7 Amendments of Emil RADEV related to 2013/0255(APP)
Amendment 4 #
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the importance of ensuring the independence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the European Chief Prosecutor and his/her deputies, the European prosecutors and the European delegated prosecutors, including from any undue influence on the part of national political, administrative or judicial authorities, including EU institutions, including those with which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is bound to cooperate in conducting its investigations;
Amendment 15 #
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the need, as regards the appointment of the European public prosecutors, for an open and transparent and independent competition for candidates fulfilling the required criteria of professionalism, experience, and independence, and suggests in terms of procedure, that they may be shortlisted by the Commission and evaluated by an independent panel of experts, with the final decision on appointment to be made by the Council and approved by Parliament; stresses that Parliament and the Council should appoint the European Chief Prosecutor by common agreement;
Amendment 16 #
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office pay special attention to the appointment of the European prosecutors and the European delegated prosecutors and to the fulfilment of the criteria regarding qualifications, professional experience and independence insuring balanced geographical representation;
Amendment 22 #
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Member States to ensure the adoption of harmonised measures regarding the recognition and admissibility of evidence submitted by EPPO;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the structure of the EPPO should reflect a maximum degree of independence andbe fully independent from national governments and EU institutions and protected from political influence and pressure; therefore calls for openness and transparency in the selection and appointment procedures of the European Prosecutors;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that rules governing the division of jurisdiction between the EPPO and the national authorities should be clear and avoid anyly defined in order to avoid any uncertainty or misinterpretation in the operational phase: the EPPO should have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the offences constituting fraud to the Union's financial interests according to the directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’'s financial interests by means of criminal law;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Council to ensure the admissibility of the evidence gathered by the EPPO throughout the Union, and on Member States to respect the uniform application of the rules on admissibility of evidence submitted by EPPO, as this is crucial for the effectiveness of the prosecutions;