Agency shall provide technical and operational assistance and ensure the coordination or the organisation ofto carry out return operations, including through the chartering of aircraft for the purpose of such operations or organising returns on scheduled flights. The Agency may, on its own initiative coordinate or organise return operations.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1042 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency may provide technical and operational assistance and, either at the request of the participating Member States or on its own initiative, ensure the coordination or the organisation of return operations for which the means of transport and forced-return escorts are provided by a third country of return (‘collecting return operations’). The participating Member States and the Agency shall ensure that the respect for fundamental rights, the principle of non- refoulement, and the proportionate use of means of constraints are guaranteed during the entire return operation. At least one Member State representative, and one forced-return monitor from the pool established under Article 52 or from the national monitoring system of the participating Member State, shall be present throughout the entire return operation until arrival at the third country of return.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1051 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 7
7. The Agency shall finance or co- finance return operations from its budget, in accordance with the financial rules applicable to the Agency, giving priority to those conducted by more than one Member State, or from hotspot areas or controlled centres.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1059 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. After the pool of forced-return monitors is constituted by the Agency, following the determination of the profile and the number of forced-return monitors, the Agency shall entrust the Council of Europe and its forced return monitors within its Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) to conduct spot-checks on a selected sample of a maximum of 20 per cent of return operations carried out or facilitated by the Agency. The Council of Europe's forced return monitors shall compile a report following each spot- check. The Council of Europe shall compile an annual evaluation report from the information collected which shall be communicated to the Executive Director, the Agency's Management Board, Fundamental Rights Officer and Consultative Forum, the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission. The Council of Europe shall receive an adequate budget by the Agency on an annual basis to evaluate the Agency's pool of forced- return monitors. The results of the annual evaluation report shall be taken into account in the evaluation of this Regulation in line with the provisions laid down in Article 116.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1060 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. No forced return shall be carried out or facilitated by the Agency before its pool of forced-return monitors is fully constituted and ready for deployment.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1064 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency may deploy return teams, that also consist of officers with specific expertise in child protection, either at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, during return interventions, in the framework of migration management teams or as necessary to provide additional technical and operational assistance in the area of return, including where such challenges are linked to large inward mixed migratory flows or taking in third-country nationals rescued at sea.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1068 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency may deploy return teams either at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, during return interventions, in the framework of migration management teams or as necessary to provide additional technical and operational assistance in the area of return, including where such challenges are linked to large inward mixed migratory flows or taking in third- country nationals rescued at sea.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1075 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1
1. In circumstances where a Member State is facing a burden when implementing the obligation to return third- country nationals who are the subject of return decisions issued by a Member State, the Agency shall, either on its own initiative or upon request of that Member State, provide the appropriate technical and operational assistance in the form of a return intervention. Such intervention may consist of the deployment of return teams to the host Member State providing assistance in the implementation of return procedures and the organisation of return operations from the host Member State.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1084 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 3
3. In circumstances where a Member State is facing specific and disproportionate challenges when implementing its obligation to return third- country nationals who are the subject of return decisions, the Agency shall, either on its own initiative or upon the request of that Member State, provide the appropriate technical and operational assistance in the form of a rapid return intervention. A rapid return intervention may consist in the rapid deployment of return teams to the host Member State providing assistance in the implementation of return procedures and the organisation of return operations from the host Member State.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1085 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 6
6. The Agency shall finance or co- finance return interventions from its budget in accordance with the financial rules applicable to the Agency.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1088 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A European Border and Coast Guard standing corps of 10 0500 operational staff shall be part of the Agency. This standing corps shall be composed of the following three categories of staff in accordance with the annual availability scheme set in Annex I:
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1091 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) Category 3: operational staff from Member States provided to the Agency for a short term deployment as part of the standing corps in accordance with Article 58;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1101 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) on the specific numbers and profiles of operational staff per Member State to be seconded to the Agency in accordance with Article 57 and to be nominated in accordance with Article 58 in the following year;deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1112 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. The Member States shall contribute to the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps operational staff seconded as team members to the Agency (Category 2). The duration of individual secondments shall be determined in accordance with Article 93(7). In order to facilitate the implementation of the financial support system referred to in Article 61, the secondment shall, as a general rule, start at the beginning of a calendar year. Member States’ contributions to the standing corps are voluntary.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1114 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall be responsible to ensure continuous contributions ofe operational staff as seconded team members in accordance with Annex IIIits own resources, which it shall communicate to the Agency on an annual basis.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1121 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1
1. In addition to the secondments in accordance with Article 57, by 30 June of each year, the Member States shall alsomay contribute to the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps by nominating border guards and other relevant staff to the national list of operational staff for short-term deployments (Category 3) in accordance with the contributions indicated in Annex IV and in accordance with the specific numbers of profiles decided by the Management Board for the following year as referred to in Article 55(4). The national lists of nominated operational staff shall be communicated to the Agency. The payment of the costs incurred by staff deployed under this Article shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Article 46(2).
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1127 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 6
6. In case of increased needs for the reinforcement of an ongoing joint operation or a need to launch a new joint operation not specified in the respective annual work programme, and the corresponding result of annual bilateral negotiations, the Executive Director shall inform without delay the Member States about the additional needs by indicating possible numbers of operational staff and profiles to be provided by each Member Staterequired profiles. Once an amended operational plan or, where relevant, a new operational plan is agreed upon by the executive director and the host Member State, the formal request for the number and profiles of operational staff shall be made by the Executive Director to the Member States. The respective team members shall be deployed from each Member State which decides to contribute within 20 working days from that formal request.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1128 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 7
7. Where the risk analysis or any available vulnerability assessment show that a Member State is faced with a situation that would substantially affect the discharge of national tasks, its respective contribution shall be half of its contribution for that year established in Annex IV. If a Member State invokes such an exceptional situation, it shall provide comprehensive reasons and information on the situation to the Agency in writing, the content of which shall be included in the report referred to in Article 65.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1131 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2
2. This mid-term review shall be accompanied, where necessary, by appropriate proposals to amend Annexes I, III and IV.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1180 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 2
2. Member States and the Agency shall establish operational plans for border management and returns. The operational plans of Member States related to border sections with high and critical impact levels shall be established in cooperation with neighbouring Member States and with the Agency. For the activities of the Agency, operational planning for the following year shall be defined in annex to the single programming document referred to in Article 100 and for each specific operational activity through the operational plan referred to in Article 39 and Article 75(3).
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1201 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point k a (new)
(k a) the Council of Europe for the purposes of overseeing the pool of forced- return monitors;
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1239 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 3
3. In circumstances requiring the deployment of border management and return teams from the European Border and Coast Guard standing corps to a third country where the team members will exert executive powers, a status agreement shall be concluded by the Union with the third country concerned. The status agreement shall cover all aspects that are necessary for carrying out the actions. It shall in particular set out the scope of the operation, civil and criminal liability and the tasks and powers of the members of the teams. The status agreement shall ensure the full respect of fundamental rights during these operations, including by ensuring that the teams include a member with expertise on fundamental rights.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1261 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 76 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Any exchange of information under Article 73(1), which provides a third country with information that could be used to identify persons or groups of persons whose request for access to international protection is under examination or who are under a serious risk of being subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or any other violation of fundamental rights, shall be prohibited.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1287 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 79 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency may, with the agreement of the Member States concerned, invite observers of Union institutions, bodies, offices, agencies or international organisations and CSDP missions and operations to participate in its activities, in particular joint operations and pilot projects, risk analysis and training, to the extent that their presence is in accordance with the objectives of those activities, may contribute to the improvement of cooperation and the exchange of best practices, and does not affect the overall safety and security of those activities or pose risks to fundamental rights. The participation of those observers in risk analysis and training may take place only with the agreement of the Member States concerned. As regards joint operations and pilot projects, the participation of observers shall be subject to the agreement of the host Member State. Detailed rules on the participation of observers shall be included in the operational plan. Those observers shall receive appropriate training from the Agency prior to their participation.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1292 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 79 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency may, with the agreement of the Member States concerned, invite observers from third countries to participate in its activities at the external borders referred to in Article 37 , return operations referred to in Article 51, return interventions referred to in Article 54 and training referred to in Article 62, to the extent that their presence is in accordance with the objectives of those activities, may contribute to improving cooperation and the exchange of best practices, and does not affect the overall safety of those activities nor the safety of third country nationals and the right to asylum. The participation of those observers may take place only with the agreement of the Member States concerned regarding the activities referred to in Articles 37, 43, 51 and 62 and only with the agreement of the host Member State regarding those referred to in Articles 37 and 54. Detailed rules on the participation of observers shall be included in the operational plan. Those observers shall receive appropriate training from the Agency prior to their participation. They shall be required to adhere to the codes of conduct of the Agency while participating in its activities.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1408 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 92 – paragraph 5
5. The seat of the Agency shall be Warsaw, PolandReggio Calabria, Italy.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1411 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 94 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Management Board may grant a monthly differential payment to Agency statutory staff members. This differential payment shall be calculated as a percentage of the remuneration of each staff member concerned. That percentage shall not exceed the difference between 100% and the correction coefficient applicable in the place of employment and shall regularly be reviewed. Before granting this benefit, due account shall be taken of the overall remuneration received by individual staff members, including reimbursements of mission expenses.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1412 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 94 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The Management Board shall lay down the rules for implementing this paragraph, with prior approval of the Commission. By 2024, the Management Board shall review these rules, with prior approval of the Commission.deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1436 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 3 – point g
(g) to adopt a recommendation on measures in accordance with Article 33(9), including decisions proposing that Member States initiate and carry out joint operations, rapid border interventions or other action referred to in Article 37(2);deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1438 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 3 – point j
(j) to ensure the implementation of the operational plans referred to in Article 39, Article 43 and Article 54(4);
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1439 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 3 – point l
(l) to ensure the implementation of the Commission decision referred to in Article 43(1);deleted
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1487 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 3
3. The fFundamental rRights oOfficer shall be consulted on the operational plans drawn up in accordance with Articles 39, 43, 54(4) and 75(3)0, 41, 43, 51, 54 and 75 as well as on pilot projects and technical assistance projects in third countries. He or she shall have access to all information concerning respect for fundamental rights in all the activities of the Agency.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1489 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Agency shall provide its Fundamental Rights Officer with adequate resources and staff corresponding to its mandate and size. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall have access to all information necessary to fulfil her or his tasks and shall be granted administrative autonomy from the Agency.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1493 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. In the case of a long-term absence of the Fundamental Rights Officer, the management board shall appoint an interim Fundamental Rights Officer within one calendar week of such absence. The interim Fundamental Rights Officer shall have the necessary qualifications and experience in the field of fundamental rights. The interim Fundamental Rights Officer shall, where possible, be appointed from within the Agency's Fundamental Rights Office or from staff who worked in the same Office in the past.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1494 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall be tasked to present an annual report on the work of the Agency's Fundamental Rights Office. The report shall be communicated to the Executive Director, the Agency's Management Board and Consultative Forum, the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1514 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 4
4. The fFundamental rRights oOfficer shall be responsible for handling complaints received by the Agency in accordance with the right to good administration. For this purpose, the fFundamental rRights oOfficer shall review the admissibility of a complaint, register admissible complaints, forward all registered complaints to the eExecutive dDirector, forward complaints concerning members of the teams to the home Member State, inform the relevant authority or body competent for fundamental rights in a Member State for further action in line with their mandate, and register and ensure the follow-up by the Agency or that Member State.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1520 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
In accordance with the right to good administration, if a complaint is admissible, complainants shall be informed that a complaint has been registered, that an assessment has been initiated and that a response may be expected as soon as it becomes available. If a complaint is forwarded to national authorities or bodies, the complainant shall be provided with their contact details. If a complaint is not declared inadmissible, complainants shall be informed of the reasons and, if possible, provided with further options for addressing their concerns. Complainants shall be granted the possibility to appeal an inadmissibility decision to the European Ombudsman.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1533 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 7
7. If a complaint is registered that concerns a team member of a host Member State or a team member from other participating Member States, including a seconded member of the teams or seconded national expert, the home Member State shall ensure appropriate follow-up, including disciplinary measures as necessary or other measures in accordance with national law. The relevant Member State shall report back to the fFundamental rRights oOfficer as to the findings and follow- up made in response to the complaint within a determined time periodone calendar year, and if necessary, at regular intervals thereafter. The Agency shall follow-up the matter if no report is received from the relevant Member State.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1542 #

2018/0330(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 9
9. The fFundamental rRights oOfficer shall report to the executive director and to the management board a, as part of her or his annual report on the work of the Agency's Fundamental Rights Office, include specific references to the Agency's and Member States' findings and follow-ups made in response to complaints. The Agency shall include information on the complaints mechanism in its annual report.
2018/12/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) An effective and fair return policyThe external borders of the Member States are the borders of the Union. A joint return policy that is both effective and respectful of the rights of illegally staying migrants is an essential part of the Union’s approach to better manage migration in all aspects, as reflected in the European Agenda on Migration of May 201511. _________________ 11 11 COM(2015)285.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 128 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) On 28 June 2018, in its conclusions, the European Council underlined the necessityThe rate of return of migrants in irregular situations in the Union remains too low. As stressed by the European Council on 28 June 2018, in its conclusions, it is necessary to adopt an effective and coherent European return policy with a view to significantly stepping up the effective return of irregular migrants, and welcomed the intention of the Commission to make legislative proposals for a more effective and coherent European return policy through the improvement of return and readmission procedures, including through the conclusion of new bilateral readmission agreements and by ensuring that existing agreements are fully applied.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The implementation of joint awareness-raising campaigns in third countries on the risks inherent in irregular migration and on the Union’s return policy should be strengthened.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 144 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) The need for Union andMember States and the Union should conclude further bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. A lack of these agreements is the main reason why numbers for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union are low. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable return.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 150 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected, provided that the return procedure is suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union- wide objective criteria. Moreover this Directive should set out specific criteria which establish a ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding exists.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, includingthird-country nationals should bye providing the information and elements that ared with the necessary in forder to assess their individual situation. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-comation on the voluntary return process, the period allowed for voluntary nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying wdeparture and the possibilithy those obligations, in relao impose detention toin the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistancevent that the third- country national poses a risk to security and public order in cases clearly determined by law, and on access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance. The possibility of voluntary return should be clearly pointed out to third-country nationals applying for international protection right at the start of the asylum procedure.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 166 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded, or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union-widesolely on objective criteria. Moreover laid down by this Directive shouland sdet out specific criteria which establish a ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding existsermined by a judicial or administrative authority following consideration of the individual circumstances of the case.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to 30 days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded, or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security within the meaning of this Directive or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security, duly evidenced either by a conviction or by elements that substantiate the assessment that they represent a danger to the public. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Member States shall ensure that third-country nationals receive information on the return procedure in a language that they understand. In the case of vulnerable persons, in particular unaccompanied minors, this information shall be supplied in a manner that is appropriate to the unaccompanied minor’s age and ability to understand, including by using multimedia formats.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 202 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The deadline for lodging an judicial appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. A limit of 30 days should be granted from notification of the return decision in which to appeal against the decision. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding five15 days should be granted to appeal against a return decision. This provision should only apply following a decision rejecting an application for international protection which became final, including after a possible judicial review.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be subject to the risk a third-country national poses to security or public order and always be subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and the objectives pursued. Detention is justified only to and geared towards prepareing the return or to carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process, or when the third third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 235 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) The necessary legal aid should be made available free of charge, upon request, to those who lack sufficient resources. National legislation should establish a list of instances where legal aid is to be considered necessary.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) Without prejudice to the possibility for Member States not to apply this Directive with regard to the cases referred to in Article 2(2)(a), when a border procedure is applied in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], a specific border procedure should follow for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals whose application for international protection under that asylum border procedure has been rejected in order to ensure direct complementarity between the asylum and return border procedures and prevent gaps between the procedures. In such cases, it is necessary to establish specific rules that ensure the coherence and synergy between the two procedures and preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the whole process.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, a period for voluntary departure should not be granted. However, a period for voluntary departure should be granted to third- country nationals who hold a valid travel document and cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures. In such cases, to prevent absconding, third-country nationals should hand over the travel document to the competent authority until their departure.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 250 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be considered a measure of last resort and subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and objectives pursued. Preference should be given to alternatives to detention. The detention of unaccompanied minors or families with minors should never be possible. Detention is justified only to prepare the return or carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 252 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal against a return decision following a decision rejecting an application for international protection adopted under the border procedure and which became final.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) An appeal against a return decision taken in the context of the border procedure should have an automatic suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement, there has been a significant change in the situation of the third- country national concerned since the adoption under the asylum border procedure of the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection, or if no judicial remedy was effectively exercised against the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection adopted under the asylum border procedure.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 259 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process,ithin the meaning of this Directive or when the third- country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 263 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
(36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure may be kept in detention in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, once his or her application has been rejected. To avoid that a third country national is automatically released from detention and allowed entry into the territory of the Member State despite having been denied a right to stay, a limited period of time is needed in order to try to enforce the return decision issued at the border. The third-country national concerned may be detained in the context of the border procedure for a maximum period of four months and as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence. That period of detention should be without prejudice to other periods of detention established by this Directive. Where it has not been possible to enforce return by the end of the former period, further detention of the third-country national may be ordered under another provision of this Directive and for the duration provided for therein.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged once only for a maximum of a further six months, should be established in order to provide for sufficient time to complete the return procedures successfully, without prejudice to the established safeguards ensuring that detention is only applied when necessary and proportionate and for as long as removal arrangements are in progress.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 274 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) This Directive should not preclude Member States from laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties and criminal penalties, including imprisonment, in relation to the infringements of migration rules, provided that such penalties are compatible with the objectives of this Directive, do not compromise the application of this Directive and are in full respect of fundamental rights.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 283 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) Without prejudice to the possibility for Member States not to apply this Directive with regard to the cases referred to in Article 2(2)(a), if a border procedure is applied in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], a specific border procedure should follow for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals whose application for international protection under that asylum border procedure has been rejected in order to ensure direct complementarity between the asylum and return border procedures and prevent gaps between the procedures. In such cases, it is necessary to establish specific rules that ensure the coherence and synergy between the two procedures and preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the whole process.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 288 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, a period for voluntary departure should not be granted. However, a period for voluntary departure should be granted to third- country nationals who hold a valid travel document and cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures. In such cases, to prevent absconding, third-country nationals should hand over the travel document to the competent authority until their departure.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 295 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal against a return decision following a decision rejecting an application for international protection adopted under the border procedure and which became final.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 301 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) An appeal against a return decision taken in the context of the border procedure should have an automatic suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement, there has been a significant change in the situation of the third- country national concerned since the adoption under the asylum border procedure of the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection, or if no judicial remedy was effectively exercised against the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection adopted under the asylum border procedure.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 308 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
(36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure may be kept in detention in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, once his or her application has been rejected. To avoid that a third country national is automatically released from detention and allowed entry into the territory of the Member State despite having been denied a right to stay, a limited period of time is needed in order to try to enforce the return decision issued at the border. The third-country national concerned may be detained in the context of the border procedure for a maximum period of four months and as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence. That period of detention should be without prejudice to other periods of detention established by this Directive. Where it has not been possible to enforce return by the end of the former period, further detention of the third-country national may be ordered under another provision of this Directive and for the duration provided for therein.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 324 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TBy the objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least the following criteriais meant:
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) lack of documentation proving the identity;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 329 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) lack of residence, fixed abode or reliable address;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 332 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
(46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular migration and represents an important reason of substantial public interest. element of an overall approach to migration, combining more effective control of the Union’s external borders, reinforcement of external action and the internal dimension.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 333 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lack of financial resources;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 340 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) illegal entry into the territory of the Member States;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 341 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) unauthorised movement to the territory of another Member Stadelete;d
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 344 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) being subject of a return decision issued by another Member State;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 344 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) are subject to a refusal of entry in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 , or who are apprehended or intercepted by the competent authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the external border of a Member State and who have not subsequently obtained an authorisation or a right to stay in that Member State;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 345 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) non-compliance with a return decision, including with an obligation to return within the period for voluntary departure;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 346 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) non-compliance with the requirement of Article 8(2) to go immediately to the territory of another Member State that granted a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 350 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures, referred to in Article 7;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 367 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 367 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteria defined by lawthis Directive to believe that a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond;
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 385 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the duty to provide information on the third countries transideleted;
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 394 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least the following criteriaare as follows:
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 395 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) lack of documentation proving the identity;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 400 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The elements referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall include the third- country nationals’ statements and documentation in their possession regarding the identity, nationality or nationalities, age, and the country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 400 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lack of financial resources;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 405 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) illegal entry into the territory of the Member States;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 410 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) being subject of a return decision issued by another Member State;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 412 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) non-compliance with the requirement of Article 8(2) to go immediately to the territory of another Member State that granted a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 415 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures, referred to in Article 7;deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 416 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) existence of conviction for a criminal offence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State, where the sentence has not been fully served;
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 425 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) not complying with an existing entry ban.deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 433 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such a period shall be granted only following an application by the third-country national concerned. In such a case, Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an applicationThe minimum duration of such a period may not be less than 15 days.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 437 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (m), (n), (o) and (po) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall provide the necessary information on the possibility for third-country nationals to return voluntarily if they have been found to be irregularly staying on national territory or while irregularly crossing an internal or external border or if they have arrived on the territory of a Member State following rescue operations at sea. That information shall cover programmes offering logistical or financial assistance and other types of material assistance, including support for reintegration in countries of origin, the time-frames for the procedure, the related obligations, and the consequences of non-compliance.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 445 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities, deposit of an adequate financial guarantee, submission of documents or the obligation to stay at a certain place or the submission of documents, may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 455 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the duty to provide information on the third countries transideleted;
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 477 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) technical reasons, such as lackthe lack of bilateral readmission agreements or of transport capacity, or failure of the removal due to lack of identification.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 519 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such a period shall be granted only following an application by the third-country national concerned. In such a case, Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application and of the voluntary return programmes available in a language which the illegally staying third-country national understands, in sufficient time to enable them to exercise the rights guaranteed by this Directive.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 527 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be subject to the cooperation of the third- country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 574 #

2018/0329(COD)

1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted, in the presence of the appointed guardian and with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 592 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The length of the entry ban shall be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of the individual case and shall not in principle exceed, up to a maximum of five years. It may however exceed five years if the third- country national represents a serious threat to public policy, public security or national security where this has been duly proven either by a conviction or by other objective elements that may be deduced from the circumstances of the case.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 613 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. UFor unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall only be detained as a measure of last resort analternatives to detention shall be provided for the shortest appropriate period of time.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 614 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 620 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Minors in detention shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 625 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Unaccompanied minors shall, as far as possibleappropriate, be provided with faccommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities whichilities and assisted by personnel, takeing into account the needs of persons of their age.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 630 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the detentiontreatment of minors pending removal.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 633 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22
22 [...]deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 651 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
An appeal against a return decision must be lodged within 30 days of its notification to the person concerned. Member States shall establish reasonable time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 657 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall grant a period not exceeding five15 days to lodge an appeal against a return decision when such a decision is the consequence of a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 678 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security. on the basis of a conviction or elements that substantiate the assessment that they represent a danger to the public
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 684 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Any detention shall be a measure of last resort to be applied when measures other than detention are not available, and for as short a period as possible and only maintained as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 686 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Detention shall never be used for unaccompanied minors or families with minors.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 687 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 b (new)
The maximum period of detention must be between three and six months; it may be extended once only for a maximum period of a further six months.
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 711 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20
Detention of minors and families 1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall only be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. 2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy. 3. Minors in detention shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education. 4. Unaccompanied minors shall as far as possible be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age. 5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the detention of minors pending removal.Article 20 deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 739 #

2018/0329(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22
[...]deleted
2020/09/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The substantial body of Union legislation underpins the functioning of the internal market. This concerns, in particular, competitiveness, standardisation, conformity assessment, consumer protection, market surveillance and food chain regulation but also rules concerning business, trade and financial transactions and the promotion of fair competition providing for a level playing field essential for the functioning of the internal market.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 55 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Still, barriers to the proper functioning of the internal market remain and the new obstacles emerge. Adopting rules is only a first step, but making them work is as important. This is ultimately a matter of citizens' trust in the Union, in its capacity to deliver, and in its ability to create jobs and growthprosperity and quality jobs, while protecting the public interest. Or. it (Technical note: this amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 57 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) In order not to place further burdens on the budgets of the Member States, national contributions to the Union budget should be deducted from the deficit calculation. Furthermore, it is essential that the contributions of individual Member States to the financing of the Union budget for the period 2021- 2027 are not increased compared to the resources allocated in the 2014-2020 multiannual plan. Instead, the necessary resources should be found for the implementation of the programme through a thorough spending review, allowing actions to be taken to identify and rationalise expenditure and programmes that have had little benefit for citizens, so as to channel resources from inefficient sectors with no real added value towards efficient sectors.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 63 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) It is therefore appropriate to establish a Programme for the internal market and for consumer protection, standardisation processes, product monitoring and safety, competitiveness of enterprises, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, the protection of the health and safety of humans, animals and plants throughout the food chain, and European statistics (the 'Programme'). The Programme should be established for the duration of seven years from 2021 to 2027.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 67 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The Programme should support the design, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation underpinning the proper functioning of the internal market. The Programme should support the creation of the right conditions to empower all actors of the internal market: businesses, citizens including consumers, civil society and public authorities. To that end, the Programme should aim to ensure the competitiveness of businesses, notably SMEsmicro and SMEs, including those in the tourism sector, but also supporting the enforcement of consumer protection and safety rules and by raising the awareness of businesses and individuals by providing them with the right tools, knowledge and competence to make informed decisions and strengthen their participation in Union’s policy- making. Furthermore, the Programme should aim to enhance regulatory and administrative cooperation, notably through exchange of best practices, building of knowledge and competence bases, including the use of strategic public procurement. The Programme should also aim to support the development of high- quality international standards that underpin the implementation of Union legislation. This also includes standard setting in the field of financial reporting and audit, thereby contributing to the transparency and well-functioning of the Union’s capital markets and to enhancing investor protection. The Programme should support rulemaking and standard setting also by ensuring the broadest possible stakeholder involvement. The objective of the Programme should also be to support the implementation and enforcement of Union legislation providing for a high level of health for humans, animals and plants along the food chain and the improvement of the welfare of animals. (Technical note: this amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitateOr. it corresponding changes throughout.)
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 72 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) A modern internal market promotes competition and benefits consumers, businesses and employees. Making better use of the ever evolving internal market in services should help European businesses create jobs and grow across borders, offer wider choice of services at better prices, and maintain high standards for consumers and workers. To achieve this, the Programme should contribute to the removal of remaining barriers, and to ensure a regulatory framework that can accommodate new innovative business models, including collaborative economy models, especially those with social objectives.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 76 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Regulatory obstacles in the internal market have been removed for many industrial products through prevention mechanisms, the adoption of common rules and, where no such Union rules exist, through the principle of mutual recognition. In areas where no Union legislation exists, the principle of mutual recognition means that goods that are lawfully marketed in one Member State enjoy the right to free movement and can be sold in another Member State, always in accordance with the highest European standards and the precautionary principle. However, inadequate application of mutual recognition makes it harder for companies to access markets in other Member States. Despite the high degree of market integration in the area of goods, this leads to lost opportunities for the economy at large. The Programme should therefore aim to improve the application of mutual recognition in the area of goods and to reduce the number of illegal and non- compliant goods entering the market. by strengthening market surveillance and implementing specific provisions on product traceability, so as to identify the country in which they were manufactured and to contribute to the fight against fraud. To ensure that only safe and compliant goods are available in the internal market, it is essential to train staff in online investigations, create points of contact for cooperation with major sales and social media platforms, and cooperate with payment service providers.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 78 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) New regulatory and enforcement challenges relate to a rapidly changing environment of the digital revolution, concerning issues such as cybersecurity, data protection and privacy, internet of things or artificial intelligence. Should damage occur, stringent rules on product safety and liability are essential to ensure a policy response that allows European citizens, including consumers and businesses, to benefit from such rules. The Programme should therefore contribute to the rapid adaptation and enforcement of a Union product liability regime which fosters innovation.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Placing on the market of products that are not compliant with Union law puts those who comply at disadvantage and may endanger consumers. Many entrepreneurs disregard the rules either through lack of knowledge or intentionally to gain a competitive advantage. Market surveillance authorities are often underfunded and constrained by national boundaries, while entrepreneurs trade at Union or even global level. In particular, in the case of e-commerce, market surveillance authorities have great difficulties in tracing non-compliant products imported from third countries and identifying the responsible entity within their jurisdiction. The Programme should therefore seek to strengthen product compliance by providing the right incentives to entrepreneurs, intensifying compliance checks and promoting closer cross-border cooperation among enforcement authorities, including through spot checks, which should include anonymous checks by market surveillance authorities, imposing effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties, and promoting closer cross-border cooperation among enforcement authorities following a risk-based approach and taking the precautionary principle into account. The Programme should also contribute to the consolidation of the existing framework for market surveillance activities, encourage joint actions of market surveillance authorities from different Member States, improve the exchange of information and promote convergence and closer integration of market surveillance activities, insuring the implementation of rules in specific sectors of particular concern to consumers, such as type approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) Product safety is a common concern. The conformity assessment bodies verify whether products meet the safety requirements before they are placed on the market. It is therefore of paramount importance that the conformity assessment bodies are reliable and competent. The Union has put in place a system of accreditation of the conformity assessment bodies, verifying their competence, impartiality and independence. The main challenge is now to keep the accreditation system in line with the latest state of the art and to ensure that it is applied with the same stringency across the Union. The Programme should therefore support measures to ensure that conformity assessment bodies continue fulfilling the regulatory requirements and to enhance the European accreditation system, in particular in new policy areas, by supporting the uniformity of checks and sanctions, as well as the European co-operation for Accreditation (EA) referred to in Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council48 and by supporting the creation of a European database of defective products and related accidents.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) As consumer markets know no borders with the development of online trade and travel services, it is important to ensure that consumers residing in the Union can benefit from adequatethe same level of protection when importing goods and services from economic operators based in third countries, compared to the goods and services offered by operators located within the internal market. The Programme should therefore allow supporting cooperation with relevant bodies located in key trading third country partners of the Union where necessary.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Public procurement is used by public authorities to ensure value for public money spent and to contribute to a more innovative, sustainable, inclusive and competitive internal market. Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council51 provide the legal framework for the integration and effective functioning of the public procurement markets representing 14 % of Union’s gross domestic product, to the benefit of public authorities, businesses as well as citizens, including consumers. The Programme should therefore support measures to ensure a wider uptake of strategic public procurement, the professionalisation of public buyers, improved access to procurement markets for SMEs, facilitate the division of tenders into lots for large infrastructure works and ensure that the practice of maximum reductions is eliminated and that the most economically advantageous tender is respected in award procedures, so as to take due account of qualitative elements such as environmental considerations, social factors and innovation. The Programme should also aim to ensure increase of transparency, integrity and better data, boosting the digital transformation of procurement and promotion of joint procurement, through strengthening a partnership approach with the Member States, improving data gathering and data analysis including through development of dedicated IT tools, supporting exchange of experiences and good practices, providing guidance, pursuing beneficial trade agreements, strengthening cooperation among national authorities and launching pilot projects.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 96 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) In order to meet the objectives of the Programme and to facilitate the lives of citizens and businesses, high-quality user- centric public services need to be put in placethat are increasingly digitally orientated and fully accessible need to be put in place, in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies. This implies that public administrations will need to start working in new ways, bring down silos between the different parts of their administrations, and to engage in the co-creation of these public services with citizens and businesses. Moreover, tIn addition, it is essential to introduce an effective system for evaluating the performance of public administration as a whole and of its staff and management, also by involving users. The continuous and steady increase of cross-border activities in the internal market requires provision of up-to- date information on the rights of businesses and citizens, but also information explainadministrative formalities to be completed, as well as on the rights of businesses and citizens, including the rights of businesses with respect to creditors in the event of late payment and the rights of citizens ing the administrative formalitiesevent of the purchase of unsafe or non-compliant products, as well as their right to take part in a class action. In addition, provision of legal advice and helping to solve problems which occur at cross national level becomes essential. Furthermore, connecting national administrations in a simple and efficient manner as well as evaluating how the internal market works on the ground is necessary. The Programme should therefore support the following existing internal market governance tools: the Your Europe Portal which should be a backbone of the upcoming Single Digital Gateway, Your Europe Advice, SOLVIT, the Internal Market Information system and the Single Market Scoreboard in order to improve citizens' daily lives and businesses' ability to trade across borders.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 103 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The Programme should also promote the correct and full implementation and application of the Union legal framework for combating corruption, anti-money laundering and countering terrorism financing by the Member States and the development of future policies to address new challenges in the field. It should also support the relevant activities of the international organisations of European interest, such as the Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering Measures and the Financing of Terrorism of the Council of Europe.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 109 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Many of the Union's competitiveness problems involve SMEs' difficulties in obtaining access to finance because they struggle to demonstrate their credit-worthiness and have insufficient collateral. It is therefore essential to support programmes that aim to reduce payment delays, so as to support the development of businesses, particularly SMEs. Additional financing challenges arise from SMEs' need to stay competitive by engaging e.g. in digitization, internationalization and innovation activities and skilling up their workforce. Limited access to finance has a negative effect on businesses creation, growth and survival rates, as well as on the readiness of new entrepreneurs to take over viable companies in the context of a business succession.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) In the application of this Regulation, the Commission should consult all relevant stakeholders, including public and private organisations representing SMEs. Particular attention should be paid to micro enterprises, enterprises engaged in craft activities, the self-employed, the liberal professions and social enterprises. Attention should also be paid to young entrepreneurs and female entrepreneurs, as well as to entrepreneurs belonging to socially disadvantaged or vulnerable groups such as people with disabilities and the elderly.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 111 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) The policy objectives of this Programme will be also addressed through financial instruments and budgetary guarantee under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund, provided that overly risky operations are avoided. Financial support should be used to address market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, in a proportionate manner and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions should have a clear European added value.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 112 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) The Programme should provide effective support for SMEs, including those in the tourism sector, throughout their life-cycle. It should build on the unique knowledge and expertise developed with regard to SMEs and industrial sectors and on a long experience in working with European, national and regional stakeholders. This support should build on the successful experience of the Enterprise Europe Network as a one-stop-shop to improve SMEs competitiveness and develop their business in the Single Market and beyond. The Network plans to continue delivering services on behalf of other Union programmes, notably for the Horizon2020 programme, using the financial resources of these programmes. Also the mentoring scheErasmus programme for newyoung entrepreneurs should remain the tool to enable new or aspiring entrepreneurs to gain business experience by matching with an experienced entrepreneur from another country and thus allow strengthening entrepreneurial talents. The Programme should further strive to grow and extend its geographical coverage and thus offer wider range of matching possibilities to entrepreneurs in complementarity with other Union initiatives where relevant, and should be able to respond to new challenges for SMEs in the single market, such as those posed by digitalisation.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 114 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) Clusters are a strategic tool for supporting the competitiveness and scaling-up of SMEs as they offer favourable business environments. Joint Cluster Initiatives should achieve critical mass to accelerate the growth of SMEs. By connecting specialised eco-systems, clusters create new business opportunities for SMEs and integrate them better in European and global strategic value chains. Support should be provided for the development of transnational partnership strategies and the implementation of joint activities, supported by the European Cluster Collaboration Platform. Sustainable partnering should be encouraged with continuation funding if performance and participation milestones are reached. Direct support to SMEs should be channelled through cluster organisations for the following: uptake of advanced technologies, new business models, low- carbon and resource-efficient solutions, in order to facilitate the transition to a zero- carbon economy by 2050, creativity and design, skills upgrading, talent attraction, entrepreneurship acceleration, and internationalisation. Other specialised SME support actors should be associated to facilitate industrial transformation and implementations of smart specialisation strategies. The Programme should thus contribute to growth and build linkages with the Union's (digital) innovation hubs and investments made under Cohesion Policy and Horizon Europe. Synergies with the Erasmus programme can also be explored.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 115 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) Creativity and innovation are crucial for the competitiveness of the Union's industrial value chains. They represent catalysts for industrial modernisation and contribute to smart, inclusive sustainable growth. However, uptake by SMEs is still lagging behind. The Programme should therefore support targeted actions, networks and partnerships for creativity-driven innovationinnovation based on digital innovation and creativity throughout the societal and industrial value chain.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 118 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) A well-functioning common financial reporting framework is essential for the internal market, for the effective functioning of the capital markets and for the realisation of the integrated market for financial services in the context of the Capital Markets Union.deleted
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) The Union contributes to ensuring a high level of consumer protection, empowering consumers and putting them at the heart of the internal market by supporting and complementing Member States’ policies in seeking to ensure that citizens when acting as consumers and prosumers can fully reap the benefits of the internal market and that, in so doing, their safety and legal and economic interests are properly protected by means of concrete actions. The Union has also to ensure that consumer and product safety laws are properly and equally enforced on the ground and that businesses enjoy a level playing field with fair competition in the internal market. Moreover, it is necessary to empower, encourage and assist consumers in making sustainable choices, thus contributing to a sustainable, energy and resource efficient and circular economy.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 125 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) The Programme should aim to raise the awareness of consumers, businesses, civil society and authorities on Union consumer and safety laws and to empower consumers and their representative organisations at national level and at the Union level notably by supporting the Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs (BEUC) which is the long established and recognised NGO representing consumer interests in relation to all relevant Union policies, and the European Association for the Co- ordination of Consumer Representation in Standardisation (ANEC) which represents consumers interest in relation to standardisation issues. In doing so, particular attention should be given to new market needs regarding the promotion of sustainable consumption and the prevention of vulnerabilities as well as challenges created by the digitisation of the economy or the development of new consumption patterns and business models, such as the collaborative economy and social entrepreneurship. The Programme should support the development of relevant and exhaustive information on markets, policy challenges, emerging issues and behaviours, and the publication of the Union consumer scoreboards.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) The Programme should support national competent authorities, including those responsible for monitoring product safety, who cooperate notably via the Union’s rapid alert system for dangerous products. It should also support the enforcement of Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council58 and Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 regarding consumer protection and product safety, and the Consumer Protection Cooperation network and international cooperation between the relevant authorities in third countries and in the Union. The Programme should also aim to ensure access for all consumers and traderpromote information campaigns for consumer rights, in particular in cases of involving the purchase of products and services and in cases of fraud and unfair commercial practices, and should aim to ensure access for all consumers and traders to the process for participating in a class action, as well as to quality out of court dispute resolution and online dispute resolution and information on redress possibilities.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) The fitness check of Union consumer and marketing law carried out by the Commission in May 2017 exposed the need to better enforce rules and facilitate redress when consumers have been harmed by breaches to consumer laws. As a result the Commission adopted a "New Deal for Consumers" in April 2018 to ensure, inter alia, the equal treatment of consumers across the internal market in relation to dual quality standards, stronger enforcement capacities of Member States, enhanced product safety, including through effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, increased international cooperation and new possibilities for redress notably through representative actions by qualified entities, and to bring standards up to date with the digital age by requiring platforms where products and services are sold or traded to be much more transparent to users about a range of key data. The Programme should aim to support consumer policy with awareness raising and knowledge building, capacity building and exchange of best practices of the consumer organisations and consumer protection authorities, networking and development of market intelligence, strengthening the evidence base on the functioning of the internal market for consumers, IT systems and communication tools, inter alia.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) Citizens are particularly affected by the functioning of financial services markets. These are a key component of the internal market and require a solid framework for regulation and supervision which ensures not only financial stability and a sustainable economy, but also provides a high level of protection to consumers and other financial services end users, including retail investors, savers, insurance policyholders, pension fund members and beneficiaries, individual shareholders, borrowers and SMEs. It is important to enhance their capacity to participate in policy making for the financial sector and to understand its development.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 136 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
(45) The general objective of Union law in the food chain area is to contribute to a high level of health for humans, animals and plants along the food chain, to support the improvement of the welfare of animals, to contribute to a high level of protection and information for consumers and a high level of protection of the environment, including the preservation of biodiversity, while improving the sustainability of European food and feed productions, increasing quality standards across the Union, enhancing the competitiveness and the quality of the products of the Union food and feed industry and favouring the creation of jobs.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
(47) Official controls carried out by the Member States are an essential tool for verifying and monitoring that relevant Union requirements are being implemented, complied with and enforced. The effectiveness and efficiency of official control systems is vital for maintaining a high level of safety for humans, animals and plants along the food chain whilst ensuring a high level of protection of the environment and of animal welfare, including upstream of industrial processes, while monitoring and minimising the impact of environmental determinants on human health, animal health and the food chain. Union financial support should be made available for such control measures. In particular, a financial contribution should be available to Union reference laboratories in order to help them bear the costs arising from the implementation of work programmes approved by the Commission. Moreover, since the effectiveness of official controls also depends on the availability to the control authorities of well trained staff with an appropriate knowledge of Union law, the Union should be able to contribute to their training and relevant exchange programmes organised by competent authorities.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 144 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
(55) The Agreement on the European Economic Area provides for cooperation in the fields subject to the Programme between the Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and the countries of the European Free Trade Association participating in the European Economic Area, on the other. Provision should also be made to open the Programme to participation by other countries, including the neighbouring countries of the Union and countries which are applying for, are candidates for or are acceding to, membership of the Union, provided that they respect the principles and the values contained in the Union Treaties. In addition, in the field of European statistics, the Programme should be open to Switzerland in accordance with the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on cooperation in the field of statistics64.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 147 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
(70) Finally, food chain actions such as veterinary and phytosanitary measures in case of animal and plant health crises could be complemented by market based interventions from the Union’s Common Agriculture Policy programming established by Regulation (EU) […] of the European Parliament and of the Council78, as well as by measures to monitor and address the level of environmental determinants.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
(74) To ensure regular monitoring and reporting, a proper framework for monitoring the actions and results of the Programme should be put in place from the very beginning, including through the committees dealing with the individual work programmes. Such monitoring and reporting should be based on indicators, measuring the effects of the actions under the Programme against pre-defined baselines.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 81
(81) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council90 governs the processing of personal data carried out in the Member States in the context of this Regulation and under the supervision of the Member States competent authorities. Regulation (EC) 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council91 governs the processing of personal data carried out by the Commission within the framework of this Regulation and under the supervision of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Any exchange or transmission of information by competent authorities is to comply with the rules on the transfer of personal data as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and in Regulation XXX [Regulation on privacy and electronic communications] and any exchange or transmission of information by the Commission is to comply with the rules on the transfer of personal data as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the programme for improving the functioning of the internal market and the competitiveness of enterprises, including particular micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, including those in the tourism sector, and the framework for financing of development, production and dissemination of European statistics within the meaning of Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 (the 'Programme').
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 168 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to improve the functioning of the internal market, and especially to protect and empower citizens, consumers and businesses, in particular micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), by enforcement of Union law, facilitation of market access, promoting a level playing field through fair competition between enterprises, standard setting, and by promoting human, animal and plant health and animal welfare; as well as to enhance cooperation between the competent authorities of Member States and between the competent authorities of Member States and the Commission and the decentralised Union agencies;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 170 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to provide high-quality, comparable and reliable statistics on the European Union which underpin the design, monitoring and evaluation of all the Union policies and help policy makers, businesses, academia, citizens and media to make rapid and informed decisions and actively participate in the democratic process.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 174 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) making the internal market more effective, facilitating the prevention andof market disparities which create inequalities between companies and damage competition, promoting the removal of obstacles, supporting the development, implementation and enforcement of the Union law in the areas of the internal market for goods and services, public procurement, market surveillance as well as in the areas of company law and contract and extra- contractual law, anti-money laundering, free movement of capital, financial services and competition, including the development of governance tools, promoting market surveillance, implementing specific provisions on product traceability so as to identify the country in which they were manufactured and contributing to the fight against fraud;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) improving the competitiveness of enterprises with special emphasis on SMEs, including those in the tourism sector, and achieving additionality through the provision of measures that provide various forms of support to SMEs, access to markets including the internationalisation of SMEs, favourable business environment for SMEs, the competitiveness of sectors, the modernisation of industry and the promotion of entrepreneurship;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 184 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d – point i
(i) empowering, assisting and educating consumers, businesses and civil society; ensuring a high level of consumer protection, especially for the most vulnerable consumers, sustainable consumption and product safety and healthiness, notably by supporting competent enforcement authorities and consumer representative organisations and cooperation actions, both between Member States and with third countries, in order to combat fraud more effectively, particularly in the online sales sector, by implementing specific provisions on product traceability, so as to identify their country of origin and increase consumer confidence in digital transactions; ensuring that all consumers have access to redress and; provision of adequate information on markets and consumers; must also be ensured;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 186 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d – point ii
(ii) enhancing the participation of consumers, other financial services end- users and civil society in financial services policy-making; promoting a better understanding ofand a secure use of the opportunities given by the financial sector;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 190 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) contributing to a high level of health and safety for humans, animals and plants along the food chain and in related areas, including by preventing and eradicating diseases and pests, and to support the improvement of the welfare of animals as well as a sustainable food production and consumption, including through monitoring and addressing environmental determinants;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 199 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6
6. Resources allocated to Member States under shared management may, at their request, be transferred to the Programme. The Commission shall implement those resources directly in accordance with point (a) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with point (c) of that Article. Where possible tThose resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member State concerned.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 200 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) The programme shall be open to countries described by points (b), (c) and (d) provided that the principles and rights enshrined in the European treaties and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union are respected.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 204 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) creation of the right conditions to empower all actors of the internal market, including businesses, citizens and con, consumers, prosumers, civil society and public authorities through transparent information and awareness raising campaigns, best practice exchange, promotion of good practices, exchange and dissemination of expertise and knowledge and organization of trainings;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) support for the effective enforcement and modernisation of the Union legal framework and its rapid adaptation to the ever-changing environment, including through data gathering and analyses; studies, evaluations and policy recommendations; organization of demonstration activities and pilot projects; promoting digital literacy among citizens and companies; communication activities; development of dedicated IT tools ensuring transparent, fair and efficient functioning of the internal market, including through the efforts to combat fraud, particularly in online markets, by implementing specific provisions on product traceability.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) promotion of information campaigns for consumer rights, in particular in cases of involving the purchase of products and services and in cases of fraud and unfair commercial practices; facilitation of the process participating in a class action and access to quick and efficient out-of-court dispute resolution.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) facilitating the growth of businesses, including skills development, especially digital skills, and industrial transformation across manufacturing and service sectors, including the tourism sector;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 217 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) supporting the competitiveness of enterprises and whole sectors of the economy, and supporting SMEs' uptake of innovation, with a particular focus on collaborative economy models, including social entrepreneurship and e-commerce models, and value chain collaboration through strategically connecting ecosystems and clusters, including the joint cluster initiative;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 218 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) fostering an entrepreneurial business environment and entrepreneurial culture, including the mentoring scheErasmus programme for newyoung entrepreneurs and supporting start- ups, business sustainability and scale- ups.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) supporting programmes that aim to reduce payment delays, so as to encourage the development of European businesses, particularly SMEs.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 229 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
(i) the competent authorities of the Member States and their affiliated entities, including environmental protection authorities, the European Union Reference Laboratories and the European Union Reference Centres referred to in Articles 92, 95 and 97 of Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council98 and international organisations;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 231 #
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 237 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Programme shall be implemented by work programme(s) referred to in Article 110 of the Financial Regulation. Work programmes shall set out, where applicable, the overall amount reserved for blending operations. The work programmes shall be drawn up by the specific reference committees, bringing together experts from the Member States and acting in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 and established by the individual basic acts. They shall set out in detail a description of the actions to be financed, the objectives of those actions and the amount allocated to each action. The programmes shall also set out the method and timing of implementation of each action and the indicators that will be used to monitor the actual correspondence with the expected results.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 245 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The interim evaluation of the Programme shall be performedcarried out once there is sufficient information available about the implementation of the Programme, but no later than fourthree years after the start of the Pprogramme implementation.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 246 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a The Commission shall monitor the implementation and management of each work programme on an annual basis and shall publish on its web portal a report on the actual implementation of the supported actions, including an assessment of the costs and benefits of the individual actions.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 249 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall communicate and publish on its online portal the conclusions of the evaluations accompanied by its observations, to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 259 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Healthin each work programme by the specific reference committees established by Article 58 of Regulation (ECU) No 1782/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council99. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/201111 and established by the individual basic acts.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 262 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. The recipients of Union funding shall operate in a transparent manner, acknowledge the origin and ensure the visibility of the Union funding (in particular when promoting the actions and their results), by providing coherent, effective and proportionate targeted information to multiple audiences, including the media and the public.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 265 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point 1.3 – point 1.3.1
1.3.1. Protection measures taken in the case of a direct threat to the health status of the Union as a result of the occurrence or development, in the territory of a third country, a Member State or an OCT, of one of the animal diseases and zoonoses listed in Annex III as well as protection measures, or other relevant activities, taken in support of the plant health status of the Union, such as the adoption of multiannual plans based on best agronomic practices;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 266 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point 1.3 – point 1.3.4 a (new)
1.3.4a measures to combat epidemic and environmental emergencies resulting from the harmful impact of environmental determinants.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 267 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point 2.3 – point b a (new)
(ba) investigations for specific periods of time with the aim of monitoring and counteracting the level of environmental determinants in situations of threat to the food supply chain;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 268 #

2018/0231(COD)

(ea) additional protection measures to limit the spread of environmental determinants that have not yet been eradicated to other areas;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 270 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. Activities supporting a sustainable food production and consumption, in particular at local level.
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 271 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 1
– providing high-quality statistics and disaggregated data underpinning the Excessive Deficit Procedure, Reform Support Programme and the Union's annual cycle of economic monitoring and guidance;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 272 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 2
– providing and where necessary, enhancing the Principal European Economic Indicators (PEEIs), also including data for monitoring the Social Progress Index and of the Genuine Progress Indicator;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 273 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 8
– providing high quality, timely and reliable statistics to support the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Union Skills Policy, including statistics on the labour market, and employment, with disaggregated data for precarious contracts and good quality jobs, statistics on education and training, income, living conditions, poverty, inequality, social protection, undeclared work and satellite accounts on skills;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 274 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 15
– providing key environmental statistics and indicators including on waste, water, biodiversity, forests, land use and land cover and environmental determinants, as well as climate-related statistics and environmental economic accounts, with particular focus on climate change, the Paris Agreement, the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle and the transition to a carbon neutral economy by 2050;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 276 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 19
– providing timely, disaggregated and comprehensive statistical indicators on regions, including the Union outermost regions, cities and rural areas to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of territorial development policies, including technical assistance, and to evaluate the territorial impacts of sectoral policies;
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 277 #

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 29 a (new)
(29a) Borreliosis infection [Lyme disease]
2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 69 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(aa) In paragraph 1, the following point (da) is added: (da) types of procedures used when considering applications for international protection and relevant data on the outcome of those procedures;
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a b (new)
Regulation (EC) 862/2007
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(ab) In paragraph 1, the following point (db) is added: (db) number of procedures carried out to establish the age of unaccompanied minors and the outcome of those procedures;
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a c (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(ac) In paragraph 1, the following point (dc) is added: (dc) number of unaccompanied minors per guardian;
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 78 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a d (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(ad) In paragraph 1, the following point (dd) is added: (dd) total number of guardians in Italy;
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point e
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
These statistics shall be broken down by age, gender and citizenship for the persons concerned. These statistics shall relate to reference periods of one calendar year and shall be supplied to the Commission (Eurostat) within three months of the end of the reference year. The first reference year is 2020 .
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 112 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 5
(1a) Article 5 is replaced by the following: "Article 5 Statistics on the prevention of illegal entry and stay 1. Member States shall supply to the Commission (Eurostat) statistics on the numbers of: (a) third-country nationals refused entry to the Member State’s territory at the external border; (b) third-country nationals found to be illegally present in the Member State's territory under national laws relating to immigration.; (ba) number of unaccompanied minors who have irregularly entered the territory of the Member State and are untraceable; The statistics under point (a) shall be disaggregated in accordance with Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006. The statistics under points (b) and (c) shall be disaggregated by age and gendersex, and by citizenship of the persons concerned. 2. The statistics referred to in paragraph 1 shall relate to reference periods of one calendar year and shall be supplied to the Commission (Eurostat) within three months of the end of the reference year. The first reference year shall be 2008. " Or. xm (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:199:0023:0029:IT:PDF)
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(aa) In paragraph 1, the following point (ba) is added: (ba) the number of unaccompanied minors who have actually left the territory of the Member State following an administrative or judicial decision or act under point (a), with a breakdown of the minors concerned by age, gender and citizenship.
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2018/0154(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 862/2007
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(ab) In paragraph 1, the following point (bb) is added: (bb) the number of third-country nationals who have voluntarily chosen to leave the territory of the Member State through the assisted return procedure;
2018/10/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) The rule of law is one of the essential values upon whichRespect for certain constitutional principles common to the legal systems of the Member States is important to ensure sound management of the Union is founded. As recalled by Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, these values are common to the Member Statesinancial interests. Respect for the principle of separation of state powers, and supervision by an independent and impartial court able to ensure effective judicial protection, are particularly important.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 57 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) The rule of law requires that all public powers act within the constraints set out by law, in accordance with the values of democracy and fundamental rights, and under the control of independent and impartial courts. It requires, in particular, that the principles of legality7 , legal certainty8 , prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers 9 , separation of powers10 and effective judicial protection by independent courts11 are respected12 . _________________ 7 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 29 April 2004, CAS Succhi di Frutta, C- 496/99 PECLI:EU:C:2004:236, paragraph 63. 8 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 November 1981, Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato v Srl Meridionale Industria Salumi and others Ditta Italo Orlandi & Figlio and Ditta Vincenzo Divella v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato. Joined cases 212 to 217/80, ECLI:EU:C:1981:270, paragraph 10. 9 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 September 1989, Hoechst, Joined cases 46/87 and 227/88, ECLI:EU:C:1989:337, paragraph 19. 10 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 November 2016, Kovalkovas, C-477/16, ECLI:EU:C:2016:861, paragraph 36; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 November 2016, PPU Poltorak, C-452/16, ECLI:EU:C:2016:858, paragraph 35; and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 22 December 2010, DEB,C-279/09, ECLI:EU:C:2010:811, paragraph 58. 11 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses v Tribunal de Contas C-64/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:117, paragraphs 31, 40-41. 12 Communication from the Commission "A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law", COM(2014) 158 final, Annex I.deleted
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 63 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of the other fundamental values on which the Union is founded, such as freedom, democracy, equality and respect for human rights. Respect for the rule of law is intrinsically linked to respect for democracy and for fundamental rights: there can be no democracy and respect for fundamental rights without respect for the rule of law and vice versa.deleted
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 66 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Whenever the Member States implement the Union’s budget, and whatever method of implementation they use, respect for the rule of lawaforementioned common constitutional principles is an essential precondition to comply with the principles of sound financial management enshrinedreferred to in Article 317 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 77 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Respect for the rule of lawse common constitutional principles is not only important for citizens of the Union, but also for business initiatives, innovation, investment and the proper functioning of the internal market, which will flourish most where a solid legal and institutional framework is in place.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 82 #

2018/0136(COD)

(9) Article 19 TEU, which gives concrete expression to the value of the rule of law stated in Article 2 TEU, requires the Member States to provide effective judicial protection in the fields covered by Union law, including those relating to the implementation of the Union’s budget. The very existence of effective judicial review designed to ensure compliance with Union law is the essence of the rule of law and requires independent courts13. Maintaining the independence of the courts is essential, as confirmed by the second subparagraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union14. This is true, in particular, for the judicial review of the validity of the measures, contracts or other instruments giving rise to public expenditure or debts, inter alia in the context of public procurement procedures which may also be brought before the courts. _________________ 13 14Case C-64/16, para 32-36. Case C-64/16, para 40-41.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 84 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) There is hence a clear relationship between respect for the rule of laprinciples of separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review and an efficient implementation of the Union budget in accordance with the principles of sound financial management.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 86 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) Generalised deficiencies in the Member States as regards the rule of law which affect in particularas regards the proper functioning of public authorities and effective judicial review, can seriously harm the financial interests of the Union.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 94 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) The identification of a generalised deficiency requires a qualitative and quantitative assessment by the Commission. That assessment cshould be based on the information from all available sources and recognized institutions, including judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and reports of the Court of Auditors, and conclusions and recommendations of relevant international organisations and networks, such as the bodies of the Council of Europe and the European networks of supreme courts and councils for the judiciary.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 98 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) When identifying generalised deficiencies, the Commission should bear in mind that data concerning a higher number of reports generally equate to a more effective monitoring and control system and should not by themselves be regarded as indicators of a generalised deficiency.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 102 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The possible measures to be adopted in the event of generalised deficiencies and the procedure to be followed to adopt them should be determined, and an assessment made of the impact they will have on citizens in the Member State concerned. It is important to ensure that measures penalising actions or omissions by the state apparatus do not have an adverse effect on citizens. Those measures should include the suspension of payments and of commitments, a reduction of funding under existing commitments, and a prohibition to conclude new commitments with recipients.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 104 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) The principle of proportionality should apply when determining the measures to be adopted, in particular taking into account the seriousness of the situation, the time which has elapsed since the relevant conduct started, its duration and its recurrence, the intention, and the degree of cooperation of the Member State concerned in putting an end to the generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law, and the effects ofeffects of that deficiency on the respective Union funds and how citizens and businesses will be affected. The measures taken should in each case be restricted to those Union actions actually affected by thate deficiency on the respective Union fundsies identified.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 109 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure uniform implementation of this Regulation and in view of the importance of the financial effects of measures being imposed pursuant to this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council which should act on the basis of a Commission proposal. To facilitate the adoption of decisions which are required to protect the financial interests of the Union, reversed qualified majority voting should be us following a preliminary stage in which the Council and the Commission examine with the Member State the alleged deficiencies and the measures the Commission may require to remedy them. To facilitate the adoption of decisions which are required to protect the financial interests of the Union, a unanimous vote should be used. The European Parliament should be consulted before the measures provided for in this Regulation may be adopted.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 115 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) Before proposing the adoption of any measure pursuant to this Regulation, the Commission should inform the Member State concerned why it considers that a generalised deficiency regarding the rule of law might exist in that Member Stathe principles of separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review may have been affected. The Member State should be allowed to submit its observations contradicting the Commission’s view. The Commission and the Council should take those observations into account.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 118 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The Commission should keep the European Parliament informed of any measures proposed and adopted pursuant to this Regulation,deleted
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 119 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the rules necessary for the protection of the Union’s budget in the case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of laprinciples of separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review in the Member States.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 122 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘the rule of law’ refers to the Union value enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union which includes the principles of legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process for enacting laws; legal certainty; prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers; effective judicial protection by independent courts, including of fundamental rights; separation of powers and equality before the law;deleted
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 127 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) 'generalised deficiency as regards the ruprinciples of law'separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review’ means a widespread or recurrent practice or omission, or measure by public authorities which affects the rule of laprinciples of separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review;
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 135 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Appropriate measures shall be taken where a generalised deficiency as regards the ruprinciples of law in a Member State affects or risks affecting the principles of sound financial management orseparation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review in a Member State affects the protection of the financial interests of the Union, in particular:
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 174 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point 2
(2) a suspension of commitments;deleted
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 178 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point 3
(3) a reduction of commitments, restricted to the current year and for the amount of the deficiency detected, including through financial corrections or transfers to other spending programmes;
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 191 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The measures taken shall be proportionarestricted to the nature, gravity and scope of the generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law. They shall, insofar as possible,extent of the deficiency identified. They shall only target the Union actions affected or potentially affected by that deficiency.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 194 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Before taking such measures, the Commission shall conduct a mandatory assessment of the impact of the measures on citizens, businesses and civil society in the Member State concerned.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 202 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission mayshall take into account all relevant information, including decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and reports of the Court of Auditors, and conclusions and recommendations of relevant international organisations.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 211 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Where the Commission considers that the generalised deficiency as regards the rule of laprinciples of separation of state powers and of independence and impartiality in judicial review is established, it shall submit a proposal for an implementing act on the appropriate measures to the Council.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 216 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The Council, in agreement with the Commission, shall open a preliminary stage in which the Commission shall examine with the Member State the alleged deficiencies and the measures the Commission may require to remedy them. The preliminary stage may not last for less than three months. Should the Council decide by simple majority that the Member State concerned has in the meantime remedied the deficiencies identified, the implementing act shall lapse automatically.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 223 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The decision shall be deemed to have been adopted by the Council, unless itCouncil shall decides, by qualified majority, to rejectunanimous vote on the Commission proposal within one month of its adoption by the Commissionthe end of the preliminary stage.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 226 #

2018/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The European Parliament shall adopt the proposal under the consent procedure.
2018/11/09
Committee: BUDGCONT
Amendment 40 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) Persons who work for an organisation or are in contact with it in the context of their work-related activities are often the first to know about threats or harm to the public interest which arise in this context. By ‘blowing the whistle’ they play a key role in exposing and preventing breaches of the law and in safeguarding the welfare of society. However, potential whistle blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns or suspicions for fear of retaliation. in case they expose irregularities, mismanagement, misuse of funds, maladministration or potential corruption related to the activity of public and private bodies within the Union; they are not truly protected and do not feel protected; this is why many of them use other means to reveal the wrongdoing or even refrain from acting;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) At Union level, reports by whistleblowers and investigative journalists are one upstream component of enforcement of Union law: they feed national and Union enforcement systems with information leading to effective detection, investigation and prosecution of breaches of Union law.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) In certain policy areas, bBreaches of Union law may cause serious harm to the public interest, in the sense of creating significant risks for the welfare of society. Where weaknesses of enforcement have been identified in those areas, and whistleblowers are in a privileged position to disclose breaches, it is necessary to enhance enforcement by ensuring effective protection of whistleblowers from retaliation and introducing effective reporting channels.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) Whistleblower protection currently provided in the European Union is fragmented across Member States and uneven across policy areas; moreover, there is a lack of follow-up and proper settlement regarding whistle-blowing cases across Member States as well as within the European institutions. The consequences of breaches of Union law with cross-border dimension uncovered by whistleblowers illustrate how insufficient protection in one Member State or within the European bodies not only negatively impacts on the functioning of EU policies in that Member State but can also spill over into other Member States and the Union as a whole.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 56 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) Accordingly, common minimum standards ensuring effective whistleblower protection with a global and comprehensive approach, should apply in those acts and with particular emphasis on policy areas where i) there is a need to strengthen enforcement; ii) under-reporting by whistleblowers is a key factor affecting enforcement, and iii) breaches of Union law cause serious harm to the public interest.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 61 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The protection of the financial interests of the Union, which relates to the fight against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity affecting the use of Union expenditures, the collection of Union revenues and funds or Union assets, is a core area in which enforcement of Union law needs to be strengthened. The strengthening of the protection of the financial interests of the Union also encompasses implementation of the Union budget related to expenditures made on the basis of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community. Lack of effective enforcement in the area of the financial interests of the Union, including fraud and corruption at national level, causes a decrease of the Union revenues and a misuse of EU funds, which can distort public investments and growth and undermine citizens’ trust in EU action. Whistleblower protection isInvestigative journalists also play a crucial role in revealing wrongdoing connected to all these areas; they represent a very exposed group of professionals, often paying with their jobs, freedom and even with their lives disclosure of massive irregularities and corruption schemes; therefore, special measures to protect investigative journalists should be included in a horizontal legislative proposal for the protection of whistle-blowers. Investigative journalism and whistleblower protection are necessary to facilitate the detection, prevention and deterrence of relevant fraud and illegal activities.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 62 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The protection of the financial interests of the Union, which relates to the fight against fraud, corruption, the violation of legal obligations, the abuse of power and any other illegal activity affecting the use of Union expenditures, the collection of Union revenues and funds or Union assets, is a core area in which enforcement of Union law needs to be strengthened. The strengthening of the protection of the financial interests of the Union also encompasses implementation of the Union budget related to expenditures made on the basis of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community. Lack of effective enforcement in the area of the financial interests of the Union, including fraud and corruption at national level, causes a decrease of the Union revenues and a misuse of EU funds, which can distort public investments and growth and undermine citizens’ trust in EU action. Whistleblower protection is necessary to facilitate the detection, prevention and deterrence of relevant fraud and illegal activities.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 16, 33, 43, 50, 53(1), 62, 91, 100, 103, 109, 114, 168, 169, 192, 207, 325(4) and 3525(4) thereof and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 31 thereof,
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 81 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) Protection should also extend to further categories of natural or legal persons, who, whilst not being 'workers' within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, can play a key role in exposing breaches of the law and may find themselves in a position of economic or other type of vulnerability in the context of their work- related activities. For instance, in areas such as product safety, suppliers are much closer to the source of possible unfair and illicit manufacturing, import or distribution practices of unsafe products; in the implementation of Union funds, consultants providing their services are in a privileged position to draw attention to breaches they witness. Such categories of persons, including self- employed persons providing services, freelance, contractors, sub-contractors and suppliers, are typically subject to retaliation in the form of early termination or cancellation of contract of services, licence or permit, loss of business, loss of income, coercion, intimidation or harassment, blacklisting/business boycotting or damage to their reputation. Shareholders and persons in managerial bodies, may also suffer retaliation, for instance in financial terms or in the form of intimidation or harassment, blacklisting or damage to their reputation. Protection should also be granted to investigative journalists who acquired and published information on corruption schemes, money laundering, fraud, misuse of public money, abuse of office and other irregularities; the same protection should apply to candidates for employment or for providing services to an organisation who acquired the information on breaches of law during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation stage, and may suffer retaliation for instance in the form of negative employment references or blacklisting/business boycotting.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) In certain policy areas, bBreaches of Union law may cause serious harm to the public interest, in the sense of creating significant risks for the welfare of society. Where weaknesses of enforcement have been identified in those areas, and whistleblowers are in a privileged position to disclose breaches, it is necessary to enhance enforcement by ensuring effective protection of whistleblowers from retaliation and introducing effective reporting channels.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 91 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) Accordingly, common minimum standards ensuring effective whistleblower protection should apply in those acts and, adopting a global and organic approach, should apply in particular to those policy areas where i) there is a need to strengthen enforcement; ii) under- reporting by whistleblowers is a key factor affecting enforcement, and iii) breaches of Union law cause serious harm to the public interest.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 92 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) Effective prevention of breaches of Union law requires that protection is also granted to persons who provide information about potential breaches, which have not yet materialised, but are likely to be committed. For the same reasons, protection is warranted also for persons who do not provide positive evidence but raise reasonable concerns or suspicions. At the same time, protection should not apply to the reporting of information which is already in the public domain or of unsubstantiated rumours and hearsay.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) Retaliation expresses the close (cause and effect) relationship that must exist between the report and the adverse treatment suffered, directly or indirectly, by the reporting person, so that this person can enjoy legal protection. Effective protection of reporting persons as a means of enhancing the enforcement of Union law requires a broad definition of retaliation, encompassing any act or omission occurring in the work-related context which causes them detriment.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 98 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) Whistleblowers are, in particular, important sources for investigative journalists. Providing effective protection to whistleblowers from retaliationas well as to investigative journalists from retaliation and any form of harassment increases the legal certainty of (potential) whistleblowers and thereby encourages and facilitates whistleblowing also to the media. In this respect, protection of whistleblowers as journalistic sources is crucial for safeguarding the ‘watchdog’ role of investigative journalism in democratic societies.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) It is for the Member States to identify the authorities competent to receive and give appropriate follow up to the reports on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive. These may be regulatory or supervisory bodies in the areas concerned, law enforcement agencies, anti-corruption bodies and ombudsmen. The authorities designated as competent shall have the necessary capacities and powers to assess the accuracy of the allegations made in the report and to address the breaches reported, including by launching an investigation, prosecution or action for recovery of funds, or other appropriate remedial action, in accordance with their mandate. At the same time, an independent advisory and referral Unit within the European Ombudsman should be established with a view to coordinate with Member States and advise on specific measures for the protection of whistle-blowers and investigative journalists.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) It is for the Member States to identify the authorities competent to receive and give appropriate follow up to the reports on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive which also guarantee the highest possible level of independence and impartiality. These may be regulatory or supervisory bodies in the areas concerned, law enforcement agencies, anti-corruption bodies and ombudsmen. The authorities designated as competent shall have the necessary capacities and powers to assess the accuracy of the allegations made in the report and to address the breaches reported, including by launching an investigation, prosecution or action for recovery of funds, or other appropriate remedial action, in accordance with their mandate.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
(40) It should be clear that, in the case of private legal entities which do not provide for internal reporting channels, reporting persons should be ableguaranteed the right to report directly externally to the competent authorities and such persons should enjoy the protection against retaliation provided by this Directive..
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
(42) Provided the confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person is ensured, it is up to each individual private and public legal entity to define the kind of reporting channels to set up, such as in person, by post, by physical complaint box(es), by telephone hotline or through an online platform (intranet or internet). However, reporting channels should not be limited to those amongst the tools, such as in-person reporting and complaint box(es), which do not guarantee confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person; anonymous reporting should be taken into consideration and protection of initially anonymous whistle-blowers should be put in place, in cases where such protection is required.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2018/0106(COD)

(16) The protection of the financial interests of the Union, which relates to the fight against fraud, corruption, breaches of legal requirements, abuse of power and any other illegal activity affecting the use of Union expenditures, the collection of Union revenues and funds or Union assets, is a core area in which enforcement of Union law needs to be strengthened. The strengthening of the protection of the financial interests of the Union also encompasses implementation of the Union budget related to expenditures made on the basis of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community. Lack of effective enforcement in the area of the financial interests of the Union, including fraud and corruption at national level, causes a decrease of the Union revenues and a misuse of EU funds, which can distort public investments and growth and undermine citizens’ trust in EU action. Whistleblower protection is necessary to facilitate the detection, prevention and deterrence of relevant fraud and illegal activities.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 115 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 45
(45) The most appropriate persons or departments within a private legal entity to be designated as competent to receive and follow up on reports depend on the structure of the entity, but, in any case, their function should ensure absence of conflict of interest and independence. For these subjects, a civil liability regime should be provided in case of will full misconduct or gross negligence. In smaller entities, this function could be a dual function held by a company officer well placed to report directly to the organisational head, such as a chief compliance or human resources officer, a legal or privacy officer, a chief financial officer, a chief audit executive or a member of the board.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
(57) Member States should ensure the adequate record-keeping of all reports of infringement and that every report is retrievable within the competent authority and that information received through reports could be used as evidence in enforcement actions where appropriate, respecting, where possible, the privacy of the reporter.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) Effective prevention of breaches of Union law requires that protection is also granted to persons who provide information about potential breaches, which have not yet materialised, but are likely to be committed. For the same reasons, protection is warranted also for persons who do not provide positive evidence but raise reasonable concerns or suspicions. At the same time, protection should not apply to the reporting of information which is already in the public domain or of unsubstantiated rumours and hearsay.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 145 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) Retaliation expresses the close (cause and effect) relationship that must exist between the report and the adverse treatment suffered, directly or indirectly, by the reporting person, so that this person can enjoy legal protection. Effective protection of reporting persons as a means of enhancing the enforcement of Union law requires a broad definition of retaliation, encompassing any act or omission occurring in the work-related context which causes them detriment.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 150 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 80
(80) This Directive introduces minimum standards and Member States should have the power to introduce or maintain more favourable provisions to the reporting person, provided that such provisions do not interfere with the measures for the protection of concerned persons. Moreover, the Member States can set up a reward system that can offer a fair compensation in the event that the report involves the prevention of considerable pecuniary damage or a recovery of significant sums by the European Union
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) It is for the Member States to identify the authorities competent to receive and give appropriate follow up to the reports on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive and that guarantee a maximum degree of independence and impartiality. These may be regulatory or supervisory bodies in the areas concerned, law enforcement agencies, anti-corruption bodies and ombudsmen. The authorities designated as competent shall have the necessary capacities and powers to assess the accuracy of the allegations made in the report and to address the breaches reported, including by launching an investigation, prosecution or action for recovery of funds, or other appropriate remedial action, in accordance with their mandate.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 154 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 82
(82) The material scope of this Directive is based on the identification of areas where the introduction of whistleblower protection appears justified and necessary on the basis of currently available evidence. Such material scope may and it shall be extended to furtherall areas or Union acts, if this proves necessary as a means of strengthening their enforcement in the light of evidence that may come to the fore in the future or on the basis of the evaluation of the way in which this Directive has operatedon the basis of the art. 352 of TFUE..
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 157 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 84
(84) The objective of this Directive, namely to strengthen enforcement in certain policy areas and acts where breaches of Union law can cause serious harm to the public interest through effective whistleblower protection, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting alone or in an uncoordinated manner, but can rather be better achieved by Union action providing minimum standards of harmonisation on whistleblower protection. Moreover, only Union action can provide coherence and align the existing Union rules on whistleblower protection. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this objective.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
(40) It should be clear that, in the case of private legal entities which do not provide for internal reporting channels, reporting persons should be ablemust be guaranteed the right to report directly externally to the competent authorities and such persons should enjoy the protection against retaliation provided by this Directive.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 165 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to enhancing the enforcement of Union law and policies in specific areas, this Directive lays down common minimum standards for the protection of persons reporting on the following unlawful activities or abuse of law:
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 167 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 45
(45) The most appropriate persons or departments within a private legal entity to be designated as competent to receive and follow up on reports depend on the structure of the entity, but, in any case, their function should ensure absence of conflict of interest and independence. A set of rules regarding civil liability in the event of wilful misconduct or gross negligence on the part of such entities should be provided for. In smaller entities, this function could be a dual function held by a company officer well placed to report directly to the organisational head, such as a chief compliance or human resources officer, a legal or privacy officer, a chief financial officer, a chief audit executive or a member of the board.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 177 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
(57) Member States should ensure the adequate record-keeping of all reports of infringement and that every report is retrievable within the competent authority and that information received through reports could be used as evidence in enforcement actions where appropriate, protecting the identity of the informant wherever possible.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 179 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) all the remaining sectors in which the public interest is harmed or there is a breach of EU law.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 188 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) persons having the status of worker, or former worker, with the meaning of Article 45 TFEU;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 191 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) This Directive shall also apply to European Union staff members, as defined within the EU Staff Regulation
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 194 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) investigative journalists.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation, or even to reporting persons whose employment relationship is terminated.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 200 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. This Directive shall also apply to legal and natural person associated with a reporting person if such person makes probable that suffered a detriment due to connection to a reporting person.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. This Directive shall also apply to legal and natural person who makes probable that suffered a detriment due to the fact that was believed to be a reporting person or an associated person.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 210 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 78
(78) Penalties are necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the rules on whistleblower protection. Penalties against those who take retaliatory or other adverse actions against reporting persons can discourage further such actions. Penalties against persons who make a report or disclosure demonstrated to be knowingly false are necessary to deter further malicious reporting and preserve the credibility of the system. The proportionality of such penalties should ensure that they do not have a dissuasive effect on potential whistleblowers.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 212 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 80
(80) This Directive introduces minimum standards and Member States should have the power to introduce or maintain more favourable provisions to the reporting person, provided that such provisions do not interfere with the measures for the protection of concerned persons. Member States may also offer commensurate rewards for information leading to the prevention of major financial losses or to the recovery of substantial amounts by the European Union.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 216 #

2018/0106(COD)

(82) The material scope of this Directive is based on the identification of areas where the introduction of whistleblower protection appears justified and necessary on the basis of currently available evidence. Such material scope may be and is extended to all further areas or Union acts, if this proves necessary as a means of strengthening their enforcement in the light of evidence that may come to the fore in the future or on the basis of the evaluation of the way in which this Directive has operated under Article 352 TFEU.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 217 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 84
(84) The objective of this Directive, namely to strengthen enforcement in certain policy areas and acts where breaches of Union law can cause serious harm to the public interestof Union law through effective whistleblower protection, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting alone or in an uncoordinated manner, but can rather be better achieved by Union action providing minimum standards of harmonisation on whistleblower protection. Moreover, only Union action can provide coherence and align the existing Union rules on whistleblower protection. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this objective.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 224 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to enhancing the enforcement of Union law and policies in specific areas, this Directive lays down common minimum standards for the protection of persons reporting on the following unlawful activities or abuse of law:
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 225 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘retaliation’ means any threatened or actual act or omission prompted by the internal or external reporting which occurs in a work-related context, or even after the termination of the employment relationship and causes or may cause unjustified detriment to the reporting person;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 234 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that legal entities in the private and in the public sector establish internal channels and procedures for reporting and following up on reports, and protecting reporting persons, following consultations with social partners, if appropriate.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – point a a (new)
a a) European Union Institutions, Agencies and bodies;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 244 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) all other sectors in which the public interest has been undermined or Union law infringed
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 250 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
e a) the prompt acknowledgement of receipt of written reports to the postal or electronic address indicated by the reporting person;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman shall publish, every year: a) Special Reports containing statistics and a clear track record of whistle- blowing cases identified in the European institutions; b) the follow-up of the institutions concerned in relation to the cases revealed, according to the provisions set therein; c) the outcome of each investigation open as a result of the information received form whistle-blowers; d) the measures foreseen in every case for the whistle-blowers´ protection.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 269 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation, as well as to reporting persons whose work-based relationship has terminated.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 274 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities shall ensure that a report received by means other than dedicated reporting channels referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 is promptly forwarded without modification to the dedicated staff members of the competent authority by using dedicated communication channels. Anonymous reporting shall be taken into account.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 281 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) the confidentiality regime applicable to reports, including a detailed description of the circumstances under which the confidential data of a reporting person may be disclosed; the same confidentiality regime and protection measures shall be applicable to whistle blowers who initially reported anonymously, if they ask for such measures.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 308 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘retaliation’ means any threatened or actual act or omission prompted by the internal or external reporting which occurs in a work-related context or after the cessation of the working relationship and causes or may cause unjustified detriment to the reporting person;
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 309 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A reporting person shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 317 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
d) he or she could not reasonably be expected to use internal reporting channels in light of the subject-matter of the report and the seriousness of the violation;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 324 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. A person publicly disclosing information on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive, including investigative journalists, shall qualify for protection under this Directive where:
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 330 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
a a) A person making a report or a disclosure anonymously and who subsequently has been identified shall qualify for protection as laid down in this Directive under the same conditions as a person who identified themselves when making a report or a disclosure
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 339 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – title
14 Prohibition of retaliation against reporting persons and investigative journalists
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 342 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point g
g) coercion, intimidation, harassment or ostracism at the workplace, in public or private life;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 348 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
k a) abusive suing and disproportionate financial claims;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 350 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a Duty of maintaining the confidentiality of the identity of reporting persons 1. The identity of a reporting person may not be disclosed without the individual’s explicit consent. This includes information that may be used to discover the identity of the reporting person. 2. Any person who learns about the data referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be required to protect such data. 3. Circumstances under which the confidential data of a reporting person may be disclosed are limited to cases where the disclosure of data is a necessary and proportionate obligation required under Union or national law in the context of investigations or subsequent judicial proceedings or to safeguard the freedoms of others including the right of defence of the concerned person, and in each case subject to appropriate safeguards under such laws. 4. In the cases referred to in paragraph 3, the person designated to receive and follow-upon reports shall be required to notify the reporting person before disclosing his or her confidential data. 5. The internal and external reporting channels are designed, set up and operated in a manner that ensures the confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person, and prevents access to non-authorised staff members.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 355 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Reporting persons shall have access to effective assistance from competent authorities before any relevant authority involved in their protection against retaliation, including, where provided for under national law, certification of the fact that they qualify for protection under this Directive.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 357 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. In judicial proceedings relating to a detriment suffered by the reporting person, and subject to him or her providing reasonable grounds to believeestablishing that the detriment was in retaliation for havingor she made thea report or disclosure, it shall be for the person who has taken the retaliatory measure to prove that the detriment was not a consequence of the report but was exclusively based on duly justified grounds and suffered a detriment it shall be presumed that the detriment was made in retaliation for having made the report or disclosure.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 359 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 6
6. Reporting persons shall have access to remedial measures against retaliation as appropriate, including interim relief pending the resolution of legal proceedings, in accordance with the national frameworkcovering all direct, indirect, and future consequences of any detriment, including, as appropriate, a) making any provision to act taken in breach of Article 14 void; b) the reinstatement of the reporting person with equal salary, status, duties and working conditions; c) the transfer of the reporting person to a new department or supervisor; d) compensation for pain and suffering; e) interim relief pending the resolution of legal proceedings.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 360 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 6
6. Reporting persons shall have access to remedial measures against retaliation as appropriate, including interim relief pending the resolution of legal proceedings, in accordance with the national framework.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 363 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 8
8. In addition to providing legal aid to reporting persons in criminal and in cross- border civil proceedings in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/1919 and Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council63 , and in accordance with national law, Member States mayshall provide for further measures of legal and financial assistance and support for reporting persons in the framework of legal proceedings. _________________ 63 Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 136, 24.5.2008, p. 3).
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 371 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) take retaliatory measures against reporting persons or investigative journalists revealing wrondoing;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 372 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) bring vexatious proceedings against reporting persons or investigative journalists revealing wrongdoing;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 376 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) do not fulfil their obligation to follow- up on a report;
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 378 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
d b) do not fulfil their obligation to provide feedback to the reporting person about the follow up to the report.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 388 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – part II – subpart C a (new)
Ca D. – protection of the Union’s financial interests; (i) Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union.
2018/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 426 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A reporting person shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 441 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) he or she could not reasonably be expected to use internal reporting channels in light of the subject-matter of the report and the gravity of the breach;
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 500 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to persons making malicious or abusive reports or disclosures, including measures for compensating persons who have suffered damage from malicious or abusive reports or disclosures.deleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 508 #

2018/0106(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Member States may introduce or retain provisions more favourable to the rights of the reporting persons than those set out in this Directive, without prejudice to Article 16 and Article 17(2). In particular, it is possible to establish a reward system that may offer a fair reward in the event that the reporting results in the prevention of considerable damage to its assets or the recovery of large sums by the EU.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down rules facilitating the use of financial and other information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of csertainious criminal offences and repealing Council Decision 2000/642/JHA
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) Asset Recovery Offices should be designated among the competent authorities and have direct accessbe able to have access, in accordance with national laws, to the information held in centralised bank account registries when preventing, detecting or investigating a specific serious criminal offence or supporting a specific criminal investigation, including the identification, tracing and freezing of assets.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 56 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) The information acquired by competent authorities from the national centralised bank account registries can be exchanged with competent authorities located in a different Member State, in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA14 and Directive 2014/41/EU15 of the European Parliament and the Council15, in compliance with the data protection provisions laid down in Directive 2016/680/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council15 a. _________________ 14 Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA of 18 December 2006 on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities of the Member States of the European Union, OJ L 386 of 29.12.2006, p. 89. 15 Directive 2014/41/EU of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters, OJ L 130 of 1.5.2014, p. 1. 15 a Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) Directive (EU) 2015/849 has substantially enhanced the Union legal framework that governs the activity and cooperation of Financial Intelligence Units. The powers of Financial Intelligence Units include the right to access the financial, administrative and law enforcement information that they require to combat money laundering, the associated predicate offences and terrorist financing. Nevertheless, Union law does not lay down all specific tools and mechanisms that Financial Intelligence Units must have at their disposal in order to access such information and accomplish their tasks. Sincethe exchange of information between law enforcement or prosecution services and Financial Intelligence Units remains insufficient. However, Member States remain entirely responsible for the setting up and deciding the organisational nature of Financial Intelligence Units, and different Financial Intelligence Units have varying degrees of access to the regulatory databases which leads to an insufficient exchange of information between law enforcement or prosecution services and Financial Intelligence Unitestablished under national laws.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 65 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) This Directive should also set out a clearly defined legal framework to enable Financial Intelligence Units to request access to relevant data stored by designated competent authorities in order to enable them to prevent and combat money laundering, the associated predicate offences and terrorist financing effectively.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 66 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) Sharing information between Financial Intelligence Units and with competent authorities should only be permitted where it is necessary on a case- by-case basis, either for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of serious criminal offences as defined by this Directive, or for money laundering, the associated predicate offences and terrorist financing.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) In order to prevent and combat money laundering, the associated predicate offences and terrorist financing more effectively and to reinforce its role in providing financial information and analysis, a Financial Intelligence Unit should be empowered to exchange information or analysis already in its possession or which can be obtained from obliged entities at the request of another Financial Intelligence Unit or of a competent authority in its Member State. This exchange should not hamper a Financial Intelligence Unit's active role in disseminating its analysisown information to other Financial Intelligence Units where that analysisinformation reveals facts, conduct or suspicion of money laundering and terrorist financing of direct interest to those other Financial Intelligence Units. Financial analysis covers operational analysis which focuses on individual cases and specific targets or on appropriate selected information, depending on the type and volume of the disclosures received and the expected use of the information after dissemination as well as strategic analysis addressing money laundering and terrorist financing trends and patterns. However, this Directive should be without prejudice to the organisational status and role conferred to Financial Intelligence Units under the national law of Member States.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Time limits for exchanges of information between Financial Intelligence Units are necessary to ensure quick, effective and consistent cooperation. Sharing information necessary to solve cross-border cases and investigations should be carried out with the same celerity and priority as for a similar domestic case. Time limits should be provided to ensure effective sharing of information within reasonable time or to meet procedural constraints. Shorter time limits should be provided in duly justified cases, where the requests relate to specific serious criminal offences, such as terrorist offences and offences related to a terrorist group or activities as laid down in Union lawMember States should encourage their competent authorities to rapidly, constructively and effectively provide the widest possible range of cross-border cooperation for the purposes of this Directive, in compliance with existing legislation and respecting the independence of the Financial Intelligence Units.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) Under its specific competences and tasks as laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council16, Europol provides support to Member States’ cross- border investigations into the money laundering activities of transnational criminal organisations. According to Regulation (EU) 2016/794, the Europol National Units are the liaison bodies between Europol and the Member States' authorities competent to investigate criminal offences. To provide Europol with the information necessary to carry out its tasks, Member States should provide that their Financial Intelligence Unit replies to requests for financial information and financial analysis made by Europol through the respective Europol National Unit. Member States should also provide that their Europol National Unit replies to requests for information on bank accounts by Europol. Requests made by Europol have to be duly justified. They have to be made on a case-by case basis, within the limits of Europol's responsibilities and for the performance of its tasks. and in compliance with national laws. _________________ 16 Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA, OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive lays down measures to facilitate access by competent authorities to financial information and bank account information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of serious criminal offences. It also provides for measures to facilitate access by Financial Intelligence Units to law enforcement information and to facilitate the cooperation between Financial Intelligence Units, in compliance with the national law.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the competences of the national authorities responsible for the application of the laws concerning the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing;
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) 'financial information' means any type of information or data which is held by Financial Intelligence Units to prevent, detect and effectively combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or any type of information or data which is held by public authorities or by obliged entities for those purposes and which is available to Financial Intelligence Units without the taking of coercive measures under national lawon financial activities, movement of funds or financial reports held by Financial Intelligence Units under Chapter IV of Directive (EU) 2015/849;
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 119 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) 'financial analysis' means the operational and strategic analysis carried out by the Financial Intelligence Units for the performance of their tasks pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/849;deleted
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 122 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate among its authorities competent for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences the competent authorities empowered to access and search the national centralised bank account registries set up by the Member States in accordance with Article 32a of Directive (EU) 2015/849. They shall include the Europol National Units and the Asset Recovery Offices.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 125 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall designate among its authorities competent for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences the competent authorities empowered to request and receive financial information or financial analysis from the Financial Intelligence Unit. They shall include the Europol National Units.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Subject to national procedural safeguards, each Member State shall ensure that its national Financial Intelligence Unit is required to reply to requests for financial information or financial analysis by its designated competent authorities referred to in Article 3(2), where that financial information or financial analysismay be obtained by the competent authorities that request it in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations, is necessary, on a case- by-case basis, for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of serious criminal offences and is not directly available. The exceptions and conditions laid down in Articles 32(5), 53 and 54 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 shall apply.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall ensure that its Financial Intelligence Unit is enabled to exchange financial information or financial analysis with any Financial Intelligence Unit in the Union where that financial information or financial analysis is necessary for the prevention and combating of money laundering, associate predicate offences and terrorist financing.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 167 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that where a Financial Intelligence Unit is requested pursuant to paragraph 1 to exchange financial information or financial analysis, it shall do so as soon as possible and in any case no later than three days after the receipt of the request. In exceptional, duly justified cases, this time limit may be extended by a maximum of 10 days.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 170 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that, in exceptional and urgent cases, and by way of derogation from paragraph 2, where a Financial Intelligence Unit is requested pursuant to paragraph 1 to exchange financial information or financial analysis already in its possession that relates to specific investigations concerning an act or conduct qualified as a serious criminal offence, a Financial Intelligence Unit shall provide that information or analysis no later than 248 hours after the receipt of the request.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 174 #

2018/0105(COD)

4. Member States shall ensure that a request issued pursuant to this Article and its response shall be transmitted by using the dedicated secure electronic communications network FIU.net or its successor. That network shall ensure the secure communication and shall be capable of producing a written record under conditions that allow ascertaining authenticity. In the event of technical failure of the FIU.net, the financial information or financial analysis shall be transmitted by any other appropriate means ensuring a high level of data security.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall ensure that its Europol National Unit is entitled to repliesy to duly justified requests related to bank account information or to financial information provided by the Financial Intelligence Unit made by the Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation established by Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Europol') on a case-by-case basis within the limits of its responsibilities and for the performance of its tasks.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 184 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall ensure that its Financial Intelligence Unit replies to duly justified requests related to financial information and financial analysis made by Europol through the Europol National Unit within the limits of its responsibilities and for the performance of its tasks.deleted
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 190 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Europol is entitled to reply to requests for information by Financial Intelligence Units on a case-by-case basis and where the information is necessary for the prevention and combating of money laundering, associated predicate offences and terrorist financing;
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 198 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The processing of personal data related to bank account information, financial information and financial analysis referred to in Article 10(1) and (2) shall be performed only by the persons within Europol who have been specifically designated and authorised to perform those tasks.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2018/0105(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
This Chapter shall only apply to designated competent authorities and Financial Intelligence Units in the exchange of information pursuant to Chapter III and in respect of exchanges of financial information and financial analysis involving the Europol National Units pursuant to Chapter IV.
2018/10/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 40 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Directive is to enable qualified entities, which represent the collective interest of consumers, to seek remedy through representative actions against infringements of provisions of Union law. The qualified entities should be able to ask for stopping or prohibiting an infringement, for confirming that an infringement took place and to seek redress, such as compensation, repair or price reducimbursement of the price paid, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction or contract termination as available under national laws.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 45 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Directive is to enable qualified entities, which represent the collective interest of consumers, to seek remedy through representative actions against infringements of provisions of Union law. The qualified entities should be able to ask for stopping or prohibiting an infringement, for confirming that an infringement took place and to seek redress, such as compensation, repair or price reducimbursement of the price paid, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction or contract termination as available under national laws.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 70 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) The qualified entity initiating the representative action under this Directive should be a party to the proceedings. Consumers concerned by the infringement should have adequate opportunities to influence the selection of the lawyers who will represent them in court, to assess their independence and to benefit from the relevant outcomes of the representative action. Injunction orders issued under this Directive should be without prejudice to individual actions brought by consumers harmed by the practice subject to the injunction order.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) Qualified entities should be able to seek measures aimed at eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. These measures should take the form of a redress order obligating the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate and as available under national laws.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) Member States should be allowed to decide whether their court or national authority seized of a representative action for redress may exceptionally issue, instead of a redress order, a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement which could be directly relied upon in subsequent redress actions by individual consumers. This possibility should be reserved to duly justified cases where the quantification of the individual redress to be attributed to each of the consumer concerned by the representative action is complex and it would be inefficient to carry it out within the representative action. Declaratory decisions should not be issued in situations which are not complex and in particular where consumers concerned are identifiable and where the consumers have suffered a comparable harm in relation to a period of time or a purchase. Similarly, declaratory decisions should not be issued where the amount of loss suffered by each of the individual consumers is so small that individual consumers are unlikely to claim for individual redress. The court or the national authority should duly motivate its recourse to a declaratory decision instead of a redress order in a particular case.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 90 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) In low-value cases most consumers are unlikely to take action in order to enforce their rights because the efforts would outweigh the individual benefits. However, if the same practice concerns a number of consumers, the aggregated loss may be significant. In such cases, a court or authority may consider that it is disproportionate to distribute the funds back to the consumers concerned, for example bet is therefore desirable that consumers should in every cause it is too onerous or impracticable. Therefore the funds received as redress through representative actions would better serve the purposes of the protection of collective interests ofobtain the compensation due and that the charges for the redistribution of funds to the consumers anconcerned should be directed to a relevant public purpose, such as a consumer legal aid fund, awareness campaigns or consumer movborne by the traders who committed the infringements.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 94 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) Measures aimed at eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement may be sought only on the basis of a final decision, establishing an infringement of Union law covered by the scope of this Directive harming collective interest of consumers, including a final injunction order issued within the representative action. In particular, measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement may be sought on the basis of final decisions of a court or administrative authority in the context of enforcement activities regulated by Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004.32 . _________________ 32. Although the decision on representative actions can be taken after having established that a practice constitutes a violation of Union law, nonetheless in order not to prolong procedures and not to increase the risk that consumers may lose evidence which supports their case and may cease to have an interest in the case, actions can also be initiated before a final decision is handed down by a court or administrative authority. _________________ 32 OJ L 345, 27.12.2017. OJ L 345, 27.12.2017.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 97 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) This Directive does not replace existing national collective redress mechanisms. Taking into account their legal traditions, it leaves it to the discretion of the Member States whether to design the representative action set out by this Directive as a part of an existing or future collective redress mechanism or as an alternative to these mechanisms, insofar as the national mechanism complies with the modalities setinimum standards established by this Directive.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 102 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) The qualified entity initiating the representative action under this Directive should be a party to the proceedings. Consumers concerned by the infringement should have adequate opportunities to influence the selection of the lawyers who will represent them in court, to assess their independence and to benefit from the relevant outcomes of the representative action. Injunction orders issued under this Directive should be without prejudice to individual actions brought by consumers harmed by the practice subject to the injunction order.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 107 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) Qualified entities should be able to seek measures aimed at eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. These measures should take the form of a redress order obligating the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate and as available under national laws.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 118 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) Member States should be allowed to decide whether their court or national authority seized of a representative action for redress may exceptionally issue, instead of a redress order, a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement which could be directly relied upon in subsequent redress actions by individual consumers. This possibility should be reserved to duly justified cases where the quantification of the individual redress to be attributed to each of the consumer concerned by the representative action is complex and it would be inefficient to carry it out within the representative action. Declaratory decisions should not be issued in situations which are not complex and in particular where consumers concerned are identifiable and where the consumers have suffered a comparable harm in relation to a period of time or a purchase. Similarly, declaratory decisions should not be issued where the amount of loss suffered by each of the individual consumers is so small that individual consumers are unlikely to claim for individual redress. The court or the national authority should duly motivate its recourse to a declaratory decision instead of a redress order in a particular case.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 129 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) In low-value cases most consumers are unlikely to take action in order to enforce their rights because the efforts would outweigh the individual benefits. However, if the same practice concerns a number of consumers, the aggregated loss may be significant. In such cases, a court or authority may consider that it is disproportionate to distribute the funds back to the consumers concerned, for example because it is too onerous or impracticable. ThereConsumers should therefore in every case obtain the compensation due and the charges fore the funds received as redress through representative actions would better serve the purposes of the protection of collective interests of consumers and should be directed to a relevant public purpose, such as a consumer legal aid fund, awareness campaigns or consumer movredistribution of funds to the consumers concerned should be borne by the traders who committed the infringements.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 134 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions designed to grant qualified entities or any other persons concerned other procedural means to bring actions aimed at thegreater protection of the collective interests of consumers at national level than those provided for in this Directive.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 135 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) Measures aimed at eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement may be sought only on the basis of a final decision, establishing an infringement of Union law covered by the scope of this Directive harming collective interest of consumers, including a final injunction order issued within the representative action. In particular, measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement may be sought on the basis of final decisions of a court or administrative authority in the context of enforcement activities regulated by Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/200432. _________________ 32Although the decision on representative actions can be taken after having established that a practice constitutes a violation of Union law, nonetheless in order not to prolong procedures and not to increase the risk that consumers may lose evidence which supports their case and may cease to have an interest in the case, actions can also be initiated before a final decision is handed down by a court or administrative authority. _________________ 32 OJ L 345, 27.12.2017. OJ L 345, 27.12.2017.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 143 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) This Directive does not replace existing national collective redress mechanisms. Taking into account their legal traditions, it leaves it to the discretion of the Member States whether to design the representative action set out by this Directive as a part of an existing or future collective redress mechanism or as an alternative to these mechanisms, insofar as the national mechanism complies with the modalities setinimum standards established by this Directive.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 164 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it publishes in detail the provenance of the funds it receives and the representative actions that it pursues.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 200 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. TIn order to avoid prolonging the procedures, these measures shallmay also be sought on the basis of any final decisionseparately from measures whose purpose is to establishing that a practice constitutes an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I harming collective interests of consumers, including a final injunction order referred to in paragraph (2)(b).
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 210 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions designed to grant qualified entities or any other persons concerned other procedural means to bring actions aimed at thegreater protection of the collective interests of consumers at national level than those provided for in this Directive.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 215 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of Article 5(3), Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking a redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate. A Member State may require the mandate of the individual consumers concerned before a declaratory decision is made or a redress order is issued.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 226 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. By derogation to paragraph 1, Member States may empower a court or administrative authority to issue, instead of a redress order,in which, on the date of entry into force of this Directive, a court or administrative authority is empowered to issue a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I, may continue to apply the existing procedural arrangements only in duly justified cases where, due to the characteristics of the individual harm to the consumers concerned the quantification of individual redress is complex. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 232 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) consumers have suffered a small amount of loss and it would be disproportionate to distribute the redress to them. In such cases, Member States shall ensure that the mandate of the individual consumers concerned is not required. The redress shall be directed to a public purpose serving the collective interests of consumers.deleted
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 248 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The qualified entity seeking a redress order as referred in Article 6(1) shall declare in detail at an early stage of the action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action. It shall demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to represent the best interests of the consumers concerned and to meet any adverse costs should the action fail.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) to receive any type of financial benefit deriving from the representative action, other than to cover legal costs.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 264 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the court or administrative authority shall require the infringing trader to inform affected consumers at its expense about the final decisions providing for measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, and the approved settlements referred to in Article 8, by means appropriate to the circumstance of the case and within specified time limits, including, where appropriate, through notifying all consumers concerned individually. In addition to the channels of the trader who committed the infringement, this information may also be provided via relevant public authority channels or through the channels of designated qualified entities, in every case at the expense of the trader who committed the infringement.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 271 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it publishes in detail the provenance of the funds it receives and the representative actions that it pursues.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 297 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. No later than one year after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall assess whether the rules on air and rail passenger rights offer a level of protection of the rights of consumers comparable to that provided for under this Directive. Where that is the case, the Commission intends to make appropriate proposals, which may consist in particular in removing the acts referred to in points 10 and 15 of Annex I from the scope of application of this Directive as defined in Article 2.deleted
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 324 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement. TIn order to avoid prolonging the procedures, these measures shallmay also be sought on the basis of any final decisionseparately from measures whose purpose is to establishing that a practice constitutes an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I harming collective interests of consumers, including a final injunction order referred to in paragraph (2)(b).
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 341 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of Article 5(3), Member States shall ensure that qualified entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking a redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, removal, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate. A Member State may require the mandate of the individual consumers concerned before a declaratory decision is made or a redress order is issued.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 354 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. By derogation to paragraph 1, Member States may empower a court or administrative authority to issue, instead of a redress order,in which, on the date of entry into force of this Directive, a court or administrative authority is empowered to issue a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement of Union law listed in Annex I, may continue to apply the existing procedural arrangements only in duly justified cases where, due to the characteristics of the individual harm to the consumers concerned the quantification of individual redress is complex. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 369 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) consumers have suffered a small amount of loss and it would be disproportionate to distribute the redress to them. In such cases, Member States shall ensure that the mandate of the individual consumers concerned is not required. The redress shall be directed to a public purpose serving the collective interests of consumers.deleted
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 387 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The qualified entity seeking a redress order as referred in Article 6(1) shall declare in detail at an early stage of the action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action. It shall demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to represent the best interests of the consumers concerned and to meet any adverse costs should the action fail.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 400 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) to receive any type of financial benefit deriving from the representative action, other than to cover legal costs.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 432 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the court or administrative authority shall require the infringing trader to inform affected consumers at its expense about the final decisions providing for measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, and the approved settlements referred to in Article 8, by means appropriate to the circumstance of the case and within specified time limits, including, where appropriate, through notifying all consumers concerned individually. In addition to the channels of the trader who committed the infringement, this information may also be provided via relevant public authority channels or through the channels of designated qualified entities, in every case at the expense of the trader who committed the infringement.
2018/11/08
Committee: JURI
Amendment 86 #

2017/2131(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 19 a (new)
(19a) According to the annual Corruption Perceptions Index on perceived levels of corruption in 2017, published by Transparency International, Hungary ranks 66th with a score of 45 out of 100, three points less than a year ago and 10 points less than in 2012. Numerous non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and business associations have reported that corruption in Hungary poses a significant risk to companies, especially in the areas of tax administration and public procurement. Public procurement is an area that is particularly vulnerable to local irregularities due to robust informal relations between businesses and politicians. Even though corruption in the public and private sectors is considered a crime that is expressly punishable under the Hungarian Criminal Code, that legislation is not being properly implemented.
2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2017/2131(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 20 a (new)
(20a) Hungary receives substantial funding through payments from the Structural and Cohesion Funds. In a 2016 report by the European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF), OLAF investigators found ‘serious irregularities’ in projects co- financed by the European Union, including projects managed by a company that was once co-owned by the son-in-law of Prime Minister Viktor Orban. This highlights dangerous conflicts of interest in the country and shows serious irregularities in the use of EU funds in the country and substantial fraud against the financial interests of the Union.
2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2017/2131(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 52 a (new)
(52a) In its first report on Hungary’s implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, published in May 2015, the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) found that insufficient measures had been taken to identify possible human trafficking victims among asylum seekers and irregular migrants. In its latest report, published in March 2018, GRETA again criticised Hungary for its inability and unwillingness to detect potential victims of trafficking in human beings among migrants and asylum seekers in the country and called on the Hungarian authorities to adopt a legal framework for the identification of victims of human trafficking among third country nationals who were not legally resident and to step up its procedures for identifying victims of such trafficking among asylum seekers and irregular migrants.
2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 234 #

2017/2131(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 55 a (new)
(55a) On 15 June 2017 the Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Hungary for failure to comply with its legal obligations under the temporary emergency relocation scheme, established under two Council decisions in September 2015 (Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 and Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601). Despite confirmation by the Court of Justice of the European Union of the validity of the EU relocation scheme and of the EU’s right to require Member States to receive refugees, as expressed in its judgment of 6 September, Hungary has continued to infringe its legal obligations by refusing to contribute to the implementation of the relocation decisions. On 7 December 2017 the Commission decided to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union on the grounds of its failure to comply with legal obligations concerning relocation.
2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the freedom of movement and residence of EU citizens and their families is one of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Citizens’ Rights Directive (Directive 2004/38/EC) and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; stresses that it is vital to eliminate any economic and social discrimination so as to enable all citizens to fully enjoy that right on an essentially equal footing; notes that petitioners from different countries are concerned about the risk of losing their EU citizenship and afraid of not being able to benefit from the rights associated with this freedom;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 7 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the fact that, in some EU Member States, access to social protection is severely limited for EU citizens who are not nationals, and wage gaps exist among people performing the same work, which is a breach of the fundamental right not to be discriminated against.
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 9 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Observes that the austerity policies adopted at EU level and by the Member States have aggravated the problems faced by citizens with regard to the practical enjoyment of their fundamental rights and have caused a considerable increase in socioeconomic disparities and economic migration within the EU;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 10 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Notes the need to put an end to austerity policies, a move which should lead to the early adoption of legislation guaranteeing high levels of social protection and stable, adequately paid jobs;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 11 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that freedom of expression, information and the media are key to safeguarding democracy and the rule of law, and; considers it necessary to take effective action at EU level to tackle the serious problems which limit pluralism and freedom of information within the Member States; stresses that freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to change one’s religion or belief, are also among the EU’s core values;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 13 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that all citizens living in a Member State other than their own have the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in EU and local elections, in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights; considers that the factors which prevent all citizens of the EU from fully enjoying that right must be tackled and eliminated without delay;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Member States to promote the protection of the rights of the child, in line with the Treaty onies of the European Union (TEU), the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the international commitments undertaken in this field, namely by ensuring that children’s views are taken into account in matters that concern them and that their best interests are a primary consideration in any decisions that affect them; recalls the consistently high number of petitions on discrimination based on nationality, gender or financial status when granting custody rights; calls on the Commission to monitor carefully the procedures and practices applied by the competent authorities of the Member States in this regard, in the decisions of a cross-border character that they take concerning minors, to ensure that they are not discriminatory, with the aim of safeguarding the overriding interest of the minor and the other related fundamental rights; calls on the Commission to move forward with the recasting of the Brussels II Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003) announced in June 2016, taking due account of these aspects;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 21 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that all EU residents are entitled to benefits and assistance under the social security systems of their Member State of residence and have the right to healthcare and medical treatment; notdeplores, in this connection, that the price and accessibility of medicinee fact that high prices prevent access to medicines and to certain therapies for an increasing number of citizens in the Member States arend that this is among the major issues affecting patientscitizens; calls on the Member States to pursue policies designed to improve public health by ensuring universal access to medical care for all citizens and compliance with the strictest standards of human rights, in order to guarantee a high level of protection of human health for the whole population;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 25 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States to ensure gender equality in the areas that require improvement and in which women’s fundamental rights are being violated, and to preventintroduce and implement all necessary measures to prevent and combat effectively gender-based violence;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 32 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Strongly supports the need for effective environmental protection in line with the principle of sustainable developto ensure the application of the highest standards of environmental protection in line with the precautionary principle, the ‘polluter pays’ principle and the principle of environmental sustainability, applying penalties for any damage to natural resources and the environment, thisese being by far the most recurrent issueconcerns expressed in petitions;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 36 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls the need to guarantee a high level of consumer protection, in accordance with Article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls, therefore, for this right to be safeguarded effectively in the banking, insurance and credit sectors.
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 38 #

2017/2125(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to adopt without delay a proposal for a binding legislative act to make it possible for consumers to bring class actions in cases of fraud and unfair or illegal practices perpetrated against them, in order to substantially step up, throughout the Union, protection of consumers’ rights, including the right to adequate compensation;
2017/10/23
Committee: PETI
Amendment 94 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas many fundamental rights violations still occur in the EU and in Member States, as pointed out in reports by the Commission, the FRA, NGOs, the Council of Europe and the UN;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 200 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas Articles 37 and 38 of the Charter recognise the right to a high level of environmental protection bound in with the implementation of EU policies;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 203 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)
Lb. whereas being unemployed, poor or socially marginalised has major consequences as regards the availing and exercising of fundamental rights, which underscores the fact that people in such vulnerable circumstances must continue to be assured access to basic services, and in particular welfare and financial assistance;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 251 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that corruption undermines the rule of law, democracy and human rights, poses a threat to good governance and the existence of a just and socially equitable judicial system and slows economic development; , human rights and the equal treatment of all citizens; stresses that corruption, by diverting public funds from the public use for which they are intended, reduces the level and quality of public services, thereby infringing fundamental rights; reiterates that corruption poses a threat to good governance and the existence of a just and socially equitable judicial system and slows economic development; calls on the Member States and EUinstitutions to devise effective ways of combating corruption, regularly monitoring the use made of EU and national public funding; considers it regrettable that the Commission has decided not to publish the bi-annual report on corruption in the EU, and is not satisfied by the reasons for this given by First Vice-President of the Commission Frans Timmermans; also calls for an independent analysis of corruption in the EU institutions;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 256 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to produce annual reports on the situation of fundamental rights in the individual Member States, in partnership with the FRA; reiterates the importance of preventing violations of fundamental rights rather than reacting post facto when these violations are repeated;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Points out that the right to access to justice is vital for the protection of all fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law; calls for direct, easily accessible instruments to be made available to individuals to counter violations of their fundamental rights by Member States, without giving the national courts or the EU institutions any margin of discretion;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 272 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Believes that the aim of the EU’s migration policy must not simply be to protect the external borders or stop flows of migrants; considers regrettable the flawed Commission policies aimed at closing borders without addressing the real problems associated with migration; calls for the introduction of new ways to enter the EU legally so as to reduce the risks associated with illegal entry and stem the loss of migrants’ lives at sea, and to combat the abuses committed by smuggling networks and the risk of refoulement;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 275 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the flow of migration towards the EU is continuing and that it mostly consists of people from Africa who have not left a country which is at war or where their lives are at risk, but who have come to Europe in search of a better life;deleted
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 301 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the Council to adopt a position as quickly as possible on the missing pieces of the Common European Asylum System, which is based on respect for the principles of solidarity and the fair distribution of responsibilities; calls for the establishment of a mechanism for the redistribution of asylum seekers that is permanent and binding on all Member States and that lays down sanctions for any Member States that refuse to participate;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 316 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Roundly condemns the conclusion of any agreement with dictatorial regimes or regimes that do not respect fundamental rights when seeking to reduce the flow of migrants to Europe;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 317 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Expresses concern that the implementation of the EU-Turkey declaration may result in migrants being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 326 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Takes the view that legal channels should be available for migration, including from Africa, but not for all the men and women hoping to come to Europe; takes the view that the best way to protect the rights of persons who cannot legally enter Europe would be to br and that these should contribute to the rapid and robust development of countries of origin and transit by developing local economies and offering new opportunities there, as well as investing ing about the rapid and robust development of Africa, which Europe could promote by stepping up its involvement on the African continentsylum systems in these countries which fully respect international law in this area;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 333 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Expresses concern at migrant reception funding management being infiltrated by organised crime and calls on the Commission to monitor closely the use of that funding and ensure that any irregularities are investigated and those responsible prosecuted;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 518 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Points out that Article 6 TEU requires the Union to accede to the ECHR; highlights the need for integration between European systems for the protection of fundamental rights; takes note of Opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union; is concerned that the Commission and the Council have not yet drawn up any proposals designed to ensure that the aforementioned obligation is met as quickly as possible, on the basis of full transparency and with the aim of enhancing the protection of individuals and making the EU institutions more accountable for their actions and failings regarding fundamental rights;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 529 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls for the European legislative framework on eco-crimes to be strengthened, so as to better protect the fundamental right to individual and collective health.
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 537 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Calls on the Commission to broaden the scope of the EU Justice Scoreboard to cover the assessment of criminal justice systems and of efforts to uphold fundamental rights and the rule of law;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 541 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Calls on the EU institutions to examine the impact of all economic measures proposed or implemented, with specific reference to austerity measures (first and foremost the Fiscal Compact), on the fundamental rights of citizens; calls for a guarantee that sufficient resources will be made available to safeguard respect for fundamental rights and to ensure minimum essential levels for the enjoyment of civil, economic, cultural and social rights, with a special focus on the most vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups; calls on the EU institutions to take remedial action immediately where austerity measures have had a negative impact on the economic, social and cultural rights of European citizens;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 549 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)
18d. Emphasises the essential role of witnesses and informers in ensuring that the activities of criminal organisations or serious violations of the rule of law are prosecuted and punished; calls on the Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal establishing a special European programme for the protection of witnesses and informers;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 558 #

2017/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 e (new)
18e. Calls on the Commission to fully implement the recommendations made in the European Parliament resolution of 7 October 2016 on the fight against corruption and follow-up of the CRIM resolution;
2017/11/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas EU citizenship and its related rights were initially introduced in 1992 by the Treaty of Maastricht and were further enhancdefined by the Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force in December 2009, as well as by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 32 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)
Bb. whereas efforts to promote EU citizenship are linked to improvements in the quality of democracy within the Union, to the practical enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms and to the opportunity for every citizen to participate directly in the democratic life of the Union;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 35 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the Treaty of Lisbon ought to have consolidated the inalienable rights and guarantees of EU citizenship, including, inter alia, the freedom to travel, work and study in other EU countries, to participate in European political life, to promote equality and respect for diversity and, to be protected from economic and social discrimination, especially and that practised on the basis of nationality;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 41 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas the right to free movement and its exercise is central to EU citizenship and complements the other freedoms of the EU internal marketelimination of all economic and social discrimination is vital in order to reinforce EU citizenship, guaranteeing the practical enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms to all citizens; whereas young Europeans in particular consider free movement, which ranks first among EU citizens in terms of recognition and popularity, as the EU’s most positive achievement;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 43 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas a holistic approach designed to pursue the objectives laid down in the EU Treaties, such as full employment and social progress, is vital in order to permit the genuine enjoyment of the rights and freedoms arising from EU citizenship;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 47 #

2017/2069(INI)

G. whereas, as petitions have shown, EU citizens face notable difficulties in exercising this right, owing tofundamental rights and freedoms, owing to serious economic and employment problems, aggravated by the adoption of austerity measures at EU level and by the Member States and by administrative burdens and bureaucracy in Member States, and to misinformation and/or a lack of cooperation by Member State authorities;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 50 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas the principle of non- discrimination on the basis of nationality, sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or beliefe, skin colour or ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or personal beliefs, political or other opinions, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation is the primary expression of EU citizenship; whereas it forms at the same time a crucial component of the successful exercise of the fundamental rights and freedoms of movemcitizents, as evidenced in petitions;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 84 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Draws attention to the importance of immediately launching consultations at EU level among all Member States with a view to the adoption of guidelines addressed to the Member States to lay down uniform rules for the granting of national citizenship of a Member State to citizens from countries outside the EU, bearing in mind that anyone who possesses the citizenship of a Member State thereby in addition acquires citizenship of the EU;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 85 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Is firmly convinced that reinforcement of EU citizenship requires the adoption of democratic and participatory governance capable of ensuring the highest levels of social justice, the genuine enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms, full transparency and direct involvement of all citizens in decision-making processes;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 92 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the introduction of a citizens’ income in all EU Member States will make a significant contribution to reducing the economic and social inequalities which prevent the full exercise of the rights and freedoms arising from EU citizenship;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 93 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls for the adoption of an effective legislative framework and coordination measures at EU and Member State level to ensure high levels of social protection and stable, properly paid jobs; considers this approach to be vital in order to strengthen the fundamental rights and freedoms arising from EU citizenship;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 94 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Stresses that the austerity measures adopted at EU and Member State level have aggravated economic and social inequalities, severely limiting the practical exercise of the fundamental rights and freedoms arising from EU citizenship;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 124 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Notes with appreciation the Commission’s efforts to make multiple information and assistance outlets about the EU and Citizenship rights, such as the Europe Direct network, the Your Europe portal and the e-justice portal, available and more accessible; urges the Commission to systematise the information and possibly plan for a single, EU-wide information window; at the same time, invites the Member States to promote the SOLVIT network and its services among EU citizens, as well as other redress mechanisms, both at EU level, such as the Committee on Petitions and the European Ombudsman and at national level, such as the local ombudsman;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 133 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that citizens should have full access to all the necessary information, which should be presented in a clear and comprehensible way, in order to be able to make informed decisions on the exercise of their Treaty rights, and especially their right to free movement and residence within the EUrights guaranteed by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; recommends the promotion of full transparency and proactive publishing as the most appropriate tools to that end;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 145 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges that enhancing voter turnout in European elections is a shared responsibility between the EU and Member States; encourages the latter to promote participation in democratic life by better informing citizens of their right to stand and vote in local and European elections through various channels and in a comprehensible language, and by removing any barriers to their participation, such as economic, social and linguistic discrimination, unfair practices or corruption; urges the Member States to remove accessibility obstacles for citizens with disabilities and to facilitate voting for their citizens residing abroad by embracing electronic identification and voting solutions;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 160 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the reform of the Electoral Act on the basis of Parliament’s legislative initiative is an unmissablecould be an opportunity for the Union to become more democratic; highlights the fact that thousands of Europeans share this view, as evidenced by the ‘Let me Vote’ European Citizens’ Initiative, which aims to allow citizens to vote in their place of residence; commends the Commission for exploring the possibilities for non-national EU citizens who have exercised their right to free movement to vote in national elections in the country in which they reside; urges the Commission to devise a concrete action plan for the introduction of electronic voting with a view to the 2019 European Parliament elections;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 169 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Expresses its conviction that free media and access to a plurality of voices in society and in the media are an indispensable part of a healthy democracy; underlines the need for a defined EU policy to tackle anti-European propaganda and false information; proposes that EU institutions proceed with the creation of a European television channel broadcasting in all Member Statesthe serious problems which limit pluralism and freedom of information within the Member States; proposes that EU institutions proceed with the creation of better training opportunities to ensure media literacy of all citizens in all Member States, devoting particular attention to the socioeconomically most disadvantaged;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 176 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Maintains that full transparency is a key tool for bringing citizens closer to the EU and involving them in its activities; recommends the promotion ofintroducing the right tof full access to documents and the translation of as manythe documents as possible into all EU languages, ensuring the highest possible level of multilingualism; supports the intensification of dialogue with citizens and, the encouragement of public debates, in order to improve EU citizens’ understanding of the impact of the EU on their daily lives and to allow them to take part in an exchange of views, through slots in television programmes for targeted audiencecluding by means of specific slots within television programmes, and their direct participation in decision-making processes, ensuring that the impact of the EU on their daily lives is intended to respond to their priorities and improve their material living conditions;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 190 #

2017/2069(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 f (new)
14f. Stresses the need to resolve the Commission’s conflict of interest arising from the decision-making powers simultaneously vested in it with regard to decisions on the registration of a European citizens’ initiative and the exclusive power of decision on the legislative action to be taken on a successful European citizens’ initiative; considers that the legal assessment of the registration of a European citizens’ initiative must be entrusted to an independent body, and calls on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal for each successful European citizens’ initiative;
2017/10/06
Committee: PETI
Amendment 18 #

2017/2011(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Notes, in particular, that the Commission has tackled the problem of poor air quality in Europe by launching a number of infringement proceedings for breach of Directive 2008/50/EC, on account of continuous exceedances of the NO2 limit values; regrets, however, that in 2015 the Commission did not exercise the same powers of control to prevent the placing on the single market of pollutant, diesel- powered cars that contribute significantly to the release of NO2 into the atmosphere over these limits and that do not comply with EU rules on the type-approval and emissions of passenger and light commercial vehicles;
2017/03/10
Committee: JURI
Amendment 46 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The area without internal borders permitting the free movement of persons is one of the main achievements of the EU, and its normal consolidation and operation must be an indispensable objective for the Institutions and the Member States.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Alternative measures to mitigate threats that have been identified should take precedence over the reintroduction of temporary internal border controls. These measures may be targeted and intensified police checks, greater use of existing technologies and increased cross-border cooperation both from an operational point of view and from that of the exchange of information between police and intelligence services.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 59 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) However, experience has shown that certain serious threats to public policy or internal security, such as cross- border terrorist threats or specific cases of secondary movements of irregular migrants within the Union that justified the reintroduction of bordein practice, internal border controls have been reintroduced for clontrols, may persist well beyondger than the above periods. It is therefore needed and justified to adjust the time limits applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control to the current needs, while ensuring that this measure is not abused and remains an exception, to be used only as a last resort. To that end, the general deadline applicable under Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code should be extended to one yearcessary to ensure that this measure is not abused and remains an exception, to be used only as a last resort.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) In order to guarantee that these internal border controls remain an exception, Member States should submit a risk assessment concerning the intended reintroduction of border control or prolongation thereof. The risk assessment should, in particular, assess for how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrate that the prolongation of border controls is a last resort measure, indicate what alternative measures have been taken and for what period of time, demonstrate that these have proven ineffective, and explain how border control would help in addressing the identified threat. In case of internal border control going beyond six months, the risk assessment should also demonstrate retrospectively the efficiency of the reintroduced border control in addressing the identified threat and explain in detail how e. Each neighbouring Member State affected by such prolongation wasmust be duly consulted and involved in drawing up the risk assessment for the purpose of determining jointly the least burdensome operational arrangements.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) The power of the Commission to issue an opinion under Article 27(4) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified to reflect the new obligations on the Member States related to the risk assessment, including the cooperation with Member States concerned. When border control at internal borders is carried out for more than six months, the Commission should be obliged to issue an opinion. Also the consultation procedure as provided for in Article 27(5) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified in order to reflect the role of the Agencies (European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol) and focus on the practical implementation of different aspects of cooperation between the Member States, including the coordination, where appropriate, of different measures on both sides of the border.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 90 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) In order to make the revised rules better adapted to the challenges related to persistent serious threats to public policy or internal security, a specific possibility should be provided to prolong internal border controls beyond one yearsix months. Such prolongation should accompany commensurate exceptional national measures also taken within the territory to address the threat, such as a state of emergency. In any case, such a possibility should not lead to the further prolongation of temporary internal border controls beyond twoone years.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) The reference to Article 29 in Article 25(4) should be modified with a view of clarifying the relation between the time periods applicable under Article 29 and Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code. Member States may not combine the measures taken in order to deal with the circumstances covered by Article 29 with measures taken pursuant to Articles 25 and 28.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) The possibility to carry out temporary internal border controls in response to a specific threat to public policy or internal security which persists beyond a yearsix months should be subject to a specific procedure.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) To that end, the Commission should issue an opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such prolongation and, where appropriate, on the cooperation with the neighbouring Member States.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 110 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The Council, taking account of the Commission's opinion, mayshould recommend such extraordinary further prolongation and where appropriate determine the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned, with a view to ensuring that it is an exceptional measure, in place only for as long as necessary and justified, and consistent with the measures also taken at the national level within the territory to address the same specific threat to public policy or internal security. The Council recommendation should be a prerequisite for any further prolongation beyond the period of one yearsix months and hence be of the same nature as the one already provided for in Article 29.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) As referred to in Article 29, internal border controls may be reintroduced to respond to inadequacies in the management of the external borders. That article is unaffected by this change, and the procedure governing it should be kept separate from that which gives rise to the reintroduction of internal border controls in the other circumstances provided for by the Schengen Borders Code.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may exceptionally reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders for a limited period of up to 30 days or for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat if its duration exceeds 30 days, as a last resort. The scope and duration of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders shall not exceed what is strictly necessary to respond to the serious threat. The total period during which border controls at the internal borders are reintroduced in accordance with Articles 27, 27a and 28 may not be extended or combined with the period provided for in Article 29. The total period for which the internal border controls are reintroduced in accordance with Articles 27, 27a, 28 and 29 shall not exceed two years.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 121 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Border control at internal borders shall only be reintroduced as a last resort, and in accordance with Articles 27, 27a, 28 and 29. The criteria referred to, respectively, in Articles 26 and 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on reintroduction of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant, respectively, to Article 27, 27a, 28 or 29.deleted
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond the period provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 26 and in accordance with Article 27, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for renewable periods corresponding to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and not exceeding six months.deleted
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, including any prolongation provided for under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed one year. In the exceptional cases referred to in Article 27a, the total period may be further extended by a maximum length of two years in accordance with that Article. Where there are exceptional circumstances as referred to in Article 29, the total period may be extended by a maximum length of two years, in accordance with paragraph 1 of that Article.deleted
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26
(1a) Article 26 is replaced by the following: ‘Article 26. Criteria for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders WheBefore a Member State decides, as a last resort, on the temporary reintroduction of border control at one or more of its internal borders or at parts thereof, or decides to prolong such a temporary reintroduction, in accordance with Article 25 or Article 28(1), it shall assess the extent to which such a measure is likely to adequately remedy the threat to public policy or internal security, and shall assess the proportionality of the measure in t shall: (a) assess whether the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to resolve or mitigate the threats to its public policy or internal security. If the temporary reintroduction of internal border controls is not considered a sufficient measure to resolve or mitigate the threat, the Member State concerned should not reintroduce internal border controls; (b) assess whether measures other than the temporary reintroduction of internal border controls are likely to remedy the threat to public policy or internal security; If the Member State concerned considers that such measures as cross-border police cooperation and police checks are sufficient to address this threlation to that threat. In making such an assessment,, border controls cannot be reintroduced or prolonged and those measures must be applied; (c) assess the proportionality of the Mtember State shallporary reintroduction of internal border controls to that threat, in particular, by take the following into account: (ai) the likely impact of any threats to its public policy or internal security, including following terrorist incidents or threats and including those posterrorist threats and threats presented by organised crime; (bii) the likely impact of such a measurethe temporary reintroduction of internal border controls on free movement of persons within the area without internal border control. If the proposed internal border controls are not proportionate to the threat or have a disproportionate impact on free movement, the Member State concerned cannot reintroduce internal border controls or prolong them.” Or. it (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R0399- 20170407&from=EN)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 148 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -i (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – title
(-i) The title is replaced by the following: "Procedure for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders under Article 25(1) in the event of a foreseeable serious threat to public policy or internal security"; Or. it (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R0399- 20170407&from=EN)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -i (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph -1 (new)
(-i) A new paragraph -1 is inserted as follows: " -1. Where, in the area without internal border controls, a Member State observes that a serious threat to public policy or internal security exists in a Member State, and intends to reintroduce internal border controls, the Member State may reintroduce the border controls along all or along specific parts of its internal borders for a period limited to a maximum of 30 days - or for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat, if that period exceeds 30 days, but at all events for a period not exceeding two months - in exceptional circumstances, as a last resort and in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 26.”
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 150 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -i a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where a Member State plans to reintroduce border control at internal borders under Article 25, it(-ia) In paragraph 1, the introductory part is replaced by the following: "1. For the purposes of paragraph -1, the Member State concerned shall notify the other Member States and the Commission at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction, or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border control at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction. To that end, the Member State shall supply the following information: Or. it (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R0399- 20170407&from=EN)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 1
a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstratexplaining twhat the prolongation of border control is a lastalternative measures to border controls have been taken and the reasort measure and explaining how border control would help addns, based on verifiable, concrete and statistical evidence, why the measuress the identified threat. Where border chave not been sufficient to mitigate the threat, demonstrol has already been reintroduced for more than six months, the risk assessment shall alsoating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedyingborder control would help address the identified threat.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 162 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point ii
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) where appropriate, the measures to be taken by the other Member States as agreed prior to the temporary reintroduction of border control at the relevant internal borders concerned."
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – last sentence
WhereIf necessary, the Commission may request additional information from the Member State(s) concerned, including on the cooperation with the Member States affected by the planned reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as additionalfurther information needed to assess whether this is a last resort measure.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 166 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(iiia) The following paragraph 1a is inserted: “1a. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond two months, that Member State may prolong border controls at its internal borders, taking into account the criteria laid down in Article 26, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article or in the light of any further new information which demonstrates the persistence of the serious threat, for a period which shall correspond to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and shall not exceed four months. Such a prolongation shall be permitted on condition that alternative measures, such as cross-border police cooperation and police checks, have proven, on the basis of concrete data and evidence, to be ineffective. To that end, in addition to the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the Member State concerned shall provide the Commission and the Member States with a risk assessment, which must without fail contain the following elements: (i) an assessment of how long the threat that has been identified is likely to persist and what sections of the internal borders will be affected; (ii) alternative measures or measures taken previously to address the threat identified; (iii) an explanation of why these alternative measures have not sufficiently mitigated the threat; (iv) a demonstration that the prolongation of border controls is a last resort, and (v) an explanation of how the border controls could help to address the threat identified more effectively. This risk assessment must also include a detailed report on the cooperation that has taken place between the Member State concerned and the Member State(s) directly concerned by the reintroduction of border controls, including the Member States with which it shares the internal borders at which the border controls have been carried out. The Commission shall communicate the assessment to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency or Europol and may, if appropriate, request their opinion on the risk assessment. The Commission shall establish, in cooperation with the Member States, a uniform model for the notification and the risk assessment by means of an implementing act to be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 38(2) of this Regulation.”
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 2
(iiia) Article 27(2) is replaced by the following: "2. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a shall be submitted to the European Parliament and to the Council at the same time as it is notified to the other Member States and to the Commission pursuant to thatose paragraphs. Or. it (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0399)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 170 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii b (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. Member States making a notification under paragraph 1(iiib) Article 27(3) is replaced by the following: "3. Member States may, where necessary and in accordance with national law, decide to classify parts of the information. Such classification shall no referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this article. Such classification shall not preclude access by the Member States affected by the border controls to such classified information through appropriate and secure police cooperation channels, nor shall it preclude information from being made available by the Commission to the European Parliament. The transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the European Parliament under this Article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the European Parliament and the Commission. ’ Or. it (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0399)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 173 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Following notification by a Member State under paragraphs 1 and 1a and with a view to consultation provided for in paragraph 5, the Commission or any other Member State may, without prejudice to Article 72 TFEU, issue an opinion.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 176 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
WhereIf, on the basis of the information contained in the notification or any additional information it has received, the Commission has concerns as regards the necessity or proportionality of the planned reintroduction of border control at internal borders, or whereif it considers that a consultation on some aspects of the notification would be appropriate, it shall issue an opinion to that effect.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Where border control at internal borders has already been reintroduced for six months, the Commission shall issue an opinion.deleted
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 183 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 5
‘The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a and any Commission or Member State opinion referred to in paragraph 4 shall be the subject of a consultation led by the Commission. Where appropriate, t. The consultation shall without fail include: (i) joint meetings between the Member State planning to reintroduce border control at internal borders, the other Member States, especially those directly affected by such measures and the relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementatCommission. The joint meetings shall be held with the aim of organising, if appropriate, mutual cooperation between the Member States and assessing the proportionality of the measures in relation to the events which give rise to the reintroduction of border controls and the threat to public policy or internal security. (ii) where appropriate, unannounced on-site visits by the Commission tof the mutual cooperation between the Member States shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolongrelevant internal borders, where appropriate with the support of experts from Member States and from the Agency, Europol or any other relevant Union body, office or agency, to assess the effectiveness of border controls at those internal borders shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out border controls.’ . The reports on such unannounced visits shall be communicated to the European Parliament;’
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 1
1. In exceptional cases, where the Member State is confronted with the same serious threat to public policy or internal security beyond the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence7(1a), and where commensurate exceptional national measures are also taken within the territory to address this threat, the border control as temporarily reintroduced to respond to that threat may be further prolonged in accordance with this Article.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2017/0245(COD)

2. At the latest six weeks before the expiry of the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence7(1a), the Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission that it seeks a further prolongation in accordance with the specific procedure laid down in this Article. The notification shall contain all the information required inunder Article 27(1)(a) to (e and (1a). Article 27 paragraphs 2 and 3 shall apply.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall issue an opinand any Member State may issue an opinion on the compliance of the proposal for prolongation with the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article and the necessity and proportionality of the proposed prolongation.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 198 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 4
4. The Council, taking dueOnce it has taken account of the opinion of the Commission, may and of the Member State(s) / the Council may, as a last resort, recommend that the Member State decide toconcerned further prolong border control at its internal borders for a period of up to six months. That period may be prolonged, no more than three times, for a further period of up to six months. In its recommendation, the Council shall at least indicate the information referIn its recommendation, the Council shall indicate the information referred to in Article 27(1) and (1a) and it shall lay down the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned. The Council may also recommend the application of alternative measures to border controls or recommend that border controls at internal borders be lifted whered to in Article 27(1) (a) to (e). Where appropriate, it shall determine the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concernedhe principles of necessity and proportionality, including their impact on free movement, have not been respected. Where appropriate, the Council may also request the Commission to monitor the implementation of prolonged border controls in accordance with Article 27(5)(ii).
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 204 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. This article shall be without prejudice to measures that may be adopted by Member States under exceptional circumstances in which the general functioning of the area without internal border controls is at risk as referred to in Article 29.
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2017/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to Article 25(4), t(3a) In Article 28, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: "4. The total period during which border control iss are reintroduced at internal borders, on the basis of the initial period under paragraph 1 of this Article and any prolongations under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed two months. ” Or. it (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R0399- 20170407&from=EN)
2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Council Framework Decision 2001/413/JHA44 needs to be updated and complemented byin order to include further provisions on offences, penalties and cross- border cooperation with a view to combating computer-related fraud. _________________ 44 Council Framework Decision 2001/413/JHA of 28 May 2001 on combating fraud and counterfeiting of non- cash means of payment (OJ L 149, 2.6.2001, p. 1).
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) The fact that an offence involves a significant aggregate advantage or a high number of victims should be considered an aggravating circumstance. 'Significant aggregate advantage' means a gain of EUR 20 000 or more. 'High number of victims' means 500 victims or more.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 53 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) Jurisdictional rules should ensure that the offences laid down in this Directive are prosecuted effectively, preventing positive and negative conflicts of jurisdiction by establishing a clear hierarchy of criteria for allocating jurisdiction. In general, offences are best dealt with by the criminal justice system of the country in which they occur. Member States should therefore establish their jurisdiction over offences committed on their territory, over offences committed by their nationals and over offences that cause damage in their territory.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) counterfeiting or falsification of a payment instrument in order for it to be used fraudulently;
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) possession, procurement for use, import, export, sale, transport, distribution or otherwise making available of a stolen or otherwise unlawfully appropriated, or of a counterfeited or falsified payment instrument in order for it to be used fraudulently.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, when committed intentionally with fraudulent purpose, the production, procurement for use, import, export, sale, transport, distribution or otherwise making available of a device or an instrument, computer data or any other means specifically designed or adapted for the purpose of committing any of the offences referred to in Article 4(a) and (b) or Article 5, is punishable as a criminal offence.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Aggravating circumstances Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following circumstances shall be regarded as aggravating circumstances, in relation to the offences referred to in Articles 3, 4, and 5 when: (a) the offence has caused widespread or substantial damage; (b) the offence has led to a significant aggregate advantage; (c) the offence has entailed a significant number of victims.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 whereWhere an offence referred to in Articles 3 to 7 falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and any of the Member States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, those Member States shall cooperate for the purpose of determining which of them will prosecute the offender in order to centralise the proceedings in a single Member State. The following factors shall be taken into account, in order of priority:
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2017/0226(COD)

3a. Each Member State shall adopt rules to ensure that any positive or negative conflict of jurisdiction can be resolved effectively and without delay. Where an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and can be prosecuted in more than one of those Member States, on the basis of the same facts, the Member States concerned shall cooperate for the purpose of determining which of them is to have jurisdiction in order, if possible, to centralise the proceedings in a single Member State.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 171 #

2017/0226(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. The statistical data referred to in paragraph 2 shall, as a minimum, cover the number of offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 reported to the Member States, the number of cases investigated, the number of persons prosecuted for and convicted of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7, andthe number of persons involved in the fraud and the extent of the damage caused, data on the functioning of the reporting, investigative and judicial phases concerning these offences.
2018/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 166 #

2016/2323(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Is convinced that, under the current circumstances, where the ceiling in Heading 3 is too low, the EU budget has maximised its impact in dealing withthe EU budget should tackle properly the impact of the effects of the migratory and refugee crisis; points out, however, that a sustainable solution must be found to this issue, as it has been shown by the repeated mobilisation of special instruments, such as the flexibility instrument, that the EU budget was not initially designed to address crises of such magnitude;
2017/02/15
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 174 #

2016/2323(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. WelcomStresses the role played byfact that instruments such as the Internal Security Fund (ISF) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in addressingshould face properly and concretely the effects of the migratory and refugee crisis, and calls for adequate budgeting in the coming years for these funds; welcom commensurate and optimized budgeting for these funds in the coming years with the necessary flexibility to better address the challenges of the unfolding refugees' emergency in order to achieve concrete solutions; recognizes also the role of EU agencies in the area of justice and home affairs, such as Europol, Eurojust and the European Border and Coast Guard, and calls, in this context, for their mandate to be executed through adequate budgeting and staffing; is convinced that the EU needs to invest more in strengtheningmake more efficient the control of its borders, enhancing cooperation between law enforcement agencies, fighting terrorism and radicalisation and ensuring sound return oper and with the relevant authorities of Member States to ensure a smooth exchange of intelligence information in order to fight more effectively terrorism and radicalizations;
2017/02/15
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 206 #

2016/2323(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Reaffirms its conviction that in order to tackle the root causes of the migratory and refugee crisis, the EU needs to step up its role through investments in the countries of origin of the refugees and migrants, without however penalizing the investments and competitiveness of the EU Member States and their SMEs; notes that investments in infrastructure, housing, education, medical services and support for SMEs are part of the solution to tackle the root causes of migration; welcomstresses therefore that the External Investment Plan, as a coherent and coordinated framework to promoteing investments in Africa and the Neighbourhood countries, should ensure a comprehensive monitoring and control system;
2017/02/15
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 222 #

2016/2323(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that one of the conditions for preserving stability and prosperity in the EU is a stable EU Neighbourhood; calls on the Commission therefore to ensure that priority is given tobelieves that investments in the EU Neighbourhood in order tomay support efforts to tackle the main issues that this area is facing: such as the migration and refugee crisis in the Southern Neighbourhood and Russian aggression in the Eastern Neighbourhood; reiterates that supporting countries which are implementing association agreements with the EU is key to facilitating political and economic reform; underlines the importance of an efficient control system in order to assure transparent and proper investments;
2017/02/15
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 7 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas in order to cover liability for environmental damage, a financial security market has grown up spontaneously, but whereas this might, however, be insufficient to cover specific cases, for instance for SMEs or involving particular types of operations (offshore platforms, nuclear facilities, etc.);
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 8 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the uneven implementation of the ELD is due primarily to, for example, difficulties of appreciation when the damage to a natural resource exceeds the set threshold and the fact that many Member States have no means of eliciting comments and criticism from environmentalist NGOs and other stakeholder bodies;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 9 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas in many Member States large numbers of stakeholders (environmentalist NGOs, insurance companies, operators, and, above all, the authorities concerned) know little – or in some cases nothing – about the details of the ELD, a situation due not least to the fact that there are no guidance documents to help in transposing the legislation;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 13 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Observes with concern that the findings of those reports give an alarming picture of the actual implementation of the ELD and notes that the directive has been transposed in a patchy and uninterested way in many Member States;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the cost of environmental damage for the operators responsible can be reduced through the use of financial security instruments, but also that demand is low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many Member Sta (insurance and alternative instruments such as bank guarantees, in addition to the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directivefunds, or securities);
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 25 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Believes that within the ELD financial security market, demand is still low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many Member States, the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directive, and the fact that, in many Member States, insurance models are generally proving slow to emerge;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the fact that, as regards the application of the ELD in relation to protected species and natural habitats, half the Member States apply a broader scope (Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom);
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to determine what rules are necessary in order to establish a clear and irrefutable distinction between those cases in which the ELD is applicable and those in which the national standard should apply, where this is more stringent;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 63 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD modelled on, for example, the Irish reporting system whereby cases of environmental damage can be notified online;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 69 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Proposes that a channel be set up to encourage environmentalist NGOs and other stakeholder bodies to put forward their comments and criticisms;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 73 #

2016/2251(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the Commission to step up its training programme for the application of the ELD for the Member States and recommends that guidance documents be adopted to help Member States transpose the legislation correctly;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the Union is founded on the values of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights, which are enshrined in Article 2 TEU;
2017/07/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C
C. whereas reporting by whistle- blowers of information that could threaten or harm the public interest is done on the basis of their freedom of expression and information, both rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular Article 11 thereof, and with a strong sense of responsibility and civic morality;
2017/07/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C
C. whereas recent mass leaks revealing corruption, such as the Panama Papers and SwissLeaks affairs, or the avoidance of rules on labour law leading in certain cases to precarious employment, confirm the importance of the role played by whistle- blowers in defending the public interest;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 18 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. Whereas Article 352 TFEU confers to the Union the possibility to act beyond its explicit powers, within the framework of the policies defined in the Treaties, if its action proves necessary to attain one of the objectives set out in Treaties themselves;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital D
D. whereas concerns have often been raised that whistle-blowers face hostility and exclusion at their place of work, rather than being viewed positively, and are subjected not only to harassment but also to intimidation up to and including threats to their life;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 23 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that whistle-blowing plays a crucial role in the fight against corruption and other serious crimes; points out that protection of whistle-blowers should not be limited only to cases where confidential information is revealed but to all cases of disclosure of misconduct, wrongdoing or involvement in illegal activities; points out that the existing Union legislation on protection of whistle- blowers is scattered and that the protection of whistle-blowers across the Member States is uneven, which often impacts and, in certain cases, non-existent, which could impact highly negatively on EU policies;
2017/07/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 32 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas whistleblowing has proved useful in a number of areas, both in private and public sector, such as public health, taxation, the environment, consumer protection, combating corruption and upholding social rights;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 38 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas economic intelligence can be cross-border in scope and whereas whistle-blowers play a major role in bringing to light illegal acts carried out in other countries against national economic interests;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 44 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern at retaliation against whistle-blowers in their personal and professional lives, resulting in discrimination and social exclusion, not infrequently affecting their families also, and at the possibility of initiating criminal and civil judicial proceedings against whistle- blowers; calls for the creation of a clear horizontal legal framework that includes definitions, protection against different forms of reprisals, and exemptions from criminal and civil proceedings, according to criteria to be established; considers it essential, moreover, to protect whistle-blowers in psychological, physical, financial and professional terms and ensure prompt compensation for any harm suffered by them as a result of their actions;
2017/07/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for action, including in school and university programmes, to change the public perception of whistle- blowers by highlighting their positive role as an early warning mechanism to prevent abuses and corruption and to enable public scrutiny of state action;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 58 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Urges the introduction of effective arrangements for protecting anyone who reports wrongdoing at the workplace, such as harassment, job blackmail, illegal recruitment and dismissal practices, pay discrimination and any other form of law- breaking;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 59 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for measures to protect workers to include arrangements for safeguarding people’s anonymity and the confidentiality of information, where appropriate by means of encryption, and penalties for anyone failing to meet their obligations in this area;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 64 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to present a horizontal legislative proposal with a view to effectively protectingn holistic approach to the task of introducing a common regulatory framework which guarantees a high level of protection across the board in both the public and private sectors for whistleblowers in the EU before the end of this year; stresses that there are at present a number of possibilities for legal bases enabling the EU to take action on the matter; calls on the Commission to consider all those possibilities with the aim of proposing a coherent and effective mechanism; calls on the Commission to consider the doctrine elaborated by the CJEU, through long-standing case-law, about the concept of implied competences of the Union;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 67 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Points to the dangers of excluding whistle-blowing workers from career progression and of retaliation by colleagues at their workplace, and the dampening effect this has on those who may come across wrongdoing, and calls for everything possible to be done to put an end to behaviour of this kind;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 68 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Urges the Member States to pass legislation encouraging people to report illegal acts and wrongdoing by establishing an awards system including arrangements for paying whistle-blowers a percentage of any sums recovered by the public or private organisation involved;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 75 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of devising instruments to ban any form of retaliation, whether this be active dismissal or passive measures such as the blocking of promotion, and of taking action through the courts wherever this is necessary;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 81 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Takes ‘whistleblower’ to mean anybody who reports on or reveals information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines the public interest, in the context of his or her working relationship, be it in the public or private sector, of a contractual relationship, or of his or her trade union or association activities; this includes individuals who are outside the traditional employee- employer relationship, such as consultants, contractors, trainees/interns, volunteers, student workers, temporary workers and former employees;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 87 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that proper and effective legislation is needed; encourages Member States to develop legislative instruments that protect those who report justified and proven breaches of conduct to public authorities;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 90 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that a breach of the public interest includes, but is not limited to, acts of corruption, criminal offences, breaches of legal obligation, miscarriages of justice, abuse of authority, conflicts of interest, unlawful use of public funds, threats to the environment, health, public safety, national security and privacy and personal data protection, tax avoidance, attacks on workers’ rights and other social rights and attacks on human rights, and acts to cover up any of these breaches;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 92 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses the importance of urging Member States to implement rules protecting whistle-blowers in both the public and the private sectors;
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 99 #

2016/2224(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the relevant authorities to lay down a best-endeavours obligation in connection with arrangements for receiving and dealing with reports that are put in place by both employers and the authorities themselves.
2017/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 116 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Encourages the Member States to promote the positive role that whistleblowers play, in particular through awareness-raising campaigns and even providing a reward for cases of tax losses, fiscal damage and damage to the public image;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 148 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses its concerns about the risks run by whistleblowers at their place of work, in particular the risks of direct or indirect retaliation by the employer and by those working for or acting on behalf of the employer; stresses that retaliation usually takes the form of suspending, slowing down or stopping career progression or even dismissal, along with psychological harassment; stresses that retaliation is a barrier to whistleblowers’ activities; believes that it is necessary to introduce protective measures against destabilising practices; takes the view that retaliation should be penalised and sanctioned effectively; stresses that, once somebody is recognised as a whistleblower, the measures taken against him or her should be brought to an end, and the whistleblower should receive full compensation for the damage incurred, such as lost earnings and status and pain and suffering;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 168 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Points out the risk that whistleblowers run of having legal and civil proceedings brought against them; stresses that they are often the weaker party in trials; considers it necessary to provide for a reversal of the burden of proof in respect of retaliation against and pressure on whistleblowers; takes the view that confidentiality should be guaranteed throughout the proceedings and that the identity of the whistleblower may not be disclosed without the individual’s explicit consent, unless it is absolutely necessary in order to carry out criminal proceedings;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 188 #

2016/2224(INI)

18. Stresses the role that trade unions and civil society organisations play in supporting and helping whistleblowers in their dealings within their organisation;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 204 #

2016/2224(INI)

20. Calls on the Member States to introduce an independent body responsible for collecting reports, verifying their credibility and guiding whistleblowers, particularly in the absence of a positive response from their organisation; believes that those independent bodies should be provided with specific support funds;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 215 #

2016/2224(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. consider that, when the result of reporting by a whistleblower ends in a sentence of fiscal damage or damage to the public image, whistleblowers should be awarded with an amount of money proportionate to the recovered sum;
2017/07/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #

2016/2145(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the development of the European Open Science Cloud must take place with due regard for the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR), in particular for the rights of data protection, privacy, liberty and security, and that it must abide by the principles of privacy by design and by default, and the principles of proportionality, necessity, data minimisation and purpose limitation; recognises that additional safeguards, such as pseudonymisation or anonymisation, and cryptography,can enhance protection when personal data and metadata are used in big data applications or cloud computing;
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2016/2145(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the free flow of data is paramount to the digital economy, on the condition of reciprocity, and essential for the development of science and research; emphasises that the Commission initiative on the free flow of data should enable the growing European cloud computing sector to be in the forefront of the global innovation race, including for science and innovation purposes; stresses that the Initiative should also aim to lift any arbitrary restrictions as to where companies should place infrastructure or store data within the EU territory, as these would hamper the development of Europe’s economy; believes that data of European citizens should not circulate, be stored or used in countries that cannot guarantee a level of data protection safeguards similar to the one provided by the EU, in particular an effective right to redress to EU citizens before a court or tribunal;
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2016/2145(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the scientific community needs a secured and safe high-capacity infrastructure in order to advance research and prevent potential security breaches, cyber-attacks or misuse of personal data, especially when large amounts of data and metadata are collected, stored and processed; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support and incentivise the development of the necessary technology, taking into account the security by design approach; supports the Commission’s efforts to enhance cooperation among public authorities, European industry, researchers and academia in the area of big data and cybersecurity from the early stages of the research and innovation process in order to enable innovative and trustworthy European solutions.
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 2
2 Takes the view that evaluating a possible conflict of interests must be based on objective factors and also but not only take into account the portfolio of the Commissioner- designate;
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 7 (a)
a) if, when scrutinising a declaration of financial interests, the Committee onf Legal Affairs deems, on the basis of the documents presented, the declaration to be accurate and to contain nothing indicating an actual or potential conflict of interests in connection with the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate, its Chair shall send a letter confirming this fact to the committees responsible for the hearing or to the committees involved in the event of a procedure taking place during a Commissioner's term of office;
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 42 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 7 (c)
c) if the Committee on Legal Affairs identifies a conflict of interests based on the declaration of financial interests or the supplementary information supplied by the Commissioner-designate, it shall draw up recommendations aimed at resolving the conflict of interests; the recommendations may include renouncing the financial interests in question and/or, changes being made to the portfolio of the Commissioner- designate by the President of the Commission or, in more serious cases, a resignation request in accordance with Article 17(6) of the TEU;
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 45 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines the obligation for all Members of the Commission to ensure that their declarations of interests are regularimmediately updated, whenever there is a change in their financial circumstances which could give rise to a conflict of interests; and calls on the Commission to inform Parliament immediatwithout delay of any substantial changes;
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 56 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the current scope of the Commissioners’ declarations of interests is too limited and calls on the Commission to revise its rules on this as soon as possible6Regulation as soon as possible6, in particular to extend and improve the rules on conflicts of interest with regard to the relationship and associations; ___________________ 6 See paragraph 13 of the European Parliament’s resolution of 8 September 2015 referred to above.
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that, to gain a more complete picture of the financial position of the declaring Commissioner, the declaration referred to in Section 1.4 of the code of conduct for Commissioners should contain added information regarding the relatives, including those related up to the second degree of kinship.
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 63 #

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a Resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that the family interests referred to in point 1.6 of the code of conduct for Commissioners should be included in the declarations of financial interests in the same way as are the financial interests of their partners or spouses, spouse or other relatives up to the second degree of kinship;
2016/09/14
Committee: JURI
Amendment 112 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas pursuant to Article 2 TEU, the EU is founded on respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights, values which are common to the Member States and which must be respected by the EU and by each individual Member State, in all the measures they take; whereas, in accordance with Article 17 TEU, the Commission must ensure the application of the Treaties;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 120 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)
-Aa. whereas Member States cannot reduce the level of guarantees offered in their own constitutions in respect of certain rights on the pretext that the Charter of Fundamental Rights provides for a lower level of protection;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the EU is undergoing a period of economic and financial crisis and the austerity policies of the EU and the Member States have seriously compromised the well-being of citizens and their fundamental rights;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the wording of Article 51 is too restrictive and does not provide sufficient guarantees as to the full respect of fundamental rights in the EU in action taken by individual Member States; whereas the CJEU has interpreted this provision more flexibly, while the Commission continues to interpret it as restrictively as possible;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 144 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas many fundamental rights violations still occur in the EU and in Member States, as pointed out in reports by the Commission, the FRA, NGOs, the Council of Europe and the UN;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union became a fully-fledged component of the Treaties when the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, and is therefore now legally binding on the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the EU and on the Member States when EU legislation is applied; whereas a genuine fundamental rights culture must be developed, fostered and strengthened in the EU and its Member States;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas acts of terrorism constitute one of the most serious violations of fundamental rights and freedoms; whereas it is necessary to have adequate tools in place to protect EU citizens and residents and to respond properly to such violations; whereas measures taken to ensure the safety of citizens must under no circumstances jeopardise fundamental rights;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas, according to the Commission, 75 million people fall victim to crime across the EU every year,deleted
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 224 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas, in application of Article 37 of the Convention on Children’s Rights and the principle of the best interests of the child, unaccompanied or separated children should not, as a general rule, be detained;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas Articles 37 and 38 of the Charter recognise the right to a high level of environmental protection intrinsically linked to the deployment of the policies of the Union;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 226 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas being unemployed, poor or socially marginalised has a major impact as regards gaining access to and exercising fundamental rights;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 291 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the importance of ensuring that the principles set out in Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights are fully implemented, in both EU and national laws; expresses regret and concern about the Commission's reluctance to initiate infringement proceedings with regard to the violations of the Charter;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 298 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that Article 6 TEU requires the EU to accede to the ECHR; calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the aforementioned obligation is met as quickly as possible, on the basis of full transparency and with the aim of enhancing the protection of individuals and making the European institutions more accountable for their actions or failings regarding fundamental rights;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 305 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Calls on the Commission to broaden the scope of the EU Justice Scoreboard to cover the assessment of criminal justice systems and of efforts to uphold fundamental rights and the rule of law;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 307 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the FRA, to submit annual reports on the situation regarding fundamental rights in the EU and in individual Member States; reiterates the importance of preventing infringements of fundamental rights rather than reacting afterwards, when the infringements are repeated; calls on the Commission to propose a revision of the FRA Regulation so that it can be given broader responsibilities and powers;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 308 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Points out that the right of access to justice is vital for the protection of all fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law; calls for direct, easily accessible instruments to be made available to individuals to combat infringements of their fundamental rights by Member States, without giving any discretionary powers to the national courts or the EU institutions;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 309 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to look into the impact on fundamental rights of austerity measures, be they proposed or implemented, taking into account the disproportionate impact these measures have had on employment and growth in Europe; calls for a guarantee that sufficient resources will be made available to safeguard respect for fundamental rights and to ensure minimum essential levels for the enjoyment of civil, economic, cultural and social rights, with a special focus on the most vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups; calls on the EU institutions to take remedial action immediately where austerity measures have had a negative impact on the economic, social and cultural rights of EU citizens;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Encourages the EU and the Member States to open up new legal channels for entering the European Union, so as to reduce the risks inherent in attempting to enter illegally and the loss of migrant lives at sea, to combat human trafficking and exploitation and the risk of forced return;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 328 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1h. Calls on the Commission to put respect for the rights of migrants at the centre of any bilateral or multilateral cooperation agreement with non-EU countries in relation to migration, including the new Migration Partnership Frameworks and readmission agreements;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 353 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Expresses its concern that implementation of the EU-Turkey declaration may, in practice, result in migrants being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 356 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Urges Member States to ensure that arrivals are treated with respect in line with existing legislation regarding fundamental rights and asylum, paying particular attention to the most vulnerable and seeking to minimise the risk of asylum seekers suffering social exclusion;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 404 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Expresses concern at migrant reception fund management being infiltrated by organised crime and calls on the Commission to monitor closely the use of these funds and ensure that any irregularities are investigated and those responsible prosecuted;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 405 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and fair treatment for all citizens; stresses that, by diverting public funds from their intended public use, corruption detracts from the level and quality of public services and hence undermines our fundamental rights; calls on the Member States and institutions to devise effective ways of combating corruption, regularly monitoring the use made of both European and national public funds;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 419 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Urges the European Commission to adopt an anti-corruption strategy backed up by effective instruments; calls on all Member States and the EU to join the Open Government Partnership and to devise concrete strategies to promote transparency, empower citizens and combat corruption; calls on the Member States to follow up the recommendations contained in the Commission’s anti- corruption report and Parliament’s resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken; urges them to step up police and judicial cooperation in combating corruption;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 434 #

2016/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Takes the view that respect for fundamental rights and guaranteed collective safety are compatible goals and should always be given equal weight, even when responding to emergency situations; stresses that the former should not be sacrificed to the dictates of the latter, especially when acting in response to the terrorist threat;
2016/09/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) It is important to facilitate the mutual recognition and execution of orders to freeze and to confiscate property by establishing rules obliging a Member State to recognise and execute in its territory freezing and confiscation orders issued by another Member State within the framework of criminal proceedingsa criminal action. The mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation procedures in criminal matters is intended to establish an effective mechanism for the cross-border recognition and enforcement of such judgments, this being one of the most effective means of combating crime. The effectiveness of such a mechanism should ensure the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation procedures provided that they are ordered in connection with national court proceedings, which, without necessarily being criminal proceedings, meet the essential requirements thereof.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) This Regulation should apply to all confiscation orders imposed by a court following proceedings in relaand issued in connection towith a criminal offenceaction and all freezing orders issued with a view to possible subsequent confiscation. It should therefore cover all types of orders covered by Directive 2014/42/EU, as well as other types of orders issued without final conviction within the framework of criminal proceedingsfreezing and confiscation orders issued within the framework of a criminal action, including extended confiscation, third-party confiscation and non-conviction based confiscation orders. Where such measures do not exist in the legal system of a Member State, the latter should be able to recognise and enforce the order issued in another Member State where it is imposed by a court with jurisdiction in criminal matters, and following procedures fully respecting the formal rights of respondents and defendants in criminal proceedings and property-related proceedings presumed - on the basis of facts - to arise from a criminal offence. This Regulation should not apply to freezing and confiscation orders issued within the framework of civil or administrative proceedings.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 83 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) This Regulation should be applied taking into account Directives 2010/64/EU30, 2012/13/EU31, 2013/48/EU32, 2016/34333, 2016/80034 and 2016/191935 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which concern procedural rights in criminal proceedings. Directives on procedural rights in criminal proceedings apply only to criminal proceedings involving Member States that are bound by it. In addition, the basic rules of criminal procedure under the Charter apply to the conduct of proceedings that, while not strictly speaking criminal in nature, arise in connection with criminal proceedings. _________________ 30 Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p. 1). 31 Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p. 1). 32 Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty (OJ L 294, 6.11.2013, p. 1). 33 Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ L 65, 11.3.2016, p. 1). 34 Directive (EU) 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings (OJ L 132, 21.5.2016, p. 1). 35 Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings (OJ L 297, 4.11.2016, p.1).
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down the rules under which a Member State shall recognise and execute in its territory a freezing or a confiscation order issued by another Member State within the framework of a criminal proceedingsaction.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 125 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
- terrorism, including the offences set out in Directive 2017/541/EU;
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
- enslavement and trafficking in human beings,
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 9 a (new)
- tax offences relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes, including evading taxes by concealing income, earned either legally or illegally, from detection and collection by the tax authorities;
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 13
- environmental crime, including illicit waste dumping and trafficking and illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties,
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 153 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The issuing authority shall immediately and at the latest within 24 hours inform the executing authority by any means capable of producing a written record:
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 156 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. As soon as the execution of the order has been completed the executing authority shall informmmediately and at the latest within 24 hours notify the issuing authority by any means capable of producing a written record.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 171 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The executing authority shall take the decision on the recognition and execution of the confiscation order without delay and, without prejudice to paragraph 5, no later than 310 days after the executing authority has received the confiscation order.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 173 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. The executing authority shall immediately and at the latest within 10 days communicate the decision on a confiscation order to the issuing authority without delay by any means capable of producing a written record.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 175 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Unless grounds for postponement pursuant to Article 11 exist, the executing authority shall carry out the confiscation without delay and without prejudice to paragraph 5 of this Article, not later than 310 days following the taking of the decision referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The executing authority shall without dimmediatelay make a report toand at the latest within 24 hours notify the issuing authority by any means capable of producing a written record on the postponement of the execution of the order, including the grounds for the postponement and, if possible, the expected duration of the postponement.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 182 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. As soon as the ground for postponement has ceased to exist, the executing authority shall without delimmediately and at the latest within 10 days take the necessary measures for the execution of the order and inform the issuing authority thereof by any means capable of producing a written record.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 185 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Where it is impossible to execute the confiscation order because the property to be confiscated has already been confiscated, has disappeared, has been destroyed, or cannot be found in the location indicated in the certificate or because the location of the property has not been indicated in a sufficiently precise manner, even after consultation with the issuing authority, the issuing authority shall be notified without delayimmediately and at the latest within 24 hours. Where possible, the order may be executed on other property in accordance with Article 8(2) or (3).
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 187 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the issuing of the order is necessary and proportionate in order to provisionally prevent the destruction, transformation, moving, transfer or disposal of property with a view to possible subsequent confiscation taking into account the rights of the person concerned and any third parties acting in good faith;
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the reason or reasons for the order are properly indicated, at least briefly.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 213 #

2016/0412(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. The executing authority shall communicate the decision on a freezing order to the issuing authority without dimmediatelay by any means capable of producing a written record.
2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) In order to contribute to the functioning of the internal market, to move towards a fully-fledged digital single market, to promote cultural and linguistic diversity, social cohesion and to increase access to information and content, it is necessary to provide for wider dissemination of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States, for the benefit of users and businesses across the Union by facilitating licensing of copyright and related rights in works and other protected subject-matter contained in broadcasts of such programmes. Indeed, television and radio programmes are important means of promoting cultural and linguistic diversity, social cohesion and access to information.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) The development of digital technologies and internet has transformed the production, the distribution of and access to television and radio programmes, changing tremendously the market and contributing to stimulate competition with established players and ultimately fostering creativity. Users increasingly expect to have access to television and radio programmes, as well as other services, both live and on- demand, using traditional channels such as satellite or cable and also through online services. Broadcasting organisations are therefore increasingly offering, in addition to their own broadcasts of television and radio programmes, online services ancillary to their broadcast, such as simulcasting and catch-up services. Furthermore, broadcasting organisations and service providers are also making TV and radio- like programmes available through linear online-only transmissions (for example, webcasting services), which represent a growing reality in the market, offering a new user experience. Retransmission services operators, which aggregate broadcasts of television and radio programmes into packages and provide them to users simultaneously to the initial transmission of the broadcast, unaltered and unabridged, use various techniques of retransmission such as cable, satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based or mobile networks as well as the open internet. On the part of users, there is a growing demand for access to broadcasts of television and radio programmes not only originating in their Member State but also in other Member States of the Union, including from members of linguistic minorities of the Union as well as from persons who live in another Member State than their Member State of origin.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) A number of barriers hinder the provision of online services which are ancillary to broadcasts and the provision of retransmission services and thereby the free circulation of television and radio programmes within the Union. Broadcasting organisations transmit daily many hours of news, cultural, political, documentary or entertainment programmes. These programmes incorporate a variety of content such as audiovisual, musical, literary or graphic works, which is protected by copyright and/or related rights under Union law. That results in a complex process to clear rights from a multitude of right holders and for different categories of works and other protected subject matter. Often the rights need to be cleared in a short time-frame, in particular when preparing programmes such as news or current affairs. In order to make their online services available across borders, broadcasting organisations need to have the required rights to works and other protected subject matter for all the relevant territories which further increases the complexity of the rights' clearance.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 49 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Operators of retransmission services, that normally offer multiple programmes which use a multitude of works and other protected subject matter included in the retransmitted television and radio programmes, have a very short time- frame for obtaining the necessary licences and hence also face a significant rights clearing burden. There is also a risk for authors, creators and right holders of having their works and other protected subject matter exploited without authorisation or payment of fair remuneration.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 54 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) There is the need to strike the right balance between a high-level protection of authors, creators and rightholders and the public goal of favouring the dissemination and access to information, knowledge and content within the internal market.In this view, the right of citizens and consumers to have cross-border access to television and radio programmes as well as other online services should be guaranteed.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 58 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) Council Directive 93/83/EEC17 facilitates cross-border satellite broadcasting and retransmission by cable of television and radio programmes from other Member States of the Union. However, the provisions of that Directive on transmissions of broadcasting organisations are limited to satellite transmissions and therefore do not apply to online services ancillary to broadcast while the provisions concerning retransmissions of television and radio programmes from other Member States are limited to simultaneous, unaltered and unabridged retransmission by cable or microwave systems and do not extend to such retransmissions by means of other technologies. _________________ 17 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15– 21.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 72 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) Therefore, cross-border provision of online services ancillary to broadcast and retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States should be facilitated by adapting the legal framework on the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for those activities.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 77 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The ancillary online services covered by this Regulation are those services offered by broadcasting organisations whichand service providers, which could have a clear and subordinate relationship to the broadcast or consist in online-only TV and radio-like services. They include services giving access to television and radio programmes in a linear manner simultaneously to the broadcast and services giving access, within a defined time period after the broadcast, to television and radio programmes which have been previously broadcast by the broadcasting organisation (so-called catch- up services). In addition, ancillary online services include and services which give access to material which enriches or otherwise expands television and radio programmes broadcast by the broadcasting organisation, including by way of previewing, extending, supplementing or reviewing the relevant programme's content. The provisIn addition, of acnline servicess to individual works or other protected subject matter that have been incorporated in a television or radio programme should not be regarded as an ancillary online service. Similarly, tinclude: online-only linear transmission (for example, webcasting), not linked to the broadcast, transmitted by broadcasting organisations and/or services providers, services provided simultaneously with, or for a defined period of time after, their transmission, services giving access to any material, produced by or for the broadcasting organisation or the service provider, ancillary to such transmission. The provision of access to individual works or other protected subject matter independently of broadcast, such as services givthat have been incorporated ing access to individual musical television or raudiovisual works, music albums or videos, do not fall under the definition of ancillary programme should not be regarded as an online service.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 89 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) In order to facilitate the clearance of rights for the provision of ancillary online services across borders it is necessary to provide for the establishment of the country of origin principle as regards the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for acts occurring in the course of the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service. That principle of country of origin should apply exclusively to the relationship between right holders (or entities representing right holders such as collective management organisations) and broadcasting organisations and solely for the purpose of the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service. The principle of country of origin should not applyor service providers and to any subsequent communication to the public or reproduction of content which is protected by copyright or related rights and which is contained in the ancillary online service.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 101 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Since the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service is deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation or the service provider has its principal establishment, while de facto the ancillary online service can be provided across borders to other Member States, it is necessary to ensure that in arriving at the amount of the payment to be made for the rights in question, the parties should take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the nature and features of the service, the audience, including the audience in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation or service provider has its principal establishment and in other Member States in which the ancillary online service is accessed and used, and the language version.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 110 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) Through the principle of contractual freedom it will be possible to continue limiting the exploitation of the rights affected by the principle of country of origin laid down in this Regulation, especially as far as certain technical means of transmission or certain language versions are concerned, provided that any such limitations of the exploitation of those rights are in compliance with Union law, in particular competition provisions.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 118 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based, mobile and similar networksvia an open internet access service provided in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council, provide services which are equivalent to those provided by operators of cable retransmission services when they retransmit simultaneously, in an unaltered and unabridged manner, for reception by the public, an initial transmission from another Member State of television or radio programmes, where this initial transmission is by wire or over the air, including by satellite but excludingand online transmissions, and intended for reception by the public. They should therefore be within the scope of this Regulation and benefit from the mechanism introducing mandatory collective management of rights. Retransmission services which are offered on the open internet should be exincluded fromwithin the scope of this Regulation asif those services have different characteristics. They are not linked to any particular infrastructure and their ability to ensure a controlled environment is limited when compared for example to cable or closed circuit IP-based networksey can ensure a controlled environment and therefore there is a definable number of users. Access to such environment could be granted in exchange of monetary or non monetary consideration.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 132 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In order to provide legal certainty to operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based, mobile or similar networks, as well as via the open internet as long as the number of users is definable, and to overcome disparities in national law regarding such retransmission services, rules similar to those that apply to cable retransmission as defined in Directive 93/83/EEC should apply. The rules established in that Directive include the obligation to exercise the right to grant or refuse authorisation to an operator of a retransmission service through a collective management organisation. This is without prejudice to Directive 2014/26/EU18 and in particular to its provisions concerning rights of right holders with regard to the choice of a collective management organisation. _________________ 18 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi- territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market, OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p. 72–98.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 161 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to prevent circumvention of the application of the country of origin principle through the extension of the duration of existing agreements concerning the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for the provision of an ancillary online service as well as the access to or the use of an ancillary online service, it is necessary to apply the principle of country of origin also to existing agreements but with a limited transitional period.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 174 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Whilst there may be an interference with the exercise of the rights of right holders insofar as mandatory collective management is required for the exercise of the right of communication to the public with regard to retransmission services, it is necessary to prescribe such a condition in a targeted manner for specific services and in order to allow more widespread cross- border dissemination of television and radio programmes as well as access to information and content, by facilitating the clearance of these rights.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 178 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) In order to achieve the objective of promoting the cross-border provision of ancillary online services and of facilitating retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States, it is appropriate to adopt a Regulation, which directly applies in Member States. A Regulation is necessary in order to guarantee a uniform application of the rules across Member States and their entering into force at the same time with regard to all the concerned transmissions and retransmissions. The direct applicability of a Regulation reduces legal fragmentation and provides greater uniformity by introducing a harmonised set of rules which promote the free circulation of television and radio programmes and other online-only linear transmissions originating in other Member States.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 180 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) A review of the Regulation should be undertaken after the Regulation has been in force for a period of time, in order to assess, among others, to what extent the cross-border provision of ancillary online services has increased to the benefit of European consumers and businesses, and hence also to the benefit of improved cultural diversity in the Union. Such a review should also include an impact assessment on the necessity to include in the scope of this Regulation those operators that transmit to the public television and/or radio programmes of broadcasting organisations received through direct injection techniques.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 184 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) A review of the Regulation should be undertaken after the Regulation has been in force for a period of time, in order to assess, among others, to what extent the cross-border provision of ancillary online services has increased to the benefit of European consumers and hence also to the benefit of improved cultural diversity in the Union.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 188 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely promoting the cross- border provision of ancillary online services and facilitating retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve its objective. As concerns the cross-border provision of ancillary online services, this Regulation establishes enabling mechanisms to facilitate the clearance of copyright and related rights. This Regulation does not oblige broadcasting organisations to provide such services across borders. Neither does this Regulation oblige operators of retransmission services to include in their services television or radio programmes originating in other Member States. This Regulation concerns only the exercise of certain retransmission rights to the extent necessary to simplify the licensing of copyright and related rights for such services and only with regard to television and radio programmes originating in other Member States of the Union,
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 197 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) "ancillary online service" means an online service consisting in the provision to the public of: i) radio or television programmes, by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation, of radio or television programmes simultaneously with or for a defined period of time after their broadcast by the broadcasting organisation as well as of any material produced by or for the broadcasting organisation which is ancillary to such broadcast; or ii) linear transmissions of radio or television-like programmes, under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation or a service provider and on the basis of a schedule, which are not linked to a broadcast but transmitted only online, and any other service provided simultaneously with, or for a defined period of time after, such transmissions as well as services giving access to material, produced by or for the broadcasting organisation or the service provider, ancillary to such transmissions;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 207 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) "retransmission" means any simultaneous, unaltered and unabridged retransmission, other than cable retransmission as defined in Directive 93/83/EEC and other than retransmission provided over an internet access service as defined in Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council19 , intended for reception by the public of an initial transmission from another Member State, by wire or over the air, including that by satellite but excluding online transmission, intended for reception by the public of an initial transmission from another Member State, irrespective of the retransmission technology or network used providing that the retransmission takes place in a controlled environment, of television or radio programmes intended for the reception by the public, provided that such retransmission is made by a party other than the broadcasting organisation which made the initial transmission or under whose control and responsibility such transmission was made. _________________ 19 European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 5312015/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union, OJ L 310, 26.11.2015, p. 1.0 of the
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 221 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) "controlled environment" means any environment in which a retransmission operator provides a retransmission service to a definable group of users;
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 235 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – title
Application of the principle of ‘country of origin’ to ancillary online services
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 245 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
(1) The acts of communication to the public and of making available occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation or a service provider as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of the ancillary online service shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation or the service provider has its principal establishment.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 260 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
(2) When fixing the amount of the payment to be made for the rights subject to the country of origin principle as set out in paragraph 1, the parties shall take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the nature and features of the ancillary online service, the audience, and the language version.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 291 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
(4) A right holder shall have the same rights and obligations resulting from the agreement between the operator of the retransmission service and the collective management organisation which is deemed to be mandated to manage his or her right as the right holders who have mandated that collective management organisation and shall be able to claim those rights within a period, to be fixed by the Member State concerned, which shall not be shorter than threfive years from the date of the retransmission which includes his or her work or other protected subject matter.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 326 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Agreements on the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for the acts of communication to the public and the making available occurring in the course of provision of an ancillary online service as well as for the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service which are in force on [the date mentioned in Article 7(2), to be inserted by OPOCE ] shall be subject to Article 2 as from [the date mentioned in Article 7(2) + 2 years, to be inserted by OPOCE] if they expire after that date.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 328 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
(1) No later than [3 years after the date mentioned in Article 7(2) to be inserted by OPOCE], the Commission shall carry out a review of this Regulation and present a report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. The report shall be made easily and effectively accessible to the public.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 329 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
(2) Member States shall provide the Commission, in a timely and accurate manner, with the necessary information for the preparation of the report referred to in paragraph 1.
2017/06/23
Committee: JURI
Amendment 14 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 18 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchercitizens, startups, researchers and journalists to process large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefitalso benefit citizen science, business, the research community and journalism and in so doing encourage innovation. However, in the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutesindividuals and legal entities having lawful access to content are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of contentthereof. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject- matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholders. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 22 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researcherindividuals and legal entities have lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As both research isand business are increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 28 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database, including raw data. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisationLegal entities should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 37 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC allows Member States to introduce an exception or limitation to the rights of reproduction, communication to the public and making available to the public for the sole purpose of, among others, illustration for teaching or scientific research. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of a database and the extraction or re-utilization of a substantial part of its contents for the purpose of illustration for teaching. The scope of those exceptions or limitations as they apply to digital uses is unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity as to whether those exceptions or limitations would apply where teaching is provided online and thereby at a distance. Moreover, the existing framework does not provide for a cross-border effect, nor allow the application of such exceptions or limitations to private study purposes. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning, scientific research and private study. Therefore, the introduction of a new mandatory exception or limitation is necessary to ensure that educational establishments benefit from full legal certainty when using works or other subject-matter in digitall teaching activities, scientific research and private study, including digital,online and across borders.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 40 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educationalSuch tools are also used in scientific research and private study activities. The exception provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational, scientific and private study activityies for a non-commercial purpose. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 43 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digitall uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limita, the scientific research and private study. The exception should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching or scientific research, as well as private study.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 46 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digitall uses and cross- border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism would, for example, allow giving precedence to licences for materials which are primarily intended for the educational market. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustrascientific research and private study, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper in any way the effective application of the exception for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemcross- border uses.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 63 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 65 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 69 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to define the concept of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weekly or monthly magazines of general or special interest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 74 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Citation 1 a (new)
Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 11, 14, 16, 17, 38 thereof,
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 75 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 76 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The directives which have been adopted in the area of copyright and related rights provide for a high level of protection for rightarmonised legal framework, which contributes to the good functioning of the internal market. This legal framework shoulders and create a framework wherein the exploitation of work however be updated, taking into account new digital technologies that pose new challenges in finding the right balance between the protection of intellectual property rights and other protected subject-matter can take place. This harmonised legal framework contributes to the good functioning of the internal market; it stimulate new possibilities for consumers and businesses to create, innovate, access and exchange copyright-protected works and other subject matter. Furthermore, it should be acknowledged that there is an increasing number of cases where copyright hampers innovation, and creativity, investment and production of new content, also rather than fostering them. An updated legal framework would contribute to the general public goal of increasing access to, and favouring the digital environment. The protection provided by this legal framework also contributesssemination of, creative content, information and knowledge, and to the Union's objective of respecting and promoting cultural diversity while at the same time bringing the European common cultural heritage to the fore. Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 81 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploitnjoyed. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, changing tremendously the market, contributing to stimulating competition with the established players and fostering creativity and innovation. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework need to be updated and adapted in order to increase access to and dissemination of content, information and knowledge within the internal market. Indeed, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms, and the use of works and other subject matters belonging to the public domain, with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning and fair marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 83 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 84 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement of right holders have flourished and have become main sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject-matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 93 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
(38) Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. _________________ 34Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 93 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) In the fields of research, education and, preservation of cultural heritage and public lending of literary works, digital technologies permit new types of uses that are not clearly covered by the current Union rules on exceptions and limitations. In addition, the optional nature of exceptions and limitations provided for in Directives 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively impact the functioning of the internal market and the access to creative content, information and knowledge. This is particularly relevant as regards cross-border uses, which are becoming increasingly important in the digital environment. Therefore, the existing exceptions and limitations in Union law that are relevant for scientific research, teaching and, preservation of cultural heritage and public lending of literary works, should be reassessed in the light of those new uses. Mandatory exceptions or limitations for uses of text and data mining technologies in the field of scientific research, illustration for teaching and scientific research in the digital environment and for, preservation of cultural heritage, public lending of literary works, and out-of-commerce works should be introduced. For uses not covered by the exceptions or the limitation provided for in this Directive, the exceptions and limitations existing in Union law should continue to apply. Directives 96/9/EC, 2001/29/EC and 2001/296/115/EC should be adapted.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 94 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 102 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) The exceptions and the limitation set out in this Directive seek to achieve a fair balance between the specific rights and interests of authors and other rightholders on the one hand, and of users on the other. They can be applied only in certain special cases which do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the works or other subject- matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholders. The public goal of favouring the creation, dissemination and access to content, information and knowledge within the internal market should be also duly taken into account in the balance of the different interests at stake.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 103 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 107 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Consumers are not only users but are increasingly, in particular in a digital environment, also creators and distributors of works created by themselves, albeit for non-commercial purposes.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 109 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 109 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) The protection of technological measures established in Directive 2001/29/EC remains essentialimportant to ensure the protection and the effective exercise of the rights granted to authors and to other rightholders under Union law. This protection should be maintained while ensuring that the use of technological measures does not prevent or hinder in any way the enjoyment of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive, which are particularly relevant in the online environment. Rightholders should have the opportunity to ensure this through voluntary effective measures. They should remain free to choose the format and the modalities to provide the beneficiaries of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive with the means to effectively benefit from them provided that such means are appropritransparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate. In the absence of voluntary effective measures, Member States should take appropriate measures in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 115 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 117 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchercitizens, startups, researchers and journalists to process large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefitalso benefit citizen science, business, the research community and journalism and, in so doing, encourage innovation. However, in the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutesindividuals and legal entities having authorised access to content are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of contentthereof. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject- matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholders. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 127 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researchers have lawfulindividuals and legal entities have authorised access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As both research isand business are increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 130 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation of a collection of literary works of a journalistic nature, which may also comprise other works or subject-matter and constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly-updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine, having the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics and published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 133 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and, Article 11(1) of this Directive, and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC for reproductions and extractions made by research organisationpersons or legal entities in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful access for the purposes of scientific research.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 144 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 146 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database, including raw data. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations shLegal entities could also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 148 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) It should be noted that technological innovation can make legal rules obsolete and to counter this, it would be advisable to simplify and modernise the legal framework for copyright and related rights by introducing an open standard concerning the interpretation of exceptions and limitations.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 149 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisationbeneficiaries to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3across the Union concerning the development of technologies implementing the exception provided for in paragraph 1 as well as the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3. These best practices shall be made easily and effectively accessible to the public.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 152 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety of entities the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due to the diversity of such entities, it is important to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exception. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public- interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 156 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 411(1) of this Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 114(1) of this Directive 2009/24/EC in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research, including private study, to the extent justified by the non- commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use: is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 160 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) takes place on the premises of an educational establishment or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and teaching staff;deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 161 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to and downloads of their works or other subject- matter, rRightholders should be allowed to apply measures where there is risk that the security and integrity of the system or databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted wcould be jeopardised. Those measures should be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and not exceed what is necessary to pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine in any way the effective application of the exception.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 164 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 166 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 168 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States may provide that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of works or other subject- matter, to the extent that adequate licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 are easily available in the market.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 171 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States availing themselves of the provision of the first subparagraph shall take the necessary measures to ensure appropriate availability and visibility of the licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 for educational establishments.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 172 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC allows Member States to introduce an exception or limitation to the rights of reproduction, communication to the public and making available to the public for the sole purpose of, among others, illustration for teaching or scientific research. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of a database and the extraction or re-utilization of a substantial part of its contents for the purpose of illustration for teaching. The scope of those exceptions or limitations as they apply to digital uses is unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity as to whether those exceptions or limitations would apply where teaching is provided online and thereby at a distance. Moreover, the existing framework does not provide for a cross-border effect, nor allow the application of such exceptions or limitations to private study purposes. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning, scientific research and private study. Therefore, the introduction of a new mandatory exception or limitation is necessary to ensure that educational establishments benefit from full legal certainty when using works or other subject-matter in digitall teaching activities, includingscientific research and private study, including digital, online and across borders.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 176 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching through secure electronic networksor scientific research, including private study, undertaken in compliance with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the educational establishmentbeneficiary is established.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 178 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. 4. Member States may provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by theany unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 184 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. Such tools are also used in scientific research and private study activities. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educational activity for a non-commercial purpose, scientific and private study activities for a non- commercial purpose. Access to works and other subject matter should take place through a secure electronic network. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 189 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Protection of press publications 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject- matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted concerning digital uses
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 190 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital usall uses, including digital and online ones, of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limita, the scientific research and private study. The exception should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching or scientific research, as well as private study.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 202 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digitall uses and cross-border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism would, for example, allow giving precedence to licences for materials which are primarily intended for the educational market. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustrascientific research and private study, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper in any way the effective application of the exception for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemcross-border uses.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 208 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 218 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) Different approaches in the Member States for acts of preservation by cultural heritage institutions hamper cross- border cooperation and the sharing of means of preservation by cultural heritage institutions in the internal market, leading to an inefficient use of resources and risking to negatively affect the preservation of cultural heritage.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 219 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 223 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) Member States should therefore be required to provide for an exception to permit cultural heritage institutions to reproduce works and other subject-matter permanently in their collections for preservation purposes, such as traditions and intangible cultural heritage, for example to address technological obsolescence or, the degradation of original supports or the loss of oral or intangible heritage. Such an exception should allow for the making of copies by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in the required number and at any point in the life of a work or other subject-matter to the extent required in order to produce a copy for preservation, consultation, cataloguing and filing purposes only.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 225 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 226 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) Member States should therefore be required to provide for an exception to permit cultural heritage institutions to reproduce works and other subject-matter permanently in their collections for preservation purposes, for example to address technological obsolescence or, the degradation of original supports and digitisation. Such an exception should allow for the making of copies by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in the required number and at any point in the life of a work or other subject-matter to the extent required in order to produce a copy for preservation purposes only.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 237 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) It should be acknowledged the importance of certain exceptions and limitations already provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, and the need to ensure legal certainty and harmonisation within the internal market. To this end such exceptions and limitations should be made mandatory. It should also be recognised that new technologies are enhancing and changing the ways in which the uses of copyrighted works or other subject matter can take place and be enjoyed, which often are not detrimental to rightholders. Therefore a general de minimis exception should be introduced in order to take into account technological developments.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 241 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) In view of allowing citizens and consumers to fully benefit from the opportunities offered by new technologies, public lending of literary works, including e-lending, should be permitted within the internal market. The concept of lending, within the meaning of Articles 1(1), 2(1)(b) and 6(1) of Directive 2006/115/EC, covers the lending not only of physical books, but also of a digital copy thereof. When Member States apply the derogation set out in Article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC, libraries should be able to buy any physical book on the market. Once purchased, they can lend it without restrictions linked to contract terms or other measures of protection which prevent the exercise of exceptions and limitations to copyright. These provisions should also apply to e-books. In order to achieve legal certainty and harmonisation within the internal market, Member States should ensure that the exception to the exclusive public lending right set out in article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC should be mandatory.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 247 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) Cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non- commercial documentation centers should benefit from a clear framework for the digitisation and dissemination, including across borders, of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter. However, the particular characteristics of the collections of out-of-commerce works mean that obtaining the prior consent of the individual rightholders may be very difficult. This can be due, for example, to the age of the works or other subject- matter, their limited commercial value or the fact that they were never intended for commercial use. It is therefore necessary to provide for measures to facilitate the licensing of rights inavailability of out-of-commerce works that are in the collections of cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers and thereby to allow the conclusion of agreements with cross- border effect in the internal market.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 254 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
(23) Member States should, within the framework provided for in this Directive, have flexibility in choosing the specific type of legal mechanism allowing for licences for out-of-commerce works to extend to the rights of rightholders that are not represented by the collective management organisation, in accordance to their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms can include extended collective licensing and presumptions of representationcultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers to digitise, distribute, communicate to the public or make available the out-of-commerce works permanently in their collection, in accordance to their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms should allow rightholders to exclude their works, on the basis of reasonable evidence, and can include extended collective licensing and presumptions of representation. In any case, Member States should be required to provide for a mandatory general exception, applying where collective management organisations do not exist, or are unable to achieve sufficient representativity, or to offer easily available licences to cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers for the types of works and other subject matter held in their collections.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 257 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) For the purpose of those possible licensing mechanisms, a rigorous and well- functioning collective management system is important. That system includes in particular rules of good governance, transparency and reporting, as well as the regular, diligent and accurate distribution and payment of amounts due to individual rightholders, as provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU. Additional appropriate safeguards should be available for all rightholders, who should be given the opportunity to exclude the application of such mechanisms to their works or other subject-matter. Conditions attached to those mechanisms should not affect their practical relevance for cultural heritage institutions.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 258 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
(25) Considering the variety of works and other subject-matter in the collections of cultural heritage institutions, it is important that the potential licensing mechanisms introduced by this Directive areare easily available and can be used in practice for different types of works and other subject-matter, including photographs, sound recordings and audiovisual works. In order to reflect the specificities of different categories of works and other subject-matter as regards modes of publication and distribution and to facilitate the usability of those mechanisms, specific requirements and procedures may have to be established by Member States for the practical application of those potential licensing mechanisms. It is appropriate that Member States consult rightholders, users, cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments, other non-commercial documentation centers and collective management organisations when doing so.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 259 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The provisions of Article 11 shall also apply to press publications published before [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 264 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
(26) For reasons of international comity, the licensing mechanisms for the digitisation and dissemination of out-of- commerce works provided for in this Directive should not apply to works or other subject-matter that are first published or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in a third country or, in the case of cinematographic or audiovisual works, to works the producer of which has his headquarters or habitual residence in a third country. Those mechanisms should also not apply to works or other subject- matter of third country nationals except when they are first published or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in the territory of a Member State or, in the case of cinematographic or audiovisual works, to works of which the producer's headquarters or habitual residence is in a Member State.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 266 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) As mass digitisation projects can entail significant investments by cultural heritage institutions, any licences granted under the mechanisms provided for in this Directive should not prevent them from generating reasonable revenues in orderthat should be allocated only to cover the costs of the licence and the costs of digitising and disseminating the works and other subject- matter covered by the licence.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 269 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Information regarding the future and ongoing use of out-of-commerce works and other subject-matter by cultural heritage institutions on the basis of the licensing mechanism, educational establishments, other non-commercial documentation centers provided for in this Directive and the arrangements in place for all rightholders to exclude the application of licences to their works or other subject- matter should be adequately publicised. This is particularly important when uses take place across borders in the internal market. It is therefore appropriate to make provision for the creation of a single publicly accessible online portal for the Union to make such information available to the public for a reasonable period of timepermanently, easily and effectively available to the public, in any case for at least six months before the cross-border use takes place. Under Regulation (EU) No 386/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , the European Union Intellectual Property Office is entrusted with certain tasks and activities, financed by making use of its own budgetary measures, aiming at facilitating and supporting the activities of national authorities, the private sector and Union institutions in the fight against, including the prevention of, infringement of intellectual property rights. It is therefore appropriate to rely on that Office to establish and manage the European portal making such information available. _________________ 33 Regulation (EU) No 386/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 April 2012 on entrusting the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) with tasks related to the enforcement of intellectual property rights, including the assembling of public and private-sector representatives as a European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights (OJ L 129, 16.5.2012, p. 1–6).
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 270 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) In order to substantiate the general public goal of increasing access to, and favouring the dissemination of, creative content, information and knowledge and to ensure legal certainty within the internal market, a definition of public domain should be introduced. It should also be highlighted that the ultimate goal of most authors, performers and creators is primarily the human and societal development and prosperity rather than the potential economic gain.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 271 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 b (new)
(28 b) It is of the utmost importance to clarify that once a work or other subject matter is in the public domain, any faithful reproduction, whether analogical or digital, of that work or subject matter, which does not constitute a new or transformative work or subject matter, should remain in the public domain. Public domain should encompass works or other subject matter whose copyright have expired, or have never existed or have been voluntarily relinquished by rightholders.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 272 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 c (new)
(28 c) When the copyright expires on a work or other subject matter, it could be extremely difficult to establish that such work or subject matter has passed into the public domain. Public domain works or other subject matter could never be identified, thus hindering access to content, information and knowledge. Member States should allow authors, performers and producers, who do not intend to copyright their work or other subject matter, to dedicate it, in whole or in part, to the public domain. Indeed, it should be acknowledged that the ultimate goal of most authors, performers and creators is primarily the human and societal development and prosperity rather than the potential economic gain. In light of this, Member States should encourage the use of appropriate public domain equivalent licences (e.g. creative commons). This would help authors, performers and producers to makes it clear to potential re-users that the work is in the public domain, thus spreading the dissemination of content, information and knowledge.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 274 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) On-demand services have the potential to play a decisive role in the dissemination of European works across the European Union. However, agreements on the online exploitationnjoyment of such works may face difficulties related to the licensing of rights. Such issues may, for instance, appear when the holder of the rights for a given territory is not interested in the online exploitation of the work or where there are issues linked to the windows of exploitation.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 277 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights in audiovisual works to video-on-demand platforms, this Directive requires Member States to set up a negotiation mechanism allowing parties willing to conclude an agreement to rely on the assistance of an impartial public body. The body should meet with the parties and help with the negotiations by providing professional and, external, impartial and affordable advice. Against that background, Member States should decide on the conditions of the functioning of the negotiation mechanism, including the timing and duration of the assistance to negotiations and, the bearing of the costs and the composition of such bodies. Member States should ensure that administrative and financial burdens remain proportionate to guarantee the efficiency of the negotiation forum.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 281 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 282 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 294 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 295 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 308 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to define the concept of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weekly or monthly magazines of general or special interest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 312 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 325 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 326 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 340 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 341 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 350 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
(36) Publishers, including those of press publications, books or scientific publications, often operate on the basis of the transfer of authors' rights by means of contractual agreements or statutory provisions. In this context, publishers make an investment with a view to the exploitation of the works contained in their publications and may in some instances be deprived of revenues where such works are used under exceptions or limitations such as the ones for private copying and reprography. In a number of Member States compensation for uses under those exceptions is shared between authors and publishers. In order to take account of this situation and improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, Member States should be allowed to determine that, when an author has transferred or licensed his rights to a publisher or otherwise contributes with his works to a publication and there are systems in place to compensate for the harm caused by an exception or limitation, publishers are entitled to claim a share of such compensation, whereas the burden on the publisher to substantiate his claim should not exceed what is required under the system in place.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 359 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement of right holders have flourished and have become main sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject-matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 381 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
(38) Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 383 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 404 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 414 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 434 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 461 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors, creators and performers needoften face a lack of transparency regarding the information they need to assess and the economic value of their rights, which are harmonised under Union law. This is especially the case where such rightholders grant a licence or a transfer of rights in return for remuneration. AsSuch information should be adequate, accurate and comprehensive in order to allow authors and performers, who tend to be in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of theirose rights, compared to the remuneration receivoriginally agreed for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate, accurate and comprehensive information by their contractual counterparts or their successors in title is importantessential for the transparency and balance, equality and fairness in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 470 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
(41) When implementing transparency obligations, the specificities of different content sectors and of the rights of the authors and performers in each sector should be considered. Member States should consult all relevant stakeholders as that shcould help determine sector-specific requirements. Collective bargaining shouldmay be considered as an option to reach an agreement between the relevant stakeholders regarding transparency. To enable the adaptation of current reporting practices to the transparency obligations, a transitional period should be provided for. The transparency obligations do not need to apply to agreements concluded with collective management organisations as those are already subject to transparency obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 471 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) The creative drive is present in every human being, and needs to be nurtured, protected and stimulated in order to lay the foundations for the continuous renewal of creative talents. Therefore, the fundamental and prominent role of authors, creators and performers in the creative process and within society should be recognised. To this end, Member States should ensure that they are entitled to a fair and proportionate remuneration of the revenues derived from the exploitation of their works.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 477 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
(42) Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive. Such mechanism should allow authors and performers, individually or through representative organisations, to claim an additional and equitable remuneration. The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectors. Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent judicial authority.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 482 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
(43) Authors and performers are often reluctant to enforce their rights against their contractual partners before a court or tribunal. Member States should therefore provide for an voluntary and public alternative dispute resolution procedure that addresses claims related to obligations of transparency and the contract adjustment mechanism.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 488 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive lays down rules which aim at further harmonising the Union law applicable to copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, taking into account in particular digital and cross-border uses of protected content. IWithout jeopardising the further changes likely to be made to the regulatory framework in the future in order to allow for technological developments, it also lays down rules on exceptions and limitations, on the facilitation of licences as well as rules aiming at ensuring a well-functioning marketplace for the exploitation of works and other subject-matter.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 490 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive lays down rules which aim at further harmonising the Union law applicable to copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, taking into account in particular digital and cross-border uses of protected content. It also lays down rules on exceptions and limitations, on the facilitation of licences as well as rules aiming at ensuring a well-functioning marketplace for the exploitationnjoyment of works and other subject-matter.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 491 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In addition, Member States shall harmonise the term of protection of copyright and related rights so that its duration does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne Convention, taking into account the time needed to recoup an investment, the average commercial life of a work, and the public interest in the dissemination of creative works.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 497 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
‘research organisation’ means a university, a research institute or any other organisation the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to conduct scientific research and provide educational services: (a) on a non-for-profit basis or by reinvesting all the profits in its scientific research; or (b) pursuant to a public interest mission recognised by a Member State;deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 502 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) on a non-for-profit basis or by reinvesting all the profits in its scientific research; ordeleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 505 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) pursuant to a public interest mission recognised by a Member Stadelete;d
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 506 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
in such a way that the access to the results generated by the scientific research cannot be enjoyed on a preferential basis by an undertaking exercising a decisive influence upon such organisation;deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 516 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) 'public domain' means the status of a work or other subject matter when the copyright and related rights therein : (a) have expired, or (b) have never existed, or (c) have been voluntarily relinquished by rightholders;
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 519 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation of a collection of literary works of a journalistic nature, which may also comprise other works or subject-matter and constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly-updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine, having the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics and published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 521 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation of a collection of literary works of a journalistic nature, which may also comprise other works or subject-matter and constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly-updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine, having the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics and published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 536 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and, Article 11(1) of this Directive and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC for reproductions and extractions made by research organisationpersons or legal entities in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawfulauthorised access for the purposes of scientific research.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 552 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate, shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective and be justified by objective reasons.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 553 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 557 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisationbeneficiaries to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3across the Union concerning the development of technologies implementing the exception provided for in paragraph 1 as well as the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3. These best practices shall be made easily and effectively accessible to the public.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 567 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Right to impose private copying levies Member States shall regulate the right to impose private copying levies in order to ensure that citizens are informed about the actual amount to be levied, the purpose of the levy, and the ways in which it is to be used.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 568 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – title
Use of works and other subject-matter in digital and cross-border teaching activities and scientific research
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 572 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research, including private study, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use: is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 586 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) takes place on the premises of an educational establishment or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and teaching staff;deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 597 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 604 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 607 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States may provide that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of works or other subject- matter, to the extent that adequate licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 are easily available in the market.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 616 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States availing themselves of the provision of the first subparagraph shall take the necessary measures to ensure appropriate availability and visibility of the licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 for educational establishments.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 627 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching through secure electronic networksor scientific research, including private study, undertaken in compliance with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the educational establishmentbeneficiary is established.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 630 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by theany unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 645 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States, taking into account the fact that the dissemination of culture and knowledge is in the public interest, shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive, permitting cultural heritage institutions, to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, for the sole purpose of the preservation, consultation, or cataloguing of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 654 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 661 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a Public lending of literary works 1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided in Article 1 of Directive 2006/115/EC, permitting public libraries to lend literary works in any format to the public, including remotely, where such literary works have entered into their collections or to which they have authorised access. This is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC. 2. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void. 3. Member States shall, in consultation with authors, publishers and public libraries, ensure that public libraries can acquire and lend on reasonable terms, in any format, including remotely, all literary works which have already been lawfully made available to the public and have entered into their collections or to which they have authorised access. 4. Member States shall report to the Commission on the steps taken according to paragraph 3. The Commission shall facilitate the exchange of best practices among Member States and make them easily and effectively accessible to the public.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 669 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 b (new)
Article 5 b General de minimis exception 1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Article 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, regardless of the format or medium used, in the following cases: (a) uses for the benefit of persons with a disability, which is directly related to the disability, to the extent required by the specific disability; (b) reproduction, communication to the public or making available of published articles on current economic, political or religious topics or of broadcast works or other subject-matter of the same character, in cases where such use is not expressly reserved, and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated or use of works or other subject- matter in connection with the reporting of current events, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossible; (c) quotations for purposes such as criticism or review, provided that they relate to a work or other subject-matter which has already been lawfully made available to the public, that, unless this turns out to be impossible, the source, including the author's name, is indicated, and that their use is in accordance with fair practice, and to the extent required by the specific purpose; (d) uses for the purposes of public security or to ensure the proper performance or reporting of administrative, parliamentary or judicial proceedings; (e) use of political speeches as well as extracts of public lectures or similar works or subject-matter to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and provided that the source, including the author's name, is indicated, except where this turns out to be impossible; (f) incidental inclusion of a work or other subject-matter in other material; (g) uses for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche; (h) uses in connection with the demonstration or repair of equipment, or the reconstruction of an original or a copy of a work; (i) making of a back-up copy of a work by a person having a right to use it and insofar as it is necessary for that use; 2. Any other use that is analogous to the uses enumerated in paragraph 1 is permitted provided that the corresponding requirements of the relevant exceptions or limitations are met and the use does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the authors or rightholders, and taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 676 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 680 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide that when a collective management organisation, on behalf of its members, concludes a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural heritage institution ffor an exception to the rights set out in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC, permitting cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or othe digitisationr non- commercial documentation centers, to digitise, distributione, communicatione to the public or makinge available of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter permanently in their collection of the institution, such a non-exclusive licence may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licence who are not represented by the collective management organisation, provided that:for non- commercial purposes.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 681 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licence;deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 683 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) equal treatment is guaranteed to all rightholders in relation to the terms of the licence;deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 685 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) all rightholders may at any time object to their works or other subject- matter being deemed to be out of commerce and exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject- matter.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 687 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
When implementing the exception laid down in the first subparagraph, Member States may provide for remuneration schemes to compensate any unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders. Rightholders may at any time, on the basis of reasonable evidence, object to their works or other subject- matter being deemed to be out of commerce and be able to exclude the application of the exception laid down in the first subparagraph.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 691 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States may estabish that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of out-of- commerce works or other subject-matter, to the extent that operational non- exclusive licences, concluded between a collective management organisation, on behalf of its member, and a cultural heritage institution, an educational establishment or another non-commercial documentation center, authorising the uses provided for in paragraph 1, exist and are easily available. In this case, such non-exclusive licences may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licences who are not represented by the collective management organisation, provided that: (a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licence; (b) equal treatment is guaranteed to all rightholders in relation to the terms of the licence; (c) all rightholders may at any time, on the basis of reasonable evidence, object to their works or other subject-matter being deemed to be out of commerce and exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject-matter.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 698 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
A work or other subject-matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when the whole work or other subject-matter, in all its translations, versions and manifestations, is not available to the public through customary, easily accessible, channels of commerce and cannot be reasonably expected to become so. Out-of- commerce works shall also include works that have never been, or were never intended, to be in commerce.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 700 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall, in consultation with rightholders, collective management organisations and, cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non- commercial documentation centers, ensure that the requirements used to determine whether works and other subject-matter can be licensed in accordance with paragraph 1deemed to be out of commerce, do not extend beyond what is necessary and reasreasonable and proportionablte and do not preclude the possibility to determine the out-of- commerce status of a collection as a whole, when it is reasonable to presume that all works or other subject-matter in the collection are out of commerce.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 701 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall provide that appropriate and effective publicity measures are taken regarding:
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 702 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) theany licence, and in particular its application to unrepresented rightholders;
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 703 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point c – paragraph 1
the possibility of rightholders to object, referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 and in point (c) of paragraph 1a;
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 705 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) the cultural heritage institution, educational establishment or non- commercial documentation center is established, when a Member State or a third country could not be easily determined, after reasonable efforts, according to points (a) and (b).
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 706 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply to the works or other subject-matter of third country nationals except where points (a) and (b) of paragraph 4 apply.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 712 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. WOut-of-commerce works or other subject-matter covered by a licence grantmay be used, in accordance with Article 7 may be used by the, by cultural heritage institution in accordance with the terms of the licences in all Member States.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 716 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that information that allows the identification of the works or other subject-matter covered by a licence grantused in accordance with Article 7 and information about the possibility of rightholders to object referred to in Article 7(1)(c) are made publicthe second subparagraph of Article 7(1) and Article 7(1a)(c) are made permanently, easily and effectively accessible in a public single online portal, and in any case for at least six months before the works or other subject-matter are digitised, distributed, communicated to the public or made available in Member States other than the one where the licence is granted, and for the whole duration of the licence.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 718 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure a regular dialogue between representative users' and rightholders' organisations, and any other relevant stakeholder organisations, to, on a sector-specific basis, foster the effectiveness of the measures applied to implement the exception referred to in Article 7, including the relevance and usability of the licensing mechanisms referred to in Article 7(1), ensure the effectiveness of the safeguards for rightholders referred to in this Chapter, notably as regards publicity measures, and, where applicable, assist in the establishment of the requirements referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 7(2).
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 722 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a Public domain Member States shall ensure that once a work or other subject-matter is in the public domain, faithful reproductions, in any format or medium, in full or in part of that work or subject matter, which does not constitute a new work or subject matter, shall equally not be subject to copyright or related rights.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 724 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where parties wishing to conclude an agreement for the purpose of making available audiovisual works on video-on-demand platforms face difficulties relating to the licensing of rights, they may rely on the assistance of an impartial public body with relevant experience. That body shall provide impartial and affordable assistance with negotiation and help reach agreements.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 731 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Protection of press publications 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject- matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted concerning digital uses
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 735 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Protection of press publications 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject- matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted concerning digital uses
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 745 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 767 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject-matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 774 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 779 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 786 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12
Claims to fair compensation Member States may provide that where an author has transferred or licensed a right to a publisher, such a transfer or a licence constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the publisher to claim a share of the compensation for the uses of the work made under an exception or limitation to the transferred or licensed right.Article 12 deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 789 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Member States may provide that where an author has transferred or licensed a right to a publisher, such a transfer or a licence constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the publisher to claim a share of the compensation for the uses of the work made under an exception or limitation to the transferred or licensed right.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 799 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by 1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter. 2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1. 3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.Article 13 deleted their users
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 807 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 838 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 856 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 890 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive on a regular basis and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate and sufficient, accurate and comprehensive information on the exploitation of their works and performances from those to whom they havir works are licensed or transferred their rightsheir rights are transferred, notably as regards all modes of exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 900 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and effective and shall ensure an appropriate level of transparency in every sector. However, in those cases where the administrative burden resulting from the obligation would be disproportionate in view of the revenues generated by the exploitation of the work or performance, Member States may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1, provided that the obligation remains effective and ensures an appropriate level of transparency.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 910 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may decide that the obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when the contribution of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performance.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 927 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 Member States shall, in any case, ensure that authors and performers are entitled to a fair and proportionate remuneration of the revenues derived from the exploitation of their works.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 941 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers, individually or through representative organisations, are entitled to requestclaim an additional, appropriatnd equitable remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 957 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Any contractual provision contrary to paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 960 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Mandatory term for the use of transferred rights Member States, in order to restore balance to the bargaining power between authors and publishers, may provide for a mandatory period, of reasonable duration, for the use of the rights transferred from an author to a third party, after which those rights would lapse.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 963 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Without prejudice to other judicial remedies, Member States shallmay provide that disputes concerning the transparency obligation under Article 14 and the contract adjustment mechanism under Article 15 may be submitted to a voluntary, and public alternative dispute resolution procedure.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 966 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Such mechanism shall guarantee impartiality and be affordable, equally accessible and shall comply with the national constitutional rights and safeguards provided for the parties.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 994 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Directive 2006/115/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1
2 a. Article 6 - paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "Member States may derogate from the exclusive right provided for in Article 1 in respect of public lending, provided that at least authors obtain a remuneration for such lending, without prejudice to the exceptions provided for in Directive [this Directive]. Member States shall be free to determine this remuneration taking account of their cultural promotion objectives." (This amendment seeks to amend a provision within the existing act - Article 6, paragraph 1 -Or. en that was not referred to in the Commission proposal.)
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 29 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) Such a framework is a necessary part of a well-managed migration policy to reduce divergences among national resettlement practices and procedures, provide for the legal and safe arrival to the territory of the Member States of third- country nationals and stateless persons in need of international protection, help reduce the risk of a large-scale irregular inflow of third-country nationals and stateless persons to the territory of the Member States and thereby reducing the pressure of spontaneous arrivals on the Member States' asylum systems, be an expression of solidarity with countries in regions to which or within which a large number of persons in need of international protection has been displaced by helping to alleviate the pressure on those countries, help achieve Union's foreign policy objectives by increasing the Union's leverage vis-à-vis third countries, and effectively contribute to global resettlement initiatives through speaking with one voice in international fora and with third countries.
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) In order to help reduce the risk of a large-scale irregular inflow of third- country nationals and stateless persons to the territory of the Member States, show solidarity with countries in regions to which or within which a large number of persons in need of international protection has been displaced by helping to alleviate the pressure on those countries, and help achieve the Union's foreign policy objectives, the regions or third countries from which resettlement is to occur should fit in a tailored engagement with third countries to better manage migration as foreseen in the Commission's Communication of 7 June 2016 on Establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration32. _________________ 32 COM(2016) 385 final.deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 39 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) The common standard procedures should build on the existing resettlement experience and standards of the Member States, in particular the Standard Operating Procedures guiding the implementation of the resettlement scheme with Turkey set out in the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016. The Union Resettlement Framework should allow the use of two types of standard resettlement procedures and on the resettlement principles laid down by the UNHCR.
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 71 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) This Regulation does not affect the ability of the Member States to adopt or implement national resettlement schemes, which do not jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives under this Regulation, for example where they contribute an additional number of resettlement places to targeted Union resettlement schemes established under this Regulation going beyond their contribution to the maximum number of persons to be resettled under the annual Union resettlement plan.
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 89 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of persons in need of international protection displaced to or within a third country and any onward movement of those persons to the territory of the Member States;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 94 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the Unregion's overall relations with the third country or countries from which resettlement occurs, and with third countries in generalexperiencing protracted refugee situations;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 99 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
(i) reducing the number of third- country nationals and stateless persons irregularly crossing the border into the territory of the Member States coming from that third country;deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 100 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
(ii) creating the conditions for the use of the first country of asylum and safe third country concepts for the return of asylum applicants who have irregularly crossed the border into the territory of the Member States coming from or having a connection with the third country concerned;deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 101 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iv
(iv) increasing the rate of readmission of third-country nationals and stateless persons irregularly staying in the territory of the Member States such as through the conclusion and effective implementation of readmission agreements;deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 114 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – indent 6 a (new)
– persons lacking alternative durable solutions;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 117 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – introductory part
(ii) family members of third-country nationals or stateless persons or Union citizens legally residing in a Member State: only where it is not possible through other existing legal means;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 124 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) On 15 December 2015, the Commission addressed a Recommendation for a Voluntary Humanitarian Admission Scheme with Turkey29 to the Member States and Associated States recommending that participating States admit persons displaced by the conflict in Syria who are in need of international protection. According to the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 a Voluntary Humanitarian Admission Scheme will be activated once irregular crossings between Turkey and the EU are ending or at least have been substantially and sustainably reduced. Member States will contribute on a voluntary basis to this scheme. _________________ 29deleted C(2015) 9490.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 127 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) According to the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 all new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into Greek islands as from 20 March 2016 would be returned to Turkey. For every Syrian being returned to Turkey from Greek islands, another Syrian will be resettled from Turkey to the Union taking into account the United Nations Vulnerability Criteria. In May 2016, the Member States and Dublin Associated States and Turkey reached a common understanding on Standard Operating Procedures guiding the implementation of this resettlement scheme.deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) persons who have irregularly stayed, irregularly entered, or attempted to irregularly enter the territory of the Member States during the five years prior to resettlement;deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 142 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) Such a framework is a necessary part of a well-managed migration policy to reduce divergences among national resettlement practices and procedures, provide for the legal and safe arrival ton the territory of the Member States of third- country nationals and stateless persons in need of international protection, help reduce the risk of a large-scale irregular inflow of third-country nationals and stateless persons to the territory of the Member States and thereby, thereby reducing deaths in the Mediterranean, destroying the human traffickers’ business model, and reducing the pressure of spontaneous arrivals on the Member States’ asylum systems, be anand give expression tof solidarity with countries in regions to which or within which a large number of persons in need of international protection hasve been displaced by helping to alleviate the pressure on those countries, help achieve Union’s foreign policy objectives by increasing the Union’s leverage vis-à-vis third countries, and effectively contribute to global resettlement initiatives through speaking with one voice in international fora and with third countri and effectively contribute to global resettlement initiatives.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 146 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) In order to help reduce the risk of a large-scale irregular inflow of third- country nationals and stateless persons to the territory of the Member States, show solidarity with countries in regions to which or within which a large number of persons in need of international protection has been displaced by helping to alleviate the pressure on those countries, and help achieve the Union’s foreign policy objectives, the regions or third countries from which resettlement is to occur should fit in a tailored engagement with third countries to better manage migration as foreseen in the Commission’s Communication of 7 June 2016 on Establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration32. _________________ 32 COM(2016) 385 final.deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 150 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f – paragraph 1
persons whom Member States have during the last five years prior to resettlement refused to resettle in accordance with this paragraph.deleted
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the maximum total numberarget figures of persons to be resettled, based on the UNHCR's annual Projected Global Resettlement Needs;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 166 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) The common standard procedures should build on the existing resettlement experience and standards of the Member States, in particular the Standard Operating Procedures guiding the implementation of the resettlement scheme with Turkey set out in the EU- Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The Union Resettlement Framework should allow the use of two types of standard resettlement procedures.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 172 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the precise number of persons to be resettled from the maximumtarget total number as set out in the annual Union resettlement plan provided for in point (a) of Article 7(2) and details about the participation of the Member States in the targeted Union resettlement scheme;
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 180 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The resettlement procedure should be concluded as soon as possible in order to discourage persons in need of international protectionguarantee protection to persons in need of it and ensure that they will not be compelled to use irregular ways to enter the European Union to seek protection. At the same time it should ensure that Member States have sufficient time for a full and adequate examination of each case. The time-limits should correspond to what is necessary to make the different types of assessment foreseenprovided for in the ordinary and expedited procedures.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 197 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to allow for supplementing the rules which govern the procedure to be applied in targeted Union resettlement schemes, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to adapt the procedure to the circumstances in the third country from which resettlement takes place such as determining that third country’s role in the procedure. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201633. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 33deleted OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the Union Resettlement Framework, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council for establishing the annual Union resettlement plan, fixing the maximum total number of persons to be resettled, the details about the participation of the Member States in the plan and their contributions to the total number of persons to be resettled, as well as overall geographical priorities.deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 207 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A High-Level Resettlement Committee shall be established, composed of representatives of the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and the Member States. [The European Union Agency for Asylum,] UNHCR, and IOM mayshall be invited. Representatives of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland shall be invited to attend the meetings of the High-Level Resettlement Committee where they have indicated their intention to be associated with the implementation of the annual Union resettlement plan.
2017/04/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 208 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) These powers should be exercised on a proposal from the Commission o Commission, by means of delegated acts to be adopted in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, should draw up the annual resettlement plan laying down the maximum total number of persons to be resettled and overall, the geographical priorities. The Commission should make its proposal simultaneously with its proposal on the draft Union annual budget. The Council should aim to adopt the proposal within two months. The Commission and the Council, and the levels of Member State participation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. The Commission should make its proposal simultaneously with its proposal on the draft Union annual budget. The Commission should take into account the discussions within the High-Level Resettlement Committee.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 212 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the Union Resettlement Framework, the Commission should be empowered to establish targeted Union resettlement schemes laying down the precise number out of the total number of persons to be resettled and participation of the Member State, consistent with the annual Union Resettlement plan. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers34. The examination procedure should be used for establishing targeted Union resettlement schemes given that those schemes have substantial implications. The Commission should aim to establish targeted Union resettlement schemes as soon as possible after the adoption of the annual Union resettlement plan and whenever necessary during the period covered by the annual Union resettlement plan. The Commission should take into account the discussions within the High-Level Resettlement Committee. _________________ 34deleted OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 221 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Resettled persons should be granted international protection. Accordingly, the provisions on the content of international protection contained in the asylum acquis should apply as of the moment when resettled persons arrive on the territory of the Member States, including the rules to discourage secondary movement of beneficiaries of international protection.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 226 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) In line with the Commission proposal for a Regulation establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast)35, in order to comprehensively reflect the efforts of each Member State, the number of persons effectively resettled to a Member State should be added to the number of applications for international protection for the purpose of calculating the corrective allocation mechanism proposed by the Commission. _________________ 35 COM(2016) 270 final.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) This Regulation does not affect the ability of the Member States to adopt or implement national resettlement schemes, which do not jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives under this Regulation, for example where they contribute an providing additional number of resettlement places to targeted Union resettlement schemes established under this Regulation going beyond their contribution to the maximum number of persons to be resettledgoing beyond those established by the annual Union resettlement plan under the annual Union resettlement planrogramme.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 260 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
It lays down rules on the resettlement of third-country nationals and stateless persons to the territory of the Member States and assigns quotas of persons to be resettled to each Member State.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 270 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) contribute to the reduction of the risk of a large-scale irregular inflow ofguarantee a legal and safe route giving access to the Union to third-country nationals and stateless persons in need of international protection to the territory of the Member States;
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 280 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
In determining the regions or third countries from which resettlement shall occur within the Union Resettlement Framework, in accordance with the implementingdelegated acts referred to in Articles 7 and 8, the following factors shall be taken into consideration:
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 286 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) complementarity with financial and technical assistance provided to third countries to which or within which persons in need of international protection have been displaced;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 296 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the Union’s overall relations with the third country or countries from which resettlement occurs, and with third countries in general;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 304 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
(i) reducing the number of third- country nationals and stateless persons irregularly crossing the border into the territory of the Member States coming from that third country;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 308 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
(ii) creating the conditions for the use of the first country of asylum and safe third country concepts for the return of asylum applicants who have irregularly crossed the border into the territory of the Member States coming from or having a connection with the third country concerned;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 313 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iv
(iv) increasing the rate of readmission of third-country nationals and stateless persons irregularly staying in the territory of the Member States such as through the conclusion and effective implementation of readmission agreements;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 353 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – introductory part
(ii) family members of third-country nationals or stateless persons or Union citizens legally residing in a Member State where no other existing legal instruments can be implemented at EU level:
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 357 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – indent 2
– the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of third- country nationals or stateless persons to be resettled, on the condition that they are unmarried, regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 359 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – indent 3
– the father, mother or another adult responsible for the unmarried minor to be resettled, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present;
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 363 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – indent 5
– third-country nationals or stateless persons to be resettled who are dependent on their child or parent for assistance as a result of pregnancy, a newborn child, serious illness, severe disability or old age, provided that family ties existed in the country of origin, that the child or parent is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 371 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
In implementing this regulation, Member States shall ensure that family unity can be maintained between persons referred to in point (b)(ii).
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 392 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) persons who have irregularly stayed, irregularly entered, or attempted to irregularly enter the territory of the Member States during the five years prior to resettlement;deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 400 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) persons who have already been resettled by another Member State in the implementation of this Regulation, the Conclusions of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council 11097/15 of 20 July 2015, the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016, the Commission Recommendation C(2015) 9490 of 15 December 2015, oror as part of a national resettlement scheme; and
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 412 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Third-country nationals or stateless persons may be excluded from targeted Union resettlement schemes established in accordance with Article 8, where one of the grounds for exclusion referred to in points (a) or (b) of paragraph 1 applies prima facie.deleted
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 420 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. On the basis of a proposal from the Commissdelegated act under Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Councilmmission shall adopt an annual Union resettlement plan in the year preceding that in which it is to be implemented.
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 438 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a Reference key 1. For the purposes of determining the amount each Member State is obliged to contribute to the European Resettlement Programme, a reference key shall be used. 2. The reference key referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State: (a) population (35%) (b) GDP total (35%) (c) unemployment rate (20%) (d) total number of beneficiaries of international protection present in the Member State’s territory (10 %)
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 449 #

2016/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where necessary, local coordination and practical cooperation arrangements among Member States, supported by the [European Union Agency for Asylum] in accordance with Article 12(3), and with third countries, and UNHCR or other partners;
2017/05/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a
(39a) In the interest of swift and fair procedures for all applicants, whilst also ensuring that the stay of applicants who do not qualify for international protection in the Union is not unduly prolonged, including those who are nationals of third countries exempt from the requirement to be in a possession of a visa pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 2018/1806, Member States should accelerate the examination of applications of applicants who are nationals or, in the case of stateless persons, formerly habitual residents of a third country for which the share of decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. Where a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant Eurostat data and taking into account the guidance note pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation XX/XX on the European Asylum Agency, or where the applicant belongs to a specific category of persons for whom the low recognition rate cannot be considered as representative of their protection needs due to a specific persecution ground, examination of the application should not be accelerated. Cases where a third country may be considered as a safe country of origin or a safe third country for the applicant within the meaning of this Regulation should remain applicable as a separate ground for respectively the accelerated examination procedure or the inadmissible procedure.deleted
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40b
(40b) Member State should be able to choose whether to assess applications in a border procedure where the applicant is a danger to national security or public order, where the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his or her identity or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision and where it is likely that the application is unfounded because the applicant is of a nationality for whom decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. In other cases, such as when the applicant is from a safe country of origin or a safe third country, the use of the border procedure should be optional for the Member States.
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40d
(40d) In case where the use of the border procedure is an obligation, Member States should by way of exception not be required to apply it for the examination of applications for international protection from nationals of a third country that does not cooperate sufficiently on readmission, since a swift return of the persons concerned, following rejection of their applications, would be unlikely in that case. The determination of whether a third country is cooperating sufficiently on readmission should be based on the procedures set out in Article 25a of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009.deleted
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 263 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3
3. Member State shallmay examine an application in a border procedure in the cases referred to in paragraph 1 where the circumstances referred to in Article 40(1), point (c), (f) or (i),f) apply.
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 275 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – second subparagraph
Where, following the examination carried out in accordance with Article 25a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, the Commission considers that the third country is cooperating sufficiently, the Member State shall again apply the provisions of paragraph 3.deleted
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 277 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – third subparagraph
Where the Commission considers that the third country concerned is not cooperating sufficiently, the Member State may continue not to apply paragraph 3: (a) until an implementing act previously adopted by the Council in accordance with Article 25a(5) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 is repealed or amended; (b) consider that action is needed in accordance with Article 25a of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, until the Commission reports in its assessment carried out in accordance with paragraph 2 of that Article that there are substantive changes in the cooperation of the third country concerned.deleted where the Commission does not
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 289 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5
5. The border procedure may onlynot be applied to unaccompanied minors and to minors below the age of 12 and their family members in the cases referred to in Article 40(5) (b).
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 305 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 7
7. When applying the border procedure, Member States may carry out the procedure for determining the Member State responsible for examining the application as laid down in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management], without prejudice to the deadlines established in paragraph 11deleted
2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 639 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. The determining authority shall ensure that applicants and, where applicable, their guardians, legal advisers or other counsellors have access to the information referred to in Article 33(2)(eb) and (c) required for the examination of applications and to the information provided by the experts referred to in Article 33(3), where the determining authority has taken that information into consideration for the purpose of taking a decision on their application.
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 705 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Where requested by the applicant, the determining authority shall ensure that the interviewers and interpreters are of the same sex as the applicant provided that this is possible and the determining authority does not have reasons to believe that such a request is based on grounds which are not related to difficulties on the part of the applicant to present the grounds of his or her application in a comprehensive manner.deleted
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1341 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a subsequent application has been rejected by the determining authority as inadmissible or manifestly unfoundedunder Article 42(5);
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1346 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a second or further subsequent application is made in any Member State following a final decision rejecting a previous subsequent application as inadmissible, unfounded or manifestly unfounded under Article 42(5).
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1412 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. TA Member State may apply the concept of safe third country shall be applied:when the third country has been designated at national level as a safe third country in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 50.
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1474 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 4
4. Where such a proposal is not submitted by the Commission within three months from the adoption of the delegated act as referred to in paragraph 2, the delegated act suspending the third country from its designation as a safe third country at Union level or suspending the presence of the third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin shall cease to have effect. Where such a proposal is submitted by the Commission within three months, the Commission shall be empowered, on the basis of a substantial assessment, to extend the validity of that delegated act for a period of six months, with a possibility to renew this extension once.
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1595 #

2016/0224(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 7
Turkeydeleted
2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) For a well-functioning CEAS, including of the Dublin system, substantial progress should be made regarding the convergence of national asylum systems with special regard to differing recognition rates and type of protection status in the Member States. In addition, government departments should not be burdened and rules on status review should therefore be strengthened to ensure that protection is only granted to those who need it and for so long as it continues to be needed. Moreover, divergent practices regarding the duration of the residence permits should be avoided, and the rights granted to beneficiaries of international protection should be further clarified and harmonised.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The further approximation of rules on the recognition and content of refugee and subsidiary protection status shcould moreover help to limit the secondary movement of applicants for international protection and beneficiaries of international protection between Member States, where such movement may have been caused by any differences in the national legal measures taken to transpose the Qualification Directive replaced by this Regulation.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Successful resettlement candidates should be granted international protection. Accordingly, the provisions of this Regulation on the content of international protection should apply, including the rules to discourage secondary movement.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the application of this Regulation, in particular by providing experts to assist the Member State authorities to receive, register, and examine applications for international protection, providing updated information regarding third countries, including Country of Origin Information, and other relevant guidelines and tools. When applying this Regulation, Member States' authorities should take into account operational standards, indicative guidelines, and best practices developed by the European Union Agency for Asylum [the Agency]. When assessing applications for international protection, Member States' authorities should take particular account of the information, reports, common analysis and guidance on the situation in countries of origin developed at Union level by the Agency and the European networks on country of origin information in accordance with Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation34 _________________ 34. For the purpose of applying this Regulation the European Union Agency and the Member States should take into account the information provided by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) active on the ground. _________________ 34 COM(2016)271 final. COM (2016) 271 final.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 168 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The notion of family members should take into account the different types of family that exist, the different particular circumstances of dependency and the special attention to be paid to the best interests of the child. It should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The notion should therefore include both families formed outside the country of origin, but before and those formed after their arrival on the territory of the Member State. The notion must exclude, however - under all circumstances - forced marriages.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 178 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Protection can be provided, where they are willing and able to offer protection, either by the State or by parties or organisations, including international organisations, meeting the conditions set out in this Directive, which control a region or a larger area within the territory of the State by the State, where it is willing and able to ensure protection. Such protection should be effective and of a non-temporary nature.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 183 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Internal protection against persecution or serious harm should be effectively available to the applicant in a part of the country of origin where he or she can safely and legally travel to, gain admittance to and can reasonably be expected to settle. The assessment of whether such internal protection exists should be an inherent part of the assessment the application for international protection and should be carried out once it has been established by the determining authority that the qualification criteria would otherwise apply. The burden of demonstrating the availability of internal protection should fall on the determining authority.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 193 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) It is necessary, when assessing applications from minors for international protection, that the determining authorities should have regard to child-specific forms of persecution and exploitation of all kinds, or the lack of protection therefrom.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) In accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, when assessing applications for international protection, the competent authorities of the Member States should use methods for the assessment of the applicant's credibility in a manner that respects the individual's rights as guaranteed by the Charter, in particular the right to human dignity and the respect for private and family life. Specifically as regards homosexual orientation and gender identity, the individual assessment of the applicant's credibility should not be based on stereotyped notions concerning homosexuals orientation and gender identity and the applicant should not be submitted to detailed questioning or tests as to his or her sexual practices.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 215 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) As regards the required proof in relation to the existence of a serious and individual threat to the life or person of an applicant, in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union36 , determining authorities should not require the applicant to adduce evidence that he is specifically targeted by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstances. However, the level of indiscriminate violence required to substantiate the application is lower if the applicant is able to show that he is specifically affected by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstance. Moreover, the existence of a serious and individual threat should exceptionally be established by the determining authorities solely on account of the presence of the applicant on the territory or relevant part of the territory of the country of origin, provided the degree of indiscriminate violence characterising the armed conflict taking place reaches such a high level that there are substantial grounds for believing that a civilian, returned to the country or origin or to the relevant part of country of origin, would, solely on account of his presence on the territory of that country or region, face a real risk of being subject to the serious threat. _________________ 36International protection should also be granted, for the purposes of this Regulation, to individuals who are suffering a serious threat due to natural or man-made disasters. _________________ 36 C-465/07. C-465/07.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 228 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
(39) With a view to ascertaining whether beneficiaries of international protection are still in need of that protection, determining authorities shouldmay review the granted status when the residence permit has to be renewed, for the first time in the case of refugees, and for the first and second time in the case of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, as well as when a significant relevant change in the beneficiaries' country of origin occurs as indicated by common analysis and guidance on the situation in the country of origin provided at Union level by the Agency and the European networks on country of origin information in accordance with Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation37 . _________________ 37 COM (2016) 271 final.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) When the refugee status or the subsidiarystatus of beneficiary of international protection status ceases to exist, the application of the decision by which the determining authority of a Member State revokes, ends or does not renew the status should be deferred for a reasonable period of time after adoption, in order to give the third-country national or stateless person concerned the possibility to apply for residence on the basis of other grounds than those having justified the granting of international protection, such as family reasons, or reasons related to employment or to education, in accordance with relevant Union and national law.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 246 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
(43) In order also to prevent secondary movements within the European Union, beneficiaries of international protection, if found in a Member State other than the Member State having granted them protection without fulfilling the conditions of stay or reside, should be taken back by the Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down by Regulation41 _________________ 41 (EU) No [xxx/xxxx New Dublin Regulation].
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 272 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
(51) In addition, especially to avoid social hardship, it is appropriate to provide beneficiaries of international protection with social assistance without discrimination. However, as regards beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, Member States should be given some flexibility, to limit such rights to core benefits, which is to be understood as covering at least minimum income support, assistance in the case of illness, or pregnancy, and parental assistance, in so far as those benefits are granted to nationals under national law. In order to facilitate their integration, Member States should be given the possibility to make the access to certain types of social assistances specified in national law, for both refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, conditional on the effective participation of the beneficiary of international protection in integration measures.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 280 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
(53) In order to facilitate the integration of beneficiaries of international protection into society, beneficiaries of international protection shall have access to integration measures, modalities to be set by the Member States. Member States may make the participation in such integration measures, such as language courses, civic integration courses, vocational training and other employment-related courses compulsory, provided that they are free of charge, genuinely and easily accessible and that they take into account the special needs of beneficiaries of international protection.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 387 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
parties or organisations, including international organisations, controlling the State or a substantial part of the territory of the Statedeleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 393 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b – paragraph 2
provided they are willing and able to offerensure protection in accordance with paragraph 2.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 398 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. When assessing whether an international organisation controls a State or a substantial part of its territory and provides protection as referred to in paragraph 2, determining authorities shall base themselves on any guidance provided in relevant Union law, in particular available Union level country of origin information and the common analysis of country of origin information referred to in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [ Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum ].deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 404 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
[...]deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 436 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
– members share an innate characteristic, or a common background that cannot be changed, or share a characteristic or belief that is so fundamental to identity or conscience that a person should not be forced to renounce it, andor
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 442 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 2
depending on the circumstances in the country of origin, the concept might include as groups based on a common characteristic of sexual orientation (a term which cannot be understood to include acts considered to be criminal in accordance with national law of the Member States); gender relatedrelated to sexual orientation and gender aspects, including gender identity,; those aspects shall be given due consideration for the purposes of determining membership of a particular social group or identifying a characteristic of such a group;
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 492 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority shallmay revoke, end or refuse to renew the refugee status of a third-country national or stateless person where :
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 523 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
In order to apply Article 14(1), the determining authority shallmay review the refugee status, in particular: where Union- level country of origin information and common analysis of country of origin information as referred in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum] indicate a significant change in the country of origin which is relevant for the protection needs of the applicant.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 528 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) where Union level country of origin information and common analysis of country of origin information as referred in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum ] indicate a significant change in the country of origin which is relevant for the protection needs of the applicant,deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 533 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) when renewing, for the first time, the residence permit issued to a refugee.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 546 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a serious and individual threat to a civilian’s life or person by reason of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict., or
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 550 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) a serious and individual threat to a civilian’s life or person by reason of a natural or man-made disaster.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 578 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority shallmay revoke, end or refuse to renew the subsidiary protection status of a third- country national or a stateless person where:
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 594 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
In order to apply Article 20(1), the determining authority shallmay review the subsidiary protection status, in particular where Union-level country of origin information and common analysis of country of origin information as referred in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum] indicate a significant change in the country of origin which is relevant for the protection needs of the applicant.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 598 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph a
(a) where Union level country of origin information and common analysis of country of origin information as referred in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum ] indicate a significant change in the country of origin which is relevant for the protection needs of the applicant,deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 602 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph b
(b) when renewing, for the first and second time, the residence permit issued to a beneficiary of subsidiary protection.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 613 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 5
5. When applying the provisions of this ChapterRegulation that involve minors the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration tofor the relevant authorities.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 628 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
The competent authorities shall provide beneficiaries of international protection with information on the rights and obligations relating to refugee status or subsidiary protection status, as soon as possible after that has been granted. That information shall be provided in a language that the beneficiary can understand or is reasonably supposed to understand and shall make explicit references to the consequences of not complying with the obligations outlined in Article 28 on movement within the Union.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 644 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6
6. Member States may decide that this aArticle also applies to other close relatives who lived together as part of the family at the time of leaving the country of origin or before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, and who were wholly or mainly dependent on the beneficiary of international protection at the time.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 648 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. NAs soon as possible and in any event no later than 30 days after international protection has been granted, a residence permit shall be issued using the uniform format as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1030/2002.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 656 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) For beneficiaries of refugee statusinternational protection, the residence permit shall have a period of validity of threfive years and be renewable thereafter for periods of threfive years.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 664 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) For beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status, the residence permit shall have a period of validity of one year and be renewable thereafter for periods of two years.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 673 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) where imperative reasons of national security or public order so require.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 685 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Competent authorities shall issue travel documents to beneficiaries of refugee status, in the form set out in the Schedule to the Geneva Convention and with the minimum security features and biometrics outlined in Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/200445. Those travel documents shall be valid for at least onfive years. _________________ 45 Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 of 13 December 2004 on standards for in passports and travel documents issued by Member States (OJ L 385, 29.12.2004, p. 1)
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 688 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. Competent authorities shall issue travel documents with the minimum security features and biometrics outlined in Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 to beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status who are unable to obtain a national passport. Those documents shall be valid for at least onfive years.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 707 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities, where necessary shall facilitate the full access to the activities referred to in paragraph (2)(c) and (d).
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 723 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. For beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status Member States may limit social assistance to core benefits.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 767 #

2016/0223(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may make participation in integration measures compulsory, provided that these actually readily accessible and free of charge and allow for the specific needs of beneficiaries of international protection.
2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 64 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) Where an applicant is present in another Member State from the one in which he or she is required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], the applicant should not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 17.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure that applicants are aware of the consequences of absconding, Member States should inform applicants in a uniform manner, as soon as possiblet the time when the person concerned expresses the intention to apply for international protection and at the latest when they lodge their application, of all the obligations with which applicants must comply relating to reception conditions, including the circumstances under which the granting of material reception conditions may be restricted and of any benefits.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) Harmonised EU rules on the documents to be issued to applicants make it more difficult for applicants to move in an unauthorised manner within the Union. It needs to be clarified that Member States should only provide applicants with a travel document when serious humanitarian or other imperative reasons arise. The validity of travel documents should also be limited to the purpose and duration needed for the reason for which they are issued. Serious humanitarian reasons could for instance be considered when an applicant needs to travel to another State for medical treatment or to visit relatives in particular cases, such as for visits to close relatives who are seriously ill, or to attend marriages or funerals of close relatives. Other imperative reasons could include situations where applicants who have been granted access to the labour market are required to perform essential travel for work purposes, where applicants are required to travel as part of study curricula or where minors are travelling with foster familiesThe validity of travel documents should also be limited to the purpose and duration needed for the reason for which they are issued.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 79 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) Applicants do not have the right to choose the Member State of application. An applicant must apply for international protection ion the Member State either of first entry or, in case of legal presence, in the Member State of legal stay or residence. An applicant who has not complied with this obligation is less likely, following a determination of the Member State responsible under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], to be allowed to stay in the Member State where the application was made and consequently more likely to abscond. His or her whereabouts should therefore be closely monitoredbasis of the criteria established in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation].
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) Applicants are required to be present in the Member State where they made an application or in the Member State to which they are transferred in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation]. In casWhere an applicant has absconded from thistravelled to another Member State and, without authorisation, travelled to another Member State, it is vital, for the purpose of ensuring a well- functioning Common European Asylum System that the applicant is swiftly returned to the Member State where he or she is required to be present. Until such a transfer has taken place, there is a risk that the applicant may abscond and his or her whereabouts should therefore be closely monitored.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) For reasons of public interest or public order, for the swift processing and effective monitoring of his or her application for international protection, for the swift processing and effective monitoring of his or her procedure for determining the Member State responsible in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] or in order to effectively prevent the applicant from absconding, Member States should, where necessary, assign the applicant residence in a specific place, such as an accommodation centre, a private house, flat, hotel or other premises adapted for housing applicants. Such a decision may be necessary to effectively prevent the applicant from absconding in particular in cases where the applicant has not complied with the obligations to: make an application in the Member State of first irregular or legal entry; to remain in the Member State where he or she is required to be present; or in cases where the applicant has been sent back to the Member State where he or she is required to be present after having absconded to another Member State. In case the applicant is entitled to material reception conditions, such material reception conditions should also be provided subject to the applicant residing in this specific place.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should not be held in detention for the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection, particularly in accordance with the international legal obligations of the Member States and with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. Applicants may be detained only under the very clearly defined exceptional circumstances laid down in this Directive and subject to the principle of necessity and proportionality with regard to both the manner and the purpose of such detention. Minors should not be detained or placed in confinement under any circumstances. Detention of applicants pursuant to this Directive should only be ordered in writing by judicial or administrative authorities stating the reasons on which it is based, including in the cases where the person is already detained when making the application for international protection. Where an applicant is held in detention he or she should have effective access to the necessary procedural guarantees, such as judicial remedy before a national judicial authority and the right to free legal assistance.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) An applicant's entitlement to material reception conditions under this Directive may be curtailed in certain circumstances such as where an applicant has absconded to another Member State from the Member State where he or she is required to be present. However, Member States should in all circumstances ensure access to health care and a dignified standard of living for applicants in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular by providing for the applicant's subsistence and basic needs both in terms of physical safety and dignity and in terms of interpersonal relationships, with due regard to the inherent vulnerabilities of the person as applicant for international protection and that of his or her family or caretaker. Due regard must also be given to applicants with special reception needs. The specific needs of children, in particular with regard to respect for the child's right to education and access to healthcare have to be taken into account. When a minor is in a Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present, Member States should provide the minor with access to suitable educational activities pending the transfer to the Member State responsible. The specific needs of women applicants who have experienced gender-based harm should be taken into account, including via ensuring access, at different stages of the asylum procedure, to medical care, legal support, and to appropriate trauma counselling and psycho-social care.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 125 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Due to the possibly temporary nature of the stay of applicants and without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 1231/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Member States should be able to exclude family benefits and unemployment benefits from equal treatment between applicants and their own nationals and should be able to limit the application of equal treatment in relation to education and vocational training. The right to freedom of association and affiliation may also be limited by excluding applicants from taking part in the management of certain bodies and from holding a public office.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
(41) To ensure that the material reception conditions provided to applicants comply with the principles set out in this Directive, it is necessary to further clarify the nature of those conditions, including not only housing, food and clothing but also essential non-food items such as sanitary items. It is also necessary that Member States determine the level of material reception conditions provided in the form of financial allowances or vouchers on the basis of relevant references to ensure adequate standards of living for nationals, such as minimum income benefits, minimum wages, minimum pensions, unemployment benefits and social assistance benefits . That does not mean that the amount granted should be the same as for nationals. Member States may grant less favourable treatment to applicants than to nationals as specified in this Directive.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7a) ‘Adequate standard of living’: means a quality of life such as to guarantee the health and well-being of the applicant and their family, with particular regard to receiving the necessary food, clothing, accommodation, medical treatment and social services;
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall inform applicants, as soon as possiblet the time when the person concerned expresses the intention to apply for international protection and at the latest when they are lodginge their application for international protection, of any established benefits and of the obligations with which they must comply relating to reception conditions. They shall point out in the information provided that the applicant is not entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 17 of this Directive as stated in Article 17a of the same Directive in any Member State other than where he or she is required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation].
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 170 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shallmay provide applicants with a travel document only when serious humanitarian or other imperativewhen reasons arise that require their presence in another State. The validity of the travel document shall be limited to the purpose and duration needed for the reason for which it is issued.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 190 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) to effectively prevent the applicant from absconding, in particular:;
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d – indent 1
- for applicants who have not complied with the obligation to make an application in the first Member State of entry as set out in Article [4(1)] of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] and have travelled to another Member State without adequate justification and made an application there; ordeleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 198 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d – indent 2
- where applicants are required to be present in another Member State in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation]; ordeleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 202 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 –subparagraph 1 – point d – indent 3
- for applicants who have been sent back to the Member State where they are required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] after having absconded to another Member State.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 208 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Where there are reasons for considering that there is a risk that an applicant may abscond, Member States shallmay, where necessary, and with the authorisation of the judicial authorities, require the applicant to report to the competent authorities, or to appear before them in person, either without delay or at a specified time as frequently as necessary to effectively prevent the applicant from absconding.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 214 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall require applicants to inform the competent authorities of their current place of residence or address, including their e- mail address, or a telephone number where they may be reached and notify any change of telephone number or address to such authorities as soon as possible.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Member States shall state reasons in fact and, where relevant, in law in any decision taken in accordance with this Article. Applicants shall be immediately informed in writing, in a language which they understand or are reasonably supposed to understand, of the adoption of such a decision, of the procedures for challenging the decision in accordance with Article 25 and of the consequences of non- compliance with the obligations imposed by the decision.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 229 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Under no circumstances may minors be detained or placed in confinement.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 230 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Any decision which involves detaining the applicant must be taken by judicial authorities;
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 243 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Detention of applicants shall be ordered in writing by judicial or administrative authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 245 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Where detention is ordered by administrative authorities, Member States shall provide for a speedy judicial review of the lawfulness of detention to be conducted ex officio and/or at the request of the applicant. When conducted ex officio, such review shall be decided on as speedily as possible from the beginning of detention. When conducted at the request of the applicant, it shall be decided on as speedily as possible after the launch of the relevant proceedings. To this end, Member States shall define in national law the period within which the judicial review ex officio and/or the judicial review at the request of the applicant shall be conducted. Where, as a result of the judicial review, detention is held to be unlawful, the applicant concerned shall be released immediately.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 246 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where detention is ordered by administrative authorities, Member States shall provide for a speedy judicial review of the lawfulness of detention to be conducted ex officio and/or at the request of the applicant. When conducted ex officio, such review shall be decided on as speedily as possible from the beginning of detention. When conducted at the request of the applicant, it shall be decided on as speedily as possible after the launch of the relevant proceedings. To this end, Member States shall define in national law the period within which the judicial review ex officio and/or the judicial review at the request of the applicant shall be conducted.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where, as a result of the judicial review, detention is held to be unlawful, the applicant concerned shall be released immediately.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 258 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Minors shall be detained only as a measure of last resort and after it having been established that other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively. Such detention shall be for the shortest period of time and all efforts shall be made to release the detained minors and place them in accommodation suitable for minors.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 265 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where minors are detained, their right to education must be secured and they shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Unaccompanied minors shall be detained only in exceptional circumstances. All efforts shall be made to release the detained unaccompanied minor as soon as possible.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 271 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Unaccompanied minors shall never be detained in prison accommodation.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 320 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) education and vocational training, except study and maintenance grants and loans or other grants and loans related to education and vocational training;
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 328 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point ii
ii) pursuant to point (c) of this paragraph, to education and vocational training which is directly linked to a specific employment activity;deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 332 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point iii
iii) pursuant to point (e) of this paragraph by excluding family benefits and unemployment benefits, without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 1231/2010.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 367 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. When assessing the resources of an applicant, when requiring an applicant to cover or contribute to the cost of the material reception conditions or when asking an applicant for a refund in accordance with paragraph 4, Member States shall observe the principle of proportionality. Member States shall also take into account the individual circumstances of the applicant and the need to respect his or her dignity or personal integrity, including the applicant's special reception needs. Member States shall in all circumstances ensure that the applicant is provided with an adequate standard of living which guarantees his or her subsistence and protects his or her physical and mental healthas defined in this Directive.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 390 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
Such different conditions shall in any circumstances ensure access to health care in accordance with Article 18 and a dignifiedn adequate standard of living as defined in this Directive for all applicants.
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 395 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17a
Reception conditions in a Member State other than the one in which the applicant 1. to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 17 in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation]. 2. dignified standard of living for all applicants. 3. Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] of a minor to the Member State responsibArticle 17a deleted is required to be present An applicant shall not be entitle,d Member States shall provide him or her with access to suitable educational activities.ensure a Pending the transfer under
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 427 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) fails to attend compulsory integration measures; ordeleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 430 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point g
(g) has not complied with the obligation set out in Article [4(1)] of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] and has travelled to another Member State without adequate justification and made an application there; ordeleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 433 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h
(h) has been sent back after having absconded to another Member State.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 438 #

2016/0222(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In relation to points (a) and (b), when the applicant is traced or voluntarily reports to the competent authority, a duly motivated decision, based on the reasons for the disappearance, shall be taken on the reinstallation of the grant of some or all of the material reception conditions replaced, withdrawn or reduced.deleted
2017/02/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicantexamines in accelerated procedures applications made by applications presenting security concerns.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure full respect for the principle of family unity and for the best interests of the child, the existence of a relationship of dependency between an applicant and his or her child, sibling or parent on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should become a binding responsibility criterion. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the presence of a family member or relative on the territory of another Member State who can take care of him or her should also become a binding responsibility criterion. In order to discourage secondary movements of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, in the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodgedis present when his or her application for international protection is lodged, unless it is demonstrated that this would not be in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure that that Member State will take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure the adequate protection of the child, and in particular the prompt appointment of a representative or representatives tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 167 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should beis exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 174 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure that the aims of this Regulation are achieved and obstacles to its application are prevented, in particular in order to avoid absconding and secondary movements between Member States, it is necessary to establish clear obligations to be complied with by the applicant in the context of the procedure, of which he or she should be duly informed in a timely manner. Violation of those legal obligations should lead to appropriate and proportionate procedural consequences for the applicant and to appropriate and proportionate consequences in terms of his or her reception conditions. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Member State where such an applicant is present should in any case ensure that the immediate material needs of that person are covered.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 184 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection unless the applicant has absconded or the information provided by the applicant is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible. As soon as the application for international protection is lodged, the applicant should be informed in particular of the application of this Regulation, of the lack of choice as to which Member State will examine his or her asylum application; of his or her obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not complying with themrights under this Regulation, in particular the opportunity to provide information on any family members or persons with other family connections in other Member States, and of his or her obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not complying with them. The information given to the applicant must be clear and concise and in a language that he or she understands.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) The Member State which is determined as responsible under this Regulation should remain responsible for examination of each and every application of that applicant, including any subsequent application, in accordance with Article 40, 41 and 42 of Directive 2013/32/EU, irrespective of whether the applicant has left or was removed from the territories of the Member States. Provisions in Regulation (EU) 604/2013 which had provided for the cessation of responsibility in certain circumstances, including when deadlines for the carrying out of transfers had elapsed for a certain period of time, had created an incentive for absconding, and should therefore be removed.deleted
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 227 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) A key based on the size of the population and of, on the economy of the Member States, including their growth and employment rates, should be applied as a point of reference in the operation of the corrective allocation mechanism in conjunction with a threshold, so as to enable the mechanism to function as a means of assisting Member States under disproportionate pressuremost exposed to migration flows. The application of the corrective allocation for the benefit of a Member State should be triggered automatically where the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible exceeds 150% of the figure identified in the reference keyand in a way that is binding on all the Member States. In order to comprehensively reflect the efforts of each Member State, the number of persons effectively resettled to that Member State should be added to the number of applications for international protection for the purposes of this calculation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 236 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) WhenIn applying the allocation mechanism applies, the applicants who lodged their applications in the benefitting Member State should be allocated to Member States which are below their share of applications on the basis of the reference key as applied to those Member States. Appropriate rules should be provided for in cases where an applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to national security or public order, especially rules as regards the exchange of information between competent asylum authorities of Member States. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should determine the Member State responsible, and should become responsible for examining the application, unless the overriding responsible criteria, related in particular to the presence of family members, determine that a different Member State should be responsible.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 284 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
(52) In order to assess whether the corrective allocation mechanism in this Regulation is meeting the objective of ensuring a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and of relieving disproportionate pressure on certain Member States, the Commission should review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism and in particular verify that the threshold for the triggering and cessation of the corrective allocationmechanism effectively ensures a fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 287 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining the single Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (‘the Member State responsible’).
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 304 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 2
- the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law,
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 311 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 3
- the father, mother or, when the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or, another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present,
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 317 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 4
- whenthe father or mother of the beneficiary of international protection is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or, if the applicant is a minor, another adult responsible for him or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the beneficiary is present,
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5 a (new)
- the aunt or uncle or grandparent of the beneficiary of international protection, if they are present in the territory of a Member State, regardless of whether the applicant and/or the beneficiary was born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 333 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) “representative”‘guardian’ means a person or an organisation appointed by the competent bodies in order to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor in procedures provided for in this Regulation with a view to ensuring the best interests of the child and exercising legal capacity for the minor where necessary. Where an organisation is appointed as a representative, it shall designate a person responsible for carrying out its duties in respect of the minor, in accordance with this Regulation;
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 340 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
(o) ‘benefitting Member State’ means the Member State benefitting from the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation and carrying out the allocation of the applicant;
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 372 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) examine whether the application for international protection is inadmissible pursuant to Article 33(2) letters b) and c) of Directive 2013/32/EU when a country which is not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum or as a safe third country for the applicant; andeleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 374 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b – point i
(i) the applicant has the nationality of a third country, or he or she is a stateless person and was formerly habitually resident in that country, designated as a safe country of origin in the EU common list of safe countries of origin established under Regulation [Proposal COM (2015) 452 of 9 September 2015]; ordeleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 381 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Member State considers an application inadmissible or examines an application in accelerated procedure pursuant to paragraph 3, that Member State shall be considered the Member State responsible.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 388 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. The Member State which has examined an application for international protection, including in the cases referred to in paragraph 3, shall be responsible for examining any further representations or a subsequent application of that applicant in accordance with Article 40, 41 and 42 of Directive 2013/32/EU, irrespective of whether the applicant has left or was removed from the territories of the Member States.deleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 395 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Where a person who intends to make an application for international protection has entered irregularly into the territory of the Member States, the application shall be made in the Member State of that first where he or she is presentry. Where a person who intends to make an application for international protection is legally present in a Member State, the application shall be made in that Member State.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 411 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State in which the applicant is obliged to be present shall continue the procedures for determining the Member State responsible even when the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available for the competent authorities of that Member State.deleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 418 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU, with the exception of emergency health care, during the procedures under this Regulation in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present.deleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 424 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. As soon as an application for international protection is lodged within the meaning of Article 21(2) in a Member State, its competent authorities shall inform the applicant of the application of this Regulation, in particular the opportunity to provide information regarding the presence of family members or any other family relations in other Member States and of the obligations set out in Article 4 as well asnd the consequences of non-compliance set out in Article 5 , and in particular:
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 434 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) of the objectives of this Regulation and the consequences of making another application in a different Member State as well as the consequences of leaving the Member State where he or she is obliged to be present during the phases in which the Member State responsible under this Regulation is being determined and the application for international protection is being examined, in particular that the applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU in any Member State other than the one where he or she is required to be present, with the exception of emergency health careapplication for international protection is being examined;
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 438 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the opportunity to provide information regarding the presence of family members or any other family relations in other Member States;
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 454 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) where applicable, of the allocation procedure set out in Chapter VII.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 462 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in writing in clear, concise language, and in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. Member States shall use the common leaflet drawn up pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 486 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 495 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. The Member State conducting the personal interview shall make a written summary thereof which shall contain at least the main information supplied by the applicant at the interview. This summary may either take the form of a report or a standard formrecord it in full using audiovisual equipment. The Member State shall ensure that the applicant and/or the legal advisor or other counsellor who is representing the applicant have timely access to the summaryaudiovisual recording.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 498 #

2016/0133(COD)

1. The best interests of the child shall be athe primary consideration for Member States with respect to all procedures provided for in this Regulation.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 499 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Each Member State where an unaccompanied minor is obliged to be present shall ensure that a representativeguardian represents and/or assists the unaccompanied minor with respect to the relevant procedures provided for in this Regulation. The representativeguardian shall have the qualifications and, expertise and independence to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration during the procedures carried out under this Regulation. Such representative, and the guardian must have received appropriate training in this area. Such a guardian shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the applicant’s file including the specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors. Through implementing measures, the Commission shall lay down the requirements and procedures for the training of guardians.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 536 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The criteria for determining the Member State responsible shall be applied only once, in the order in which they are set out in this Chapter.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 547 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State responsible shall be that where a family member of the unaccompanied minor is legally present, provided that it is in the best interests of the minor. Where the applicant is a married minor whose spouse is not legally present on the territory of the Member States, the Member State responsible shall be the Member State where the father, mother or other adult responsible for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, or sibling is legally present.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 555 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. In the absence of a family member or a relative as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Member State responsible shall be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protectionis staying, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 584 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15
Where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013], that an applicant has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection.Article 15 deleted Entry
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 610 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 617 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The Member State which decides to examine an application for international protection pursuant to this paragraph shall become the Member State responsible and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility. Where applicable, iIt shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 621 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Member State in which an application for international protection is made and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible may, at any time before a Member State responsible has been determined , or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, on humanitarian grounds , even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 10 to 13 and 18. The persons concerned must express their consent in writing.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 623 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19a Cessation of responsibilities 1. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, the obligations specified in Article 20(1) shall be transferred to that Member State. 2. The obligations specified in Article 20(1) shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take charge or take back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c) or (d), that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application lodged after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible. 3. The obligations specified in Article 20 (1)(c) and (d) shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20 (1)(c) or (d), that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States in compliance with a return decision or removal order issued following the withdrawal or rejection of the application. An application lodged after an effective removal has taken place shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 773 #
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 782 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number ofan applicant is present, in which he or she has submitted an applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulationand who has no family ties in any EU Member State.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 788 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 150% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the keyautomatically on the basis of the automated system referred to in Article 3544(1).
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 805 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. The automated system shall inform Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum once per weekyear of the Member States' respective shares in applications for which they are the Member State responsible.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 806 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5
5. The automated system shall continuously monitor whether any of the Member States is above the threshold referred to in paragraph 2, and if so, notify the Member States and the Commission of this fact, indicating the number of applications above this threshold.deleted
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 809 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 6
6. Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 5, the allocation mechanism shall apply.deleted
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 812 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 a (new)
Article 34 a Family reunification procedure 1. Where the applicant states that he or she has family links in one of the Member States, the Member State which has received the application for international protection shall, within 30 days of the registration of the application for international protection, carry out a check on the information provided by the applicant, before applying the allocation mechanism referred to in Article 34(1). 2. If, on the basis of that check, the applicant’s statements prove to be well- founded, the relevant Member State shall transfer the applicant to the Member State in which he or she has declared he or she has family links. 3. If the Member State to which the applicant is transferred ascertains that the applicant has made false declarations, that Member State shall apply the allocation mechanism referred to in Article 34(1).
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 821 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of the correctiveallocation mechanism, the reference number for each Member State shall be determined by a key.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 824 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the size of the population (540 % weighting);
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 828 #
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 837 #
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 854 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. Where the threshold referred to in Article 34(2) is reached, tThe automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall apply the reference key referred to in Article 35 to those Member States with a number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1) and notify the Member States thereof.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 857 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. Applicants who lodged their application in the benefitting Member State after notification of allocation referred to in Article 34(5) shall be allocated to the Member States referred to in paragraph 1, and these Member States shall determine the Member State responsiblebecome responsible for examining the application for international protection.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 864 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. Applications declared inadmissible or examined in accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 3(3) shall not be subject to allocation.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 868 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a Determination of the Member State of allocation 1. On the basis of the reference key referred to in Article 35, the automatic system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate the Member State of allocation responsible for examining the application for international protection, taking into account the following criteria: (a) Member States which have received the lowest number of applications for international protection; (b) Applicant’s skills, including spoken language skills; (c) Applicant’s cultural and social ties.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 885 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – title
Financial solidarityConsequences of failure to comply with the allocation mechanism
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 887 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State may, at the end of the three-month period after the entry into force of this Regulation and at the end of each twelve-month period thereafter, enter in the automated system that it will temporarily not take part in the correctivThe allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation as a Member Stateshall apply ofn allocation and notify th mandatory basis to theall Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 894 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall in that case apply the reference key during this twelve- month period to those Member States with a number ofFailure to comply with the obligations arising from the applications for which of they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1), with the exception of the Member State which entered the information, as well as the benefitting Member State. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count each application which would have otherwise been allocated to the Member State which entered the information pursuant to Article 36(4) for the sharellocation mechanism referred to in Chapter VII shall result in the suspension of commitments and payments in relation to the national and regional operating programmes of thate Member State involved.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 902 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. At the end of the twelve-month period referred to in paragraph 2, the automated system shall communicate to the Member State not taking part in the corrective allocation mechanism the number of applicants for whom it would have otherwise been the Member State of allocation. That Member State shall thereafter make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250 000 per each applicant who would have otherwise been allocated to that Member State during the respective twelve-month period. The solidarity contribution shall be paid to the Member State determined as responsible for examining the respective applications.deleted
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 911 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt a decision in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56, lay down the modalities for the implementation of paragraph 3.deleted
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 918 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5
5. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.deleted
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 974 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43
The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 150 % of its share pursuant to Article 35(1). Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 2, the application of the corrective allocation shall cease for that Member State.Article 43 deleted Cessation of corrective allocation
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2016/0132(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) In view of strengthening the protection of unaccompanied minors who have not applied for international protection and those children who may become separated from their families, it is also necessary to take fingerprints and a facial image for storage in the Central System to help establish the identity of a child and assist a Member State to trace any family or links they may have with another Member State. Establishing family links is a key element in restoring family unity and must be is closely linked to the determination of the best interests of the child and eventually, the determination of a durable solution. In performing all these operations, Member States should adhere to the principles laid down in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989.
2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 176 #

2016/0132(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Taking fingerprints and facial images of minors from the age of six shall only be carried out in the best interests of the child and in accordance with the other principles enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, in a child-friendly and child- sensitive manner and by officials trained specifically to enrol minor's fingerprints and facial images. The minor shall be informed in an age-appropriate manner using leaflets and/or infographics and/or demonstrations specifically designed to explain the fingerprinting and facial image procedure to minors, and they shall be accompanied by a responsible adult, guardian or representative at the time their fingerprints and facial image are taken. At all times Member States must respect the dignity and physical and psychological integrity of the minor during the fingerprinting procedure and when capturing a facial image.
2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 337 #

2016/0132(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes laid down in Article 13(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 13(2) shall be stored in the Central System for five yeareighteen months from the date on which his or her fingerprints were taken.
2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 343 #

2016/0132(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for five yeareighteen months from the date on which his or her fingerprints were taken.
2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2016/0131(COD)

(1) In June 2018, the European Council reconfirmed the importance of relying on a comprehensive approach to migration and considered that migration is a challenge not only for one Member State but for Europe as a whole. In this respect, it highlighted the importance for the Union to provide full support to ensure an orderly management of migration flows, notablyincluding through rapid processing to ensure access to protection of those in need, with swift returns for those who are not in need of protection, including through controlled centres established in the territory of all Member States and only on a voluntary basis. These centres should not be closed centres and should fully respect the EU asylum legislation and migrants’ fundamental rights. Therefore, the Union should be able to provide the Member States concerned with full financial and operational support through the relevant Union Agencies including the European Union Agency for Asylum.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2016/0131(COD)

(2) In this respect, at twhe request of a Member State, it should be possible for requests the support of the Agency, to provide an even more reinforced operational and technical assistance byhe latter should be able to provide an enhanced operational and technical assistance including by assisting Member States’ competent authorities in carrying out the entire procedure for international protection or parts of that procedure at the administrative stage ands well as provide assistance with the procedure applicable under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], without prejudice to the competence of Member States to take decisions on individual applications.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2016/0131(COD)

(3) The Agency’s involvement in the procedure for international protection and in the procedure applicable under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] would ensure that Member States receive all the required support to process applications for international protection swiftly and in a timely manner allowing for the efficient and orderly functioning of the asylum and reception systems. For that purpose, the Agency should also be able to assist national competent authorities at the administrative stage of the procedure with preparing decisions on applications for international protection. Those national competent authorities should be able to take into account the draft decisions prepared by the Agency, without prejudice to their competence to take decisions on individual applications.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2016/0131(COD)

(4) The Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should cooperate closely in order to address effectively the migratory challenges, in particular at external borders characterised by often large inward mixedwithin their respective mandates and powers in order to address effectively the migratory flowchallenges. In particular, both Agencies should coordinate their activities and support requesting Member States to facilitate the procedure for international protection and the return procedure with regard to third country nationals whose applications for international protection have been rejected or who are otherwise illegally present in the Member States. The Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should also closely cooperate in other common operational activities such as shared risk analysis, collection of statistical data, training and support to Member States on contingency planning with their agreement.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2016/0131(COD)

(5) Member States should be able to rely on increasenhanced operational and technical reinforcement by migration management support teams in particular at hotspot areas or controlled centres. The migration management support teams should be composed of teams of experts from Member States deployed by the Agency, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol or other relevant Union agencies, as well as experts from the staff of the Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. The Commission should ensure the necessary coordination in the assessment of needs and of the operations on the ground notably in view of the involvement of several Union agencies and possibly other stakeholders.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2016/0131(COD)

(6) In this regard, the Agency should be able to deploy the adequate infrastructure and technical equipment necessary for the asylum support teams, in consultation with the Member States concerned and subject to its agreement and to assist the competent national authorities, including the judiciary.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 78 #

2016/0131(COD)

(7) In hotspot areas or controlled centers, the Member States should cooperate with relevant Union agencies, which should act within their respective mandates and powers in close cooperation with the competent national authorities, and under the overall coordination of the Commission.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 79 #

2016/0131(COD)

(8) In these cases, the Union agencies should, at the request of the Member State and under the coordination of the Commission, act in support of the host Member State to apply rapid procedures for international protection and/or return, fully respecting the fundamental rights of the applicants and the relevant EU asylum aquis and international obligations. It should be possible to distinguish quickly between third-country nationals in need of international protection and those who are not in need of such protection, to carry out security checks and to carry out the entire orsupport Member States in carrying out part of the procedure for international protection and/or return.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2016/0131(COD)

(9) It should be possible for Member States to request the assistance of the Agency not only to reinforce their national administrations but also to assist the courts and tribunals dealing with asylum cases, without prejudice to judicial independence and with full respect for the organisation of the judiciary in each Member State. For that purpose, when defining the profiles of the experts, the Agency should foresee profiles for experts who are independent of the national administrative authorities and who are able to assist the courts or tribunals upon their request to perform, among others, legal research, analysis and other legal support.deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2016/0131(COD)

(1) Another objective of this Regulation is to ensure that Member States, at their request and according to their needs, can benefit from increasenhanced support of the Agency including its involvement in the procedure for international protection and in the procedure applicable under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation] for them to process applications for international protection swiftly and in a timely manner allowing for the efficient and orderly functioning of the asylum and reception systems and to reinforce the elements of cooperation between the European Union Agency for Asylum and the European Border and Coast Guard.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2016/0131(COD)

(b) at the request of the Member State concerned to the Agency in accordance with Article 16a;deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 83 #

2016/0131(COD)

2. The Agency shall organise and coordinate, for a limited period of time, the appropriate operational and technical assistance which may entail taking one or more of the following operational and technical measures in accordance with the agreed operational plan and in full respect of fundamental rights:.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2016/0131(COD)

(a) identifyassist with the identification and registeration of third-country nationals, take their biometric data, in accordance with national law, and inform them of those procedures, as appropriate, in close cooperation with other Union Agencies;
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 85 #

2016/0131(COD)

(b) assist with and carry out the registration ofreceiving and registering applications for international protection;
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2016/0131(COD)

(m) prepare decisions on applications for international protection without prejudice to the competence of the national competent authority to take decisions on individual applications;deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2016/0131(COD)

(n) assist with handling appeals by, among others, performing legal research, analysis and other legal support;deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2016/0131(COD)

(p) deploy asylum support teams, upon the agreement of the Member State concerned;
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2016/0131(COD)

(q) advise where appropriate, and deploy the adequate infrastructure and technical equipment necessary for the asylum support teams and to assist the competent national authorities, including the judiciaryupon the agreement of the Member State concerned.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 90 #

2016/0131(COD)

1. A Member State may request, for a limited period of time, the Agency to provide it with enhanced assistance to assist it within the implementation of its policy on asylum including of its obobligations under the CEAS and in accordance with the agreed operational plan. This shall be done without prejudice to the competence of Member States to take decisions on individual appligcations under the CEASfor international protection. For that purpose, the Agency shall deploy asylum support teams, including from the asylum reserve pool as appropriate, to carry out one or more of the following activities:
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2016/0131(COD)

(a) carry out the entire procedure or parts of the procedure for international protection at the administrative stage in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], without prejudice to the competence of Member States to take decisions on individual applications and applicable national law and/or;
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 92 #

2016/0131(COD)

(c) assist with the handling of appeals regarding the procedures referred to in points (a) and (b).deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2016/0131(COD)

(h) prepare decisions on applications for international protection and provide those decisions to the competent national authorities, who would be responsible for taking decisions on individual applications in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Regulation No (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation];deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2016/0131(COD)

4. For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, the experts from the asylum support teams shall, as appropriate, assist the courts or tribunals upon their request and with full respect of judicial independence and impartiality with handling appeals by, among others, performing legal research, analysis and other legal support.deleted
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2016/0131(COD)

1. Migration management support teams may be deployed only at the request of athe concerned Member State, or upon the initiative of the Agency and with the agreement of the Member State concerned, to provide technical and operational reinforcement to that Member State.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2016/0131(COD)

4. The relevant Union agencies shall, under the coordination of the Commission, assess a Member State's request for reinforcement and needs so as to define the necessary measures, including the deployment of technical equipment, to be agreed upon by the Member State concerned and resulting in the establishment of an operational plan agreed between the Member State and the Agency.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2016/0131(COD)

5. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the host Member State and the relevant Union agencies, establish the terms of cooperation for the deployment of the migration management support teams as well as the deployment of technical equipment, and be responsible for the coordination of the activities of those teamcooperation between the relevant agencies.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 98 #

2016/0131(COD)

6. The asylum support teams deployed by the Agency in the framework of the migration management support teams may carry out only the tasks referred to in Article 16(2) and 16a.
2018/12/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 392 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall, in close cooperation with the UNHCR, assist the Commission in regularly reviewing the situation in third countries which are included in the common EU list of safe countries of origin established by Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX, including those that have been suspended by the Commission and those that have been removed from that list.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 409 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In developing guidelines relating to the implementation of the instruments of Union law on asylum, the Agency shall consult members of courts and tribunals and the relevant judiciary associations, with a view to ensuring that the independence of the judiciary is fully upheld.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 413 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Agency, in close cooperation with the Commission and, where appropriate, with judiciary associations with experience in asylum matters, shall establish a mechanism to:
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 418 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) monitor the implementation and assess all aspects of the CEAS in Member States, in particular the Dublin system, reception conditions, asylum procedures, including the provisions on legal aid, the application of criteria determining protection needs and the nature and quality of protection afforded to persons in need of international protection by Member States, including as regards the respect of fundamental rights, child protection safeguards and the needs of vulnerable persons;
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 494 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Agency shall provide Member States with assistance in administering the CEAS, in particular in assessing the admissibility of asylum applications. The Agency shall send liaison officers to third countries, in particular to provide support for and facilitate resettlement operations. Agency officials deployed in third countries shall cooperate with the UNHCR and other relevant organisations working in those countries.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 506 #

2016/0131(COD)

(ja) assist the judiciary of the relevant Member States by deploying judges from other Member States who have experience of hearing asylum cases.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 512 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16a Liaison officers in Member States The Agency shall assist each Member State in implementing the CEAS by providing liason officers appointed by the Executive Director from among the experts on the Agency's staff.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 606 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency may, with the agreement of the host Member State, invite officials from third countries to observe the operational and technical measures outlined in Article 16(3), where their presence does not jeopardise the achievement of objectives of those measures, and where it may contribute to improving cooperation and the exchange of best practices.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) In order to ensure a level of detail that enables citizens to better assess the contribution of multinational undertakings to welfare in each Member State, the information should be broken down by Member State. Moreover, information concerning the operations of multinational enterprises should also be shown with a high level of detail as regards certain tax jurisdictions which pose particular challenges. For all other third country operations, the information should be given in an aggregate number.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 112 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall require the ultimate parent undertakings of large groups governed by their national laws and havingexceeding, on a consolidated net turnover exceedingannual basis, the thresholds in at least two of the three following categories: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 20 000 000; (b) net turnover: EUR 7540 000 000; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250, as well as large undertakings governed by their national laws that are not affiliated undertakings and having a net turnover exceedingwhich, on their balance sheet dates exceed at least two of the three following thresholds: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 7520 000 000; (b) net turnover: EUR 40 000 000; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250, to draw up and publish a report on income tax information on an annual basis.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 126 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be made accessible to the public on the website of the undertaking on the date of its publication. published on a harmonised standard form which must be publicly available on the website of the undertaking on the date of its publication and translated into one of the working languages of the European Union.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 134 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall require the medium- sized and large subsidiaryultimate parent undertakings referred to in Article 3(3) and (4) which are governed by their national laws and controlled by an ultimate parent undertaking which hasexceeds, on a consolidated net turnover exceedingannual basis, the thresholds in at least two of the three following categories: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 20 000 000; (b) net turnover: EUR 7540 000 000; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250, and which is not governed by the law of a Member State, to publish the report on income tax information of that ultimate parent undertaking on an annual basis.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 155 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the undertaking which opened the branch is either an affiliated undertaking of a group which is controlled by an ultimate parent undertaking not governed by the law of a Member State and which hasexceeds, on a consolidated net turnover exceedingannual basis, the thresholds in at least two of the three following categories: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 20 000 000; (b) net turnover: EUR 7540 000 000 or; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250; or is an undertaking that is not an affiliated one and which has a net turnover exceeding, on a consolidated annual basis, the thresholds in at least two of the three following categories: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 20 000 000; (b) net turnover: EUR 7540 000 000; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 177 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the number of employees, specifying the number of regular employees and the number of temporary staff or employees on flexible contracts;
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 186 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
(bc) immovable property forming part of the assets;
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 191 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the amount of gains and losses before tax;
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 201 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) public subsidies received and any donations made to politicians, political organisations or political foundations;
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 213 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The report shall also present the information referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article separately for each tax jurisdiction which, at the end of the previous financial year, is listed in the common Union list of certain tax jurisdictions drawn up pursuant to Article 48g, unless the report explicitly confirms, subject to the responsibility referred to in Article 48e below, that the affiliated undertakings of a group governed by the laws of such tax jurisdiction do not engage directly in transactions with any affiliated undertaking of the same group governed by the laws of any Member Stateoutside the Union.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 217 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The report shall present the information referred to in paragraph 2 on an aggregated basis for other tax jurisdictions.deleted
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 258 #

2016/0107(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 g – paragraph 2
The Commission shall regularannually review the list and, where appropriate, am presendt it to take account of new circumstanceshe European Parliament.
2017/03/21
Committee: ECONJURI
Amendment 4 #

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that, in light of the unprecedented migratory emergency, the current ceilings of the MFF 2014-2020 – in particular heading 3 – have proven to be too tight; recalls that the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) is already virtually exhausted; recalls that the available MFF flexibility mechanisms have already been extensively used and that this will greatly reduce the degree of financial flexibility available in forthcoming financial years;
2016/04/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Deems substantial additional financial resources at EU level to be necessary to address humanitarian challenges, develop a new Common European Asylum System, support resettlement and relocation programmes, foster integration and prevent discrimination, racism and xenophobia;
2016/04/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Welcomes the establishment of an instrument for the provision of humanitarian assistance in the EU, in particular with a view to addressing the mass influx of migrants and refugees; questions, nonetheless, the choice of Article 122(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as a legal basis for the establishment of the new instrument, given the lack of provision for the proper involvement of Parliament; voices concern at the Commission's intention to fund the instrument under heading 3 of the MFF, and in particular the AMIF fund, which is already being heavily used and is underfunded; calls on the Commission to look for other ways of funding this instrument from the EU budget, so as not to adversely affect the measures and programmes funded under the AMIF;
2016/04/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Commission recently signed a Common Understanding with Member States on a three-EU recently concluded an agreement with Turkey on a six- billion-euro Ffacility for Rrefugees in Turkey, which came into force on 20 March 2016 and is to run until the end of 2018; expresses concern about the establishment of financial instruments outside the EU budget as they threaten its unicity; stresses that these funds shouldParliament was not consulted at any stage during the adoption process; regards the approach used as a circumvention of the budget procedure, which requires the full involvement of Parliament; stresses that the agreement places the forthcoming negotiations on the 2017 budget in jeopardy by creating a fait accompli that there is no realistic chance of challenging; believes that the urgent need to address the refugee crisis is no justification for disrupting the institutional balance and freezing Parliament out; stresses, furthermore, that the funding the EU will be providing to Turkey must be used to provide direct support to refugees and host communities; calls on the Commission to establish a mechanism to monitor the use of these funds;
2016/04/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 35 #

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Expects the migratory emergency to continue due to sustained political instability and conflict in many regions and the lack of legal means of access to the EU; considers that a genuine MFF revision is essential by the end of 2016 at the latest; requests an updated estimation of budgetary needs to respond to the challenges expected until the end of the MFF; calls for additional flexibility in the MFFstresses that the MFF review in 2016 provides an opportunity to make necessary adjustments to funding levels and calls for additional flexibility in the MFF and an ability to address situations that were not foreseen at the time of its adoption.
2016/04/07
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A
A. whereas Article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union specifically upholds the right of a Member State to determine the conditions for exploiting its energy resources, whilst also upholding regard for solidarity and environmental protectionits Article 11 specifically establishes that environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and development of the Union's policies and activities, and its Article 191 establishes as objectives of the environmental policy the protection of human health, and the prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, among others;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 6 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B
B. whereas conventional indigenous sources of oil and gas contribute significantly to Europe's currrepresent ena vergy needs and are crucial at present for our energy security and energy diversitysmall and continuously declining share of world oil and gas proved reserves which is better to carefully conserve underground;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the potential unconventional European sources of gas and oil, and especially gas and oil captured in shale formations, to be extracted by hydraulic fracturing, remain extremely uncertain –as the 2011-2015 experience in Poland has soundly demonstrated–, due to greater depths than expected, high clay contents, and geological barriers of significant complexity, and furthermore it is met by strong reserves, when not outright opposition, of many European citizens and Member states, due to environmental and other impacts and triggered earthquakes;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 15 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C
C. whereas there is already an extensive body of international law and international conventions which govern the seas, including European waters, although they have a limited preventive capacity, as demonstrated by a decades-long record of environmental disasters linked to offshore spills caused worldwide by the extractive industry;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 22 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Underscores the fact that the Member States already have the world's best-performing offshore safety regimes and that overregulation in this area would seriously harm the competitiveness of theirthe strict respect of existing regulation in this area is a constraint to be respected in any circumstance by their extractive industries;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 28 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that, as regards 'liability for offshore accidents and their consequences, the Offshore Safety Directive (OSD) channels it unequivocally to offshore licensees, i.e. the individual or joint holders of authorizations for oil/gas prospection, exploration, and/or production operations issued in accordance with Directive 94/22/EC1 . It also makes the licensees strictly liable for any environmental damage resulting from their operations'; however, there are founded doubts about this condition being sufficient, since it has been stated unequivocally by the same Directive that no existing financial security instruments, including risk pooling arrangements, can accommodate all possible consequences of major accidents; moreover, although the OSD contains specific provisions for liability and compensation-related issues, it does not put in place a comprehensive EU framework for liability, since it neither deals with liability for civil damage (i.e. caused to natural or legal persons, including bodily injury, property damage and economic loss, both consequential and pure), nor addresses criminal liability for offshore accidents, arising out of committing a criminal act qualified as such by the law. _________________ 1 OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p. 3.
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 38 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that the Commission itself has highlighted that liability for civil damage (i.e. third party damage, or 'traditional damage') from offshore oil and gas operations in the European Economic Area (EEA) is still poorly understood; at the same time, it highlights that the expectations of the public, civil society and some authorities are high, but there is no coherent perspective on the kinds of claims that would be permissible, nor how to manage such claims effectively in the case of major accidents – particularly accidents that cross boundaries;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 41 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that there is a 'broad variety of financial security products available to hedge oil and gas companies’ operating risk. These range from self-insurance options, to third-party insurance, to mutual schemes such as the Offshore Pollution Liability Association Ltd (OPOL), to alternative risk transfer mechanisms and others'; this notwithstanding, none of them is able to fully protect the Member states from the combined consequences of the challenging insolvency and transboundary problems that can demonstrably arise from major offshore incidents;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 44 #

2015/2352(INI)

4a. Highlights that the consequence of such an incident is likely to be a socialization of the incident's costs to local communities, the State and other businesses dependent on the marine economy; such externalization can be further composed by the complexity of the existing international legal framework, which makes it difficult to advance successful transboundary damage claims;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 49 #

2015/2352(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Concludes that there is no need to give consideration to further legislation until the Commission has published its report on implementation of the OSD., while respecting the deadlines established for the Commission to publish its report on implementation of the OSD, due for July 2019, it is of the utmost importance for the Union to pursue actively during this period the research about how a comprehensive EU's framework for liability should be put in place, as a necessary complement to the regulatory process, in order to better protect possible damaged parties, and to better reflect European societal values;
2016/06/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 6 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 13 September 2016 on the EU Trust Fund for Africa: implications for development and humanitarian aid,
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 13 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas human mobility is at an unprecedentedly high level, with 244 million international migrants, owing to various reasons, including the doubling of the world’s population since 1960, the lack of serious and effective long-term development policies and the lack of political will to firmly tackle the structural problems underpinning those migration flows; whereas international migration occurs primarily within the same region and between developing countries;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 25 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas 65 million people – including 40.8 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) and 21.3 million refugees – have been forcibly displaced because of conflicts, violence and, human rights violations and climate change, further to people displaced on account of natural disasters;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 48 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas refugees and migrants are legally two distinct categories but in reality often people are part of large-scale mixed movements of people – with political, economic, social, developmental, humanitarian and human rights implications that cut across borders; whereas the human dignity of all the people involved in these movements must be at the centre of all European policies concerning such matters; whereas, moreover, refugees and asylum-seekers must always be treated in accordance with their status and under no circumstances should they be denied the benefit of the rights stemming from the relevant international conventions and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 66 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas vulnerable people, in particular women, but alsosuch as women, children, people with disabilities, people in need of urgent medical treatment and the elderly, who are particularly exposed to all kinds of dangers, namely violence, trafficking and abuse, should be urgently protected and granted humanitarian protection as part of their resettlement;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 119 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the fact that we are witnessing in today’s world an unprecedented level of human mobility, and stresses that one of the most urgent actions the international community must undertake is the strengthening of a common response to address the challenges and opportunities that this phenomenon represents; stresses that this response must be guided by the full protection of the rights and dignity of everyone forced by any circumstance to flee their homes in search of a better life; underlines that, though their treatment is governed by separate legal frameworks, refugees and migrants have the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, which need to be safeguarded regardless of their status; recalls that the EU must abide by its values and principles in all common policies and promote them in its external relations and calls for greater consistency in this regard;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 129 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. underlines the need for the EU and its Member States to take into account this current reality and develop a new approach to the movement of people based on real data, human dignity and human rights, by fostering the resilience of people by increasing their access to basic services, notably education, and their integration and contribution to local contexts by providing opportunities for employment and self-employment;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 143 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that well-managed international migration represents an important contribution to socioeconomic development, as it has done historically, and that it is necessary to encourage this by changing the current narrative and developing a positive one, countering xenophobic, populist and nationalistic discourses and adopting policies focused on the medium and long term and not exclusively guided by immediate political pressures, while also addressing legitimate concerns regarding border management, social protection for vulnerable groups and integration of refugees and migrants; points out, however, that people should never be forced to leave their homes and that the profound causes of migration should be tackled effectively;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 164 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the humanitarian aid system is dangerously overstretched and that it will never be sufficient to respond to forced displacement crises, in particular given the protracted nature of a majority of them; welcomes therefore the new policy framework outlined in the Commission communication on ‘Forced Displacement and Development’ of April 2016; notes the importance of promoting closer humanitarian-development links and the need to engage with different partners – governments, local authorities, the diaspora, civil society, including refugees themselves, and the private sector – to develop targeted evidence-based strategies to tackle this challenge;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 173 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that EU development cooperation should continue to address the root causes of forced displacement by promoting peace, democracy and security, reducing poverty and inequality, combating corruption, strengthening basic services, addressing state fragility and promoting human rights and good governance, in line with Sustainable Development Goal 16 in the new 2030 Agenda; believes that the EU and the Member States should, using all available instruments, continue to encourage the countries of origin to adopt and implement measures and policies that enable them to achieve economic and social development;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 194 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes the EU's commitment to humanitarian assistance – as the world largest donor – but urges EU and Member States to fulfil the pledges already made and increase their financial commitments in line with the rise in humanitarian needs;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 233 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the UN General 7. Assembly High-Level Meeting to Address Large Movements of Refugees and Migrants of 19 September 2016 and the hosting of the Leaders’ Summit by the USA, as migration flows are a global responsibility which demand a global response and enhanced cooperation between all stakeholders; welcomes the outcome offact that these summits are convened as the expression of a political commitment of unprecedented force, and hopes that this will urgently initiatinge the path towards a truly international sharing of responsibilities for refugees and large migration movements; regrets however the lack of specific pledges or legally binding commitments in terms of aid or reform, which are needed to close the current gap between rhetoric and reality; calls on all the parties involved to ensure continued urgent and effective political engagement, funding and concrete acts of solidarity in support of host countries; calls for the EU and its Member States to take the lead in international efforts, particularly as regards ensuring that the agreements – including the future compacts on refugees and on safe, orderly and regular migration – are swiftly put into practice, with respect for human rights and establishing follow-up mechanisms as needed;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 254 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that the resettlement of forcibly displaced persons is a pressing responsibility of the international community; considers it crucial for the European Union as a whole to implement as a matter of urgency a coordinated response, in particular in third countries, to grant asylum for people in need of international protection, instead of leaving the burden on the front-line states or countries neighbouring conflict zones; calls for thought to continue to be given to the idea of setting up humanitarian corridors and introducing humanitarian visas, including in connection with the revision of the Schengen Code currently being considered by the Council; highlights the fact that financial support is outpaced by the scope and scale of displacement, compounded by the lack of solutions to address the root causes of this forced displacement; calls for the Commission proposal to establish a European resettlement programme to be adopted at the earliest opportunity;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 314 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that EU external action should be proactive and forward-looking instead of mainly reactive with changing, short-term objectives in response to new crises; recalls that the migration phenomenon stems from a complex set of causes such as a growing population, poverty, social inequality, corruption, unsustainable resource use, resource grabbing, insufficient job creation, political instability and climate change;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 350 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for the establishment of a genuine, value-based common European migration policy – with adequate legal channels for migration as a sustainable long-term policy to promote growth and cohesion within the EU – in order to set a clear framework for EU relations with third countries; stresses that the current lack of such a common policy is a major barrier to regional cooperation in this area; welcomes the EU Action Plan against migrant smuggling (2015-2020), which envisages closer cooperation with third countries, but underlines that the implementation of a common EU legal migration policy would be instrumental in breaking the business model of smugglers;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 365 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that the EU external migration policies need agreements with third countries to be guided by long-term objectives and by establishing durable partnerships and the respect for human rights; strongly underlines that the conclusion of agreements with third countries and providing development aid should never be conditionally linked to border management;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 380 #

2015/2342(INI)

12. WelcomNotes the new Partnership Framework with third countries as a signal of real political action; stresses that the success of the approach outlined in the communication of June 2016 depends on the EU’s capacity; stresses that the EU needs to offer real, commonly agreed incentives to third countries and is concerned by the limited offer mainly focusedwithout focusing primarily on border management or Assisted Voluntary Return schemes, which – while essential and needed – constitute only a partial and short- term response to the situation; highlightsstresses that the new partnership frameworks must not become the main pillar of EU action on migration and points to the need to balance and complement this response, focusing on the development of local economies, qualification and regional mobility and improved levels of protection in countries of transit and origin;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 396 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses concerns regarding the quantitative approach in the new Partnership Framework and the related ‘migration compacts’, which see the ‘measurable increases in the number and rate of returns’ as one of the EU’s main goals, as the number of returns clearly depends on the nature of migration flows and on the situations in the countries of origin; believes that problems should not be outsourced and stresses that the short- term objectives of the compacts should focus on how best to address the challenges faced by third countries, including by developing legal migration channels, as a result of which the levels of irregular migration and death tolls in the Mediterranean will decrease; stresses that development, humanitarian and all other forms of assistance cannot be tied to migration control indicators and must not be used as migration management tools;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 408 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that the European Union must not conclude readmission and migration control agreements with third countries that have been shown not to uphold the human rights of their own peoples and of migrants or where there is a genuine risk of them failing to do so;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 410 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Criticises the fact that, although substantial progress has been made with agreements on the free movement of goods and capital, freedom of movement for persons is still very far from having been achieved; stresses that the visa facilitation promised under the partnerships often goes no further than administrative improvements such as shorter waiting times and lower fees; calls for the scholarships available for young people from third countries to be increased;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 412 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Notes the conclusion of mobility agreements with third countries; calls on the Commission to make sure that all agreements concluded under the partnerships are based on unconditional respect for the human rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 419 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the high-level dialogues carried out by the VP/HR and the Commission, and in some cases by Member States on behalf of the EU as a whole, as good and effective practices fostering coordination; stresses that coordination should be undertaken by the Commission and the EEAS; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to keep Parliament regularly informed of these dialogues and to report on the exact operational implementation of the Rabat and Khartoum processes and the priority initiatives agreed at the Valletta Summit; notesdeplores the fact that the packages designed for priority countries as part of the new Partnership Framework, by the Commission, the EEAS and the Member States, have neither been presented nor debated by the elected representatives of European citizens;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 425 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that fulfilling the objectives of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development requires that the EU and partner countries integrate well-managed migration dynamics into their respective sustainable development strategies; calls, in this connection, on the Commission and the EEAS to help transit countries draw up migrant integration strategies and set up asylum systems with high standards of protection;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 472 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Supports the Commission’s proposal for a new and ambitious External Investment Plan (EIP) to mobilise investments in developing third countries, provided that the plan is implemented in a fully transparent manner and the investments help to improve conditions in the beneficiary countries and do not foster corruption and bad governance; considers that supporting private sectors in third countries while fostering an environment of good governance and business practices should not be presented as a new measure; calls on the Commission to ensure coherence between financing instruments – for example with the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and the European Development Fund (EDF) – and projects in order to focus the EU’s assistance on priorities and to avoid the scattering of funds and efforts;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 492 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that without sufficient funding the EU cannot perform the functions it is expected to, nor meet the expectations of the European people; underlines the political and economic costs of inaction, and voices its concern in this connection; notes that the mid-term revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) – or the negotiation of the next MFF at the latest – provides a necessary opportunity for the revision of the external instruments related to migration, and also to increarationalise the EU’s budget in such a manner that it would allow an end to ad hoc instruments and restore the unity of the budget; strongly emphasises the need for Parliament to be given a major oversight role in this area as well;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 497 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Criticises the fact that the many commitments entered into when trust funds are set up often followed by only limited action; considers it regrettable that the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa has been funded with monies already allocated to other development projects; criticises the fact that many of the commitments countries enter into in such circumstances are not honoured;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 501 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Believes that upholding the rule of law and combating corruption must be central planks of EU action in countries of origin; stresses the importance of proper checks being carried out on the use of funding for third countries, in order to make sure that it is used for its intended purpose;
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 515 #

2015/2342(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the use of common security and defence policy (CSDP) missions such as EUCAP Sahel Niger and EUNAVFOR MED, cooperation with NATO, and EU initiatives such as Europol’s Joint Operational Team (JOT) Mare to gather intelligence and fight smugglers, while underlining that global mobility should not be considered a threat; recommends the use of CSDP tools for early warning (forecasting), mediation and conflict resolution, while stressing the importance of starting to plan for durable solutions as early as possible in conflict situations;deleted
2016/10/20
Committee: AFETDEVE
Amendment 4 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
– whereas full transparency underpins citizens' trust in EU institutions, contributes to developing an understanding of the rights deriving from the legal system of the Union and awareness and knowledge of the EU decision-making process, including the correct implementation of administrative and legislative procedures,
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)
– whereas the right of access to documents is a fundamental right, protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties and implemented by Regulation 1049/2001, with the aim, in particular, of ensuring that this right can be exercised as easily as possible and of promoting good administrative practices regarding access to documents by ensuring democratic scrutiny of the activities of the institutions and ensuring that they comply with the rules enshrined in the Treaties,
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the actions of the institutions and EU policies have to be based on participatory democracy, thus ensuring compliance with the principles of full transparency, sharing, and informing citizens accurately and in good time and where possible on direct democracy, ensuring that decisions are taken as openly and as close to the citizens as possible, and thus in compliance with the principles of full transparency, sharing, and informing citizens accurately and in good time; when citizens’ participation in the decision-making process takes the form of public consultations, the institutions must take account of the outcome of those consultations;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Invites, once again,Regrets that the last meeting of the Interinstitutional Committee established byunder Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 took place on 15 December 2009. Invites, once again, the Interinstitutional Committee to work more actively and report to the competent committees on the issues discussed; calls on the Interinstitutional Committee to meet more regularly and to open up internal discussions and deliberations by inviting and considering submissions from civil society, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor; calls on it to address the issues mentioned in this resolution as a matter of urgency.
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 14 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that it is the duty of the institutions to carry on a continuing open, transparent dialogue with citizens, associations representing them and civil society, so as to enable citizens themselves to bring scrutiny directly to bearand effectively to bear on the legitimacy and effectiveness of governance, on measures taken and on the different stages of decision-taking, and to allowing them to become more activeclosely and directly involved in the decision- making process – and on the legitimacy and effectiveness of governance and measures taken;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 16 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that transparency and full access to documents held by the institutions have to be the rule, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, and that, as has already been laid down by the precedents consistently set by the EU Court of Justice, exceptions to that rule have to be properly interpreted, taking into account that there is ane overriding public interest in disclosure and in the requirements of democracy, the closer involvement of citizens in the decision- making process, the legitimacy of governance, efficiency and accountability to citizens;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 18 #

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise, the actions of their representatives, the decision-making process, how public money is allocated and spent in line with the principle of traceability of funds and in conformity with the position taken by the Parliament in earlier resolutions.
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Points out that, while progress has been achieved in providing information on Parliament's website on the different allowances MEPs are entitled to, and on the rules by which they are governed, this policy should be pursued taking into account best practices in National Parliaments, as well as the actions already undertaken by individual Members; encourages therefore all Member of Parliament to become engaged in this endeavour by proactively disclosing information relating to their specific activities and use of expenditure, in order for the Parliament to remain at the forefront of transparency and openness in the EU, and with a view to better public accountability of public funds.
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise,: – the actions of their representatives, once the latter have been elected or appointed to a public office; – the decision-making process, (including any documents circulated, individuals involved, votes cast, etc.); – the way in which public money is apportioned and spent, and the ensuing outcomes;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Deplores the fact that it is still difficult for citizens to gain access to information held by EU institutions, the reason being that there is no effective citizen-oriented interinstitutional policy geared to facilitating access to documents for citizens and based on complete and genuine transparency, communication, and direct democracy; urges the institutions to take a proactive attitude by disclosing as many of their documents as possible in as simple and accessible a way as possible for the public, having documents translated into all of the EU official languages, and establishing proper, simple and inexpensive information access arrangements, including digitally and electronically, allowing for the needs of people with disabilities;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 33 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in the proper manner; calls in particular on the Council, in particularcluding its preparatory bodies, to revise its rules, with a view to ensuring that all discussions, documents, and information are made public, and to produce transcripts of its public meetings; calls for Parliament to publish transcripts of, as well as the papers for and information on, meetings of its working groups, including coordinators’ meetings; calls also for meetings of the so-called Eurogroup to be placed on a formal footing so that transcripts of, as well as the papers for and all other information on, those meetings may be published in keeping with the public interest in transparency, which must take precedence over any exceptions intended to safeguard the decision-making process;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 41 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that, as a result of the entry into force of the TEU and the TFEU, the right of access to documents covers all EU institutions, bodies, and agencies; believes, therefore, that the substance of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be updated as a matter of urgency and its substance amended in the light of the Treaty provisions and the relevant case law of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights; believes, in particular, that it is essential to broaden the regulation's scope to include all the European institutions it currently does not cover, such as the European Council, the European Central Bank, the Court of Justice and all the EU bodies and agencies;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the Treaty of Lisbon has done away with the reference to safeguarding the efficiency of legislative decision- taking; believes therefore that this exception, which still appears in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, is no longer admissible as it is incompatible with the new constitutional setup;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the transparency of the legislative process, with a particular focus on ‘trilogues’, the established practice by which most EU legislation is adopted; urges the Ombudsman to make full use of her powers of investigation under the Treaties, with a view to enhancing the transparency of legislative and non- legislative work within the EU;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Points out that the use of trilogues is not consistent with the legislative procedure laid down in the Treaty and that conciliation committees may be used only at third reading as a last resort, in cases where Parliament and the Council are unable to reach agreement on a Commission legislative proposal;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the institutions involved to amend their own rules of procedure so as to ensure in future that negotiations will be transparent and, to that end, to allow meetings to be held in public and webstreamed and to arrange for agendas, minutes, and the main issues discussed to be published;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the Commission’s intention of proposing an interinstitutional agreement establishing a mandatory interinstitutional register of interest group representatives operating within the institutions and calls for that matter to be given the highest priority; calls for that register to contain detailed information showing who is lobbying on behalf of whom, for what purpose and with what resources and funding; stresses that the register system should apply across the board and that the register should therefore be established and governed by a specific regulation, as an interinstitutional agreement is not the right legal instrument to use for this purpose;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Also calls on Parliament and the Council to follow the Commission practice, as established by the decision of 25 November 2014, by publishing information about contacts between lobbyists and Members of Parliament, their office staff, and their advisers, and between lobbyists and Member State representatives working at the Council; believes also that uniform, effective penalties should be laid down in order to deal with any abuses;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on all the institutions to publish information about the contacts of interest group representatives with their officials, including those of non-managerial level;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Points out that, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and in order to guarantee full democratic and transparent parliamentary control, access should likewise be granted to documents produced when powers are delegated (delegated acts), since these make up a substantial portion of European legislation, for which reason adequate and transparent parliamentary and democratic control ought to be fully guaranteed; in this context, particularly deplores the lack of transparency of the European supervisory authorities (EBA, EIOPA, ESMA) because of the lack of involvement of the co-legislators; considers it disappointing that no single register of delegated actsall second-level legislation has yet been established and calls on the Commission to set one up without delay;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 85 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that international agreements have binding force and an impact on EU legislation and points to the need for negotiations to be transparent throughout the entire process, implying that the institutions should be obliged to publish the negotiating brief conferred on the Commission simultaneously with its approval and before the negotiations begin; considers it regrettable that negotiations are secret and citizens have no access to information, but only to documents communicated to the press, thus giving rise to speculation and misconceptions about the negotiations; maintains that the public should be given access to all of the parties’ relevant negotiating documents, including documents on which the parties have already reached agreement, with the exception of those which are to be classified, with a clear justification on a case-by-case basis, in keeping with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Points out to the Commission that it is required under Article 207 TFEU to inform Parliament fully and immediately at every stage while negotiations are taking place, and calls on the Council to consult Parliament before drafting the negotiating brief;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls for all documents relating to non-legislative procedures, such as binding measures, measures relating to internal organisation, administrative or budget documents or documents of a political nature (such as conclusions, recommendations or resolutions), to be rendered readily, and if possible directly, accessible in accordance with the principle of proper administration;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Deplores the lack of transparency regarding infringement procedurletters of formal notice and infringement procedures against Member States; calls in particular for documents sent by the Commission to Member States in connection with such procedures, and the related replies, to be made accessible to the public; calls furthermore for information on the execution of judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union to be published proactively;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Believes that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to prevent and combat any abuse and fraud; in this context, calls on the Commission to make it compulsory to publish particulars of all recipients of money from the Structural Funds, including subcontractors;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 1 (new)
(1) Notes that in a change to its policy on transparency the ECB now publishes the minutes of meetings of the ECB Governing Council, but regrets that the ECB is still lagging far behind the world’s other central banks in this regard; awaits the implementation of further major measures to improve the transparency of its communication channels;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 2 (new)
(2) Believes that considerable progress can still be made through publication of the minutes of Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) meetings; hopes furthermore that in the future all documents concerning decisions taken in the Asset Quality Review process will be made public to guarantee a level playing field across the EU; hopes too that transparency requirements will also be applied to the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) due to start on 1 January 2016;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 3 (new)
(3) Is disappointed with the transparency policy applied by the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD); recalls that the ECB’s new transparency policy allows it to establish confidentiality procedures in order to keep secret internal investigations into irregularities such as corruption, infiltration by organised criminal groups or maladministration; calls for a prompt review of their transparency policies and asks in particular that the EIB make public information on its beneficiaries and on the subcontractors who benefit from its funding;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 4 (new)
(4) Is critical of the lack of transparency within some institutions that have taken crucial economic decisions affecting EU citizens, such as the Eurogroup and the Ecofin Council configuration; emphasises the urgency of making these meetings public and transparent, and calls for the relevant institutions to release the documents concerned; is critical of the mismanagement of the ‘Greek crisis’ and calls attention to the fact that the Troika operated outside the limits laid down in the Treaties; is critical too of the failure to publish documentation on decisions relating to the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); asks that the Troika’s modus operandi be assessed to clarify the responsibilities attributable to the institutions involved and ensure democratic legitimacy in the adoption and implementation of the rescue programmes;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Ombudsman, the Data Protection Supervisor, and the Council of Europe.deleted
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Selection of staff for the EU institutions, agencies and other bodies
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – point 1 (new)
(1) Regrets that the procedures for selecting EU institution staff are not fully transparent and calls in particular for the Staff Regulations to be revised, particularly with reference to ‘Annex III - Competitions’;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – point 2 (new)
(2) Considers that competitions for entry to the European civil service ought to be entirely based on criteria of openness and transparency in order to combat corruption and conflicts of interest;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – point 3 (new)
(3) Considers it essential that the EU agencies apply a common policy on conflicts of interest; notes that in some cases the policy applied to date includes provisions concerning publication of the CVs and declarations of interests of the Director and of senior management; observes with concern however that the obligation to publish CVs and declarations of interest does not apply to experts; calls on the agencies to extend this obligation to experts;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 110 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – point 4 (new)
(4) Is disappointed by the lack of transparency in the appointment of EFSI managers; calls for transparency in appointment procedures and for information on CVs and declarations of interests to be made public;
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 112 #

2015/2287(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Ombudsman, the Data Protection Supervisor, and the Council of Europe.
2015/12/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to the March 2016 Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Nuclear Deal, was a notable achievement for European diplomacy in particular, and that Europe is now responsible for not simply ensuring its strict and full implementation, but for maintaining the spirit of negotiations in a way that benefits the peoples of both Iran and the EU; notes, however, that on the Iranian side the conclusion of the agreement did not represent a turning point from the point of view of the country's external and internal policies, particularly in the context of human rights and the rule of law;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that EU-Iran relations should be developed through multi-layered dialogue involving political, technical and people-to-people contacts as well as civil society actors and human rights defenders; supports the opening of EU-Iran relations for the mutual benefit of both parties, based on a realistic assessment of common interests and differences, including and especially in the field of human rights and the rule of law, with a view to encouraging step-by-step expansion of cooperation in a climate of confidence-building, foremost for the benefit of the peoples of Iran and the EU; supports, in this regard, the Commission's commitment to a renewed engagement with Iran based on 'a dialogue of the four Cs': a dialogue that is comprehensive in scope; cooperative in the fields where Iran and the EU have mutual interests; critical, open and frank in areas where Iran and the EU disagree but are looking for common ground; and that is overall constructive in tone and practice; stresses that this engagement should also be consistent with commitments made in the EU's Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy to 'place human rights at the centre of its relations with all third countries';
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 66 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Insists on the importance of developing the parliamentary dimension of EU-Iran relations as part of the strategy for re-establishing mutual trust; reiterates its support, in this regard, for the proposal discussed between Parliament and the Majlis for an inter-parliamentary dialogue on counter-terrorism; welcomes the renewed political dialogue between the EU and Iran, including on human rights; recognises that while there is suspicion and mistrust on both sides, there is also a long history between many Member States and Iran and that Iran has a strong ambition to have good relations with Europe, which provides the potential for a relationship based on mutual trust and respect; reiterates that the EU does not seek to interfere in internal political choices in this country or in any other, but seeks cooperation based on mutual respect for international standards and principles, universal principles and the International Human Rights Law; believes that the full normalisation of relations can only occur by means of regular and sustained dialogue and that while the immediate priority should be to broaden the scope of EU-Iran relations in areas where there is common agreement to do so, the parties should not renounce to pursue a more ambitious agenda on touchy subjects, including on human rights; believes, in this regard, that the preparation and formalisation of a common agenda highlighting the key human rights tangible steps expected to be attained through the development of the relation could be an important first step ; believes, however, that the ultimate aim must be one of partnership between Iran and the EU;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Recognises that differences exist between the EU and Iran on the use of the death penalty; nevertheless believes cooperation on anti-narcotics programmes and on the question of iterates the European Union strong and principled position against the death penalty and that its abolition is a key objective for the Union's human rights and foreign policy and recognizes that this item, being Iran the country with the highest rate of executions per capita in the world, has to be on the agenda; believes that sustained attention given to ending the death penalty for drug-related offences and juvenile executionoffenders, in line with Iran's own human rights commitments, could provide a common agenda for addressing this questionprogressively restricting the use of the death penalty and ensuring that it be carried out according to minimum international standards;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 117 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Takes note of the fact that eliminating the death penalty for drug- related offences would drastically reduce the number of executions (up to 80 % according to Iranian estimates); calls for EU-Iran cooperation in the fight against drugs as a way of addressing the issue of executions in the country; calls on the Commission to provide technical assistance and administrative capacity- building for Iran to enable it to secure its borders with Afghanistan and Iraqensure that any technical or other assistance offered to Iran to counter the flow of illegal drugs is not used to commit human rights violations and is conditioned on the abolition of the death penalty for drug crimes;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 148 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Takes note of Iran’s stated objective of achieving a yearly growth rate of 8 %; believes that European investments are key for Iran to achieve this goal; stresses that for Iran to realise its economic potential, it will have to take steps to create a transparent economic environment conducive to international investment and take anti-corruption measures, particularly regarding compliance with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force; calls on the EU to fully support Iran’s efforts in this process via, in particular, support for work towards forging a bilateral investment treaty between the EU and Iran; calls for the EU to develop economic cooperation with Iran and to use these negotiations as an opportunity to push for key labour rights reforms based on ILO's core conventions; takes note that Iran is the world’s largest economy outside the WTO; supports, in this regard, Iran’s bid to join the WTO;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 182 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the EU to engage EU- based business companies to ensure full transparency of their activities in Iran and to require that EU-based investors carry out human rights due diligence, including human rights impact assessments, of their operations in Iran, publicly reporting on their human rights policies, environmental and social risks, the impacts of their activities, and measures taken to mitigate negative impacts with regards to Iran;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 211 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Takes note of the fact that Iran hosts an estimated 3 million Afghan refugees, of which only an estimated 950 000 are United Nations-registered, as Iranian authorities have not provided all of them with an opportunity to legally claim asylum; is extremely worried by the reports of Afghan refugees being trained in Iran and sent to fight in Syria and calls on Iran to clarify on these allegations; welcomes the additional EUR 6.5 million of EU funding to support Iran in the education and health care of the Afghan population in the country; believes that EU-Iran cooperation on refugee management can enhance mutual understanding, promote improved respect for international law and the lives of refugees themselves, as well as contributing to conflict resolution in order to reduce the causes of current and future refugee movements;
2016/08/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 272 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the nuclear deal opens the possibility for cooperation in resolving the region’s security crisis; believes that Iran can and should play a stabilisation role in the region; believes that the whole region can benefit from a normalisation of relations with Iran; is worried that Iran military interference in Iraq and Syria through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps may contribute to increase sectarian violence in the region;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 306 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes Iran’s readiness to support the current efforts to bring stability to Iraq, and calls for additional efforts to bring all the militias operating in the country under the authority of the Iraqi army; is worried by the recent attack against Iranian opposition refugees in Camp Liberty in Iraq and by the recent tensions between Kurdistan Iraq and Iran after clashes erupted between Iranian Kurdish armed groups and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps; welcomes Iran’s contribution to the fight against ISIS/Da’esh; notes the agreement between Iran and Australia to share intelligence on the fight against ISIS/Da’esh;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 387 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Notes withExpresses serious concern that Iran has the highest level of death-penalty executions per capita in the world; stresses that eliminatingongly urges Iran to abolish the death penalty for drug- related offences would dramatically decrease the number of executions; welcomes, in this regard, the possibility that the newly-elected Majlis is considering legislation to exclude; notes, in this regard, the introduction of a draft bill that excludes, in a welcome move, some drug- related offences from the list of crimes punishable with the death penalty but remains concerns that the bill proposes to replace the death penalty with life imprisonment for drug-related offences that do not involve armed activities;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 395 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the fact that the adoption of the 2013 Islamic Penal Code and Iran’s ratification ofExpresses serious concern at the 2013 Islamic Penal Code which retains death penalty for juveniles in qesas (retribution in kind) or hudud crimes, like homicide, adultery or sodomy; expresses serious concern that scores of juvenile offenders still languish on death row; calls on Iran to fully meet their obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and prohibits child executions and allows all juvenile offenders sentenced to death prior to 2013 to seek retrial; calls on Iran to ensure this prohibition is fully implemented and that all relevant the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders, and that all juvenile offenders currently on death row have their sentences commuted; pending the full abolition of the death penalty against juvenile offenders, calls on Iran to declare a moratorium on the execution of juvenile offenders and to restrict the number of offenderces care made aware of this right; calls on Iranrying the death sentence, with a view to declareing a moratorium on the death penalty, at least for juvenile offendersall executions and the eventual full abolition of the death penalty;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 422 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on Iran to live up fully toend widespread and serious restrictions on the right to freedom of expression (both online and offline), opinion, association and peaceful assembly, of thought, conscience, religion or belief and to comply with its commitments under the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by ensuring the enjoyment by its citizens of individual rights without discrimination as to sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, or other status, as provided for in these instruments; points out that this includes a basic right to equality before the law, as well as the right of equal access to education, health care and professional opportunities;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 435 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Deplores the continuing and systematic discrimination and harassment against ethnic and religious minorities, including the Baha'i, Ahwazi Arabs, Baloch, Christians, Jews, Sunni Muslims, Sufi Muslims, Kurds and Zoroastrian; calls on the Iranian authorities to eliminate, in law and in practice, all forms of discrimination and human rights violations against persons belonging to minorities;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 445 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29b. Calls on the EEAS and Member States to regularly raise the issue of combating violence against women and girls and the types of discrimination from which such violence originates in its relations with Iran, and calls upon Iran to eliminate, in law and in practice, all forms of discrimination against women and girls; to adopt comprehensive legislation to ensure protection for women and girls against gender-based violence, including domestic violence; to address the alarming incidence of child, early and forced marriages; to promote women's participation in decision-making processes and, while recognizing the high enrolment of women in all levels of education in the Islamic Republic of Iran, to lift restrictions on women's equal access to all aspects of education and women's equal participation in the labour market and in all aspects of economic, cultural, social and political life;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 461 #

2015/2274(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes President Rohani’s campaign promise to present a charter for citizens’ rights but notes the lack of progress in this regard; underlines the importance of respecting the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary in providing the necessary legal certainty required for foreign direct investments to take place; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to work together with the Iranian authorities in areas such as judicial reform, reform of the prison system, government accountability, respect for the rule of law, citizens’ rights and the fight against corruption; believes that these measures will increase legal certainty in Iran and the country’s attractiveness to foreign investors while also benefiting Iranian citizens.;
2016/08/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls that the UN CRPD Committee in its Concluding Observations highlighted the disproportionately adverse and retrogressive effect the austerity measures in the EU have been producing on the adequate standard of living of persons with disabilities, thus suggesting the provision of a minimum social protection floor, to be introduced in accordance with national practices;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 9 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the discrimination and exclusion which persons with disabilities still suffer today; calls on the Commission to maximise synergies between the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 and the provisions of the CEDAW and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, in order to ensure, not least by harmonising and implementing the legislative framework, that the rights granted under those instruments can in fact be exercised;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission to assess whether EU legislation is compatible with the requirements of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; urges that any loopholes hampering the implementation of the Convention should be closed;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to ensure that opportunities to take part in public consultation procedures are effectively and widely publicised by means of communications which are accessible to persons with disabilities who use languages such as braille and Easy Read;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 18 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to give persons with disabilities an active role in decision- making processes, also through their representative organisations, in accordance with Article 4(3) of the CPRD; urges, further, that due account should be taken of the views expressed by persons with disabilities in the course of such processes;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that, if the rights of children with disabilities are to be protected, their families must be guaranteed proper support by strengthening and building on the legislative instruments available to the EU, such as that providing for extended parental leave for parents of children with disabilities;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers full and complete access to the political system for persons with disabilities to be a priority; recognises that this access must bcalls, in this regard, on the Commission to include an assessment of compatibility with the UNCRPD in its reporting on the implementation of Council Directives 93/109/EC and 94/80/EC, which lay down the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament and local elections; deplores the fact that, in the EU, many persons with disabilities who do not have legal capacity are also denied the right to vote; urges the Member States, therefore, to revise their national laws in such a way as to ensure that the right to vote is not systematically denied to persons with disabilities who do not have legal capacity, and instead to assess each case on its merits and provide persons with disabilities with assistance during the voting procedure; recognises that the right to vote must constitute more than mere physical access to cast a vote, and that it should include a wide range of initiatives to open the democratic process to all citizens; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the provisions of Article 3(2) of Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime and of Directives 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings and 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings, and in particular Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty, are properly and fully implemented, especially in the case of persons with disabilities;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. urges all the EU Member States to properly acknowledge the key role of family caregivers, ensuring them a proper social and economic recognition and implementing measures of direct material support such as protection of pension entitlements or subsidies that reduce the full costs of services for carers; calls on the Commission to carry out a study aimed at analyzing the legal status, or the lack thereof, of family caregivers in all Member States;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 40 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Calls on the EU and Member States to deliver effective measures aimed at tackling segregation and rejection of students with disabilities in schools and learning environments, making all the necessary efforts to ensure they fully enjoy their right to inclusive and quality formal, non-formal and informal education, including accommodation and support needed;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 41 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Urges that such data collection and such surveys must be as specific and as targeted as possible and that they should be followed by appropriate studies and workshops which result in suitable and effective forms of action;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to promote and enhance the use of Structural Funds by Member States, with a view to developing high-quality social services for people with disabilities and ensuring the transition from institutional care to community-based care; expresses its deep concern about the number of young people with disabilities living in institutions across the European Union who have no access to mainstream inclusive quality education;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 48 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Emphasises that, if the rights of persons with disabilities are to be safeguarded in full, it is essential that such persons should be guaranteed the right to choose how they want to live and how they want to maximise their potential, for example by making greater use of arrangements such as caregivers;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. calls on the Commission and the Member States to involve as much as possible national, regional and local organisations of persons with disabilities in the programming of Operational Programmes in the context of ESI Funds; stresses, moreover, the importance of guaranteeing full accessibility of people with disabilities to Erasmus +, Youth Guarantee and EURES initiatives;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 50 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. calls on Member States to refrain from cuts on disability related benefits, community based services, health services, training and education programmes that will undermine the UN CRPD and will increase even more levels of poverty and social exclusion;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 53 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Urges that, with a view to guaranteeing social inclusion for persons with disabilities, it is essential to do away with all the barriers and obstacles which still hamper their integration into education systems, at the workplace, into public life and into the communities to which they belong;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. stresses that the European Union should take appropriate measures to ensure that all persons with disabilities deprived of their legal capacity can exercise all the rights enshrined in EU treaties and legislation such as on access to justice, to goods and services, including banking and employment, and to healthcare, as well as voting and consumer rights;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 55 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Urges that the principle of freedom of movement for persons with disabilities within the EU must be guaranteed by removing all the remaining barriers to the exercise of that freedom;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Urges that, with a view to guaranteeing proper social integration for persons with disabilities, incentives must be provided for the correct use of EU funds which are intended to foster that process by means of research into and the development, implementation and dissemination of new ideas, new technologies and new methods;
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 1
1. Expresses the view that the Member States of the European Union should without delay move towards a shared culture of the meaning of the rule of law in the 28 Member States to be applied by all concerned even-handedly;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 12 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that Article 6(2) TEU commits the European Union to acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and therefore calls for this to happen;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 21 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 2
2. Considers that the procedure under Article 7 TEU is virtually unusable; notes that the Union has no legally binding mechanism in place to monitor regularly the compliance of the Member States and EU institutions with the EU's fundamental values, and therefore calls for amendments to be made to the Treaties to this end, where necessary;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 23 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 3
3. Takes note ofWelcomes the rule of law Framework established by the Commission in 20141 and of the creation of an annual dialogue on the rule of law in the General Affairs Council as established in December 2014; and looks to the formulation of common ground as between these different rule of law mechanismss a first contribution to overcoming the lack of effective mechanisms to prevent and resolve breaches of the principles of the rule of law, democracy and human rights; wishes furthermore to see coordination between the two dialogues, but recalls that they cannot absolutely be regarded as an adequate instrument to fill the gaps in the existing system, inter alia because of the lack of any binding effect of the Communication, with reference either to its issuing or to its actual implementation; __________________ 1 Communication of the Commission of 11 March 2014 on "A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law" (COM(2014)0158).
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 31 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 4
4. Considers it important to work towards a new consensus between the EU and its Member States with the aim of promoting democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, proceeding from the basis that unless extreme care is taken, there will always be a danger of politicising legality;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 51 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 6
6. Recommends, pending a possible amendment of the Treaties, the establishment onf an EU mechanism for Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights which would include all relevant stakeholders; considers that this would, however, requi, based on the introduction of infringement procedures as referred to in Articles 258 and 260 TFEU against Member States in the event of multiple individual infringements which, taken together, could prefigure a Tbreaty changech of Article 2 TEU;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 65 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 7
7. Calls for a coordination of, in order to ensure a coherent approach by the iUnitiatives from the different EU institutions and is of the opinion that informal trilogues should be regularly organised in order to ensure a coherent EU approach and to establish a fully consensual working definition of hon and to avoid any form of arbitrariness, for the formulation of a fully consensual working definition of human rights, the rule of law and democracy, taking as a point of reference, in the first place, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and, where the Charter does not contain clauses which can directly yield the above definitions, in the second place the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the recommendations of the United Nations Human rRights, the rule of law and democracy Council, as well as other international conventions agreed by all the Member States;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 70 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Encourages Member States, bearing in mind also Resolution No 48/134 of the United Nations General Assembly of 20 December 1993, which also endorses the conclusions of the United Nations World Conference on human rights in Vienna of 1993, to set up, in accordance with domestic law, national bodies for the practical promotion, protection and monitoring of human rights, ensuring that their members are diverse and independent;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 71 #

2015/2254(INL)

Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 9
9. Recommends the organisation of an annual pan-EU parliamentary debate on democracy, the rule of law and fconstant monitoring of the situation with regard to fundamental rights and the principles of the rule of law in Member States by creating an annual assessment system per Member State, devised by the Commission and the Council, on the basis of information gathered by the European Union Fundamental rRights as part of a multi- annual structured dialogue between the European Parliament and the national parliaments, on the one hand, and the Commission and the Council, on the other; Agency (FRA), the Council of Europe and its Venice Commission, as well as NGOs, also taking into account the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union; considers that the findings from these assessments should be published, inter alia by compiling a ranking, so as to encourage naming and shaming and peer review; recommends furthermore that, after the assessment, the Commission should issue a formal warning when the indicators show that certain Member States are violating the rule of law or fundamental rights; considers that this formal warning should systematically be accompanied by the launching of an institutionalised dialogue involving - in addition to the Commission and the Member State concerned - the Council, the European Parliament and the parliament of the Member State concerned;
2016/04/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 311 #

2015/2254(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal for a directive on class actions, in order to ensure that minimum standards are observed in all Member States and also to regulate cases of human rights violations;
2016/06/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas negotiations on the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) have been taking place in total secrecy since 2013; welcomes, therefore, the Council decision to declassify the TiSA negotiating mandate; takes the view, however, that the Council has not taken into due account the right of citizens to have their personal data protected and expresses concern regarding the possibility that the TiSA might undermine the fundamental rights of citizens as enshrined in the Charter;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital E
E. whereas ongoing negotiations on international trade agreements, including the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), alsomainly touch upon international data flows while excluding privacy and data protection entirely, which will be discussed and data processing, including parallelersonal data;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital F
F. whereas the draft US text on e- commerce for the TiSA would undermine EU rules and safeguards for the transfer of personal data to third countries, exposing the privacy and security of information to serious risks; whereas Parliament reserves the right to express its opinion after consulting any future text proposals and drafts of the TiSA agreement;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Safe Harbour case C-362/14 will have an impact on international agreements on the transfer of personal data;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) Expresses serious concern over the draft TiSA agreement, which would seriously undermine all the Union’s provisions and safeguards concerning the protection and transfer to third countries of the personal data of its citizens;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
(c) to ensure that personal data can be transferred outside the Union only if the provisions on third-country transfers in EU data protection laws are complied with; to negotiate on provisions which touch upon the flow of personal data only if the full application of EU data protection rules is guaranteed and respectednegotiations concerning the transfer of personal data outside the Union can continue only if full compliance with EU data protection legislation is guaranteed; points out that personal data may be processed only in Europe and that all rules relating to the transfer of that data to third countries are exceptions to that principle and must meet certain conditions; in particular, the third country must ensure an appropriate level of protection and ensure that EU citizens have the same opportunities to appeal and the same procedural rights as citizens of that third country in the event of any unlawful use of their personal data;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 38 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) to oppose any attempt to limit the powers of European and national supervisory bodies which protect personal data;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 39 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) to assess the appropriate tools for ensuring that EU citizens have a ‘right to be forgotten’ even if their personal data is transferred to third countries;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) to keep in mind that EU rules on the transfer of personal data may prohibit the processing of such data in third countries if theywhich do not meet the EU adequacy standard; to insist that any requirements for the localisation of data processing equipment and establishments be in line with EU rules on data transfers; to cooperate with third countries in the appropriate settings with a view to adopting adequate high data protection standards around the world;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 48 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) to ensure that personal data transferred to third countries are deleted after a certain amount of time;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) to ensure compliance with Member States’ provisions concerning the protection of personal data if they offer a level of protection that is higher than that provided by EU legislation;
2015/10/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the need for compliance with data protection legislation of all initiatives developed under the Digital Single Market Strategy; underlines the fact that respect for fundamental rights and data protection ar, including, in particular privacy and the protection of personal data are among the key elements in building citizens’ trust and security, which are necessary for a balanced approach allowing the development of the economy and should thus be considered as creating opportunities and a competitive advantage;
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 15 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that stimulating growthsustainable development, prosperity, innovation, consumer choice and competitivenessemployment is of the utmost importance and believes that the implementation and growth of the digital single market is key tonow vital for achieving this objective; this should be done by: removing barriers to trade, streamlining processes for online businesses and supporting creators, investors and consumers; calls in this regard for competitiveness tests on all new proposalobstacles to accessing and exercising online activities, supporting small and medium-sized enterprises and creative people, ensuring respect for fair competition, consumer protection and respect for the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and, in particular, ensuring the protection of personal data and freedom to express thoughts;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. CRecalls forthat any measures to tackle illegal content on the internet tshat will be inll fully compliancey with the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information; considers that, in order to achieve that goal, it is necessary to provide appropriate law enforcement tools, appropriate standards and protocols are provided to support public- private partnerships and cooperation, to consider the role of intermediaries and to promote education and awareness- raising campaigns;
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 35 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that encryption is an important method that helps to secure communications and the people using them. Urges the EU to counter the criminalisation of the use of encryption, anti-censorship and privacy tools, by refusing to limit the use of encryption within the EU;
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that the fast-growing number of attacks on networks and acts of cybercrime calls for a harmonised EU response with a view to ensuring a high level of cybersecurity; believes that providing security on the internet means protecting networks and critical infrastructure, the ability of law enforcement agencies to fight criminality, including terrorism, radicalisation and child pornography, and the use of the necessary data to fight crime online and offline while protecting networks and critical infrastructure and fighting criminality; stresses that security, thus defined, is necessary to reinforce trust in digital services and the processing of personal data;
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for targeted, evidence-based reforms to enhance cross-border access to legally available online content but stresses the importance of not mandating pan- European licences; calls instead; calls, in addition, for reforms to enable the enhancedfull portability of legally acquired content to be prioritisedand to encourage innovative industrial and business models by exploiting the opportunities offered by information and communications technologies appropriately integrated with other technologies;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 67 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that big data, cloud services, the Internet of Things, research and innovation are key to economic development; believes thatBelieves that balancing fundamental rights, data protection safeguards and security areis crucial for building trust in the data-driven economy sector; stresses the need to raise awareness of the role of data and, data-sharing and data aggregation in the economy and to clarifydefine data ownership rules, best practices, and voluntary standards; underlines the role of personalisation of services and products that should be developed as a balanced solution in compliance with data protection requirements; calls for the promotection of privacy by default and by design; underlines the importance of a risk-based approach in data protection legislation, especially for SMEs, as well as a democratic oversight and constant monitoring by public authorities;
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Condemns the practice of geo- blocking applied to the sale of goods and services online in that it runs counter to the fundamental principle of free movement of goods and services within the European Union;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 103 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for steps to be taken to ensure highensuring that EU standards ofn data protection are fully respected when pursuing cooperation with the third countries within the Digital Single Market Strategy. In particular, recalls that personal data of European citizens must be processed in Europe and that transfer of such data to third countries constitute exceptions to this principle and must meet a number of conditions.
2015/10/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that internet service providers should bear greater responsibilitynot be held liable for illegal content made available on the internet and should, along with other actors ; takes the view that online copyright infringements should be dealt with by the courts, while fully respecting the supply chain such as payment providers, play a significant role in tackrights and freedoms enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; stresses that administrative authorities may not adopt measures to prohibit access to onlinge copyright abusesntent, unless specifically authorised to do so by the competent court;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 147 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that copyright enforcement is importanNotes the importance of copyright in the context of the Digital Single Market and therefore calls for a modernised approach to the enforcement of intellectual property rights online, particularly with regard to commercial- scale infringementwhich should take account of the principle of public interest in the dissemination of and free access to culture and knowledge;
2015/09/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #

2015/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, according to the 2015 Special Eurobarometer 437, a vast majority of Europeans agrees that school lessons and material should include information about diversity in terms of religion or beliefs, ethnic origin, sexual orientation and gender identity1; 1 http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/Pu blicOpinion/index.cfm/ResultDoc/downloa d/DocumentKy/68004, p. 100.
2015/11/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 168 #

2015/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate the sharing of best practices among Member States in combating discrimination and prejudice on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, age and disability in educational settings, including by evaluating teaching materials, anti- bullying policies and anti-discrimination policies;
2015/11/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 192 #

2015/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers non-discrimination on the grounds of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, age and disability an essential part of the EU's values; deplores that in the area of education, EU law only prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity; calls in this regard on Member States to adopt, as a matter of urgency, the 2008 proposal for a directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, which would protect against discrimination on these grounds in education;
2015/11/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 2 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas in 2014, 1 649 irregularities were reported as being fraudulent and affecting the European budget to the tune of EUR 538.2 million, relating to both the expenditure side and the revenue side, but there are no official data on what percentage of fraud is attributable to organised crime;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 5 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A (new)
A. whereas organised crime is a global threat which therefore necessitates a common, coordinated response by the EU and its Member States;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)
B. whereas we still do not fully understand the complex issue of organised crime and the danger arising from the infiltration of criminal associations into the social, economic, business, political and institutional fabric of the Member States;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C (new)
C. whereas organised criminal groups have shown a tendency and a strong ability to diversify their activities, adapting to different geographical areas and economic and social contexts and exploiting their weaknesses and vulnerabilities, simultaneously operating on different markets and taking advantage of the different laws in individual Member States to make their businesses prosper and to maximise profit;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2015/2110(INI)

D. whereas criminal organisations have changed their modus operandi, availing themselves of the support of professionals, banks, civil servants and politicians who, although not members of the criminal organisation, support its activities at various levels;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E (new)
E. whereas criminal organisations have demonstrated a high degree of adaptability also in using the benefits of the new technologies to their advantage;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F (new)
F. whereas the dangerousness of the intimidatory power that can be exerted by the mere fact of belonging to an association is not a priority in comparison with combating 'target crimes' (the crimes that an association exists to commit) and whereas this has left a regulatory and operational gap at European level, facilitating transnational operations by organised criminal groups;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G (new)
G. whereas, besides the more obvious dangers to public policy and public security presented by the forms of violence which are typical of criminal organisations, organised crime causes equally serious problems in the form of penetration into the legal economy and associated conduct which corrupts public officials, with the consequent infiltration of institutions and the public administration;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H (new)
H. whereas the illegal proceeds of crimes committed by criminal organisations are widely laundered in the legal European economy; whereas such capital, once reinvested in the regular economy, constitutes a serious threat to free enterprise and competition, because it has a seriously distorting impact;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the Commission has proposed a vast array of measures to combat these crimes and that some results are already available (i.e. automatic information exchange, anti-money laundering directive); regrets, however, that there is still no instrument for the exchange of information regarding accounting entries between two or more Member States in order to prevent transnational fraud in respect of the Structural and Investment Funds, and calls on the Commission to draft such a proposal as soon as possible;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 13 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I (new)
I. whereas criminal groups gain access to politicians and administrators in order to tap the financial resources at the disposal of the public administration and to influence its activities with the connivance of politicians, officials and businesspeople; whereas their influence over politicians and administrators makes itself felt most of all in the sector of public procurement and public works, public funding, disposal of scrap and waste, and direct contracts for the procurement of all types of goods and the management of services;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 16 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is concerned about the increase in VAT-related fraud, in particular so-called carousel fraud; calls on all Member States to participate in all of EUROFISC’s fields of activity so as to facilitate the exchange of information to help combat this kind of fraud;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 20 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Monitoring the application of existing rulesArranging for the correct transposition of existing rules, monitoring their application and assessing whether they are effective
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the Commission to complete, as soon as possible, its assessment of the measures taken to transpose these instruments, to inform Parliament in full of the findings and, if necessary, to initiate infringement proceedings; calls on the Commission, in particular, to submit a report assessing the transposition of Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA on the fight against organised crime and Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recommends that a study be made of the national bodies of law which are most advanced in terms of fighting organised crime and corruption, in order to develop European legislation which is effective and pioneering;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 29 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out that transparency is the most effective instrument for combating abuse and fraud; calls on the Commission to improve legislation in this regard, making it compulsory to publish data relating to all the beneficiaries of EU funding, including data on subcontracts;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 30 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends that the EU become a member of GRECO and thus comply with the requirement laid down in the Treaties;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the opinion that a common method for seizing criminal group’s assets in the EU cwould be a dissuasive measure for criminals; invites the Member States competent authorities to share best practices in this area within the existing meetings platforms, such as the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention (COCOLAF) and others; calls on Member States to swiftly transpose the directive on the confiscation of assets from crime and to promote the re-use of confiscated assets for social purposes, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 31 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to submit as soon as possible its second anti- corruption report, which ought to have been published at the beginning of 2016; calls on the Commission, in this context, to include a chapter concerning corruption at the European Union Institutions;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 34 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Points out that organised crime uses construction companies that specialise in earth moving to launder money and illegally dispose of toxic substances that cause environmental pollution; calls on the Commission, in order to prevent such practices, to carry out anti-crime inspections on contractors and subcontractors who are beneficiaries of contracts for major infrastructure projects financed by the EU budget;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 35 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Is concerned about the recurring practice of criminal companies involved in money laundering submitting below- cost bids in tender procedures for major projects; calls on the Commission to include an economic assessment of proposals in respect of companies that are awarded contracts and subcontractors;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 37 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Highlights the vital role of banks with regard to money laundering and, in this regard, calls on the Commission to draw up a proposal in order to ensure full transparency of bank flows not only for individuals, but also for legal entities and trusts;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 38 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Calls for banking licences to be withdrawn from banks involved in proven cases in which large amounts of money have been laundered;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 42 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Is concerned about the lack of any specific national legislation against organised crime in many Northern European countries; is aware that such a shortcoming offers a great opportunity for organised crime in relation to the trade in illegal products passing through the ports of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea; calls on the Commission to continue promoting exchanges of information and best practice between Member States in order to combat the entry of illegal goods into the EU;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 43 #

2015/2110(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Is concerned about the decline in resources made available by Member States to combat the illicit tobacco trade; calls on the Commission, when signing new agreements with the tobacco industry, to stipulate that the share of the proceeds from those agreements for the Member States should be tied, in their budgets, to measures to combat the smuggling of illicit tobacco products;
2016/03/04
Committee: CONT
Amendment 51 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Takes the view that the current round of EU proposals concerning the fight against organised crime should place the emphasis on combating crimes of association (i.e. the fact of belonging to a criminal organisation), rather than simply combating so-called target crimes (i.e. crimes which such organisations are set up to commit); in particular, considers it necessary to make membership of a criminal organisation a criminal offence, separately from the commission of target crimes; reiterates that this round of proposals should also include combating money laundering among its priorities;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 66 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
10. Calls for a basic set of rules to bon the Commission, on the basis of the assessment of the dtrawn up concerning the definition of criminal offences and penalties in the field ofnsposition and application of the existing rules, to propose legislation to fill any gaps that may exist and to fight organised crime and corruption, in order to more effectively and improve cross-border judicial cooperation; calls, in particular, for:
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 68 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a
(a) a new proposal to introduce stronger penalties and clarify the common definitions of crimes, including that of 'organised crime', which could be construed as being a structured group that has existed for a period of time and is made up of more than two persons who work together for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, any form of financial and/or material advantagegain, and which seriously undermines the social and economic cohesion of the EU and its Member States;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a a (new)
(aa) submission of a new legislative proposal on organised crime of the Mafia type, taking into account the intimidatory force of association and the condition of subjection and the 'wall of silence' derived from it to commit offences, to directly or indirectly take over the management, or at least gain control, of economic activities, concessions, licences, public contracts and public services or to obtain unfair profits or advantages for oneself or others;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point b
(b) a definition of 'public official';deleted
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point c
(c) legislation to protect whistle- blowers, witnesses and persons who cooperate with the judicial process;deleted
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point d
(d) a revision of legislation to combat environmental crimes in order to monitor territory (including in cooperation with health establishments and/or universities: activation of soil and water pollution monitoring networks), measures against the activities of illegal waste disposal networks, promotion of forms of monitoring and penalties for businesses which dispose of waste illegally; making 'emerging pollutants', which are not yet recognised at Union level, illegal;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to draft minimum rules concerning the definition of offences and penalties; calls, in particular, for: (a) a general definition of 'public official' which is horizontally applicable; (b) definitions of the crimes of fraud and corruption; recalls in this context that the negotiations on the PIF Directive are currently blocked within the Council and calls for them to be resumed without delay; (c) legislation and programmes to protect whistle-blowers, witnesses and persons who cooperate with the judicial process;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11d. Calls on the Commission to draw up a study on the investigative practices employed in the Member States to combat organised crime, with particular reference to the use of tools such as telephone interception, environmental interception, search procedures, delayed arrest, delayed seizure, undercover operations and controlled and supervised delivery operations; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a directive by the end of 2017 on common investigative techniques to combat organised crime, pursuant to Article 87(2)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to propose common judicial standards to increase integration and cooperation among Member States;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 125 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on Member States to invest in the training of national operators who use European instruments, such as the European Police College and the European Judicial Training Network;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7
Preventing organised crime and corruption from infiltrating the legal economy
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recommends that the number of central purchasing bodies be reduced, merging those which already exist at local or regional level and also establishing a single national purchasing body as a temporary system pending the implementation of the e-procurement system;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 146 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Recommends that the Member States and European Institutions introduce compulsory rotation of public officials to prevent corruption and infiltration by organised crime;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Calls on Member States to introduce measures to ban people who have been convicted of offences against the public administration, associative offences or corruption from standing for election and from working in or for the public administration;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 168 #

2015/2110(INI)

21. Points out that drug trafficking is a major money spinner for criminal groups and must be countered by means of both law enforcement and prevention; calls on Member States and the competent institutions to tackle the links between the drugs market and other criminal activities and the impact that they have on the legal economy and legal trade, as indicated by Europol and the EMCDDA in the report on the drugs market in 2016;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Notes that an evaluation of new policies on soft drugs is a priority and considers that decriminalisation/legalisation strategies should be considered as a means of effectively combating criminal organisations; requests that the EU introduce this issue in both its internal and external policies by involving in the political debate all relevant EU and international agencies and the institutions of all countries involved;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 172 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Condemns criminal interests that revolve around gambling, including lawful gambling, and fixing of sports matches; urges the Commission to introduce legislation to combat and prevent thisese phenomenona;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 177 #

2015/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Points out that tax havens are ideal places in which to collect and launder the proceeds of criminal activities, and as such should be abolished; calls in particular for banking secrecy to be abolished;
2016/07/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital A
A. Whereas the development of robotics will bring positive effects forbenefits to the European Union economy butand also forto the daily life of individuals; whereas, however, at the same time it involves structural risks which it would be unwise to ignore; whereas all robotics and, artificial intelligence technology and related innovative disciplines have to be developed, monitored and used with due regard for the law and fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR), in particular for the rights of human dignity, data and metadata protection, privacy, liberty and security;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital A
A. whereas robot-human teams could be 85 %1 more productive than either on its own; and robots by enhancing capabilities of humans will reduce risks of human errors, while a significant number of existing jobs are considered to be at risk of automation over the next twenty years; __________________ 1 According to research from MIT following joint experience with Carmakers BMW and Mercedes-Benz.
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 3 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital B
B. whereas the Union holds a leading position in industrial robotics, with a share of more than 25 %2 of supply and use; and whereas maintaining that leading position and share is therefore an industrial strategy priority; __________________ 2 http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon20 20/en/h2020-section/robotics.
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 6 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas more substance needs to be given to the Commission’s work to establish and achieve industrial policy, research, economic and legal objectives in the field of robotics within the framework of the completion of the digital single market, as this is a strategic means of adapting European society to the needs of the 21st century;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 7 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. takes view that the impact of automated vehicles on enhancing transport safety might potentially be a major one, since human errors are currently responsible for about 90% of road accidents; notes however that it will be impossible for automated vehicles to eliminate all accidents, which raises questions of responsibility for car accidents and generates, amongst other things, the need for new insurance models and new insurance funds;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 11 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the great influx of robotics and various AI applications will have a systemic impact on our productive and industrial organisation, as determined by new features that make it qualitatively different from the current organisation;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 13 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas these new features will have consequences for every member of the public, not only in terms of energy and the environment, but also in terms of social and political organisation, and whereas these therefore necessitate action by the public authorities in respect of the productive and industrial system which may differ qualitatively from the action currently taken;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 15 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that robotics plays a key role in improving the competitiveness and productivity of the European economyEuropean reindustrialisation, in helping to reverse the trend towards relocation and in improving the competitiveness and productivity of the economy, and therefore in developing a society that is less tied to working time, thereby freeing up more human and financial resources for personal improvement and the intellectual, creative and social aspects of shared lives; calls on the Commission to promote a pro- innovation policy in robotics, facilitating integration of technologies in value chains, and to assess the need to modernise legislation or develop European guidelines to ensure a joint approach in robotics, essential for companies to scale up in Europe;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 16 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the identification of guiding ethical rules and principles for the design, engineering and use of robots and, artificial intelligence are needednd related innovative disciplines is vital to complement the current European legal framework;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 20 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that robotics and, artificial intelligence and related innovative disciplines, especially those with built-in autonomy and the possibility of self- learning and even evolving self- modification, should be subjected to thea structured body of primary robotics laws or principles, such as a principle that a robot may do not harm to a human being and must obey a human being; these principles should also be in compliance with the rights and principles enshrined in the CFR, in particular human dignity, the respect for private and family life, the protection of personal data, the freedom of expression and information, equality and non-discrimination, solidarity, and citizens’ rights and justice;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that robotics, like any other technological innovation, must be subject to in-depth preventive assessment to identify, along with its evident benefits, its potential risks; special attention must also be awarded to identifying any long- term structural risks, such as the possible increase in technological unemployment, and the social consequences thereof on the welfare system, or the possible increase in industrial concentration;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 25 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. notes that automated vehicles can play an important role in developing sustainable transport (for example, through the potential for making savings in emissions) and calls on the Commission and Member States to pay attention to upcoming technical progress in the field of renewable technologies and to ease the diffusion of fast recharging automated stations fed from fully decarbonised and denuclearised electricity sources;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that innovation in robotics and artificial intelligence require digital infrastructure that provides ubiquitous connectivity; calls for foresight and forecast studies to be conducted to help quantify, for preventive reasons, these connectivity requirements in the medium and long term; calls on the Commission to set a frameworkestablish a road map that will meet the connectivity requirements for the various programmes, including in the field of robotics, planned for the Union’s digital future;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 31 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas at the same time the development of robotics and AI may result in a large part of the work now done by humans, not only manual but also intellectual work, being taken over by robots, so raising concerns about the future of employment and the viability of social security systems if the current basis of taxation is maintained, creating the potential for increased inequality in the distribution of wealth and influence;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 36 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas robotics and AI that can perform similar tasks to those performed by humans should be used mainly to support and boost the abilities of man, as opposed to trying to replace the human element completely;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Strongly believes that interoperability between systems, devices and cloud services, which must be based on security and privacyfundamental rights by design, are essential for enabling real time data flows enabling robots to become more secure, flexible and autonomous; asks the Commission to promotedefine the role of the European research and innovation system in promoting an open environment, from open standards and innovative licensing models, to open platforms and transparency, in order to avoid lock-in in proprietary systems that restrain interoperability;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 37 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. calls on the Commission and Member States to conduct further research to assess the safety and environmental implications of automated vehicles, and invites them to create a knowledge-sharing system to record the outcomes of tests and pilot schemes; since the act of driving itself will become a complex technical exercise, it is of the utmost importance that such a knowledge-sharing system is conceived to protect the privacy of data contributed by consumers using automated vehicles;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 37 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any Union legislation on robotics and, artificial intelligence and related innovative disciplines will include rules on privacy and data protectionand metadata protection, taking into account the rapid developments in this area, the requirement to follow principles of privacy by design and by default as well as principles of proportionality and necessity regarding the processing of data; calls and metadata; calls, among other things, for the review of rules, principles and criteria regarding the use of cameras and sensors in robots and, artificial intelligence and related innovative disciplines in accordance with the Union legal framework for data protection;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that data access is key to innovation in machine learning algorithms; calls on the Commission to implement an ambitious strategy on Open and free flow of datarespecting fundamental rights rules is central to innovation in machine learning algorithms and to their scientific and industrial exploitation; calls on the Commission to implement an ambitious strategy on Open and free flow of data, under which the protection afforded by the public authorities ensures that SMEs, start-ups and academic and citizens’ organisations can participate on an equal footing with major transnational organisations; points out that such data access calls for a thorough overhaul of the current regulatory framework applicable to copyright;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 46 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. underlines that automated cars will require a high level of safe interaction with the transport infrastructure and that the high volume of data will need to be securely transferred in real time between automated vehicles and such infrastructure; such unprecedented volume of data raises significant questions about the value that can be created with it, and about how it must be shared between entrepreneurs, government, consumers contributing the data and society as a whole;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 48 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that the free flow of data within the European Union is a basis for the digital economy and is essential for the development of robotics; highlights that high security of robotics and artificial intelligence systems and related innovative disciplines as a whole, including their internal data and metadata systems and data flows, is crucial for the adequate utilisation of robots and, artificial intelligence and related innovative disciplines; stresses that a high level of safety, security and privacy of data used for the communication between people and robots and artificial intelligence and related innovative disciplines, together with high quality of voiceperformance by recognition systems, has to be ensured; calls on the Commission and Member States to support and incentivise the development of the necessary technology, including security by design and channels of communication; urges, therefore, that appropriate monitoring technologies and procedures be included in any operating plan, accompanied, where necessary, by thorough ex-post audits carried out by independent ethics consultants or similar bodies;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the increasingly widespread use of social media and smartphones, which are constantly collecting and generating data, is causing the volume of data produced all over the world, so-called ‘Big Data’, to grow exponentially, and whereas 90% of the data in circulation today has been generated in the last two years;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 56 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Calls on the Commission to increase its support in the mid-term review of the MFF for the Horizon 2020 funded SPARC programme and to promote a collaborative environment between national and European institutions, the research community, standardisation bodies and the private sector;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 58 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that whenin the event that personal data or metadata are processed bythrough the use of RPAS, whether by public authorities for law enforcement purposes or by private or public entities for other purposes laid down by the law, the right to the protection of private life and the right to the protection of personal data as enshrined in Article 7 and 8 CFR and Article 16 TFEU apply and the Union legal framework for data protection must be fully complied with;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 59 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Any legislative initiative, in any field, on robotics and artificial intelligence should provide legal certainty without stifling innovation, in a manner compatible with the aims of the whole of European society and with the benefits which it expects these new technologies to have for all its members, without exception;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 67 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. underlines that it is necessary to focus on ensuring and strengthening the security of IT regarding automated carvehicles;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 69 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that the Commission should open a debate on the transformative effects that the widespread use of robotics and AI systems is predicted to have on social protection systems, with the aim of establishing which innovations in European distribution and solidarity mechanisms will be needed to maintain – or even improve – our social protection standards, at all stages of people’s lives and regardless of their employment status;
2016/09/08
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 74 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that appropriate legislation should be accompanied by encouragement of a soft law framework,, in specific areas where relevant studies show that the development of regulation would be premature, by encouragement of a soft law framework, which may be made up, among other elements, of a code of conduct or public-private partnerships, in order to ensure the cooperation of the industry and robotic designers with public authorities and all the other stakeholders; believes that such instruments should focus on practical solutions to ensure privacy and human dignity, privacy and data and metadata protection, the security and ethics of the robotics industry, and the proper use of robots and artificial intelligence and other related innovative disciplines on a daily basis;.
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 79 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to develop and adopt a comprehensive plan for studies on the possible consequences which invasive technologies will have on civil liberties and fundamental rights;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission to create an action plan to facilitate the democratisation of citizens’ access to robotics, artificial intelligence and other related innovative disciplines;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls on the Commission and Member States, in view of the possible structural risks that might arise in the decades ahead, to place greater emphasis on policies that are representative of social rights, such as the citizens’ income;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Calls on Member States and the Commission to increasingly promote digital teaching and training in policies relating to the right to study;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 85 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. calls on the Commission to develop European infrastructural standards to allow the diffusion of autonomous vehicles and a road map to implement them;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 87 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Calls on the Commission to carry out studies examining more deeply the possible correlation, in the years ahead, between automation and migration.
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. invites the Commission to study the potential economic and social consequences of robotics and automation in the tourism sector and related industries;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 90 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. calls on the Commission to study the potential economic and social consequences of robotics and automation over the full life cycle of transport systems, including active and preventive maintenance, fleet management, temporary storage (e.g. parking systems for city vehicles), and dismantling and other operations guaranteeing a smooth flow of the corresponding materials into the circular economy;
2016/10/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 146 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that companies that manufacture robots should also record in this register the algorithms used to programme intelligent machines;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 161 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers it essential, in the development of robotics and AI, to guarantee that humans have control over intelligent machines at all times;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 163 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers that when developing new intelligent machines, designers should always include status indicators that provide the user with information in real time, insofar as this is compatible with the design brief;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 165 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Considers that in preservation of the fundamental principle of transparency, and to allow us to understand and be aware at all times of the decisions taken by intelligent machines, any robotic application capable of performing similar tasks to those performed by humans should be equipped with a ‘black box’ which records data on every transaction carried out by the machine, including the logic that contributed to its decisions;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 166 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Highlights that the algorithms used to programme intelligent machines should be put together in line with a clear and precise code of ethics, which also allows robots capable of learning to respect ethical principles in the tasks they perform;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 176 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that to uphold these fundamental rights, ethics committees with special powers should be set up, perhaps as part of a European agency, and those committees should be able to take a holistic approach to the entire robotics research and development ecosystem;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 188 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that the use of robotics and AI for the purposes of warfare should be strongly limited and regulated;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 189 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Considers that special care should be taken in preparing robots or AI to perform tasks in positions of authority, for example performing the functions of the police, prison wardens/guards or security guards, teachers or any other state or civil servant role;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 190 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Considers that special attention should be paid to the use or creation of anthropomorphised intelligent machines that can forge emotional bonds with man, causing an emotional attachment or deception;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 191 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Considers that special attention should be paid to robots that represent a significant threat to confidentiality owing to their placement in traditionally protected and private spheres and because they are able to extract and send personal and sensitive data;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 220 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that, in the development of any EU policy on robotics, privacy and data protection, including metadata protection, guarantees are embedded in line with the principles of necessity and proportionality; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to foster the development of standards for the concepts of privacy by design and privacy by default, informed consent and encryption;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 295 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to develop an analysis of the employment challenges and structural opportunities inherent in constant technological growth, and to accompany such growth with a suitable legislative framework which is easy to keep up-to-date;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 296 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Highlights the importance of foreseeing changes to society following the new industrial revolution in robotics, and the need to start considering changing the working hours/income paradigm, creating new employment sustainability models, including through the introduction of a minimum citizens’ income;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 324 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Considers, in any case, that responsibility must always lie with a human and never a robot;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 331 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Considers that, as is the case with the insurance of motor vehicles, such an insurance system could be supplemented by a fund in order to ensure that reparation can be made for damage in cases where no insurance cover exists; this fund should be endowed by an annual fixed percentage to be paid by any private company that wishes to invest in the robotics sector; calls on the insurance industry to develop new products that are in line with the advances in robotics;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 338 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 – point a a (new)
aa) introducing a suitable instrument for consumers who wish to collectively claim compensation for damages deriving from the malfunction of intelligent machines from the manufacturing companies responsible;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 342 #

2015/2103(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 – point b
b) ensuring that a compensation fund, endowed by an annual fixed percentage paid by any private company that wishes to invest in the robotics sector, would not only serve the purpose of guaranteeing compensation if the damage caused by a robot was not covered by an insurance – which would in any case remain its primary goal – but also that of allowing various financial operations in the interests of the robot, such as investments, donations or payments made to smart autonomous robots for their services, which could be transferred to the fund;
2016/10/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomeRecalls the Commission’s commitment to take measures in order to respond to the unprecedented crisis in the Mediterranean and to improve management of migration in all its aspects by reinforcing its migration policy and adopting a strategic European Agenda on Migration, which is a good first step; highlights how art. 80 TFUE defines how the policies of the Union shall be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 4 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomAcknowledges the fact that the Commission has adopted an ambitious European migration agenda; urges the European Council to show the same level of ambition and to support the Commission by deedtaking practical measures designed to achieve shared objectives on the basis of the principles of solidarity and the fair distribution of responsibilities among all the Member States;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 18 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that numerous petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to a wide range of issues relating to the crisis in the Mediterranean, expressing shock at the tragic loss of life, the allegedbecause of the shortcomings in the implementation of the European asylum and migration acquis and violations of fundamental rights, the ineffectiveness of the existing Dublin systemIII Regulation and the lack of a comprehensive EU migration policy;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 24 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that as regards the medium term, the issue being raised by Europe’s current refugee crisis is the integration of refugees into European society; calls on the Commission, therefore, to opt for a plan geared towards social and occupational integration of refugees, not forgetting, however, that this can only be achieved by implementing immediately policies which actually tackle the issue of refugees, and that their social and occupational integration must be brought about in a manner fully consistent with human rights;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 25 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that, given the scale of the recent tragedies and the alarming increase in irregular arrivals and deaths at sea (137.000 arrivals in the first six months of 2015 according to UN Data), the EU and the Member States can no longer be observers but must take ownership of the debate and fully endorse the Commission Agenda on Migration;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 35 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Maintains that labour market data have to be taken into account in the permanent relocation mechanism for refugees in order to ensure that it will not worsen the social and economic situation for refugees’ home territories and their populations, taking account of the fact that the social and economic insecurity of these territories and their populations is a factor which is quite separate from the current refugee emergency; with that aim in view, calls on the Commission, in agreement with the Council, to strengthen the measures providing for a proportional distribution of refugees among the Member States, taking into consideration actual employment opportunities in these countries, to facilitate better integration of refugees;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 40 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that action taken by the EU needs to be regularly monitored and enhanced and, at the same time, the EU should support mutual learning and the exchange of best practices;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 44 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that poverty in the European Union must be tackled in a way which puts the needs of European citizens first, but which also creates conditions in which every human being can lead a life of dignity, with all their basic needs met;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 51 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4 Points out that, in the Commission’s view, there is nothing to prevent European funds, including the European Social Fund, from being used to help integrate refugees; calls on fund managing authorities, however, to use the funds as rationally and effectively as possible without damaging other recipients and to ensure that their use is carefully and constantly monitored; calls on the Commission, in that connection to introduce a European funds traceability mechanism to ensure that they are used properly;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 51 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the EU and the Member States to adopt, as a matter of urgency, a comprehensive European migration and asylum policy, based on respect for human rights and dignity, international standards and the values on which the EU is builtrights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental rights of the EU;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 54 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Highlights that the 1951 Refugee Convention has set the global standard for refugee protection and that, at a moment of persistent and new conflicts, its principles are as important as ever; points out that the Common European Asylum System is an advanced regional protection legal framework and must be upheld and fully implemented by all Member States;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 60 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Considers the important preventive measures contained in the Commission’s agenda for fighting smuggling networks and tackling the root causes of migration to be long-term objectives, but recalls that, meanwhile, flows of people will continue and that a permanent relocation mechanism for people in need of international protection based on fair objective criteria is needed as a matter of urgencyRecalls that, currently, flows of people will continue and that a permanent relocation mechanism for people in need of international protection based on fair objective criteria is needed as a matter of urgency; highlights, therefore, that in order to effectively tackle criminal networks of smugglers and traffickers the EU needs legal and safe ways for both economic migrants and asylum seekers to reach Europe;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 65 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, in consultation with the Member States, to set up a system to speed up diploma equivalence and the recognition of skills, thereby helping refugees and migrants to integrate socially; maintains that refugees and migrants must receive language training as soon as they arrive in the country to which they have been relocated, and highlights the importance of support staff, such as cultural mediators, in both the recognition and integration phases; emphasises, moreover, the fundamental role of schools in ensuring the healthy development of the children of refugees; points out that intellectual and cultural poverty is often no less serious than material poverty and social exclusion;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 65 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that the lack of legal routes leaves no choice for many men, women and children but to turn to smugglers, at enormous cost and danger to their lives; deplores that in the current situation, before arriving in Europe, many migrants suffer high levels of abuse, exploitation and human rights violations;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 75 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure a meaningful revision of the Dublin Regulation in order to alleviate sudden and disproportionate migration pressure on Member States such as Italy and MaltaGreece, which are more directly exposed to migrant flows, without undermining the security of the Union’s external borders;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 77 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Points out to the Commission that illegal work by migrants constitutes a danger; notes that under the ‘Sanctions’ Directive1 and the ‘Seasonal Workers’ Directive2, employers can be punished for exploiting migrant labour; calls on the Commission, however, to work towards a more integration-oriented system serving to encompass all aspects of this problem; highlights the need to provide refugees with adequate protection, in order to eliminate the abuse of migrant labour; __________________ 1 Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ L 168, 30.6.2009, p. 24). 2 Directive 2014/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the conditions of entry and stay of third-country nationals for the purpose of employment as seasonal workers (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 375).
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 79 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses the need for a binding and permanent relocation system for asylum seekers that is triggered automatically on the basis of clear, objective, measurable and identifiable criteria and that obliges all the Member States to equally share the burdens, in terms of effective reception of asylum seekers and financially;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 81 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Highlights two internal imbalances within the EU: the first one concerning arrivals, with Italy and Greece facing the large majority of all sea-borne landings, and the second one regarding destination, with Germany and Sweden that in 2014 received 43 per cent of all asylum applications in the EU;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 82 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that when they sign an asylum-seeker’s employment contract, the employee and the employer are both running a risk to the extent that the application for asylum might be rejected; considers that this could also jeopardise the Commission’s aims regarding the policy of return to the home country; urges the Commission to introduce an appropriate verification tool to avert any such risk;
2015/12/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 89 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the EU and the Member States to provide an international framework for dialogue and a comprehensive debate on migration with third countries of origin and transit in order to ensure closer solidarity and cooperation with the EU, and address the root causes of migration and ensure progress on negotiations and full implementation of readmission agreements;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 91 #

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Deplores that in some Member States like Italy, a series of serious frauds and administrative irregularities, often perpetrated with the involvement of organised crime, took place in the management of some asylum-seeker reception centres, resulting both in the misuse of European funds and in the further worsening of the living conditions and protection of the human rights of migrants;
2015/07/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 145 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M
M. whereas safe and legal routes for refugees to access the EU are limited, and many continue to take the risk of embarking on dangerous routes; and, in the absence of legal routes, many men, women and children are left with no choice but to turn to people traffickers, incurring enormous costs and placing their lives in peril; whereas, before arriving in Europe, many migrants now suffer very severe abuse, exploitation and human rights violations; whereas the creation of new safe and lawful routes for asylum seekers and refugees to enter the EU, building on existing legislation and practices, would allow the EU and the Member States to have a better overview of the protection needs and of the inflow into the EU and to undermine the business model of the smugglers;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P
P. Whereas the EU has intensified its external cooperation with third countries in migration and asylum to respond adequately to the current refugee crisis, and has launched new cooperation initiatives such as the EU- Turkey Joint Action Plan, the commitments taken on the Western Balkans Routes and the Action Plan adopted at the Valetta summit;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas cooperation with third countries should not simply take the form of outsourcing to them responsibility for managing the refugee crisis;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 170 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Pb. whereas aid for third countries to strengthen their asylum systems and assist asylum seekers in countries of origin and/or transit is one of the instruments at the EU’s disposal to tackle the root causes of the refugee crisis;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 194 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital U
U. whereas the CEAS includes a set of common rules for a common asylum policy, a uniform asylum status and common asylum procedures valid throughout the Union; whereas, however, many alerts, including the infringement decisions adopted by the Commission, show that the CEAS has not been fully implemented in many Member States; whereas implementation is essential in order to harmonise national laws and promote solidarity among Member States, and whereas Member States can seek supporting assistance from EASO to meet the standards required by the CEASthe introduction of the CEAS has created imbalances, placing an excessive burden of responsibility on Member States close to EU external borders, causing their asylum systems to collapse beneath the strain; whereas a common asylum system is essential in order to harmonise national laws and promote solidarity among Member States; whereas harmonisation of reception conditions and asylum procedures can avoid stress on countries offering better conditions and are key to responsibility sharing;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 250 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Suggests, in that respect, that search and rescue capacities must be strengthened and that Member States’ governments must deploy more resources – in terms of financial assistance and assets – in the context of a Union-wide humanitarian operation, dedicated to finding, rescuing and assisting migrants in peril and bringing them to the closest place of safetis necessary;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 265 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that private shipmasters or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) who genuinely assist persons in distress at sea should not risk punishment for providing such assistance; believes that merchant shipping should not provide an option in lieu of Member States and the Union fulfilling their obligations in terms of search and rescue;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 271 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for a clear distinction to be made between those persons who are smuggled into the Union and those who are trafficked into the Union because, while the policy response must be properly integrated, they must also be properly targeted; states that, in general terms, the criminal smuggling of migrants involves facilitating the irregular entry of a person to a Member State, whereas human trafficking involves the recruitment, transportation or reception of a person through the use of violent, deceptive or abusive means, for the purpose of exploitation;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 298 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the positive role played by navy vessels in saving lives at sea and in disrupting criminal networks to date; supports the aims of navy operations such as Operation Sophia, and stresses the need to protect life, emphasising that all aspects of the operation shouldNotes that navy operations such as EUNAVFOR MED, do not provide an effective means of dismantling criminal networks or ensureing that migrant lives are protected;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 328 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that, since criminals can and do change their modus operandi very quickly, policy responses must adapt to the most recent and accurate data; notes, as a positive step forward, that the Commission adopted a Union Action Plan against Migrant Smuggling on 27 May 2015 (‘the Action Plan on Smuggling’), under which it provides for the setting up of a Contact Group of Union Agencies on migrant smuggling, to strengthen their operational cooperation and information exchange;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 338 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that full use should be made of existing instruments, such as the agencies’ risk analyses; observes that Union agencies should cooperate fully, but that they also need to step up cooperation and reciprocal exchanges of information with Member States; notes that better coordination of efforts should allow for the collection of data at national level and its onward communication to the Agencies;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 371 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. . Takes the view that the establishment of urgent relocation measures is a move in the right direction, and calls on Member States to fulfil their obligations wi; regrets, however, the excessively slow implementation of these measures, the lack of sufficient numbers to deal with the refugee crisis, and the reluctance of the Member States to actively participate in the regard to those measurelocation process; calls on all Member States to fulfil their obligations as soon as possible;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 396 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Notes, in addition, that Member States of first arrival will therefore have to handle the more complicated asylum claims (and appeals), will have to organise longer periods of reception, and will have to organise and coordinate returns for those ultimately not entitled to international protection, which may prove detrimental to the fundamental rights of migrants;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 409 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Is of the opinion that, in addition to the criteria contained inStresses the need for a binding and permanent system for the Rrelocation Decisions, namely the GDP of the Member State, the populationof asylum seekers that is triggered automatically ofn the Member State, the unemployment rate in the Member State, and the past numbers of asylum seekers in the Member State, consideration should be given to two other criteria, namely, the size of the territory of the Member State and the population density of the Member Statebasis of clear, objective, measurable and identifiable criteria and obliges all the Member States to share the burdens equally, in terms of actually accommodating asylum seekers and providing funding;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 428 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the preferences of the applicant and other factors linking the applicant with a particular Member State should, as much as practically possible, be taken into account when carrying out relocation, with due regard for fundamental rights and paying particular attention to the most vulnerable groups; recognises that this is one way of discouraging secondary movements and encouraging applicants themselves to accept relocation decisions, but that it should not stop the relocation process;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 453 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Points out that, given the unprecedented flows of migrants that have reached and continue to reach the Union’s external borders, and the steady increase in the number of people asking for international protection, the Union needs a binding and mandatory legislative approach to resettlement, as set out in the Commission’s agenda for migration; recommends that, to have an impact, such an approach must provide for resettlement of a meaningful number of refugees, with regard to the overall numbers of refugees seeking international protection in the Union; Deleted (This paragraph duplicates paragraph 23.)
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 503 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Considers that revision of the Schengen Code represents an opportunity to make wider use of Schengen visas for humanitarian reasons;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 513 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Points out that further stepthe CEAS is fare necessary to ensure that the CEAS becomes a truly uniform system from being a uniform system; considers a thorough revision of the Dublin III Regulation to be necessary in order to achieve this;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 523 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Recalls that a comprehensive assessment (in the form of the Commission’s evaluation reports) of the implementation of this package, followed by a speedy follow-up in case implementation is unsatisfactory in certain Member States, is absolutely necessary in order to improve harmonisation;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 527 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Notes, for example, that inadmissible applications, subsequent applications, accelerated procedures and border procedures are all specific cases in which the recast of the Asylum Procedures Directive tried to strike a delicate balance between the efficiency of the system and the rights of the applicants; underlines that such a balance can only be achieved if the legislation is fully and properly implemented;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 573 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Recommends that the criteria on which the Relocation Decisions are based should be built directly into the Union’s standard rules for allocating responsibility; emphasises that, in reviewing the Dublin Regulation, it is important to reflect on the value of describing certain asylum seekers as ‘applicants in clear need of international protection’, since those migrants and refugees who do not fall into that category would still – at least under the current system – have to be dealt with by the Member State of first arrival; paying great attention to mixed flows because of steadily increasing human insecurity in third countries, and to new modalities of protection;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 600 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
35. Points out that one option for a fundamental overhaul of the Dublin system would be to establish a central collection of applications at Union level – viewing each asylum seeker as someone seeking asylum in the Union as a whole and not in an individual Member State – and to establish a central system, to be administered by the EASO, for the allocation of responsibility for any persons seeking asylum in the Union; suggests that such a system could provide for certain relative thresholds per Member State, above which no further allocation of responsibility could be made until all other Member States have met their own thresholds, which could conceivably help in deterring secondary movements, as all Member States would be fully involved in the centralised system and no longer have individual responsibility for allocation of applicants to other Member States; believes that such a system could function on the basis of a number of Union ‘hotspots’ from where Union distribution should take place; underlines that any new system for allocation of responsibility must incorporate the key concepts of family unity and the best interests of the child; notes in this respect that it is necessary to broaden the concept of family unity as defined in the Dublin III Regulation;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 625 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Points out that, in the event of a mass influx, the Commission, acting on its own initiative or after examination of a request by a Member State, can propose to trigger Council Directive 2001/55/EC on Temporary Protection (the ‘Temporary Protection Directive’)1 ; observes that the actual triggering requires a Council decision adopted by a qualified majority; notes that the directive should be triggered where there is a risk that the Union asylum system would be unable to cope with the mass influx or imminent mass influx of displaced persons; highlights, however, that, since its adoption in 2001, the Temporary Protection Directive has never been triggered, notwithstanding requests from a number of Member States; __________________ 1 Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 sets minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (OJ L 212, 7.8.2001, p. 12).
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 634 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Believes that the asylum systems of some frontline Member States are already clearly overburdened and that the Temporary Protection Directive should – under its own logic – have been triggered; calls, in any case, for a clear definition of ‘mass influx’ to be established upon revision of this directive and clear criteria to ensure that it is automatically activated; understands that such a revision of the Temporary Protection Directive can form part of the review of the Dublin system;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 772 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
50. Believes that the return of migrants should only be carried out safely, in full compliance with the fundamental and procedural rights of the migrants in question, and where the country to which they are being returned is safe for them; reiterates, in that regard, that voluntary return should be prioritised over forced returns; and that these returns should be conceived in a humanitarian and development approach, in full agreement with third countries;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 798 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
52. Acknowledges the recent Commission proposal for a Union list of safe countries of origin, amending the Asylum Procedures Directive13 ; observes that if such a Union list would become obligatory for Member States it could, in principle, be an important tool for facilitating the asylum process, including return; __________________ 13 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 810 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
53. Regrets the current situation in which Member States apply different lists, containing different safe countries, hampering uniform application and incentivising secondary movements;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 825 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
54. Underlines, in any event, that any list of safe countries of origin should not detract from the principle that every person must be allowed an appropriate individual examination of his or her application for international protection, without stereotyping asylum seekers according to their nationality or country of origin;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 861 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
60. Notes the recent role of Frontex in rendering assistance to any vessel or person in distress at sea, and acknowledges its contribution, through the Triton and Poseidon joint operations, to the rescuing and saving of many lives in the Mediterranean; takes the view that the management of the external borders of the Union should respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and the relevant international conventions;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 869 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
61. UnderstandNotes that the recently proposed European Border and Coast Guard is intended to replace Frontex and is meant to ensure a European integrated border management at the external borders with a view to managing migration effectively and ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union, while safeguarding; points out that the free movement of persons thereinwithin the Union needs to be safeguarded and respect for fundamental rights and asylum rules ensured;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 892 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64 a (new)
64a. Points out that the authorities already have numerous instruments available to them to improve the management and control of external borders, such as the SIS and the VIS; calls for interoperability and the full exploitation of the potential offered by such instruments to be guaranteed, in order to ensure that the information available is circulated properly and more effectively;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 899 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
65. Acceptknowledges that the Union needsis attempting to strengthen its external border protection and further develop the CEAS, and that measures are necessary to enhance the capacity of the Schengen Area to address the new challenges facing Europe andcalls for this to be done through measures which preserve the fundamental principles of security and free movement of persons;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 915 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
68. Emphasises again that, as for legislation specifically in the area of asylum and migration, in order for legislation on internal and external borders to be effective, it is essential that measures agreed at Union level are implemented properly by the Member States; underlines that better implementation of measures by Member States at the external borders are essential and will go some way into allaying the security fears caused by an influx of migrants;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 949 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
73. CPoints out that there are considerable delays in the establishment of the hotspots; regrets that those that are currently operational are inefficient and not working properly; calls for the hotspots to be set up as soon as possible in order to give concrete operational assistance to those Member States;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 955 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74
74. Recognises that one of the main purposes of hotspots is to allow the Union to grant protection and humanitarian assistance in a swift manner to those in need; emphasises that great care needs to be taken to ensure that the categorising ofthe hotspots must not be mere centres for registering and identifying migrants abut shotspots is carried out in full respect for the rights of all migrants; acknowledges, howevuld be part of a broader plan that provides for the centralised collection and management of asylum applications in order, that proper identificao facilitate the overall functioning of applicants for international protection at the pothe CEAS; points out that great care needs to be taken to ensure that the categorisintg of first arrival in the Union should help facilitate the overall functioning of any reformed CEASmigrants at hotspots is carried out in full respect for the rights of all migrants;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 998 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80
80. Points out that the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility (GAMM) pillar on asylum and international protection should be developed further, with greater involvement of third countries; notes that current actions in this field, under Regional Protection Programmes (RPPs) or Regional Development and Protection Programmes (RDPPs), focus on capacity building to tackle criminal smuggling and human trafficking networks within third countries of origin and transit; notes, at the same time, that the resettlement component of these programmes continues to be weak; believes that capacity-building efforts and resettlement activities should be stepped up and carried out together with third countries hosting large refugee populations; points out that these programmes, as well as humanitarian operations, should be more linked to development cooperation and durable solutions options
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1005 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
81. Acknowledges that the basic instrument that sets out the objectives of the Union’s external policies on migration, asylum and borders is the GAMM; takes note that various instruments exist under that umbrella, including regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, mobility partnerships, common agendas for migration and mobility, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements, visa exemption agreements, RPPs and RDPPs; affirms that all these instruments should be based upon the policy coherence for sustainable development principle established in the Treaty of Lisbon;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1011 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
82. Understands that the external dimension should focus on cooperation with third countries in tackling the root causes of,, contributing to the human development and addressing, irregular flows to Europe in the medium-long term; understands that partnerships and cooperation with key countries of origin, transit and destination should continue to be a focus, for example through the Khartoum and Rabat processes, the Africa- EU migration and mobility dialogue, the Budapest Process and the Prague Process; sustains that legal migration and mobility, and development impact of migration pillars of GAMM should be reinforced in these Processes.
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1085 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
92. Understands that, in the long term, greater impetus is needed in solving the geo-political issues that affect the root causes of migration, as war, poverty, corruption, hunger, infringements of human rights, dictatorships, paramilitary and multinational land grabbing and a lack of opportunities means that people will still feelbe forced to flee to Europe unless Europe looks at how to help re-build those countries; points out that this means that the Commission and the Member States must encourage political cohesion and put up the money to help build capacity in third countries, such as by facilitating investment and education, strengthening and enforcing asylum systems, helping to manage borders better, and reinforcing legal and judicial systems there, making the latter fair and impartial;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1101 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
93. Notes that the main funding instrument for funding to third countries is the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI), which includes the only Union global thematic funding for migration under the Global Public Goods and Challenges Programme managed by the Directorate General (DG) for International Cooperation and Development (DEVCO); notes further that, as with funds allocated directly to the Member States, other Commission DGs, and other Union bodies, are involved in managing the DCI, such that: Union assistance to neighbourhood countries is provided by DG Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance; humanitarian aid is provided by the DG for Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (‘ECHO’); and the European External Action Service (‘EEAS’) manages the Instrument Contributing to Stability and Peace; recalls that, since the two funds managed by the DG for Home Affairs and Migration (HOME) – the AMIF and the ISF – also provide for an external dimension, this provides a new stakeholder on the external funding scene, further increasing its complexity and fostering a lack of transparency;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1107 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
94. WelcomesTakes note of the recently established Emergency Trust Fund for Africa and the EUR 1.8 billion pledged to the fund, which has added an additional element to; points out that this represents an increase, albeit insufficient, in third- country funding; calls on the Member States to honour their commitments and continue contributing to the fund;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1115 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 a (new)
95a. Recommends that development cooperation funding must be not conditioned to the implementation of readmission agreements or similar initiatives, and that refugee reception funds must not be recorded as development aid; points out that every intervention has to be conceived in a coherent strategy between EU internal and external policies.
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1127 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 a (new)
97a. Deplores that in some Member States, like Italy, some serious instances of fraud and administrative irregularities, often perpetrated with the involvement of organised crime, have taken place in the management of several asylum-seeker reception centres, resulting both in the misuse of EU funds and in the further worsening of the living conditions and protection of the human rights of migrants;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1196 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
111. Takes the view that, in the long run, the Union will need to establish more general rules governing the entry and residence for those third-country nationals seeking employment in the Union to fill the gaps identified in the Union labour market; not only focussed on highly qualified employment;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1244 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121
121. Believes, moreover, that it is clear that the directive should focus not just on the highly-qualified, but also on targeted high- qualification occupations where there are proven labour shortages; believes, in addition, that the revision of the Blue Card should be both ambitious and targeted, and should seek to remove the inconsistencies of the existing directive, particularly as regards parallel national schemes; recommends that thought be given to revising the scope to include those third- country nationals who could help tackle the gaps identified in EU labour markets; points out that the Directive should evaluate brain drain effects occurring in third countries and measures for ethical recruitment and compensations according to the policy coherence for sustainable development principle.
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 240 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
A European Border and Coast Guard is hereby set up to ensure a European integrated border management at the external borders with a view to managing migration effectively and ensuring a high, to protecting and saving the leivels of internal securitymigrants and refugees and to combating cross-border crime, in full compliance within the Unionprinciple of non- refoulement and fundamental rights, while safeguarding the free movement of persons therein.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 273 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall establish an operational and technical strategy for the European integrated border management. It shall promote and ensure the implementation of European integrated border management in compliance with fundamental rights in all Member States.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 284 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) border control, including measures related to the prevention, detection and investiga and detection of cross-border crime, where appropriate;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 298 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the search and rescue of persons in distress at sea;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 303 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical and operational measures within the area of free movement which are related to border control and designed to prevent irregular immigration and to counter cross-border crime in accordance with Article 21 of the Schengen Borders Code;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 311 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) respect and promotion of fundamental rights in all activities;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 328 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall be responsible for the management of the external borders in the cases foreseen in this Regulation, in particular where the necessary corrective measures based on the vulnerability assessment are not taken or in the event of disproportionate migratory pressure, rendering the control of the external borders ineffective to such an extent that it risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area.deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 339 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States hold primary responsibility for the implementation of the relevant international, EU or national legislation and law enforcement actions undertaken in the context of joint operations coordinated by the Agency and therefore also for the respect of fundamental rights during these activities. The Agency is also responsible, as the coordinator, and remains fully accountable for all actions and decisions under its mandate. The Commission, in cooperation with the Agency, the Council and relevant stakeholders, shall further analyse provisions related to accountability and liability and redress any potential or actual gaps connected to activities of the Agency.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 365 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) assist Member States in protecting and saving the lives of people in distress at sea in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 656/2014;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 388 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) assist Member States on training of national border guards and experts on return and fundamental rights, including the establishment of common training standards;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 402 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point r a (new)
(ra) Adopt and promote the highest standards for border management practices, allowing for transparency and public scrutiny and ensuring respect, protection and promotion of fundamental rights and rule of law.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 436 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall prepare general and tailored risk analyses and submit it to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. The risk analysis prepared by the Agency shall cover all aspects relevant to the European integrated border management, in particular border control, the protection of fundamental rights, return, irregular secondary movements of third-country nationals within the Union, the prevention of cross-border crime including facilitation, the smuggling of irregular immigrationnts, trafficking in human being and terrorism, as well as the situation in neighbouring third countries with a view to developing a pre-warning mechanism which analyses the migratory flows towards the Union as well as the respect for fundamental rights. The Agency shall make public its methodology and criteria for the risk analysis.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 456 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall take results of the risk analysis into account when planning their operations and activities at the external borders as well as their activities with regard to return. An operational engagement of the Agency shall require a prior assessment, drawing on a broad range of sources, to identify if there are risks of fundamental rights violations or deficiencies in relevant civil and criminal laws and procedures that would make the cooperation incompatible with legal obligations, in particular to ensure protection from refoulement and the right to an effective remedy.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 477 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) monitor the measures taken by the Member State with regard to a situation requiring urgent action at the external borders as referred to in Article 18;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 501 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall assess the technical equipment, systems, capabilities, resources and contingency plans of the Member States regarding border control, and respect for fundamental rights therein. That assessment shall be based on information provided by the Member State and by the liaison officer, on information derived from Eurosur, in particular the impact levels attributed to the external land and sea border sections of each Member State in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013, and on the reports and evaluations of joint operations, pilot projects, rapid border interventions and other activities of the Agency.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 506 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall, at the request of the Agency, provide information as regardsnecessary for the vulnerability assessment, in particular as regards the state of functioning of all procedures at the border, technical equipment, staff and financial resources available at national level to carry out border control and they shall submit their contingency plans.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 522 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The results of the vulnerability assessment shall be submitted to the SupervisoryManagement Board, which shall advise the Executive Director on the measures to be taken by the Member States based on the results of the vulnerability assessment, and taking into account the Agency's risk analysis and the results of the Schengen evaluation mechanism.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 530 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5. The Executive Director shall adopt a drecisommendation setting out the necessary corrective measures to be taken by the Member State concerned, including by using resources under the Union financial instruments. The decision of the Executive Director shall be binding on the Member State and shall lay down the time-limit within which the measures are to be takenprocedure shall include an assessment of the impacts of such measures on fundamental rights, and ensure compliance with international legal obligations.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 539 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. Where a Member State does not adopt the necessary corrective measures within the time-limit set, the Executive Director shall refer the matter to the Management Board and notify the Commission. The Management Board shall adopt a decision setting out the necessary corrective measures to be taken by the Member State concerned, including the time-limit within which such measures shall be taken. If the Member State does not take the measures within the time- limit foreseen in that decision, further action may be taken by the Commission in accordance with Article 18take into account the recommendations, the Executive Director recommends to the Member State concerned to initiate and carry out joint operations or rapid border interventions.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 547 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may request the Agency for assistance in implementing their obligations with regard to the control of the external borders. The Agency shall also carry out measures as referred to in Article 18.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 556 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) coordinate activities for one or more Member States and third countries at the external borders, including joint operations with neighbouring third countries which have ratified and implement in full the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol thereto;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 572 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. The Executive Director shall, on the advice of the SupervisoryManagement Board based on the results of the vulnerability assessment, and taking into account the Agency's risk analysis and the analysis layer of the European situational picture established in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013, recommend to the Member State concerned to initiate and carry out joint operations or rapid border interventions. The Agency shall put its technical equipment at the disposal of the host or participating Member States.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 585 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point i
(i) a reporting and evaluation scheme containing benchmarks for the evaluation report, including the protection of fundamental rights, and final date of submission of the final evaluation report;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 591 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point k a (new)
(ka) Detailed provisions on fundamental rights safeguards, including risks of violations and steps taken to avoid such violations and ensure accountability for and non-repetition of such violations, including in relations to the powers to suspend and terminate an operation in accordance with Article 24.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 610 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The Executive Director, in coordination with the European Asylum Support Office and other relevant Union Agencies, shall assess the request for assistance of a Member State. The Executive Director, in coordination with the European Asylum Support Office and other relevant Union Agencies, shall forward their assessment of itsthe needs for the purpose ofof the Member State to the Commission who shall defininge a comprehensive reinforcement package consisting of various activities coordinated by the relevant Union Agencies to be agreed upon by the Member State concerned. Teams shall, as a rule, include proportionate fundamental rights and child protection experts.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 620 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the screening of third-country nationals arriving at the external borders, including the identification, registration, and debriefing of those third-country nationals and, where requested by the Member State, the fingerprinting of third- country nationals in full compliance with fundamental rights and providing information regarding the purpose and outcomes of all procedures;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 625 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the provision of information to persons in clear needunder the guidance of the European Asylum Support Office and Fundamental Rights Agency and in accordance with Directive 2013/32/EU, the provision of internformational protection or to applicants or pot on the asylum procedure, procedural rights and other fundamential applicants for relocatirights, to all persons;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 630 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) technical and operational assistance in the field of return, including the preparation and organisation of return operations in full respect of fundamental rights, due process, the principle of non- refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsion.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 631 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) the referral of persons who wish to apply for international protection to asylum experts of the national authorities of the Member State concerned or of the European Asylum Support Office, and referral of all children, and families with children, to child protection experts of the national authorities of the Member State or of the EU agencies.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 632 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) The Agency in cooperation with the European Asylum Support Office, the Fundamental Rights Agency and other relevant Union Agencies and under the coordination of the Commission shall ensure the compliance of these activities with the Common European Asylum System and fundamental rights. This includes the provision of shelter, hygienic conditions and facilities respecting gender based and children's needs in the hotspot areas.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 637 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18
[...]deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 708 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – title
Suspension or termination of joint operations and rapid border interventions
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 719 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. The Executive Director shall withdraw the financing of a joint operation or, a rapid border intervention, or suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, a joint operation or rapid border intervention if he or she considers that there are violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations that are of a serious nature or are likely to persist. a pilot project, migration management support teams, return operation, return intervention or working arrangement or suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, a joint operation or rapid border intervention, a pilot project, migration management support teams, return operation, return intervention or working arrangement if he or she considers that there are violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations that are of a serious nature or are likely to persist. Based on recommendations by the Fundamental Rights Officer, after consultation with the Consultative Forum and other relevant actors, the Executive Director shall adopt criteria for withdrawing the financing, the suspension or the termination of an activity by the Agency. The Fundamental Rights Officer may recommend the withdrawing, the financing, and the suspension of the termination of an activity.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 722 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – title
Evaluation of joint operations and rapid border interventions
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 725 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
The Executive Director shall evaluate the results of the joint operations and, rapid border interventions, pilot projects, migration management support teams, return operations, return interventions and operational cooperation with third countries, including with regard to the respect of fundamental rights, and transmit the detailed evaluation reports within 60 days following the end of those operations and projects to the Management Board, together with the observations of the Fundamental Rights Officer. The Agency shall make a comprehensive comparative analysis of those results with a view to enhancing the quality, coherence and effectiveness of future joint operations and rapid border intervenoperations, and it shall include it in its consolidated annual activity report.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 746 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) assistance on measures that are legitimate, proportionate and necessary to ensure the availability of returnees for return purposes and avoid that returnees abscond in line with Directive 2008/115/EC and international law.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 752 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Agency shall not coordinate, organise or propose return operations from Member States which are not fully implementing applicable Union legislation, in particular Directive 2008/115/EC, Directive 2013/32/EU (replacing Directive 2005/85/EC) and Directive 2011/95/EU, or to any third country where risks of fundamental rights violations or serious deficiencies in relevant civil and criminal laws and procedures have been identified through risk analyses, or reports from the Fundamental Rights Officer, EU agencies, human rights bodies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 763 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
4. The Agency may provide the necessary assistance and ensure, at the request of the participating Member States or a third country, or propose on its own initiative, the coordination or the organisation of return operations, during which a number of returnees subject to a third-country return decision are passed from this third country to another third country of return (‘mixed return operations’), provided that the third country that issued the return decision is bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. The participating Member States and the Agency must ensure that the respect of fundamental rights and the proportionate use of means of constraints are guaranteed during the whole removal operation, notably with the presence of forced return monitors and of third- country forced return escorts.deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 768 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The Fundamental Rights Agency shall constitute a pool of forced return monitors from national competent bodies who carry out independent forced return monitoring activities in accordance with Article 8(6) of Directive 2008/115/EC and who have been trained in accordance with Article 35. Forced return monitors shall also report to the Agency, including the Fundamental Rights Officer.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 802 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. The European Border and Coast Guard shall guarantee the protection of fundamental rights in the performance of its tasks under this Regulation in accordance with relevant Union law, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, relevant international law, including the European Convention on Human Rights, the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and obligations related to access to international protectionthe Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular the principle of non-refoulement. For that purpose, the Agency shall draw up and further develop and implement a Fundamental Rights Strategy, including effective mechanisms to both monitor and ensure the respect for fundamental rights and rule of law in all the activities of the Agency.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 812 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. In the performance of its tasks the European Border and Coast Guard shall ensure that no person is disembarked in, forced to enter, conducted to or otherwise handed over or returned to the authorities of a country where, inter alia, there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture, persecution, or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or where his or her life or freedom would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, membership of a particular social group or political opinion in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, or from which there is a risk of expulsion, removal, extradition or return to another country in contravention of that principle, and ensure compliance with the prohibition of collective expulsion. For this purpose, safeguards shall be included before initiating operational cooperation with third countries, and in all operational plans.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 821 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4
4. In the performance of all its tasks, in its relations with Member States and in its cooperation with third countries, the Agency shall take into account the reports of the Consultative Forum and the Fundamental Rights Officer. The Agency shall inform the Consultative Forum and Fundamental Rights Officer how it has altered or not its activities as a response to reports and recommendations of these bodies, and include details in its annual report.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 825 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Agency shall include a detailed programme for the further development and implementation of the Fundamental Rights Strategy in its annual work programme and report on it in its annual activity report.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 874 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 6
6. While performing their tasks and exercising their powers, members of the teams shall be authorised to use force, including service weapons, ammunition and equipment, with the consent of the home Member State and the host Member State, in the presence of border guards of the host Member State and in accordance with the national law of the host Member State, as well as with international human rights law, including the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The host Member State may, with the consent of the home Member State, authorise members of the teams to use force in the absence of border guards of the host Member State.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 878 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 7
7. Service weapons, ammunition and equipment may be used in legitimate self- defence and in legitimate defence of members of the teams or of other persons, in accordance with the national law of the host Member State, as well as with international human rights law and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 952 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. In matters covered by its activities and to the extent required for the fulfilment of its tasks, the Agency shall facilitate and encourage operational cooperation between Member States and third countries, within the framework of the external relations policy of the Union, including with regard to the protection of fundamental rights. The Agency and the Member States shall comply with norms and standards at least equivalent to those set by Union legislation also when cooperation with third countries takes place on the territory of those countries. The establishment of cooperation with third countries shall serve to promote European border management and return standards, including with regards to respect for fundamental rights and human dignity. An engagement of the Agency in any operational cooperation with a third country shall require a prior assessment, drawing on a broad range of sources, to identify if there are risks of fundamental rights violations or deficiencies in relevant civil and criminal laws and procedures that would make the cooperation incompatible with legal obligations, in particular to ensure protection from refoulement and the right to an effective remedy.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 994 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 5
5. The seat of the Agency shall be Warsaw, PolandTrapani, Italy, subject to the implementation of Article 56.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1000 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) an Executive Director ;deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1001 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a Supervisory Board;deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1032 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) to prepare each year the consolidated annual activity report on the Agency's activities and submit it to the Management Board, the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1033 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 3 – point g
(g) to adopt a decision on corrective measures in accordance with Article 12(5), including to propose to Member States to initiate and carry out joint operations, rapid border interventions or other action referred to in Article 13(2);deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1036 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 3 – point k
(k) to ensure the implementation of the Commission decision referred to in Article 18;deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1043 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1
1. The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director are appointed by a joint decision of the European Parliament and the Council on the basis of a list drawn up by the Commission following a public call for candidates. The Commission shall propose candidates for the post of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director based on a list following publication of the post in the Official Journal of the European Union and other press or internet sites as appropriate. The competent committee of the European Parliament may decide to arrange a hearing in order to enable it to express a preference.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1047 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Management Board on the grounds of merit and documented high-level administrative and management skills, as well as senior professional experience in the field of management of the external borders and return. The Management Board shall take its decision by a two- thirds majority of all members with a right to vote.deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1055 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Power to dismiss the Executive Director shall lie with the Management BoardEuropean Parliament and the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, according to the same procedure.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1059 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Deputy Executive Director shall be appointed by the Management Board on the grounds of merit and documented appropriate administrative and management skills, as well as relevant professional experience in the field of management of the external borders and return on the proposal of the Commission, after having consulted the Executive Director. The Management Board shall take its decision by a two-thirds majority of all members with a right to vote.deleted
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1062 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Power to dismiss the Deputy Executive Director shall be with the Management Board, according to the same procedureEuropean Parliament and the Council.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1064 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 6
6. The Management BoardEuropean Parliament and the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission that takes into account the assessment referred to in paragraph 5, may extend the term of office of the Executive Director once, for no more than five years.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1066 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 7
7. The term of the office of the Deputy Executive Director shall be five years. It may be extended by the Management BoardEuropean Parliament and the Council once for another period of up to five years.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1069 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69
1. The Supervisory Board shall advise the Executive Director: (a) on the recommendations to be made by the Executive Director to a Member State concerned to initiate and carry out joint operations or rapid border interventions in accordance with Article 14(4); (b) on the decisions to be taken by the Executive Director to Member States based on the outcome of the vulnerability assessment carried out by the Agency in accordance with Article 12; (c) on the measures needed to be taken for the practical execution of the Commission decision related to a situation requiring urgent action at the external borders, including the technical equipment and staff needed to meet the objectives of that decision in accordance with Article 18(3). 2. The Supervisory Board shall be composed of the Deputy Executive Director, four other senior officials of the Agency to be appointed by the Management Board and one of the representatives of the Commission to the Management Board. The Supervisory Board shall be chaired by the Deputy Executive Director. 3. The Supervisory Board shall report to the Management Board.Article 69 deleted Supervisory Board
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1081 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall invite the European Asylum Support Office, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and other relevant organisations to participate in the Consultative Forum. On a proposal by the Executive Director, the Management Board shall decide on the composition and the working methods of the Consultative Forum and the modalities of the transmission of information to the Consultative ForumThe Consultative Forum shall decide independently on its working methods.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1171 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
By three years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall carry outpublish an evaluation to assess particularly the impact, effectiveness and efficiency of the Agency's performance and its working practices in relation to its objectives, mandate and tasks. The evaluation shall, in particular, address the possible need to modify the mandate of the Agency, and the financial implications of any such modification. The evaluation shall be carried out by an independent external contractor or body.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) Taking account of the evolution of terrorist threats and legal obligations to the Union and Member States under international law, the definition of terrorist offences, including offences related to a terrorist group and offences related to terrorist activities, should be further approximated in all Member States, so that it covers more comprehensively conduct related to in particular foreign terrorist fighters and terrorist financing. These forms of behaviour should be punishable also if committed through the Internet, including social media.Does not affect the English version.)
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) The criminalisation of offences covered by this Directive must be contingent on observance of the principle of materiality, which requires conduct to have an external manifestation if it is to be deemed damaging or a threat to the interest being protected.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) Considering the seriousness of the threat and the need to in particular stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters, it is necessary to criminalise the travelling abroad for terrorist purposes, being not only the commission of terrorist offences and providing or receiving training but also to participate in the activities of a terrorist group. Any act ofinvolving the organisation or intentional facilitation of such travel should also be criminalised.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) In seeking to halt terrorist financing Member States should also address the processes that generate funding for terrorist organisations, such as the trafficking of arms, oil and artworks. Member States should not allow arms to be sold to countries that fund terrorist organisations, but should instead invest in increasing their own energy independence, including through the use of renewable energies, so as to cut off the flow of resources to terrorists and to governments which, through complicity or connivance, aid and abet them.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) With regard to the criminal offences provided for in this Directive, the notion of intention must apply to all the elements constituting those offences. The intentional nature of an act or omission may be inferred from objective, factual circumstancesthe fact that it has an external manifestation.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Prompt and effective sharing of relevant information and data Member States obtained from EU-wide databases is an effective tool in anti-terrorism investigations. Member States should therefore take the steps required in order to make judicial and police cooperation compulsory within the EU, using the dedicated structures and channels put in place by the relevant European agencies.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 148 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Member States should provide for sentence reductions or protection programmes for any members of terrorist organisations who disassociate themselves from those organisations and seek to ensure that their criminal activities do not lead any further or give practical assistance to police and judicial authorities in gathering evidence leading to the identification or capture of other members of the organisations.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 b (new)
(15b) Member States should support programmes to prevent radicalisation, involving measures such as information campaigns and the development of alternative narratives to counter terrorist propaganda, and should involve civil society groups, relevant local communities and other stakeholders in devising strategies to guard against radicalisation, recruitment and violent extremism.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 c (new)
(15c) The European institutions and Member States should introduce economic and social policies geared to fostering integration and combating poverty, social exclusion and all other factors that can fuel radicalism and extremism.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 235 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point i
(i) seriously threatening to commit any of the acts listed in points (a) to (h), as evidenced by objective and factual circumstances.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent that is clearly and objectively likely to incite the commission of one of the offences listed in points (a) to (h) of Article 3(2), where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed, is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 272 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that to receive practical instruction, from another person in the making or use of explosives, firearms or other weapons or noxious or hazardous substances, or in other specific methods or techniques, for the purpose of committing of or contributing to the commission of one of the offences listed in points (a) to (h) of Article 3(2) is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 284 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that travelling to another country other than the country of residence or nationality for the clear purpose of the commission of or contribution to a terrorist offence referred to in Article 3, the participation in the activities of a terrorist group referred to in Article 4 or the providing or receiving of training for terrorism referred to in Articles 7 and 8 is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally, provided that this is objectively verifiable.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 299 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that providing or collecting funds, by any means, directly or indirectly, with the intent that they should be used, or knowing that they are to be used, in full or in part, to commit any of the offence(s) referred to in Articles 3 to 10 and 12 to 14 or 16 is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 319 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
For an offence referred to in Article 4 and Title III to be punishable, it shall not be necessary that a terrorist offence be actually committed, nor shall it be necessary to establish a link to a specific terrorist offence or, insofar as the offences in Articles 9 to 11 are concerned, to specific offences related to terrorist activities.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 363 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21a Exchange of information and judicial and police cooperation 1. Member States shall undertake to share, for investigative purposes, relevant information and data they have obtained from EU-wide databases. 2. Member States shall take the steps required in order to secure effective international judicial cooperation led by the judiciary and conventional police forces.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 405 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 23 a (new)
Article 23a Fundamental rights and principles 1. This Directive shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to uphold fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Articles 2 and 6 of the Treaty on European Union, as well as in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and international humanitarian law. 2. Restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms shall be provided for by law and shall be necessary and proportionate to the aim pursued. 3. This Directive shall be implemented in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the principles of EU law. 4. Anyone whose fundamental rights and freedoms are infringed during anti- terrorism operations or in connection with the enforcement of anti-terrorism laws shall be entitled to a swift, effective and enforceable legal remedy.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 411 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 23 b (new)
Article 23b Freedom of expression 1. Nothing in this Directive may be interpreted as being intended to reduce or restrict the dissemination of information for the purpose of expressing an opinion. The public expression of radical, political or controversial views on sensitive political questions, including terrorism, falls outside the scope of this Directive and, in particular, of the definition of public provocation to commit terrorist offences. 2. This Directive shall not have the effect of requiring Member States to take measures in contradiction of fundamental principles relating to freedom of expression, in particular freedom of the press and freedom of expression in other media as they result from constitutional traditions or rules governing the rights and responsibilities of, and the procedural guarantees for, the press or other media where these rules relate to the determination or limitation of liability.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2015/0211(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
– The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
2016/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2015/0125(NLE)

3. As soon as possible after receiving the information referred to in paragraph 2, Member States shall indicate the number of applicants who can be relocated immediately to their territory and any other relevant information, within the numbers set out in Annex I and Annex II respectively. In the absence of indication on the number of applicants who can be relocated to the territory of the Member States, it will activate an automatic mechanism of relocation on the basis of parameters set out in Annex I and Annex II.
2015/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2015/0125(NLE)

Proposal for a decision
Article 11
Italy and Greece shall report to the Council and the Commission on the implementation of this Decision, including on the roadmaps referred to in Article 8, every three months. Member States in which the asylum seekers are relocated ensure that the management of the centres and reception facilities is subject to periodic reporting to the competent authorities. This should include at least the following elements: name of the managing institution, the overall number of staff members, the number of asylum seekers hosted, quantity and quality of the services provided, costs incurred in the management of the reception centres.
2015/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the European legal framework for copyright and related rights is central to the promotion ofprimarily intended to foster creativity and, innovation, and to access to knowledge, culture and information through the dissemination of creative works;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas in pursuit of those objectives the interests of authors, performers, cultural entrepreneurs and the general public, who make use of creative works, need to be set off against each other;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the purpose of copyright has traditionally been to strike a balance between the opposing interests of stakeholders by, on the one hand, ensuring adequate remuneration for creative work performed and investments made and, on the other, establishing a number of exceptions to and limitations on exclusive rights, in order to foster the dissemination of creative works;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 71 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the digital revolution has brought with it new technique and means of communication and opened the way to new forms of expression which, while calling into question the long-established three-way relationship between creators, cultural entrepreneurs and users, has spurred the emergence of a knowledge- based economy providing new jobs and helping to promote culture and innovation;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 74 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas in the new digital environment consumers are not only users of creative works but are also increasingly becoming creators and distributors of their own works, albeit not on a commercial basis;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 77 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society sought by Directive 2001/29/EC has not been achieved, in particular as regards the exceptions and limitations for which the directive provides;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas the failure to harmonise laws on copyright and related rights is hampering the completion and operation of the internal market provided for in the Treaties;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 81 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas the failure to harmonise laws on copyright and related rights and the resulting restrictions on access to digital content available on line are viewed by the general public as arbitrary and unpredictable, and are thus a source of legal uncertainty;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 83 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
Bf. whereas in its communication entitled ‘A single market for 21st century Europe’ (COM(2007)0724), the Commission emphasised the need to promote the free movement of knowledge and innovation as a ‘fifth freedom’ in the single market;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 119 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the period during which works are protected in the digital environment is often out of proportion to the time required in order to recover creation costs and to the average marketing life of works;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 125 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the EU legislative authorities have a duty to promote a clear legal framework for copyright and related rights that can be understood by all stakeholders, in particular the general public, and ensures legal certainty;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 128 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas when defining the legal framework for copyright and related rights account should be taken of the need to promote innovative industrial and commercial models, taking advantage of the opportunities offered by new technologies, in order to make EU businesses more competitive;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 132 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)
Ed. whereas technological innovation can be a factor in legal standards becoming obsolete, and whereas in order to counter this the legal framework for copyright and related rights should be simplified and modernised by introducing an open standard relating to the interpretation of exceptions and limitations;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 133 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E e (new)
Ee. whereas measures taken on an individual basis by Member States to extend the scope of protection beyond the provisions of the EU legal framework on copyright and related rights make for legal fragmentation which impedes the functioning of the internal market and increases legal uncertainty for the public, and are therefore to be deprecated;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 135 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E f (new)
Ef. whereas the right to charge for private copies, which is provided for in several Member States, appears unclear, obsolete and unjustified in a digital context, in view of the fact that it applies, for example, to the making of back-up copies or to the storage of copyrighted works by a given author, and whereas a proper degree of transparency should be ensured, with information being given to the public on the actual scale and purpose of the copy-taking and on the use to which the copies will be put;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 189 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the necessity for authors and performers to be provided with legal protection for their creative and artistic work; recognises the role of producers and publishers in bringing works to the market, and the need for appropriate remuneration for all categories of rightholders; recognises that the dissemination of culture and knowledge is in the public interest; calls for improvements to the contractual position of authors and performers in relation to other rightholders and intermediaries;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 205 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 h (new)
3h. Calls on the Commission to restore balance to copyright holders’ contractual powers by imposing a reasonable period for the use of rights transferred by them to third parties, after which those rights would lapse;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 261 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to safeguard public domain works, which are by definition not subject to copyright protection and should therefore be able to be used and re-used without technical or contractual barriers; also calls on the Commission to recognise the freedom of rightholders to voluntarily relinquish their rights and, in whole or in part, including the possibility of dedicateing their works to the public domain;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 280 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to harmonise the term of protection of copyright and related rights to a duration that does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne Convention, taking into account the time needed to recover investment costs, the average marketing life of a work and the public interest in the dissemination of creative works;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 286 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the EU legislator to remain faithful to the objective stated in Directive 2001/29/EC of safeguarding a fair balance between the different categories of rightholders and users of protected subject-mattercontent, as well as between the different categories of rightholders;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 306 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Highlights the advisability of introducing new exceptions and limitations which should take into account technological developments and new forms of both the expression and the use of works in a digital environment;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 319 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Views with concern, in view of the development of cross-border activities, the increasing impact of differencesthe lack of uniformity among Member States in the implementation of exceptions, which creates legal uncertainty and has direct negative effects on the functioning of the digital single market, ion view of the development of cross-border activitiesthe incentive to create and promote innovative industrial and trade models and on competition;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 447 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the need to enable automated analytical techniques for text and data (e.g. ‘text and data mining’) for all purposes, provided that permission to readuse the work has been acquired;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 463 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for a broad exception for research and education purposes, which should cover not only educational establishments, universities and institutions specialising in high-level artistic, musical and dance training but any kind of educational or research activity, including non-formal education and the digitalisation of cultural traditions and heritage;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 488 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Calls for the adoption of a mandatory exception allowing libraries to digitalise content for the purposes of consultation, cataloguing and archiving;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 522 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the adoption of harmonised criteria, established on the basis of scientifically proven studies, for defining the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13; __________________ 13 As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 523 #

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Notes that the right to impose private copying levies should be governed in such a way as to inform citizens of the actual amount of the levy, its purpose and how it is going to be used;
2015/03/05
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to the Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy and its accompanying Action Plan, adopted by the European Council of 25 June 2012,
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to its Resolution of 4 February 2014 on the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 b (new)
– having regard to the Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons, adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council of 24 June 2013,
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)
– having regard to the contributions by the NGOs participating in the FRA Fundamental Rights Platform,
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas, following recent terrorist attacks on EU territory, fundamental rights are at risk of being seriously compromised in the name ofby measures intended to guarantee a supposed need for tighter security;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 134 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas many fundamental rights violations still occur in the EU and in Member States, as pointed out in reports by the Commission, the FRA, NGOs, the Council of Europe and the UN, such as the violations of the right to freedom of assembly and expression of civil society organisations, the institutional discrimination of LGBTI persons through marriage bans and anti-propaganda legislation, and the remaining high-levels of discrimination and hate crime motivated by racism, xenophobia, religious intolerance, or by bias against a person's disability, sexual orientation or gender identity;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas specific human rights guidelines have been developed in external policies of the EU, this has not been the case in its internal policies, which could lead to allegations of double standards;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 168 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that it is essential to guarantee that the common European values listed in Article 2 TEU are upheld in full in both European and national legislation, public policies and their implementation;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 177 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that Article 6 TEU requires the Union to accede to the ECHR; notes Opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union; calls on the Commission and the Council to draw up proposals designed to ensure that the aforementioned obligation is met as quickly as possible, on the basis of full transparency and with the aim of increasing genuine respect for and protection of the fundamental rights of individuals against breaches, including the right to an effective remedy at national and European level, and enhancing the protection of individuals and making the European institutions more accountable for their actions or failings regarding fundamental rights;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Deplores the rarity with which Article 7 TEU is invoked against Member States responsible for breaches of fundamental rights in order to penalise them and act as a deterrent;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 185 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the appointment of the first Vice-President of the Commission with powers relating to respect for the rule of law and the Charter, and expects to see an internal strategy on fundamental rights based on Article 2 TEU adopted in the near future, in close cooperation with the other institutions and in consultation with civil society and other interested parties; the strategy should be based on Article 2, 6 and 7 TEU, and be consistent with the principles and objectives embedded in Articles 8 and 10 TFEU;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Urges the Commission to ensure that any such internal strategy is accompanied by an associated action plan, in order to supplement and strengthen the Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy already applied in EU external relations, ensuring constant monitoring, country by country, of the protection of fundamental rights, measures to prevent any breaches and action to improve the level of protection of fundamental rights; considers that the strategy and associated action plan should also serve as instruments to render the European Institutions accountable for their actions and omissions with regard to fundamental rights, and to ensure compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights with a view to accession to the Convention by the EU; notes that the strategy should:
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 197 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point -a (new)
(-a) be soundly based on international and European law and embrace all the values protected by Article 2 TEU;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point a
(a) make provision for an annual political cycle that monitors its application, takinges account of the results of annual and specific reports from the various parties involved, institutional and otherwise, and should contributes both towards improving coordination between thoseand dialogue between Member States and the other parties involved and towards establishing policies by means of greater transparency and dialoguethe exchange of best practices;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 220 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point c
(c) develop, in cooperation with the FRA, a database that collates and publishes data on the situation regarding fundamental rights in the EU and in individual Member States; reiterates, in that connection, the need for the Commission to propose a revision of the FRA Regulation in order to grant the FRA wider power, including the data gathered by the Member States, European institutions and agencies, the appropriate UN bodies, and national and international civil-society associations; reiterates, in that connection, the need for the Commission to propose a revision of the FRA Regulation in order to grant the FRA wider powers, such as constant monitoring of the individual Member States in the fields of fundamental rights, criminal justice and economic, social and cultural rights;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 223 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point d
(d) bProadenvide clear indicators in order to assess the enforcement and respect of fundamental rights, and to trigger alert mechanisms in the case of violations. Such indicators could take the form of a fundamental rights scoreboard, possibly as an extension of the scope of the EU Justice Scoreboard, which should also to cover the assessment of criminal justice systems and of efforts to uphold fundamental rights and the rule of law ; indicators should include clear data collection mechanisms, including equality data collection disaggregated according to the different discrimination grounds;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
(da) make provision for the Commission to submit annual country-by-country reports on the state of protection of fundamental rights;
2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 292 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that freedom of expression – also through information technologies – and of the press are a fundamental right that is vital for the proper functioning of democracies;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 293 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Takes the view that the goals of respect for fundamental rights and guaranteed collective safety are compatible and should always be balanced, even when responding to emergency situations; in the specific context of measures drawn up in response to the terrorist threat, procedural safeguards cannot be limited with regard to suspected terrorists and fundamental freedoms cannot be restricted when concluding agreements which provide for an exchange of information and personal data; condemns, moreover, all forms of mass surveillance carried out by governments for intelligence or espionage purposes;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 308 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. DRefers to Article 10 of the Charter, which protects freedom of thought, conscience and religion; deplores recent instances of anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic discrimination and violence; calls on Member States to protect freedom of religion or belief, including the freedom of unbelivers, and to promote tolerance;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 332 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission, with the support of the FRA, to strengthen awareness-raising, education and training measures and programmes with regard to fundamental rights; these programmes should aim to establish cohesion and trust between all social partners and involve civil society organisations, national human rights institutions and national equality and anti-discrimination offices;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 396 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that even today people belonging to minorities are still victims of discriminationPoints out that pluralism, non- discrimination and tolerance are among the founding values of the Union in accordance with Article 2 TEU; considers that only policies designed to promote both formal and substantive equality and to combat all forms of discrimination based, in particular, on gender, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or personal beliefs, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation, pursuant to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, can promote a cohesive society by breaking down all forms of prejudice which harm social integration; deplores the fact that even today in the EU there are still cases of discrimination based on the above;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Strongly deplores the fact that negotiations within the Council onat the Council has still not adopted the 2008 proposal for an anti-discrimination directive have stalled, and Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation; reiterates its call to the Council to adopt the proposal as soon as possible;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 449 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the European Commission and the Council to acknowledge the need for reliable and comparable equality data to measure discrimination, disaggregated according to discrimination grounds, in order to inform policy-making, evaluate the implementation of EU anti- discrimination legislation, and better enforce it; calls on both institutions to define consistent equality data collection principles, based on self-identification, EU data protection standards and the consultation of the relevant communities;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 453 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Violence against women
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 464 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Urges the EU and the Member States to ban all discrimination on grounds of gender identity and to combat and prosecute all forms of violence and discrimination against womenExpresses concern about extent and forms of violence against women in the EU, as documented by FRA's EU-wide survey which showed that one in three women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence since the age of 15, and that an estimated 3.7 million women in the EU experience sexual violence in the period of one year;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 472 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Member states and the Commission to review the adequacy of current legislation and policies to prevent violence against women, protect the victims and prosecute the offenders in light of the FRA survey results and requirements of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention). The survey shows that young women are at high risk of victimisation, including through cyberharassment and cyberstalking which underlines the need to identify promising practices to counter violence taking place in the online environment.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 478 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Call on the Commission to ensure the continuity of data collection on the prevalence and nature of violence against women as a basis for robust policies to prevent violence and meet the needs of victims, including to assess the implementation of the EU Victims' Directive (2012/29/EU). The efforts to collect the data should build on the first EU-wide survey carried out by FRA, and they should be based on the cooperation between the European Commission (including Eurostat), FRA and the European Institute for Gender Equality.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 486 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 b (new)
Rights of LGBTI people
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 515 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Condemns all forms of discrimination and violence on EU territory against lesbian, gay, transsexualgender, bisexual and intersex people (LGBTI), as fostered by laws and policies that restrict the fundamental rights of these personsLGBTI people; calls on the Commission and Member States to adopt laws and policies to combat homophobia and transphobia; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to issue an action plan or strategy for equality on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, as repeatedly called for by the Parliament and as promised by Commissioner Jourova in the process of the Commission hearings;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 521 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Member States, as States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, to take appropriate measures to protect children from all forms of physical and psychological violence, including cyber bullying, and to empower young people, parents, educators, carers and society as a whole to prevent and combat bullying; urges the Member States to support lifelong training for professionals working with children and to encourage active participation by young people – inter alia using new technologies – in the peaceful resolution of disputes;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 526 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Encourages EU Member States to support trade unions and employers' organisations in their efforts to adopt diversity and non-discrimination policies with a focus on LGBTI persons.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 529 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Believes that equal protection against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation across all EU Member states would significantly improve if the EU- wide prohibition of such discrimination extended beyond the field of employment and occupation, as proposed by the European Commission in its Proposal for a Council Directive of 2 July 2008 on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation; welcomes the prioritization of this Directive by the European Commission; calls on the Council to adopt it as a matter of urgency;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 530 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Recalls its resolution of 4 February 2014 on the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity and calls upon the European Commission to put forward an EU LGBTI Strategy, comparable to the LGBTI Guidelines adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council of 24 June 2013;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 534 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 e (new)
11e. Rights of persons with disabilities
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 543 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Deplores the discrimination and exclusion thato which persons with a disability still faceies are still subjected today; calls on the Commission and the Member States to fully implement the European Disability Strategy and to monitor and apply the relevant European legislation; the genuine implementation of international, European and national laws, in order to ensure that recognised rights are substantively enjoyed and effectively exercised, also by harmonising and implementing the legislative framework and through cultural and political action;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 549 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Expresses concern that legal and administrative barriers continue to prevent persons with disabilities from participating in political life on an equal basis with others, as documented by FRA's human rights indicators on political participation of persons with disabilities;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 551 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Condemns the use of forms of physical and pharmacological coercion for mental disabilities and calls on the EU and the Member States to adopt social integration policies;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 554 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on EU Member states to amend national legislation which deprives people of the right to vote based on actual or perceived disability;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 558 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Calls on the Commission to include an assessment of compatibility with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in its reporting on the implementation of Council Directives 93/109/EC and 94/80/EC which set out the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament and municipal elections.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 560 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12d. Call on the EU institutions and Member states to closely engage persons with disabilities, including through their representative organisations, in decision making processes in their respective fields of competence, in line with Article 4(3) of the CRPD;
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 562 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 e (new)
12e. Call on EU Member states and institutions to ensure that opportunities to participate in consultation processes are clearly and widely publicised using accessible communications, that input can be provided in other formats such as braille or easy-to read, and that public hearings and meetings discussing proposed laws and policies should be made accessible.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 564 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 f (new)
12f. Call on the Commission to harmonise data collection on disability through EU social surveys in line with the requirements of Article 31 of the CRPD; emphasise that such data collection should use methodologies that are inclusive of all persons with disabilities, including those with more severe impairments and those living in institutions.
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 566 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses its concerns regarding investigations and convictions in connection with hate crimes in the Member States; calls on the EU to make the fight against hate crimes a priority when drawing up European policies against discrimination and in the field of justice; calls for a review of the framework decision on racism and xenophobia;deleted
2015/05/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 586 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 d (new)
Hate crimes
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 587 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that intolerance and discrimination of all kinds must never be accepted in the European Union and calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen the fight against hate crime and discriminatory attitudes and behaviour by developing a comprehensive strategy for fighting hate crime, bias violence and discrimination;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 588 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Expresses its concerns regarding investigations and convictions in connection with hate crimes in the Member States; calls on the EU to make the fight against hate crimes a priority when drawing up European policies against discrimination and in the field of justice; as FRA findings from its large-scale surveys have consistently shown that victims of crime are reluctant to come forward and report to the police; calls for a review of the framework decision on racism and xenophobia in order for it to fully cover all forms of hate crimes and crimes committed with a bias or discriminatory motive related to the victims’ personal characteristics, and to clearly define consistent investigation and prosecution standards;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 589 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Calls on the Member States to take all appropriate measures to encourage the reporting of racist, xenophobic, homophobic and transphobic hate speech and hate crimes and to ensure adequate protection for people who report crimes and for the victims of these crimes;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 590 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13d. Express concern that several Member States have not transposed fully and/or correctly all the provisions of the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA, namely in relation to the offences of denying, condoning and grossly trivialising certain crimes;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 591 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 e (new)
13e. Calls on Member States to fully transpose and implement existing anti- discrimination and hate crime/hate speech EU standards ensuring the enforcement of national legislation punishing all forms of discrimination, hate crimes, incitement, and harassment as well as systematically triggering the prosecution of criminal offences;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 592 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 f (new)
13f. Calls on Member States to include provisions on incitement to racist and xenophobic violence and hatred that fully transpose the offences covered by the Framework Decision and calls on the Commission to monitor the correct transposition of the Framework Decision and launch infringement procedures against those Member States failing to transpose it;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 593 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 g (new)
13g. Calls on the Commission to support training programmes for law enforcement and judicial authorities, and for appropriate EU agencies, in preventing and tackling discriminatory practices and hate crimes. Calls on Member States to provide the authorities responsible for investigation and prosecution with practical tools and skills to be able to identify and deal with the offences covered by the Framework Decision, and to interact and communicate with victims;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 594 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Combating racism
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 595 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13d. Condemns all forms of discrimination and violence on EU territory against members of specific ethnic and religious communities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt specific policy commitments to combat all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Afrophobia and anti- Gypsyism;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 596 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 h (new)
13h. Calls for measures to ensure the implementation of national Roma integration strategies through periodic reviews, monitoring and support to enable local, regional and national authorities to develop and implement effective human- rights-compliant policies, programmes and action for the inclusion of Roma, using available funds, including EU funds, while strictly monitoring respect for fundamental rights and the implementation of Directive 2004/38/EC on the right to move and reside freely;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 597 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 i (new)
13i. Expresses its concern for the growing racist, islamophobic, antisemitic, antigypsy, homophobic and transphobic harassment and violence across Europe. Condemns all form of hate speech and stigmatisation against minorities in the EU;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 598 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 j (new)
13j. Calls on the European Commission and the Council to acknowledge the need for reliable and comparable equality data to measure discrimination, disaggregated according to discrimination grounds, in order to inform policy-making, evaluate the implementation of EU anti- discrimination legislation, and better enforce it; calls on both institutions to define consistent equality data collection principles, based on self-identification, EU data protection standards and the consultation of the relevant communities;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 618 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
MRights of migrants and refugeesapplicants for international protection
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 634 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – introductory part
14. Deplores the repeated and tragic losses of life in the Mediterranean; points out that the action taken by the EU and the Member States to address the problem have not helped effectively to solve it and to prevent further tragedies from occurring at sea; reiterates the need and the duty to make every possible effort to save the lives of persons in danger. To that end, urges the Commission and the Member States to review their migration policies in order to ensure that the requirement to guarantee security is not to the detriment to the rights of migrants and that respect for and the protection of such rights are priority goals in the management of migration. In particular:
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 642 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 1
save the life of a person in danger; encourages the EU and the Member States to open up new channels for legal entry into the European Union, in order to reduce the risks inherent in attempting to enter the EU illegally and the loss of migrant lives at sea, to combat the unlawful acts of the human trafficking networks and the risk of refoulement; in this regard, encourages the EU and the Member States to use humanitarian visas for asylum seekers and refugees, also when they resettle, in addition to making legal migration systems – such as those to facilitate family reunification, work and student mobility – more accessible to refugees; – calls on the Member States to improve their reception standards, with special attention paid to people who have specific needs; encourages the Commission and the Member States to establish fair and efficient asylum application procedures to identify and protect those in need of international protection, in addition to procedures to identify stateless persons, to respect fundamental rights; – calls on the EU to activate search and rescue operations without delay and urges Member States to provide genuine cooperation in the management of migration flows in order to prevent the loss of human lives at sea, especially following the conclusion of the Mare Nostrum operation, as part of the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 656/2014 and in accordance with their obligations under international navigation law; – calls on the Member States to repeal national laws that criminalise the aiding of illegal immigration, in order to ensure that private boats are not encouraged to evade their obligations under international law, which require them to assist any vessels in danger; – calls on the Member States to ensure that, in conducting interception operations at sea, the principle of non- refoulement is complied with and the persons intercepted are not returned to countries where they risk being subjected to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment, as required by the ECtHR in its ruling in the Hirsi case and others against Italy; calls on the Commission, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) and the Member States to ensure compliance with this principle and with other obligations under international and EU law, in connection with the implementation of Regulation No (EU) 656/2014; – encourages the EU and the Member States to put respect for the rights of migrants at the centre of any bilateral or multilateral cooperation agreement with non-EU countries in relation to migration, including readmission agreements, mobility partnerships and technical cooperation agreements;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 652 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 2
– improve legal avenues for refugees;deleted
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 664 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 3
– introduce new procedures for legal entry into the EU;deleted
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 696 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Condemns the practice of detaining irregular migrants, including unaccompanied minors, as a prelude to their expulsion; calls on Member States to comply with the provisions of the ‘Return Directive’, in addition to stateless persons who cannot be expelled; points out that the detention of migrants must remain a measure of last resort and urges the Member States to introduce and implement alternative measures to detention; calls on Member States to comply with the provisions of the ‘Return Directive’, including respect for the right to dignity and for the principle of a child’s best interest; in particular, reiterates the need to ensure that the right to an effective remedy can be exercised before an impartial court for illegal migrants in the event of violations of rights and freedoms enshrined in European and international law;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 727 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for an investigation into the use ofbe conducted into how the funds earmarked for home affairs are spent in this regard, checking their destination carefully; calls on the European Union to take action should it emerge that the funds have been used to finance activities which infringe fundamental rights;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 731 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to conduct investigations into any allegations of infringements of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and to follow up those allegations should they be proven; urges the Commission, in particular, to initiate infringement proceedings should any Member State be suspected of acting in breach of those rights;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 732 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Calls on the EU to hold its own agents liable for any infringements of fundamental rights they might commit; in particular, calls for assurances to be given that an investigation will be opened, following allegations that infringements were committed during operations coordinated by the Frontex agency, and that appropriate measures, of a disciplinary or other nature, will be taken against those who are shown to have committed such infringements; to that end calls for an internal Frontex redress mechanism as requested by the European Ombudsman in his investigation into Case OI/5/2012/BEH-MHZ and for the conclusions of investigations into allegations of human rights infringements to be made public; calls, moreover, for Frontex operations to be halted where infringements of human rights have been committed during such operations, as provided for in Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1168/2011;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 735 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4 b (new)
Children rights
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 736 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls on the Commission to adopt the announced EU Guidance on integrated child protection systems;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 737 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Calls on the Commission to adopt the announced EU Guidance on integrated child protection systems;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 738 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16 c. Affirms the importance to strengthen the procedural safeguards for children in criminal proceedings, particularly in the context of the on-going discussions on a Directive on special safeguards for children suspected and accused in criminal proceedings;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 749 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Deplores the way in which the financial and economic crisis and the measures taken to deal with it have had an impact – in some cases a drastic one – on economic, social and cultural rights, resulting in poverty, exclusion and isolation, in particular in the Member States in which economic adjustment programmes have been adopted;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 765 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises that, in Member States subject to economic adjustment programmes, the EU institutions are also responsible for the associated conditions; stresses that the EU institutions are always under an obligation to observe the Charter, even when acting outside the framework of EU law; reiterates its call to align Memoranda of Understanding with the EU objectives set out in Article 151 TFEU, including the promotion of employment and improvement of living and working conditions; reiterates the need to ensure there is full democratic scrutiny over the action of the EU institutions as regards the measures taken in reaction to the crisis;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 774 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the EU institutions to look into the impact on fundamental rights of the measures proposed or implemented to deal with the crisis and to take remedial action immediately should it emerge that the protection of rights is regressing or international law, including ILO conventions or recommendations, is being infringed;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 796 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5 a (new)
Age discrimination and age poverty
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 798 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recalls that Art. 25 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights proclaims the rights of the elderly to lead a life of dignity and independence and to participate in social and cultural life. Particularly regrets that the Accompanying Document to the 2013 EC Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is silent regarding the application of article 25 by the EU institutions;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 800 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Calls on the Commission to develop a Strategy on Demographic Change to put in effect article 25 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 802 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Express concern that age-based discrimination remains an issue in several Member States leading to injustice including unequal access to employment, discrimination in access to goods and services, inequalities in access of health and long-term care;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 804 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
20d. Express concern that maltreatment, neglect and abuse of older people to be widespread among Member States;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 806 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 e (new)
20e. Express concern that Member States’ cuts in public spending and to pensions is largely contributing to old age poverty decreasing their disposable income, worsening their living conditions creating inequalities in affordability of services and creating a growing number of older people with incomes just above the poverty threshold;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 815 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on all Member States to introduce income support measures to provide their citizens with decent living conditions and combat social exclusion;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 840 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses that corruption represents a seriousReiterates that corruption is a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and the fair treatment of all citizens; Stresses that corruption, by diverting public funds from the public use for which they are intended, reduces the level and quality of public services, thereby infringing fundamental rights violation; calls on the Member States and institutions to devise effective instruments for combating corruption and to monitor regularly the use made of public funds, be they European or national;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 849 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Points out that the right of access to justice is vital for the protection of all fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law; reiterates the importance of ensuring that both the civil and criminal justice systems are efficient; calls on the Commission once again to extend the EU Justice Scoreboard to the criminal sector;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 852 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Calls on the Commission to provide for offences to thwart environmental crimes committed by individuals or organised criminal groups which have an impact on the rights of human beings and animals, the right to health, life and the enjoyment of a healthy environment, as well as on the legal economy and on the use of public resources;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 854 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Calls on the EU and the Member States to provide for measures to support and protect whistleblowers;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 870 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Deplores the conditions in the prisons, including secure psychiatric hospitals, of numerous Member States; regards it as essential that the EU should adopt an instrument which guarantees that the recommendations of the European Committee for the prevention of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment (CPT) and the judgments of the ECtHR are implemented;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 877 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls on the Member States to make more frequent use of alternative measures to detention and to make social reintegration the ultimate aim of a period of custody;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 906 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7 b (new)
Victims of crime
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 907 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Calls on the EU Member States to ensure that victims of crime across the EU can rely on the rights guaranteed by the EU Victims’ Directive (2012/29/EU). With the transposition deadline being set for 16 November 2015, much remains to be done focusing on support to victims of crime, and the treatment of children in justice proceedings; to provide victims with information about their rights; ensuring effective referral systems and trainings for police officers and legal practitioners to establish a relationship of trust and confidence with victims, as FRA research on victim support has shown;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 908 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)
22c. Calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to ensure the highest quality of comparable data collection on the transposition of the EU Victims’ Directive (2012/29/EU) and on how victims, including victims of crimes committed with a bias and discriminatory motive, have accessed their rights as required under Article 28 of the Directive;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 909 #

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 d (new)
22d. Express its concern about the on- going infringement procedures against several Member States for failing to transpose the Directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography due on 18 December 2013, and calls Member States for its prompt transposition;
2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 35 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
K a. whereas using the Frontex emblem puts at stake the reputation of the EU towards migrants and ultimately engages the EU to the full respect of their fundamental rights;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 61 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that in view of the ever- growing humanitarian and legal challenges at the EU’s external borders, Frontex is in need of a mechanism that is capable of processing individual complaints about alleged breaches of fundamental rights occurring in the course of its operations, thus becoming a first-instance body for complaints;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 77 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls for the establishment of a transparent reporting mechanism on complaints that will collect data thus providing facts and figures which may be used to analyse trends and patterns;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 79 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the coordinating role of Frontex should not limit its responsibility under international and EU law; recalls that all Union agencies are bound by the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; recalls that EU Member States are also bund by the charter when implementing EU law;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 84 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Takes the view there is a legitimate expectation on the part of all to believe that the actions of those involved in Frontex operations are attributable to Frontex and more generally to the EU; stresses that the complex legal relations and the distinct yet shared responsibilities between Frontex and the Member States should not undermine the safeguarding of fundamental rights; notes that being a central point for individual complaints does not make Frontex responsible for every complaint received; believes that due consideration should therefore be given to the competences of Frontex and those of the EU Member States while remembering that the latter are using the Frontex emblem and operate under EU mandate;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 87 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need for an official central structure within Frontex for the processing of individual complaints; recommends that a panel of independent experts is created to deal with the complaints that falls under the Agency's responsibility. Recommends that the office of the Frontex Fundamental Rights Officer should play a crucial role in handling complaints; considers that, in particular, the office shouldthis process by receiving, checking the formal admissibility of complaints, filter them, pass them on to the authorities responsible, anand forward complaints to both the competent national authorities and the panel of independent experts mentioned above; considers that, in particular, the office of the Frontex Fundamental Rights Officer should follow up on them thoroughly;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 94 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the fact that Frontex has already set up a thorough procedure for handling internal reports by Frontex staff and guest officers on serious fundamental rights violations; points out that this procedure is already used for handling complaints by third parties not directly involved in a Frontex operation, and recommends building further on this procedure aiming at establishing a full and accessible individual complaints mechanism; emphasises that Frontex should ensure that theEmphasises that Frontex should ensure that the complaints mechanism respects the criteria of accessibility, independence, effectiveness and transparency;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 97 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlights that Frontex should inform Member States' authorities and officials which are part of Frontex operations about the right to lodge a complaint;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 100 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Stresses that any complaint mechanism should cover the entire scope of Frontex's activity including joint operations, pilot operations but also risks analyses, information exchange and cooperation with third countries.
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 108 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges that safeguards are needed to prevent misuse of the complaints mechanism; recommends, therefore,suggests that anonymous complaints should not be accepted; suggests further that only complaints of concrete fundamental rights violations should be admittedbe admissible if lodged by a third party representing the complainant; considers that this should not prevent Frontex from taking into account of other information sources on alleged fundamental rights violations, including general reports, beyond the complaints procedure; emphasises the need for clear criteria for the admissibility of complaints; recommends the provisionstresses that complaints can only be deemed inadmissible if the formal requirements of the complaints are not met; emphasises the need for clear criteria established by the Fundamental Rights Officer in full respect of the Charter of Fundamental rights; recommends the development - in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) - of a standardised form for complaints requiring detailed information such as date and place of the incident, since this would facilitate decisions on admissibility;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 125 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Highlights that Frontex has the responsibility to enable their officers with skills to report on complaints related matters and to handle and proceed complaints in order to make the complaint mechanism effective;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 133 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Recommends that the office of the Fundamental Rights Officer transfers a complaint against a guest officer via a well-defined referral system to the competent national authority; considers it crucial to involve national ombudsmen or any other relevant bodies competent for fundamental rights that have the responsibility to investigate national authorities and officials, whereas the Fundamental Rights Officer does not have the right to do so; stresses the need for cooperation of Frontex with the national human rights institutions in addition to the cooperation with national border authorities;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 134 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Recommends that the office of the Fundamental Rights Officer transfers a complaint against a guest officer via a well-defined referral system to the competent national authority; recommends that this system includes an appeal mechanism in the case where the case is deemed inadmissible or rejected; considers it crucial to involve national ombudsmen or any other relevant bodies competent for fundamental rights that have the responsibility to investigate national authorities and officials, whereas the Fundamental Rights Officer does not have the right to do so; stresses the need for cooperation of Frontex with the national human rights institutions in addition to the cooperation with national border authorities;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 150 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Frontex Executive Director to consider the exclusion ofexclude any officer who has been found to be in breach of fundamental rights from participating in any Frontex operation or pilot project;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 156 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that the possibility of withdrawing financial support from Member States for joint operations as well as the suspension and ultimately the termination of an operation in case of serious and persistent fundamental rights violations should be explored, without prejudice to the overall aim of the Frontex mission whereby the saving of lives is envisaged; takes the view that in order to terminate an operation Frontex should establish criteria, including criteria concerning complaints and their handling in Member States, to really terminate operations;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 165 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Takes the view that an individual complaints mechanism can only be effective if potential complainants, as well as the officers taking part in Frontex operations, are made aware of the individuals’ right to complain through an effective information campaign; believes it should be possible for the number of potential inadmissible complaints to be limited substantially through such an information campaign and a well- structured admissibility check; highlights that in order to be effective, an information campaign should make information available in different languages including, but not limited to, the languages spoken by migrants and asylum seekers;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 195 #

2014/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. RecommendsCalls for the inclusion of provisions on the individual complaints mechanism in the forthcoming review of the Frontex Regulation;
2015/11/11
Committee: LIBEPETI
Amendment 4 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses its readiness to accept cuts in commitments to humanitarian aid, food aid and disaster preparedness; calls, however, at the same time for an increase inStresses that, as a matter of priority, the level of payments to the emergency aid reserve must be substantially increased to cope with unforeseen events; recalls that payments from the emergency aid reserve are financed outside the MFF, as a special instrument;
2014/09/09
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 8 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that certain cuts proposed by the Council are unacceptable, as some programmes, such as the Pan-African programme, may not require specific levels of commitments at this stage.
2014/09/09
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 9 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Is not entirely satisfied with the limited increase in the budget of Frontex as it must reinforce its operational assistance in particular to Member States facing strong pressure at the external borders and to increase its reactivity to rapid evolutions in migration flows; considers that Frontex should have additional staff and resources to fulfil its tasks and implement the EUROSUR system;
2014/08/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the importance of an adequate EU budget in the field of asylum and migration to face the current situation affecting in particular Southern Member States and calls for a clear commitment of all Union partners in that direction;
2014/08/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission's proposal to increase Europol’s annual budget; considers that the Agency's establishment plan should be adjusted to allow it to recruit additional personnel, in particular cybercrime experts, criminal analysts and IT experts so that the EC3 and Europol ICT capabilities can keep up with the rising demand for support in the fight against cybercrime and serious international crime and terrorism; asks to consider again the opportunity of merging Europol and CEPOL in order to improve the cost efficiency and effectiveness of both Agencies;
2014/08/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2014/2040(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. SupportsTakes note of the increase of the budget of eu.LISA in order to ensure secure and well-functioning IT systems in Home Affairs; supports the further development of the Agency in view of possible further tasks such as the entry-exit system and the registered travellers programme; asks, however, for a rationalisation of the organisational structure of the Agency (i.e. a single location) in order to avoid unnecessary expenses;
2014/08/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2014/0202(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) This Regulation should take account of the 2008 UNHCR Guidelines on Determining the Best Interests of the Child.
2015/02/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 16 #

2014/0202(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 4c
4c. The Member State requested to take back an unaccompanied minor shall cooperate with the Member State where the unaccompanied minor is present in order to assess the best interests of the minor. In accordance with paragraphs 4, 4a and 4b, Member States shall assess the best interests of the minor on an individual basis and before the decision has been taken by the Member State responsible. In particular, in their assessment, Member States shall take due account of the following criteria: (a) the time necessary for completing asylum application procedures; (b) the need to avoid unnecessary transfers as much as possible; (c) the development and social welfare of the minor, with particular reference to his or her social and cultural background; (d) safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of human trafficking.
2015/02/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2014/0202(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1a. Article 27(1) is replaced by the following: "1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 18(1)(c) or (d) shall have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, before a court or tribunal, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal."the failure to submit a take back request pursuant to Articles 21, 23 and 24, or a decision relating to the take back request pursuant to Articles 22 and 25 or a review of the above.”
2015/02/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 294 #

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Direttiva 2007/36/CE
Article 9a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that shareholders have the right to vote on the remuneration policy as regards directors. Companies shall only pay remuneration to their directors in accordance with a remuneration policy that has been approved by shareholders. TheAny changes to this policy shall be submitted for approvaled by the shareholders. The shareholders shall confirm or amend the remuneration policy at least every three years.
2015/02/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 310 #

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Companies may, in case of recruitment of new board members, decide to pay remuneration to an individual director outside the approved policy, where the remuneration package of the individual director has received prior approval by shareholders on the basis of information on the matters referred to in paragraph 3. The remuneration may be awarded provisionally pending approval by the shareholdersWhere there is no remuneration policy, or the draft remuneration policy submitted to shareholders has not been approved, remuneration of directors shall be temporarily based on minimum levels provided for under current practice, until a new draft remuneration policy has been approved.
2015/02/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 332 #

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The policy shall indicate the maximum amounts of total remuneration that can be awarded, and the corresponding relative proportion of the different components of fixed and variable remuneration. It shall explain how the pay and employment conditions of employees of the company were taken into account when setting the policy or directors' remuneration by explaining the ratio between the average remuneration of executive directors and the average remuneration of full time employees of the company other than directors and why this ratio is considered appropriate. The policy may exceptionally be without a ratio in case of exceptional circumstances. In that case, it shall explain why there is no ratio and which measures with the same effect have been taken.
2015/02/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 342 #

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
For variable remuneration, the policy shall indicate the financial and non-financial performance criteria to be used and explain how they contribute to the long-term interests and sustainability of the company, and the methods to be applied to determine to which extent the performance criteria have been fulfilled; it shall specify the deferral periods, vesting periods for share- based remuneration and retention of shares after vesting, and information on the possibility of the company to reclaim variable remuneration. The value of shares shall not play a predominant role in comparison with financial or management performance criteria in the calculation of variable remuneration. Member States shall ensure that the calculation also takes account of programmes relating to corporate social responsibility and the results achieved in this regard.
2015/02/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 376 #

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Direttiva 2007/36/EC
Article 9b – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the relative change of the remuneration of executive directors over the last three financial years, and its relation to the development of the valueboth the administrative and financial development of the company and tohe change in the average remuneration of full time employees of the company other than directors;
2015/02/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 116 #

2014/0095(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Member State competent for examining and deciding on an application for a touring visa shall be the Member State whose external border the applicant intends to cross in order to enter the territory of the Member States or the first Member State in which he or she is to work.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 131 #

2014/0095(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 8
8. Consulates may waive the requirement to present one or more supporting documents if the applicants work for or are invited by a reliable company, organisation or institution known to, and if the consulate, in particular at managerial level, or as a researcher, student, artist, culture professional, sportsman or a staff member with specialist knowledge, experience and technical expertise and if adequate proof is submitted to the consulate in this regard receives adequate proof in this regard in the form of a valid work contract or a letter of invitation. The requirement may also be waived for those applicants’ close family members, including the spouse, children under the age of 18 and parents of a child under the age of 18, in case they intend to travel together.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 aims, inter alia, to further develop the common visa policy as part of a multi-layer system in order to facilitate legitimate travel and tackle irregular immigration through further harmonisation of legislation and practices .
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) A distinction should be made between new first time applicants and persons who have been previously granted visas and who are registered in the Visa Information System (VIS), in order to simplify the procedure for registered travellers while addressing the risk of irregular immigration and the security concern posed by some travellers. This distinction should be reflected in all steps of the procedure.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) It should be presumed that applicants who are registered in VIS and have obtained and lawfully used two visas within the 12 months prior to the application fulfil the entry conditions regarding the risk of irregular immigration and the need to possess sufficient, including the necessary means of subsistence. However, this presumption should be rebuttable where the competent authorities establish that one or more of these conditions are not fulfilled in individual cases.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) It is necessary to set out rules on the transit through international areas of airports in order to combat irregular immigration. To this end a common list of third countries the nationals of which should be required to hold airport transit visas should be established . Nevertheless, when a Member State experiences a sudden and substantial influx of irregular immigrants, it should be able to introduce temporarily the airport transit visa requirement for nationals of a given third country . The conditions and procedures for doing so should be laid down, in order to ensure that the application of this measure is limited in time and that in accordance with the principle of proportionality, it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objective. The scope of the airport transit visa requirement should be limited to responding to the specific situation that prompted the introduction of the measure.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) Should a visa be refused, Member States should ensure that applicants receive a full and analytical explanation of the reasons why the consulate rejected the application.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 127 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 b (new)
(32b) Should a visa be refused, Member States should ensure that applicants have the option of appealing against that decision. Appeal procedures should be effective, easily accessible, economical and, where the appeal is well-founded, liable to lead to the immediate issuing of the visa and compensation for any damages the applicant might have suffered.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 133 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular this Regulation seeks to ensure full respect for private and family life referred to in Article 7, compliance with the principle of non-discrimination referred to in Article 21, the protection of personal data referred to in Article 8 and the rights of the child referred to in Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union .
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 137 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
4a. ‘humanitarian grounds’ means all the conditions which give rise to international protection within the meaning of Directive 2011/95/EU.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Where there is a sudden and substantial influx of irregular immigrantsmigrants and without prejudice to international protection obligations and to the principle of non-refoulement, a Member State may require nationals of third countries other than those referred to in paragraph 1 to hold an airport transit visa when passing through the international transit areas of airports situated on its territory. The duration of such a measure shall not exceed 12 months. The scope and duration of the airport transit visa requirement shall not exceed what is strictly necessary to respond to the sudden and substantial influx of irregular immigrants.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 208 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) information enabling an assessment of the applicant’s intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa applied for.deleted
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 229 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 8 – point b
(b) information enabling an assessment of the applicant’s intention not to enter the territory of the Member States.deleted
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 259 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. In the examination of an application for a uniform visa, it shall be ascertained whether the applicant fulfils the entry conditions set out in Article 5(1)(a), (c), (d) and (e) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 , and particular consideration shall be given to assessing whether the applicant presents a risk of irregular immigration or a risk to the security of the Member States and whether the applicant intends to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa applied for.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. In the examination of an application for a uniform visa lodged by a VIS registered regular traveller who has lawfully used the two previously obtained visas, it shall be presumed that the applicant fulfils the entry conditions regarding the risk of irregular immigration, a risk to the security of the Member States, and the possession of sufficient means of subsistence.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 302 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5. A multiple-entry visa valid for up to 5 years may be issued to an applicant who proves the need or justifies the intention to travel frequently and/or regularly provided that the applicant proves his integrity and reliability, in particular the lawful use of previous uniform visas or visas with limited territorial validity, his economic situation in the country of origin and his genuine intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa for which he has applied.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 311 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the integrity and reliability of the applicant, in particular the lawful use of previous uniform visas, visas with limited territorial validity or airport transit visas, his economic situation in his country of origin and his genuine intention to pursue his onward journey.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. Applicants who have been refused a visa shall have the right to appeal. Appeals shall be instituted against the Member State that has taken the final decision on the application and in accordance with the national law of that Member State. National appeal procedures shall be effective, easily accessible, shall not have a disproportionate cost for the applicant and, where the appeal is well-founded, shall be liable to lead to the immediate issuing of the visa and compensation for any damages suffered by the applicant as a result of the refusal to grant a visa. Member States shall provide applicants with detailed information regarding the procedure to be followed in the event of an appeal, as specified in Annex V.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 334 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) on humanitarian grounds;
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 345 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. Consular staff shall, in the performance of their duties, fully respect human dignitythe rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Any measures taken shall be proportionate to the objectives pursued by such measures.
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 357 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part B
B. DOCUMENTATION ALLOWING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE APPLICANT’S INTENTION TO LEAVE THE TERRITORY OF THE MEMBER STATES 1. proof of financial means in the country of residence; bank statements; proof of real estate property; 2. proof of employment; 3. proof of integration into the country of residence: family ties; professional status.deleted
2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on provisional legal aid for suspects or accused persons deprived of liberty and legal aid in European arrest warrant proceedings
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) The scope and content of the right to access to a lawyer are set out in Directive 2013/48/EU. A suspect or accused person in criminal proceedings should havebe granted the right of access to a lawyer from the time when they are made aware, by official notification or otherwise, by the competent authorities, that they are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, and irrespective of whether they are deprived of liberty. That right applies until the conclusion of the proceedings, which is understood to mean the final determination of the question whether the suspect or accused person has committed the offense, including where applicable, sentencing and the resolution of any appeal.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 47 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) Directive 2013/48/EU provides that in cases where suspects or accused persons are deprived of liberty, Member States should make the necessary arrangements to ensure that they are in a position to exercise effectively their right of access to lawyer, unless they have waived this right.deleted
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) In order for suspects or accused persons who are deprived of liberty to be in a position to exercise effectively the right of access to a lawyer at the early stages of the proceedings, they should not have to wait for access to a lawyer pending the processing of the application for legal aid and the assessment of the eligibility criteria for legal aid. Member States should therefore ensure that effective provisional legal aid is available without undue delay after the deprivation of liberty and before any questioningbefore the performance of any procedural step which, under national or European law, has to be carried out in the presence of a lawyer, and it should be available at least until the competent authority has taken the decision on legal aid and, in cases of full or partial rejection, this decision has become final, or, where the application for legal aid is granted, the appointment of the lawyer by the competent authority has taken effect.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) Requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings who are deprived of liberty should have the right to provisional legal aid upon deprivation of liberty in the executing Member State, at least until the competent authority has taken the decision on legal aid and, in cases of full or partial rejection, that decision has become final, or, where the application for legal aid is granted, the appointment of the lawyer by the competent authority has taken effect.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 64 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) Member States should be able to provide that the costs relating to provisional legal aid for suspects or accused persons deprived of liberty and costs relating to provisional legal aid for requested persons canmay be recovered from those persons if, in the subsequent assessment by the competent authority of whether they have a right to ordinary legal aid, they are final decision on legal aid is found to not meet the criteria to benefit from legal aid underlaid down by national law.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 68 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) This Directive provides for the right to provisional legal aid for children deprived of liberty and to legal aid for children that are requested in European arrest warrant proceedings.deleted
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 85 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the right to provisional legal aid for suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings who are deprived of liberty, and
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 90 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings, who are deprived of liberty and who have a right of access to a lawyer pursuant to Directive 2013/48/EU;
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) provisional legal aid means legal aid to a person deprived of libertysuspect, an accused person, or a requested person until the decision on legal aid has been taken,
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) suspectsed or accused persons in criminal proceedings, who are deprived of liberty;
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) requested persons deprived of liberty in the executing Member State.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Provisional legal aid shall be granted without undue delay after deprivation of liberty and in any event before questioningnd in any event before the performance of any procedural step which, under national or European law, has to be carried out in the presence of a lawyer.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 127 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall be able to provide that the costs relating to provisional legal aid can be recovered from suspects or accused persons and requested persons who do not meet the eligibility criteria for legal aid as applicable under national law at the end of specific judicial proceedings in which the judgment has the force of res judicata.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Decisions on legal aid shall be based on objective criteria such as assessment of the financial, social, and personal circumstances of the suspect, accused person, or requested person concerned.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2013/0409(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5. To guarantee the right to a fair trial, Member States shall provide for independent legal aid of high quality at every stage of the proceedings. In particular, they shall ensure that criteria are laid down for the accreditation of officially appointed lawyers and that continuity of representation is guaranteed at every stage of the proceedings.
2015/02/03
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights enshrine the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 31 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, in order to ensure that suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings in the Member States enjoy a high level of protection and procedural safeguards apply in full.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 34 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The principle of mutual recognition of sentences and other decisions of the judicial authorities is the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters within the Union. By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive shouldeeks to strengthen the trust of Member States in the criminal justice systems of other Member States and can thus help to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters. Such common minimum rules should also remove obstacles to the free movement of citizens throughout the territory of the Member States.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings. A and to administrative proceedings that may leading to sanctions such as competition, trade, tax, financial services proceedings and other investigations by administrative authorities in relation to these proceedings, and also civil proceedings are not covered by this Directivedeprivation of liberty, irrespective of whether or not they are classified as criminal proceedings.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 40 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) This Directive should apply to natural persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the proceedings, even before those persons are made aware by the competent authorities of a Member State, by official notification or otherwise, that they are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, until the conclusion of such proceedingssuch proceedings are concluded with the handing down of a sentence.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 44 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) "Law enforcement or judicial authorities" for the purposes of this Directive refers to public authorities which, according to national law, exercise powers in the realm of criminal proceedings.deleted
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 45 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision or a public statement by judicial or other public authorities presents the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted. For the purposes of this Directive, 'public statement' means any statement relating to a crime and issued by the judicial authorities, the police or any other public authorities, including ministers and other public officials. Without prejudice to the freedom of the press and the right to information, the presumption of innocence is also infringed wherever suspects or accused persons are referred to in the press as if they have already been convicted.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and any doubt should benefit the accused. Thus, the presumption of innocence will be infringed where the burden of proof is shifted from the prosecution to the defence,. Suspects have the right to instruct their lawyers to carry out investigations for the defence. The accused always has the right to present evidence for the defence, thereby ensuring that evidence is gathered in compliance with the adversarial principle. If no evidence emerges from the proceedings establishing the case beyond all reasonable doubt, the principle of 'in dubio pro reo' applies. This is without prejudice to any possible ex officio fact findings powers of the court and without prejudice to the independence of the judiciary when assessing the suspect's or accused's guilt. criminal liability.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
(- 1) The principle of presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial are enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) However, in some cases shifting the burden of proof to the defence should not be incompatible with the presumption of innocence as long as certain safeguards are guaranteed: it should be ensured that presumptions of fact or law are confined within reasonable limits, which take into account the importance of what is at stake, and that they are rebuttable, for example by means of new evidence on extenuating circumstances or on a case of force majeure.deleted
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 49 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, so as to ensure that suspected and accused persons in criminal proceedings in the Member States receive a high level of protection with full respect for procedural guarantees.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate is an importantthe right to remain silent are key aspects of the presumption of innocence. Suspects or accused persons should notmust not in any way be forced, when asked to make a statement or answer questions, to produce evidence or documents or to provide information which may lead to incriminate themselves.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Any compulsion used to compel the suspect or accused person to provide information should be limited. To determine whether the compulsion did not violate those rights, the following should be taken into account, in the light of all circumstances of the case: the nature and degree of compulsion to obtain the evidence, the weight of the public interest in the investigation and punishment of the offense at issue, the existence of any relevant safeguards in the procedure and the use to which any material so obtained is put. However, the degree of compulsion imposed on suspects or accused persons with a view to compelling them to provide information relating to charges against them should not destroy the very essence of their right not to incriminate one-self and their right to remain silent, even for reasons of security and public orderNo information obtained from suspects by coercion shall be admissible in proceedings as evidence of criminal liability.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions made by judicial authorities is the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the Union. By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive shouldeeks to strengthen the trust of Member States in the criminal justice systems of other Member States and can thus help to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters. Such common minimum rules should also remove obstacles to the free movement of citizens throughout the territory of the Member States.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 56 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceeduse of methods of obtaining evidence that encroach further on personal liberty, including biological samplings of material which may be obtained from the suspect or accused person through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will oblood, urine or other organic substances necessary for DNA testing, must be restricted solely to cases of proven necessity provided for by law. If the suspects or accused persons, such as material acquired pursuant to a warrant, material in respect of which there is a legal obligation of retention and production upon request, breath, blood and urine samples and bodily tissue for the purpose of DNA tes refuses to give his or her consent, the sampling or examination may be carried out on the instructions of the court only with the express consent of the prosecution, which must be confirmed subsequently in writing.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 57 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) The right to remain silent is an important aspect of the presumption of innocence. It should serve as protection from self-incrimination. The right to remain silent cannot under any circumstances be used against the accused or suspected person and cannot be regarded as substantiating the charges.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings. A, including administrative proceedings that may leading to sanctionpenalties such as competition, trade, tax, financial services proceedings and other investigations by administrative authorities in relation todeprivation of liberty, irrespective of whether or not these proceedings, and also civil proceedings are not covered by this Directivere classified as criminal.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 65 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) This Directive should apply to natural persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the proceedings, even before those persons are made aware by the competent authorities of a Member State, by official notification or otherwise, that they are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, until the conclusion of such proceedings with a sentence being handed down.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2
This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused inat every stage of the criminal proceedings until thagainst them until those proceedings are finally conclusion of those proceedingsded with the handing down of a sentence.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 70 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guiltycriminally liable according to law.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 72 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the steps necessary to ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 75 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of that requirement, including the imposition of penalties, are laid down and taken in the event of a breach of that requirement, and that the suspect or accused person whose right to the presumption of innocence has been infringed has access to an effective remedy. Member States shall ensure that the presumption of innocence is not infringed by the press, by taking appropriate measures, including the imposition of penalties, in cases in which the press presents a suspect or accused person as if they had already been convicted.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 77 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution. This is without prejudice to any ex officio fact finding powers of the trial court. Member States shall also ensure that suspects or accused persons have the benefit of any doubt. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons always have the opportunity to submit evidence for the defence or to conduct investigations for the defence through their lawyer.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that any presumption, which shifts the burden of proof to the suspects or accused persons, is of sufficient importance to justify overriding that principle and is rebuttable.deleted
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) "Law enforcement or judicial authorities" for the purposes of this Directive refers to public authorities which, according to national law, exercise powers in the realm of criminal proceedings.deleted
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In order to rebut such a presumption it suffices that the defence adduces enough evidence as to raise a reasonable doubt regarding the suspect or accused person's guilt.deleted
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 82 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision or a public statement by judicial or other public authorities presents the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted. For the purposes of this Directive, 'public statements' means any statement relating to a crime and issued by the judicial authorities, police and any other public authorities, including ministers and other public officials. Without prejudice to the freedom of the press and the right to information, presumption of innocence is also infringed wherever suspects or accused persons are referred to in the press as if they have already been convicted.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves and not to cooperate in any criminal proceeding.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 86 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspects or accused persons through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the suspects or accused persons.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 88 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself or of the right not to cooperate shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a laterny stage of the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 89 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible, unless the use of such evidence would not prejudice the overall fairness at any stage of the proceedings.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 91 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and any doubt should benefit the accused. Thus, the presumption of innocence will be infringed where the burden of proof is shifted from the prosecution to the defence,. Suspects have the right to instruct their lawyers to carry out investigations for the defence. The accused always has the right to present evidence for the defence, thereby ensuring that evidence is gathered in compliance with the adversarial principle to be respected by the parties. If no evidence emerges from the proceedings establishing the case beyond all reasonable doubt, the principle of 'in dubio pro reo' applies. This is without prejudice to any possible ex officio fact findings powers of the court and without prejudice to the independence of the judiciary when assessing the suspect's or accused's guiltcriminal liability.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) However, in some cases shifting the burden of proof to the defence should not be incompatible with the presumption of innocence as long as certain safeguards are guaranteed: it should be ensured that presumptions of fact or law are confined within reasonable limits, which take into account the importance of what is at stake, and that they are rebuttable, for example by means of new evidence on extenuating circumstances or on a case of force majeure.deleted
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate is an important aspectthe right to remain silent are fundamental to the of the presumption of innocence. Suspect or accused persons should not in any way be forced, when asked to make a statement or answer questions, to produce evidence or documents or to provide information which may lead to incriminate themselves.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a laterny stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts, nor may it in any way be assessed for the purpose of ascertaining criminal responsibility.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 98 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible, unless the use of such evidence would not prejudice the overall fairness of the proceedings.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 98 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Any compulsion used to compel the suspect or accused person to provide information should be limited. To determine whether the compulsion did not violate those rights, the following should be taken into account, in the light of all circumstances of the case: the nature and degree of compulsion to obtain the evidence, the weight of the public interest in the investigation and punishment of the offense at issue, the existence of any relevant safeguards in the procedure and the use to which any material so obtained is put. However, the degree of compulsion imposed on suspects or accused persons with a view to compelling them to provide information relating to charges against them should not destroy the very essence of their right not to incriminate one-self and their right to remain silent, even for reasons of security and public orderNo information obtained from suspects by coercion shall be admissible in proceedings as evidence of criminal liability.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceeduse of methods of obtaining evidence that encroach further on personal liberty, including biological samplings of material which may be obtained from the suspect or accused person through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will ofblood, urine or other organic substances necessary for DNA testing, must be restricted solely to cases of proven necessity provided for by law. In the absence of consent given by the suspects or accused persons, such as material acquired pursuant to a warrant, material in respect of which there is a legal obligation of retention and production upon request, breath, blood and urine samples and bodily tissue for the purpose of DNA testhe sampling or examination may be carried out on the instructions of the court only with the express consent of the prosecution, also to be confirmed subsequently in writing.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on the guiltcriminal responsibility in the absence of the suspect or the accused person, provided that the suspect or accused person:
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 103 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed, by means of a summons, of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with the trial, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the scheduled trialthat a trial was ongoing against him or her;
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 104 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
(ii) was informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she does not appear for the trial; or
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 105 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) being aware of the scheduled trial, had given a mandate to a legal counsellor, who was either appointed by the person concerned or by the State, to defend him or her at the trial, and was indeed defended by that counsellor at the trial, or, where the accused person had not appointed a legal counsellor of his or her own choice, was appointed by the court, to ensure that at all events he or she was defended at the trial.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 105 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) The right to remain silent is an important aspect of the presumption of innocence. It should serve as protection from self-incrimination. The right to remain silent cannot in any circumstances be used against the accused or suspected person and cannot be regarded as substantiation of the charges.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. If the conditions of paragraph 2 have not been met, aA Member State can proceed to execution of a decision intended in that paragraphon the criminal responsibility of the accused person if, after being served with the decision and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial, or an appeal, in which the person has the right to participate and which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case, including examination of new evidence, and which may lead to the original decision to be reversed, the person:
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 110 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure the right to a review of the decision establishing the criminal responsibility of the accused person in the event of new evidence coming to light by virtue of which the decision would have been more favourable to the person concerned, or in the event of its being demonstrated that the conviction was due to judicial error.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 111 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall adopt measures to provide equitable compensation for damages in the event of the right to the presumption of innocence being violated.
2015/03/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 128 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2
This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused inat every stage of the criminal proceedings against them until the final conclusion of those proceedings with a sentence being handed down.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 133 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty according to lawcriminally liable under the legislation in force.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Member States shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of that requirement. laid down and taken, including the imposition of penalties, in the event of a breach of that requirement, and that the suspect or accused person whose right to the presumption of innocence has been violated has access to an effective remedy. Member States shall ensure that the presumption of innocence is not violated by the press, by taking the appropriate measures, including the imposition of penalties, in cases in which the press presents a suspect or accused person as if they had already been convicted.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 150 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution. This is without prejudice to any ex officio fact finding powers of the trial court. Member States shall also ensure that suspects or accused persons have the benefit of any doubt. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons always have the opportunity to submit evidence for the defence or to conduct investigations for the defence through their lawyer.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 155 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that any presumption, which shifts the burden of proof to the suspects or accused persons, is of sufficient importance to justify overriding that principle and is rebuttable. In order to rebut such a presumption it suffices that the defence adduces enough evidence as to raise a reasonable doubt regarding the suspect or accused person's guilt.deleted
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves and not to cooperate in any criminal proceeding.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 167 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspects or accused persons through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the suspects or accused persons.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 171 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself or of the right not to cooperate shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a laterny stage of the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 177 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible, unless the use of such evidence would not prejudice the overall fairness at any stage of the proceedings.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 187 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a laterny stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts, nor may it in any way be assessed for the purpose of ascertaining criminal responsibility.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 191 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible, unless the use of such evidence would not prejudice the overall fairness of the proceedings.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on the guiltcriminal responsibility in the absence of the suspect or the accused person, provided that the suspect or accused person:
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 200 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed, by means of a summons, of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with the trial, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the scheduled trialthat a trial was ongoing against him or her;
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
ii) was informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she does not appear for the trial; orand
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 207 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
b) being aware of the scheduled trial, had given a mandate to a legal counsellor, who was either appointed by the person concerned or by the State, to defend him or her at the trial, and was indeed defended by that counsellor at the trial, or, where the accused person had not appointed a legal counsellor of his or her own choice, was appointed by the court, to ensure that at all events he or she was defended at the trial.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 210 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. If the conditions of paragraph 2 have not been met, aA Member State can proceed to execution of a decision intended in that paragraphon the criminal responsibility of the accused person if, after being served with the decision and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial, or an appeal, in which the person has the right to participate and which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case, including examination of new evidence, and which may lead to the original decision to be reversed, the person:
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure the right to a review of the decision establishing the criminal responsibility of the accused person in the event of new evidence coming to light by virtue of which the decision would have been more favourable to the person concerned, or in the event of its being demonstrated that the conviction was due to judicial error.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 219 #

2013/0407(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall adopt measures to provide equitable compensation for damages in the event of the right to the presumption of innocence being violated.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) Whilst tThe European Public Prosecutor’s Office should have exclusive competence to investigate and prosecute crimes affecting the Union’s financial interests, Eurojust should be able to support national authorities wh. However, given the specific structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the limited extent they are investigating and prosecuting these forms of crime in accordance with the Regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Officeo which Member States participate in it, it is necessary to review the competences and role of Eurojust with a view to ensuring cooperation between all Member States to effectively prosecute crimes affecting the Union’s financial interests.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 197 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office and Eurojust should develop close operational cooperation in line with their respective mandates. That cooperation should be triggered at the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and may relate to any investigation conducted by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office which necessitates an exchange of information or coordination of the investigation on matters where Eurojust has responsibility. The operational cooperation may also involve third countries that have a cooperation agreement with Eurojust.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) It is necessary to provide Eurojust with an administrative and management structure that allows it to perform its tasks more effectively and respects the principles applicable to Union agencies as set out in the joint statement of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on decentralised agencies of the Union of 19 July 2012, whilst maintaining Eurojust’s special characteristics and safeguarding its independence in the exercise of its operational functions. To this end, the functions of the national members, the College and the Administrative Director should be clarified and an Executive Board established.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Eurojust’s competence shall cover the forms of crime listed in Annex 1. However, its competence shall not include the crimes for which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is competentThe forms of crime for which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is competent shall not fall within the competence of Eurojust, but this shall only apply where they involve members participating in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Where they involve Member States not participating in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, or third countries, at the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or a Member State, Eurojust may, through the national members: (a) share information, including personal data, relating to ongoing investigations, in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation; (b) provide support in forwarding decisions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or requests for assistance and execution in Member States which are members of Eurojust but which are not part of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, or in third countries.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Each national member shall be assisted by one deputy and by an Assistant. The deputy and the Assistant shall have their regular place of work at Eurojust. More deputies or Assistants may assist the national member and may, if necessary and with the agreement of the College, have their regular place of work at Eurojust.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 248 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Each national member, his or her deputy and the assistants shall remain in office for five years. That term may be renewed once, for a further five years.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 252 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) directly contact and exchange information with the European institutions, the decentralised agencies and the competent bodies of the European Union;
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 254 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) issue and execute any request for mutual assistance or mutual recognition of judicial decisions;
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 260 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) all the national members and, two representatives of the Commission and a member appointed by Parliament when the College exercises its management functions under Article 14.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 265 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The term of office of the members and their deputies shall be at least fourfive years, renewable once. Upon expiry of their term of office or in the event of their resignation, members shall remain in office until their term is renewed or until they are replaced.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 266 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The College shall elect a President and two Vice-Presidents from among the national members by a two thirds majority of its members. , following consultation with the European Parliament, which shall express its non-binding opinion.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The term of office of the President and the Vice-Presidents shall be fourive years. They may be re-elected once. When a national member is elected President or Vice-President of Eurojust, his or her term of office as national member shall be extended to ensure he or she can fulfil his or her function as President or Vice- President.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 268 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The College may, acting on a proposal from Parliament or on its own initiative, dismiss the President and Vice- Presidents.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 270 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The College shall hold at least one operational meeting per month. To exercise its management functions, the College shall hold at least two ordinary meetings a year. In addition, it shall meet on the initiative of the President, at the request of the Commission and the European Parliament, or at the request of at least one third of its members.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 289 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The Administrative Director shall be appointed by the College from a list of candidates proposed by the Commission, following an open and transparent selection procedure. For the purpose of concluding the contract of the Administrative Director, Eurojust shall be represented by the President of the College.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 292 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. The term of office of the Administrative Director shall be five years. By the end of this period, the Commission shall undertake an assessment which takes into account an evaluation of the performance of the Administrative Director.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 293 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. The College, acting on a proposal from the Commission which takes into account the assessment referred to in paragraph 3, may extend once the term of office of the Administrative Director for no more than five years.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 294 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. An Administrative Director whose term of office has been extended may not participate in another selection procedure for the same post at the end of the overall period.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 295 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 7
7. The Administrative Director may be removed from the office only upon a decision of the College acting on a proposal from the Commission.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 296 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17a Appointment of the Administrative Director and the Deputy Executive Director 1. The Commission shall propose at least three candidates for the post of Administrative Director on the basis of a list following publication of the post in the Official Journal of the European Union and, as appropriate, other press or internet sites. 2. The Administrative Director shall be appointed by the College on the grounds of merit and documented high-level administrative and management skills, including relevant senior professional experience in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters. 3. Before appointment, the candidates shall appear before the competent committee or committees of the European Parliament and answer questions put by its or their members. 4. Following the hearing, the European Parliament shall adopt an opinion setting out its view, and may express a preference for a specific candidate, which the College must take into account in appointing the Administrative Director. 5. The College shall take its decision by a two-thirds majority of all members with a right to vote. If the College takes a decision to appoint a candidate other than the candidate whom the European Parliament indicated as its preferred candidate, the College shall inform the European Parliament and the Council in writing of the manner in which the opinion of the European Parliament was taken into account. 6. The College may, acting on a proposal from the Commission or Parliament or on its own initiative, dismiss the Administrative Director. 7. The Administrative Director shall be supported by a Deputy Administrative Director. If the Administrative Director is absent or indisposed, the Deputy Administrative Director shall take his/her place. 8. The Deputy Administrative Director shall be appointed by the College, following a proposal by the Administrative Director. The Deputy Administrative Director shall be appointed on the grounds of merit and appropriate administrative and management skills, including relevant professional experience in the field of international cooperation in criminal matters. The Administrative Director shall propose at least three candidates for the post of Deputy Administrative Director. The College shall take its decision by a two- thirds majority of all members with a right to vote. The College shall have the power to dismiss the Deputy Administrative Director, in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 6. 9. The term of office of the Administrative Director shall be five years, renewable once only for a maximum of five years, on the basis of an assessment undertaken by the Commission at the end of the first five-year period which takes into account the Administrative Director’s performance, and the tasks and future challenges for the Agency. 10. The term of office of the Deputy Administrative Director shall be five years. It may be extended by the College once only, for a further period of up to five years.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 329 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5
5. Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 shall apply to the processing of personal data by Eurojust in the context of its activities. This Regulation particularises and complements Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 in as far as personal data processed by Eurojust for its operational tasks are concerned.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 390 #

2013/0256(COD)

4. The cooperation established in accordance with paragraph 1 shall entail the exchange of information, including personal data. Any data thus exchanged shall only be used for the purposes for which it was provided. Any other usage of the data shall only be allowed in as far as such usage falls within thIn cases which involve Member States not participating in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, or third countries, at the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or a Member State, Eurojust may, through the national members: (a) share information, including personal data, relating to ongoing investigations, in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation; (b) provide support in forwarding decisions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or requests for assistance mandate of the body receiving the data, and subject to the prior authorisation of the body which provided the data execution in Member States which are members of Eurojust but which are not part of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, or in third countries.
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 393 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Eurojust shall support the functioning of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office through services to be supplied by its staff. Such support shall be detailed in a separate agreement between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and shall in any case include:
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 394 #

2013/0256(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
The details of the services to be provided shall be laid down in an agreement between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.deleted
2017/09/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2013/0255(APP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph F
F. Whereas terrorism is financed also by organised crime, and criminal groupsand any kind of organised crime, including mafia style criminal organisations are financed and collect funds also through fraud fuelling corruption and mismanagement of public funds;
2015/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2013/0255(APP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph F b (new)
F b. Whereas Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union allows for extending the powers of the European Public Prosecutor's Office to include serious crime having a cross- border dimension.
2015/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2013/0255(APP)


Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the Council should be more ambitious in its proposal extending the powers of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to include serious crime having a cross border dimension and at the same time complying with the obligation provided for in Article 86 paragraph 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
2015/02/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 13 #

2013/0255(APP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Council to ensure the highest level of transparency, keeping it fully informed and constantly consulted; urges the Council to take its views also into due account, as a necessary precondition to ensure the broadest consensus on the legislative outcome;
2015/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 22 #

2013/0255(APP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Deems it crucial to ensure within a short period of time the establishment of a single, strong, independent EPPO that is able to investigate, prosecute and bring to court the perpetrators of criminal offences affecting the Union’s financial interests also in view of extending its powers to include serious crime having a cross- border dimension while fulfilling Treaties' obligation; and considers that any weaker solution would be a cost for the Union budget;
2015/01/28
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 35 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) The financing of the national supervisory authorities should guarantee their independence, and should allow them to operate in accordance with the principles of fairness, transparency, non- discrimination and proportionality. Appropriate procedures for appointing staff should contribute to guaranteeing the independence of the national supervisory authorities, ensuring in particular that the appointment of persons in charge of strategic decisions is made by a public authority which does not directly exert ownership rights over air navigation service providerensuring transparency of the decision-making process.
2021/02/05
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 150 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 40
40. ‘national supervisory authority’ means the national body or bodies entrusted by a Member State with the tasks under this Regulation other than the tasks covered by the national competent authority;
2021/02/05
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 313 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Each decision to designate an air traffic service provider shall be valid for a maximum of ten years. Member States may decide to renew the designation of an air traffic service provider.deleted
2021/02/05
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 328 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall have discretionary powers in choosing an air traffic service provider.
2021/02/05
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 335 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where this enables cost-efficiency as well as operational gains to the benefit of airspace users, air traffic service providers may decide to procure CNS, AIS, ADS or MET services under market conditions.
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 342 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where this enables cost-efficiency as well as operational gains to the benefit of airspace users, Member States shallmay allow airport operators to procure terminal air traffic services for aerodrome control and approach control under market conditions.
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 560 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 11 – introductory part
11. The Agency acting as PRBnational supervisory authority shall issue regular reports, within the time limits referred to in the implementing acts to be adopted in accordance with Article 18, on the monitoring of performance of their national en route air navigation services and network function providers, including regular assessments of the achievement of the en route Union- wideir national performance targets and of performance targets for en route air navigation services for air traffic service providers and making the results of those assessments publicly availablemaking the results of those assessments publicly available. It shall take due account of the monitoring reports published by the PRB and shall refer to them in its own report.
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 565 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 11 – subparagraph 1
The designated air trafficnavigation service provider shall provide the information and data necessary for the monitoring of the performance of air navigation services. This shall include information and data related to actual costs and revenues. Where performance targets are not reached or the performance plan is not correctly implemented, the Agency acting as PRBnational supervisory shall issue decisions requiring corrective measures to be implemented by the air traffic service providers. These corrective measures may include, where objectively necessary, a requirthe air navigation service provider to implement fcor an air traffic service provider to delegate the provision of the relevant services to another air traffic service providerrective measures. Where the performance targets continue to be missed, or where the performance plan continues to be incorrectly implemented or where corrective measures imposed are not or not properly applied, the Agency acting as PRB shall conduct an investigation and provide an opinion to the Commission in accordance with Article 24(2). The Commission may take action in accordance with Article 24(3).
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 629 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 10 – introductory part
10. The national supervisory authority concerned shall issue regular reports on the monitoring of performance of terminal air navigation services, including regular assessments of the achievement of the performance targets for terminal air navigation services for air trafficnavigation service providers and making the results of those assessments publicly available.
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 633 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
The designated air trafficnavigation service provider shall provide the information and data necessary for the monitoring of the performance of air navigation services. This shall include information and data related to actual costs and revenues.
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 636 #

2013/0186(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 2
Where performance targets are not reached or the performance plan is not correctly implemented, the national supervisory authority shall issue decisions requiring corrective measures to be implemented by the air traffic service providers. These corrective measures may include, where objectively necessary, a requirthe air navigation service provider to implement fcor an air traffic service provider to delegate the provision of the relevant services to another air traffic service providerrective measures. Where the performance targets continue to be missed, or where the performance plan continues to be incorrectly implemented, or where corrective measures imposed are not or not properly applied, the national supervisory authority shall request the Agency acting as PRB to conduct an investigation in accordance with Article 24(2), and the Commission may take action in accordance with Article 24(3).
2021/02/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 21 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) As a consequence of the progressive expansion of its jurisdiction since its creation, the number of cases before the General Court has been steadily increasinged over the years, resulting over time in an increase in the number of cases pending before that Court. This hasUnless suitable measures of both a procedural and an organisational nature are taken, including a rise in the number of Judges, this may have an impact on the duration of proceedings.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) AIt present,should be ensured that the duration of proceedings does not appear to be acceptable from the point of view of litigants, particularly in the light ofcomplies with the requirements set out in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 34 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The situation in which the General Court finds itself has structural causes relating, inter alia, to the increase in the number and variety of legal acts of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, as well as to the volume and complexity of the cases brought before the General Court, particularly in the areas of competition and State aid, State aid and intellectual property and to the fact that relevant specialised courts have not been established as provided for in Article 257 TFUE.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Consequently, the necessary measures should be taken to address this situation, and the makingreconciling the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union with the requirement to keep public spending in check. To this end, making reasonable and justified use of the possibility, provided for by the Treaties, of increasing the number of Judges of the General Court, and of that of establishing relevant special courts, would allow for a reduction within a short time of both the volume of pending cases and the excessive duration of proceedings before the General Court.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 45 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) Taking into account the likely evolution of the workload of the General Court, the number of Judges should be fixed at 56 at the end of a three-stage process40, it being understood that at no point of time can there be more than two Judges sitting at the General Court appointed upon a proposal byfrom the same Member State.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 52 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) In order to rapidly reduce the backlog of pending casesmake the administration of justice at the General Court more efficient, twelve additional Judges should take office...2 . __________________ 2* OJ: insert "in September 2015", or OJ: insert "in September 2015", or "upon entry into force of this Regulation" if the date of entry into force of this Regulation is after 31 August 2015.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) In September 2016, first instance jurisdiction in Union civil service cases, and the seven posts of the Judges sitting at the European Union Civil Service Tribunal, should be transferred to the General Court, on the basis of a future legislative request by the Court of Justice.deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 63 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) In September 2019, the remaining nine additional Judges should take office. In order to ensure cost effectiveness, this should not entail the recruitment of additional legal secretaries or other support staff. Internal re-organisation measures within the institution should ensure that efficient use be made of existing human resources.deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 80 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 1 – paragraph 3
Protocol No 3
Article 9
When, every three years, the Judges are partially replaced, one half of the number of Judges shall be replaced. If the number of Judges is an uneven number, the number of Judges who shall be replaced shall alternately be the number which is the next above one half of the number of Judges and the number which is next below one half.
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 85 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(2) Article 48 is replaced by the following : "Article 48 The General Court shall consist of: (a) 40 Judges as from …*; (b) 47 Judges as from 1 September 2016; (c) two Judges per Member State as from 1 September 2019.". __________________ * OJ: insert "1 September 2015", or the date of entry into force of this Regulation if that date is after 1 September 2015.".
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 88 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point a
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(a) 40 Judges as from …3; __________________ 3* date of entry into force of this Regulation if that date is after deleted OJ: insert "1 September 2015.", or the
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 93 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point b
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(b) 47 Judges as from 1 September 2016;deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 98 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(c) two Judges per Member State as from 1 September 2019.".deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 100 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(2a) In Article 48, the following paragraph is added: "The Judges shall be appointed in accordance with Article 254 TFEU, without prejudice to the appointment of at least on Judge per Member State."
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 101 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 b (new)
Protocol No 3
Article 48
(2b) In Article 48, the following paragraph is added: “All Judges shall have the same status and the same rights and obligations.”
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 117 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point b
(b) The term of office of three of the seven additional Judges to be appointed as from 1 September 2016 shall end on 31 August 2019. Those three Judges shall be chosen by lot. The term of office of the other four Judges shall end on 31 August 2022;deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 120 #

2011/0901B(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) The term of office of four of the nine additional Judges to be appointed as from 1 September 2019 shall end on 31 August 2022. Those four Judges shall be chosen by lot. The term of office of the other five Judges shall end on 31 August 2025.deleted
2015/09/25
Committee: JURI
Amendment 62 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The purpose of this Directive is to harmonise the laws of the Member States in order to establish a single legislative framework for the protection and exchange of PNR data between Member State law enforcement authorities.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) PNR data are necessary tocan be a useful means of effectively preventing, detecting, investigateing and prosecuteing terrorist offences and serious crime and thus enhance internal securitytransnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) PNR data help law enforcement authorities prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute serious crimes, including acts of terrorism, by comparing them with various databases of persons and objects sought, to construct evidence and, where relevant, to find associates of criminals and unravel criminal networks.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) PNR data enable law enforcement authorities to identify persons who were previously "unknown", i.e. persons previously unsuspected of involvement in serious transnational crime and terrorism, but whom an analysis of the data suggests may well be involved in such crime and who should therefore be subject to further examination by the competent authorities. By using PNR data law enforcement authorities canPNR data could also provide a useful means of addressing the threat of serious transnational crime and terrorism from a different perspective than through the processing of other categories of personal data. However, in order to ensure that the processing of data of innocent and unsuspected persons remains as limited as possible, the aspects of the use of PNR data relating to the creation and application of assessment criteria should be further limited to serious crimes that are also transnational in nature, i.e. are intrinsically linked to travelling and hence the type of the data being processed.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) The use of PNR data together with Advance Passenger Information data in certain cases has added value in assisting Member States in verifying the identity of an individual and thus reinforcing their law enforcement value.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10) To prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute terrorist offences and serious transnational crime, it is therefore essential that all Member States introduce provisions laying down obligations on air carriers operating international flights to or from the territory of the Member States of the European Union.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 121 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) The definition of terrorist offences should be taken from Articles 1 to 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism37. The definitionlist of serious crime should be taken fromtransnational crimes included in this Directive should be drawn up by selected a number of the offences referred to in Article 2(2) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European Arrest Warrant and the surrender procedure between Member States38. However, and the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Member States mayust exclude those minor offences for which, taking into account their respective criminal justice system, the processing of PNR data pursuant to this directive would not be in line with the principle of proportionality. The definition of serious transnational crime should be taken from Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA and the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organised Crimeserious offences as defined in Article 2(2) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA that are not transnational in nature and minor offences for which the processing of PNR data pursuant to this directive would not be in line with the principle of proportionality. __________________ 37 OJ L 164, 22.06.2002, p. 3. Decision as amended by Council Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA of 28 November 2008 (OJ L 330, 9.1.2.2008, p. 21). 38 OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1. OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) The contents of any lists of required PNR data to be obtained by the Passenger Information Unit should be drawn up with the objective of reflecting the legitimate requirements of public authorities to prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute terrorist offences or serious crime, thereby improving internal security within the Union as well astransnational crime, as well as guaranteeing the protectingon of the fundamental rights of citizens, notably privacy and the protection of personal data. SIn particular, such lists should not contain any personal data, and in particular any data that could reveal racial or, ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership or data concerning health or sexual life of the individual concerned. The PNR data should contain details on the passenger’s reservation and travel itinerary which enable competent authorities to identify air passengers representing a threat to internal security social origin, genetic features, language, religion or personal beliefs, political or any other opinions, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, sexual orientation, trade union membership or data concerning health or sexual life of the individual concerned. The PNR data should contain only the details referred to in this Directive.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) The Member States should take all necessary measures to enable air carriers to fulfil their obligations under this Directive. Dissuasive, effective and proportionate penalties, including financial ones, should be provided for by Member States against those air carriers failing to meet their obligations regarding the transfer of PNR data and to uphold the fundamental rights of passengers, in particular their right to privacy and to the protection of their personal data when such lists are drawn up. Where there are repeated serious infringements which might undermine the basic objectives of this Directive, these penalties may include, in exceptional cases, measures such as the immobilisation, seizure and confiscation of the means of transport, or the temporary suspension or withdrawal of the operating licence.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) Each Member State should be responsible for assessing the potential threats related to terrorist offences and serious crime.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) Taking fully into consideration the right to the protection of personal data and the right to non-discrimination, no decision that produces an adverse legal effect on a person or seriously affects him/her should be taken only by reason of the automated processing of PNR data. Such decisions shall not be taken on the basis of a person’s race or ethnic origin social origin, genetic features, language, religiousn or philosophicersonal belief, political opinr any other opinions, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, sexual orientation, trade union membership, health or sexual life.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 162 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) Member States should share with other Member States the PNR data that they receive where such transfer is necessary for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious transnational crime. The provisions of this Directive should be without prejudice to other Union instruments on the exchange of information between police and judicial authorities, including Council Decision 2009/371/JHA of 6 April 2009 establishing the European Police Office (Europol)39 and Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA of 18 September 2006 on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities of the Member States of the European Union40. Such exchange of PNR data between law enforcement and judicial authorities should be governed by the rules on police and judicial cooperation and should not undermine the protection of privacy and personal data. __________________ 39 OJ L 121, 15.5.2009, p. 37. 40 OJ L 386, 29.12.2006, p. 89.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 170 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) The period during which PNR data are to be retained should be proportionate to the purposes of the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime. Because of the nature of the data and their uses, it is necessary that the PNR data are retained for a sufficiently long period for carrying out analysis and for use in investigationstransnational crime. It is necessary that the PNR data are retained for the period strictly necessary for their use in investigations and are permanently destroyed at the end of the retention period provided for in this Directive. In order to avoid disproportionate use, it is necessary that, after an initial period, the data are anonymised and only accessible under very strict and limited conditions.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 178 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
(23) The processing of PNR data domestically in each Member State by the Passenger Information Unit and by competent authorities should be subject to a standard of protection of personal data under their national law which is in line with Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters41 (‘Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA’). __________________ 41 and subsequent amendments thereto. __________________ 41 OJ L 350, 30.12.2008, p. 60. OJ L 350, 30.12.2008, p. 60.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 184 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
(25) Taking into account the right of passengersPassengers have an inalienable right to be informed of the processing of their personal data, and Member States should ensure they are provided with accurate information about the collection of PNR data and their transfer to the Passenger Information Unit and about their right to access, correct, erase or block their personal data and to seek legal redress.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 190 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
(26) Transfers of PNR data by Member States to third countries should be permitted only on a case-by-case basis, and inonly in full compliance with the provisions laid down by Member States pursuant to Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA. To ensure the protection of personal data, such transfers should be subject to additional requirements relating to the purpose of the transfer, the quality of the receiving authority and the safeguards applicable to the personal data transferred to the third country, in particular the right to access, correct, erase or block their personal data and to seek legal redress.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 194 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) The national supervisory authority that has been established in implementation of Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA should also be responsible for advising on and monitoring of the application and implementation of the provisions of this Directive.Does not affect English version.)
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 202 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) This Directive does not affect the possibility for Member States to provide, under their domestic law, for a system of collection and handling of PNR data for purposes other than those specified in this Directive, or from transportation providers other than those specified in the Directive, regarding internal flights subject to compliance with relevant data protection provisions, provided that such domestic law respects the Union acquisMember States should not be able to use PNR data for purposes other than those specified in this Directive, or from transportation providers other than those specified in the Directive. The issue of the collection of PNR data on internal flights should be the subject of specific reflection at a future date.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 206 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) As a result of the legal and technical differences between national provisions concerning the processing of personal data, including PNR, air carriers are and will be faced with different requirements regarding the types of information to be transmitted, as well as the conditions under which this information needs to be provided to competent national authorities. These differences may be prejudicial toshould follow a single model for the collection of PNR data to be transmitted to the Passenger Information Unit, so as not to run the risk of compromising effective cooperation between the competent national authorities for the purposes of preventing, detecting, investigating and prosecuting terrorist offences or serious crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 220 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) In particular, the scope of the Directive is as limited as possible, it allows retention of PNR data for period of time not exceeding 52 years, after which the data must be permanently deleted, the data must be anonymised after a very short period, the collection and use of sensitive data isand any form of direct or indirect discrimination on the basis of the data collected are prohibited. In order to ensure efficiency and a high level of data protection, Member States are required to ensure that anthe independent national supervisory authority is responsible for advising and monitoring how PNR data are processedprovided for in Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data is responsible for advising and monitoring how PNR data are processed and is obliged to report to the competent authorities any infringements of the procedures for transferring and processing such data. All processing of PNR data must be logged or documented for the purpose of verification of the lawfulness of the data processing, self- monitoring and ensuring proper data integrity and security of the data processing. Member States must also ensure that passengers are clearly and precisely informed about the collection of PNR data and their rights.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 235 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The PNR data collected in accordance with this Directive may be processed only for the following purposes: (a) The prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime according to Article 4(2)(b) and (c); and (b) Thepurposes of prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious transnational crime in according toance with Article 4(2)(a) and (d).. deleted deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 259 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘Passenger Name Record’ or 'PNR data' means a record of each passenger’s travel requirements which contains information necessary to enable reservations to be processed and controlled by the booking and participating air carriers for each journey booked by or on behalf of any person, whether it is contained in reservation systems, Departure Control Systems (DCS) or equivalent systems providing the same functionalities. PNR data consists of the information listed in the Annex;
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘reservation systems’ means the air carrier’s internal inventory system,any inventory system used by the air carrier in which PNR data are collected for the handling of reservations;
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 266 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) push method’ means the method whereby air carriers transfer the required PNR data into the database of the authority requesting themPassenger Information Unit;
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) ‘anonymising data’ means making PNR data that could allow the passenger’s identity to be traced unavailable to the user, without erasing them.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 276 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
h) ‘serious crime’ means the offences under national law referred to in Article 2(2) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA if they are punishable by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years under the national law of a Member State, and if : However, Member States may exclude those minor offences for which, taking into account their respective criminal justice system, the processing of PNR data pursuant to this directive would not be in line with the principle of proportionality.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 290 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i – introductory part
(i) ‘serious transnational crime’ means the following offences under national law referred to in Article 2(2) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA: – participation in a criminal organisation, – terrorism, – trafficking in human beings, – sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, – illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, – illicit trafficking in arms, ammunition and explosives, – laundering of the proceeds of crime, – environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in protected animal species and in protected plant species and varieties, – murder, grievous bodily injury, – illicit trade in human organs and tissue, – kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking, – forgery of means of payment, – illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials, – crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court; – unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships, – sabotage, if they are punishable by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years under the national law of a Member State, and if:
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 298 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall set up or designate an authority competent for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences and serious transnational crime or a branch of such an authority to act as its 'Passenger Information Unit' responsible for collecting PNR data from the air carriers, storing them, analysing them and transmitting the result of the analysis to the competent authorities referred to in Article 5. Its staff members may be seconded from competent public authoritiesshall be persons of proven integrity and competence and may be seconded from competent public authorities. An independent data protection officer shall be appointed from among the staff of the Passenger Information Unit and given responsibility for overseeing the work of the unit and in particular for checking that transfers of data to the competent authorities are performed in full compliance with the limits laid down in this Directive and in Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA and for reporting any infringements to the national supervisory authority.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 332 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The PNR data transferred by the air carriers, pursuant to Article 6, in relation to international flights which land on or depart from the territory of each Member State shall be collected by the Passenger Information Unit of the relevant Member State. The air carriers shall transfer to the Passenger Information Unit only the PNR data listed in the Annex. Should the PNR data transferred by air carriers include data beyond those listed in the Annex, the Passenger Information Unit shall delete such data immediately and permanently upon receipt.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 349 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) carrying out an assessment of the passengers prior to their scheduled arrival or departure from the Member State in order to identify any persons who may be involved in a terrorist offence or serious transnational crime and who require further examination by the competent authorities referred to in Article 5. In carrying out such an assessment, the Passenger Information Unit may process PNR data against criteria that have been pre- determined criteriaand updated by the Commission through delegated acts under Article 290 TFEU. Member States shall ensure that any positive match resulting from such automated processing is individually reviewed by non-automated means in order to verify whether the competent authority referred to in Article 5 needs to take action;
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 354 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) carrying out an assessment of the passengers prior to their scheduled arrival or departure from the Member State in order to identify any persons who may be involved in a terrorist offence or serious crime and who require further examination by the competent authorities referred to in Article 5. In carrying out such an assessment the Passenger Information Unit may compare PNR data against relevant databases, including international or national databases or national mirrors of Union databases, where they are established on the basis of Union law, on persons or objects sought or under alert, in accordance with Union, international and national rules applicable to such files. Member States shall ensure that any positive match resulting from such automated processing is individually reviewed by non-automated means in order to verify whether the competent authority referred to in Article 5 needs to take action;deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 366 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) responding, on a case-by-case basis, to duly reasoned requests from competent judicial authorities to provide PNR data and process PNR data in specific cases for the purpose of prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of a terrorist offence or serious transnational crime, and to provide the competent authorities with the results of such processing; and
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 372 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) analysing PNR data for the purpose of updating or creating new criteria for carrying out assessments in order to identify any persons who may be involved in a terrorist offence or serious transnational crime pursuant to point (a).deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 378 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The assessment of the passengers prior to their scheduled arrival or departure from the Member State referred to in point (a) of paragraph 2 shall be carried out in a non- discriminatory manner on the basis of common assessment criteria established by its Passenger Information Unit. Member States shall ensure that the assessment criteria are set by the Passenger Information Units, in cooperation with the competent authorities referred to in Article 5the Commission through delegated acts pursuant to point (a) of paragraph 2. The assessment criteria shall in no circumstances be based on a person’s race orial, ethnic origin social origin, genetic features, language, religiousn or philosophicersonal beliefs, political opinionr any other opinions, membership of a national minority, assets, birth, disabilities, sexual preferences, trade union membership, or data concerning health or sexual life.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 391 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall transfer the PNR data or the results of the processing of PNR data of the persons identified in accordance with points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 for further examination to the relevant competent authorities of the same Member State. Such transfers shall only be made on a case-by- case basis.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 414 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall adopt a list of the competent authorities entitled to request or receive PNR data or the result of the processing of PNR data from the Passenger Information Units in order to examine that information further or take appropriate action for the purpose of preventing, detecting, investigating and prosecuting terrorist offences and serious transnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 417 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Competent authorities shall consist of judicial authorities competent for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences and serious transnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 435 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. The PNR data of passengers and the result of the processing of PNR data received by the Passenger Information Unit may be further processed by the competent authorities of the Member States only for the purpose of preventing, detecting, investigating or prosecuting terrorist offences or serious transnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 438 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. The competent authorities shall not take any decision that produces an adverse legal effect on a person or significantly affects a person only by reason of the automated processing of PNR data. SNeither shall such decisions shall not be taken on the basis of a person’s race orial, ethnic origin social origin, genetic features, language, religiousn or philosophicersonal beliefs, political opinionr any other opinions, membership of a national minority, assets, birth, disabilities, sexual preferences, trade union membership, or data concerning health or sexual life.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 474 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. On a case-by-case basis, upon request from a Passenger Information Unit in accordance with national law, air carriers shall transfer PNR data where access earlier than that mentioned in point (a) of paragraph 2 is necessary to assist in responding to a specific and actual threat related to terrorist offences or serious transnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 484 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that, with regard to persons identified by a Passenger Information Unit in accordance with Article 4(2)(a) and (b), the result of the processing of PNR data is transmitted by that Passenger Information Unit to the Passenger Information Units of other Member States where the former Passenger Information Unit considers such transfer to be necessary for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious transnational crime. The Passenger Information Units of the receiving Member States shall transmit such PNR data or the result of the processing of PNR data to their relevant competent authorities in accordance with the provisions of Article 4(2)(a).
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 497 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request, if necessary, the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter’s database in accordance with Article 9(1), and, if necessary, also the result of the processing of PNR data. The request for such data may be based on any one or a combination of data elements, as deemed necessary by the requesting Passenger Information Unit solely and exclusively for a specific case of prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious transnational crime. Passenger Information Units shall provide the requested data as soon as practicable and shall provide also the result of the processing of PNR data, if it has already been prepared pursuant to Article 4(2)(a) and (b).
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 504 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request, if necessary, the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter’s database in accordance with Article 9(2), and, if necessary, also the result of the processing of PNR data. The Passenger Information Unit may request access to specific PNR data kept by the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State in their full form without the masking out only in exceptional circumstances in response to a specific threat or aonly where it is necessary in order to prevent a serious, specific and immediate threat to public specific investigation or prosecuurity or as part of an investigation related to terrorist offences or serious transnational crime.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 509 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Only in those cases where it is necessary for the prevention of an immediate and serious threat to public security may the competent authorities of a Member State request directly the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter’s database in accordance with Article 9(1) and (2). Such requests shall relate to a specific investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious crime and shall be reasoned. Passenger Information Units shall respond to such requests as a matter of priority. In all other cases the competent authorities shall channel their requests through the Passenger Information Unit of their own Member State.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 518 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Exceptionally, where early access is necessary to respond to a specific and actual threat related to terrorist offences or serious crime, the Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State to provide it with PNR data of flights landing in or departing from the latter’s territory at any time.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 544 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A Member State may transfer PNR data and the results of the processing of PNR data to a third country, only on a case-by- case basis, after having consulted the national data protection authority, and if:
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 573 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the Union has concluded an international agreement with that third country or is party, together with that third country, to an international convention which provides for safeguards relating to the fundamental rights of passengers, which are compatible with the requirements of this Directive,
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 574 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) the third country guarantees that it will use the data only where it is necessary for the purposes of this Directive specified in Article 1(2),
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 575 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
(bc) the third country allows Union citizens the same rights of access, rectification, erasure and compensation with regard to the PNR data as apply in the Union, and
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 614 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the PNR data provided by the air carriers to the Passenger Information Unit are retained in a database at the Passenger Information Unit for a period of 307 days after their transfer to the Passenger Information Unit of the first Member State on whose territory the international flight is landing or departing.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 625 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Upon expiry of the period of 307 days after the transfer of the PNR data to the Passenger Information Unit referred to in paragraph 1, the data shall be retained at the Passenger Information Unit for a further period of fivetwo years. During this period, all data elements which could serve to identify the passenger to whom PNR data relate shall be masked out. Such anonymised PNR data shall be accessible only to a limited number of personnel of the Passenger Information Unit specifically authorised to carry out analysis of PNR data and develop assessment criteria according to Article 4(2)(d)anonymised. Access to the full PNR data shall be permitted only by the Head of the Passenger Information Unit for the purposes of Article 4(2)(c) and where it could be reasonably believed that it is necessary to carry out an investigation and in response to a serious, specific, and actualimmediate threat or risk or a specific investigation or prosecution.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 639 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
For the purposes of this Directive, the data elements which could serve to identify the passenger to whom PNR data relate and which should be filtered and masked outout and anonymised are:
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 645 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
– Address and contact information, including the email address, the credit card number and the billing address, frequent flyer cards, and the IP address from which access was effected;
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 666 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The result of matching referred to in Article 4(2)(a) and (b) shall be kept by the Passenger Information Unit only as long as strictly necessary to inform the competent authorities without delay of a positive match. Where the result of an automated matching operation has, further to individual review by non- automated means, proven to be negative, it shall, however, be stored so as to avoid future ‘false’ positive matches for a maximum period of threone years unless the underlying data have not yet been deleted in accordance with paragraph 3 at the expiry of the fivewo years, in which case the log shall be kept until the underlying data are deleted.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 678 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure, in conformity with their national law, that dissuasive, effective and proportionate penalties, including financial penalties, are provided for against air carriers which, do not transmit the data required under this Directive, to the extent that they are already collected by the them, or do not do so in the required format or otherwise infringe the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. The penalties laid down in Article 4 of Directive 2004/82/EC of 29 April 2004 shall apply for the purposes of this Directive.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 695 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Any processing of PNR data revealing a person’s race or ethnic origin social origin, genetic features, language, religiousn or philosophicersonal beliefs, political or any other opinions, trade union membership,membership of a national minority, property, birth, disabilities, sexual preferences, or trade union membership, or of data concerning that person’s health or sexual life, shall be prohibited. In the event that PNR data revealing such information are received by the Passenger Information Unit they shall be deleted immediately.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 701 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. All processing of PNR data by air carriers, all transfers of PNR data by Passenger Information Units and all requests by competent authorities or Passenger Information Units of other Member States and third countries, even if refused, shall be logged or documented by the Passenger Information Unit and the competent authorities for the purposes of verification of the lawfulness of the data processing, self-monitoring and ensuring proper data integrity and security of data processing, in particular by the national data protection supervisory authorities. These logs shall be kept for a period of five years unless the underlying data have not yet been deleted in accordance with Article 9(3) at the expiry of those fivewo years, in which case the logs shall be kept until the underlying data are deleted.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 708 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that air carriers, their agents or other ticket sellers for the carriage of passengers on air service inform passengers of international flights at the time of booking a flight and at the time of purchase of a ticket in a clear and precise manner about the provision of PNR data to the Passenger Information Unit, the purposes of their processing, the period of data retention, their possible use to prevent, detect, investigate or prosecute terrorist offences and serious transnational crime, the possibility of exchanging and sharing such data and their data protection rights, in particular the right to complain to a national data protection supervisory authority of their choice. The same information shall be made available by the Member States to the public.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 739 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Each Member State shall provide that the national supervisory authority established in implementation of Article 28 of Directive 46/95/EC and Article 25 of Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA shall also be responsible for advising on and monitoring the application within its territory of the provisions adopted by the Member States pursuant to the present Directive. The further provisions of Article 25 of Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA shall be applicable.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 758 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – title
Committee procedureDelegated acts
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 759 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee (‘the Committee’). That CommitteeIn accordance with Article 290 TFEU, power shall be delegated to the Commission, which, within three months from the entry into force of this Directive, shall be a ccommittee within the meaning of Regulation […/2011/EU] of 16 February 2011rdingly adopt the risk criteria referred to in Article 4 of this Directive and the common protocols and supported data formats applicable to all transfers of PNR data by air carriers to Passenger Information Units.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 760 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation […/2011/EU] of 16 February 2011 shall apply.deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 778 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) review the feasibility and necessity of including internal flights in the scope of this Directive, in the light of the experience gained by those Member States that collect PNR data with regard to internal flights. The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council within two years after the date mentioned in Article 15(1);deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 785 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) undertake a review of the operation of this Directive and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council within fourtwo years after the date mentioned in Article 15(1). Such a review shall cover all the elements of this Directive, with special attention to the compliance with the standard of protection of personal data, the length of the data retention period and the quality of the assessments. It shall also contain the statistical information gathered pursuant to Article 18.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 786 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) undertake a review of the operation of this Directive and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council within fourtwo years after the date mentioned in Article 15(1). Such a review shall cover all the elements of this Directive, with special attention to the effectiveness and necessity of PNR data transfer for the purposes of preventing and prosecuting terrorist offences or serious transnational crime and to the compliance with the standard of protection of personal data, the length of the data retention period and the quality of the assessments. It shall also contain the statistical information gathered pursuant to Article 18.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 792 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall prepare a set of statistical information on PNR data provided to the Passenger Information Units. Such statistics shall as a minimum cover the total number of persons whose PNR data have been collected and transferred, the number of identifications of any persons who may be involved in a terrorist offence or serious transnational crime according to Article 4(2) and, the number of subsequent law enforcement actions that were taken involving the use of PNR data, the number of convictions secured with the aid of PNR data, and the total number of ‘false positives’, per air carrier and destination.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 810 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20a Sunset clause This Directive shall expire in December 2020. In the light of the review referred to in Article 17 the European Parliament and the Council may extend the period of validity of this Directive.
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 814 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 8
(8) Frequent flyer informationdeleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 822 #

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 12
(12) General remarks (including all available information on unaccompanied minors under 18 years, such as name and gender of the minor, age, language(s) spoken, name and contact details of guardian on departure and relationship to the minor, name and contact details of guardian on arrival and relationship to the minor, departure and arrival agent)deleted
2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE