14 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2018/2009(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission has published the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard, an informative, comparative, non-binding tool assessing in principle the effectiveness, independence and quality of national justice systems, in order to pinpoint any shortcomings, identify good practice and progress and better define Member States’ justice policies, focusing for that purpose on the parameters of justice systems that contribute to an improved business, investment and consumer climate in the Union;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the fifth EU Justice Scoreboard analyses in particular issues relating to public access to legal proceedings, the independence of the judiciary as perceived by individuals and the business sector, current use of information and communications technologies (ICT) in the justice system and the operation of national justice systems in specific areas relating to the single market and the business sector, while also presenting an initial overview of the functioning of national criminal justice systems in enforcing EU anti- money laundering legislation;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas much data regarding certain Member States is still unavailable; whereas there are discrepancies in the quantity and specific content of data provided by certain Member States;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas this non-binding exercise has the merits of identifying both positive and negative trends and of offering a forum for exchange of best practices across the Union to promote and guarantee compliance with the rule of law;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the aim of this exchange and stresses that an effective, high quality and independent justice system could give businesses incentives to develop and invest at national and cross-border level, while at the same time protecting fundamental rights, especially those of consumers and workers, thus boosting their economic contribution;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that, although data is still lacking for certain Member States, the data gap has continued to decrease, in particular for indicators relating to the efficiency of justice systems; notes that remaining difficulties in gathering data are often due to insufficient statistical capacity or to the fact that the national categories for which data are collected do not exactly correspond to the ones used for the Scoreboard; only in very few cases is the data gap is due to the reluctance of certain national authorities to contribute;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the efforts of the Commission to provide measurable data and draw concrete conclusions on how Member States have improved or may yet improve the quality and efficiency of their justice systems; regrets that there are still instances where, though applicable or available, no data have been provided by some Member States for certain categories; urges the Commission to improve cooperation with the contact points for the Member States’ national judiciaries and with various committees and European judicial networks, so as to reduce the gaps in data collected;. calls on Member States, thereforat the same time, to fully collaborate with the Commission by sharing relevant, up-to- date data;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Member States to examine the results of the 2017 Justice Scoreboard closely and to determine what lessons need to be drawn therefrom and to consider whether national measures need to be adopted to correct any irregularities regarding the quality, efficiency and independence of their national justice systems;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that many Member States have maintained their efforts to improve the effectiveness of their national justice systems through the introduction of reforms; welcomes the fact that a significant number of new reforms have been announced in respect of legal aid, alternative dispute resolution methods (ADR), court specialisation and judicial maps;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of efficient and timely proceedings in strengthening consumer protection and safeguarding intellectual property and data privacy rights; notes with concern that such proceedings are still too lengthy in some Member States; notes, with regard to these proceedings and the justice system as a whole, that it is necessary to respect the right of all European citizens to a legal hearing of their case within a reasonable time, pursuant to Article 6(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. EPoints out that the electronic submission of claims, the possibility of monitoring and conducting proceedings online and electronic communication between courts and lawyers help to make the justice system more efficient, offering easier access to justice and reducing delays and costs; notes also that online access to judgments helps to make the justice system more transparent and comprehensible and ensure that case law is more consistent; encourages Member States, therefore, to invest in the continued development and use of ICT tools in their judicial systems, in an effort to make them more accessible and comprehensible to all EU citizens, including those with any form of disability; emphasises the benefit of ICT systems for both cross-border cooperation between the Member States' judicial authorities and at national level in reducing costs for all stakeholders involved and in improving the overall efficiency and quality of justice systems, and regrets that their full potential has not yet been reached in all Member States;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that legal aid for consumers below the poverty threshold remains an essential balancing factorPoints out that most Member States require parties to pay a court fee when initiating legal proceedings; points out that the difficulty in obtaining legal aid could be a major deterrent where court fees represent a significant share of the value of the claim; highlights that legal aid for consumers below the poverty threshold remains an essential balancing factor and urges the Member States to take all necessary measures to ensure an efficient and equitable system of legal assistance; calls in addition for national court websites to contain interactive tools enabling citizens to find out whether they are eligible for legal aid; underlines the role of legal aid in guaranteeing that weaker parties may also have access to justice, a fundamental right under EU lawegislation;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. CReiterates that an independent judiciary is of the essence when it comes to upholding the rule of law, the fairness of judicial proceedings and the confidence of individual citizens and the business sector in the judicial system; calls on Member States, therefore, to give great consideration to the fact that a strong, independent judicial system relies, on the one hand, on the lack of political interference or pressure (from government and politicsians), as well as the absence of economic interference or pressure, and, on the other hand, on effective guarantees provided by the status and position of judges;