BETA

16 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2018/0170(COD)

Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) With the adoption of Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council3 and Council Regulation (EU) 2017/19394, the Union has substantially strengthened the harmonised legal framework provisions regarding means available to protect the financial interests of the Union by means of criminal law. The European Public Prosecutor's Office ("EPPO") will haveis a key Commission priority in the field of criminal justice and anti-fraud policy, having the power to carry out criminal investigations and bring indictments related to criminal offences affecting the Union budget, as defined in Directive (EU) 2017/1371, in the participating Member States. _________________ 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29). 4 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) (OJ L 283, 31.10.2017, p. 1).
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) To protect the financial interests of the Union, the European Anti-Fraud Office ("the Office") conducts administrative investigations into administrative irregularities as well as into criminal behaviour. At the end of its investigations, it may make judicial recommendations to the national prosecution authorities, aimed at enabling indictments and prosecutions in the Member States. In future, in the Member States participating in the EPPO, it will report suspected criminal offences to the EPPO, and will collaborate with it in the context of its investigations, by offering technical and logistic support for example.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) Therefore, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council5 should be amended and correspondingly adapted following the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. The provisions governing the relationship between the EPPO and the Office in Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 should be reflected and complemented by the rules in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 to ensure the highest level of protection of the financial interests of the Union through synergies between the two bodies., which means implementing the principles of close cooperation, information exchange, complementarity and avoidance of duplication _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EURATOM) No 1074/1999 (OJ L 248, 18.9.2013, p.1).
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) In view of their common goal to preserve the integrity of the Union budget, the Office and the EPPO should establish and maintain a close relationship based on sincere and effective cooperation and aimed at ensuring the complementarity of their respective mandates and coordination of their action, in particular as regards the scope of the enhanced cooperation for the establishment on the EPPO. Ultimately, the relationship should contribute to ensuring that all means are used to protect the financial interests of the Union and avoiding unnecessary duplication of efforts and ensuring full compliance with procedural guarantees and the rights of the economic operators concerned.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure effective cooperation and in consideration of the Office's expertise, experience, mandate and powers, the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union should have the choice to make use of the Office to conduct such preliminary evaluation of allegations reported to them.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) The Office should actively support the EPPO in the course of its investigations, for example by providing appropriate technical and logistical support. In this regard, the EPPO may request the Office to support or complement its criminal investigations through the exercise of its mandate and powers under this Regulation. In these cases the Office should perform these operations within the limits of its powers and within the framework provided for in this Regulation.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) To ensure effective coordination and cooperation between the Office and the EPPO, information should be exchanged between them on a continuous basis. The exchange of information in the stages prior to the opening of investigations by the Office and the EPPO is particularly relevant to ensure proper coordination between the respective actions to guarantee complementarity and avoid duplication. The Office and the EPPO should specify the modalities and conditions of this exchange of information in their working arrangements.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The Commission Report on Evaluation of the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/20136, adopted on 2 October 2017, concluded that the 2013 changes to the legal framework brought clear improvements, as regards the conduct of investigations, cooperation with partners and the rights of persons concerned. At the same time, the evaluation has highlighted some shortcomings which impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of investigations, for example in the exercise of powers and use of OLAF’s investigative resources, or as regards uniform conditions for conducting internal investigations, cooperation between Member States and their institutions, on the one hand, and the offices, agencies, bodies and institutions of the EU, on the other, as well differences in the application of Union legal framework provisions. _________________ 6 COM(2017) 589. The report was accompanied by an evaluation Staff Working Document, SWD(2017) 332, and an Opinion of the Office's Supervisory Committee, Opinion 2/2017.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) These changes do not affect the procedural guarantees applicable in the framework of investigations. The Office is bound to apply the procedural guarantees of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013, Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/967 and those contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. This framework requires that the Office conducts its investigations objectively, impartially and confidentially, seeking evidence for and against the person concerned, and carries out investigative acts on the basis of a written authorisation and following a legality check. TSimilarly, both the EPPO and the Office must ensure the respect of the rights of persons concerned by itstheir investigations, including the presumption of innocence and the right to avoid self-incrimination. When interviewed, persons concerned have inter alia the rights to be assisted by a person of choice, to approve the record of the interview, and to use any of the official languages of the Union. Persons concerned also have the right to comment on the facts of the case before conclusions are drawn. _________________ 7 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial interests against fraud and other irregularities, OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2–5
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) Economic operators should have the possibility to use any of the official languages of the Member State where the check takes place, and the right to be assisted by a person of their choice, including by external legal counsel, during on-the-spot checks and inspections. The presence of a legal counsel should not, however, represent a legal condition for the validity of on-the-spot checks and inspections. To ensure the effectiveness of the on-the-spot checks and inspections, in particular as regards the risk of evidence disappearing, the Office should be able to access to the premises, land, means of transportation or other areas used for business purposes without waiting for the operator to consult its legal counsel, but without preventing such consultation. It should only accept a short reasonable delay pending consultation of the legal counsel before starting the conduct of the check. Any such delay must be kept to the strict minimum, provided that the procedural guarantees and the rights of the economic operator concerned are duly respected.
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) The mandate of the Office includes the protection of revenues to the Union budget arising from VAT own resources. In this field, the Office should be able to support and complement the activities of the Member States through investigations conducted in accordance with its mandate, the coordination of national competent authorities in complex, transnational cases, and the support and assistance to Member States and to the EPPO. To this end, the Office should be able to exchange information through the Eurofisc network established by Council Regulation (EU) No 904/20109, bearing in mind the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 1a in order to promote and facilitate cooperation in the fight against VAT fraud. _________________ 9 Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 of 7 October 2010 on administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax, OJ L 268, 12.10.2010, p. 1–18. 1a Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1).
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 1 – paragraph 1
The Office shall establish and maintain a close relationship with the European Public Prosecutor's Office (‘the EPPO’) established in enhanced cooperation by Council Regulation (EU) 2017/193913. This relationship shall be based on mutual cooperation, complementarity, avoidance of duplication and on information exchange. It shall aim in particular to ensure that all available means are used to protect the Union’s financial interests through the complementarity of their respective mandates and the support provided by the Office to the EPPO, including technical and logistic support. _________________ 13 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) (OJ L 283, 31.10.2017, p. 1). (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.) Or. ro (Article 1 – paragraph 1)
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 1 – paragraph 3
5. In the exercise of these powers, the Office shall comply with the procedural guarantees provided for in this Regulation and in Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96, as well as Regulation(EC) No 45/2001 1a. In the conduct of an on-the- spot check and inspection, the economic operator concerned shall have the right not to make self-incriminating statements and to be assisted by a person of choice. When making statements during the on the spot checks, the economic operator shall be provided with the possibilityable to use any of the official languages of the Member State where he is located. The right to be assisted by a person of choice shall not prevent access by the Office to the premises of the economic operator, and shall not unduly delay the start of the check. _________________ 1a Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1). (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.) Or. ro (Article 1 – paragraph 3)
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 1 – paragraph 3
The Member State concerned shall ensure, in accordance with Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96, that the staff of the Office are allowed access to all information and documents relating to the matter under investigation which prove necessary in order for the on-the-spot checks and inspection to be carried out effectively and efficiently and proportionately, and that they are able to assume custody of documents or data to ensure that there is no danger of their disappearance. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.) Or. ro (Article 1 – paragraph 3)
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point d
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 1 – paragraph 6 – point d
In addition to the first subparagraph, the institution, body, office or agency concerned may at any time consult the Office with a view to taking, in close cooperation with the Office and without duplicating its efforts, any appropriate precautionary measures, including measures for the safeguarding of evidence, and shall inform the Office without delay of such decision.; (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.) Or. ro (Article 1 – paragraph 6 – point d)
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 1– paragraph 12
The Office shall not be bound to report to the EPPO manifestonly unsubstantiated allegations. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.) Or. ro (Article 1 – paragraph 12)
2018/11/26
Committee: JURI