10 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2020/2072(INL)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Union mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights should primarily aim at preventing and addressing any threat to the Union values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) before any clear risk of infringement of these values arises in a Member State and Article 7 TEU should be triggered; recalls that failure to adhere to EU values may have a negative impact on the European project itself, particularly when it comes to the fundamental rights of European Union citizens, thereby diminishing mutual trust between Member States;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that all public authorities in the Member States must always act within the limits of the law while observing the values arising from fundamental rights in a democracy, under the control of an independent and impartial judiciary system, which is an indispensable cornerstone of the rule of law; highlights that the requirement that courts be independent is of the essence to the fundamental right to effective judicial protection and a fair trial and to ensure that all rights, both material and procedural, deriving from Union law are protected; stresses that every national court is also a European court, and is responsible for both applying Union law and initiating the preliminary reference procedure under Article 267 of the TFEU, with a view to ensuring consistency and uniformity when applying Union law; is worried that recent attacks on the rule of law have mainly consisted of attempts to jeopardise judicial independence and call into question the very legal, political and economic bases of how the European Union works;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights the importance of the Sibiu Declaration of May 2019, in which the European leaders unanimously committed to continue to protect our way of life, democracy and the rule of law in the European Union; to this end, invites the Commission, the European Council and the Council to prioritise action in this area, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis, which gave rise to autocratic and illiberal tendencies in several Member States;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the fact that, until now, the European networks have played an essential role in promoting exchanges of ideas and good practices within the EU’s judicial system; urges the Commission to identify further measures to support these networks, such as the European Judicial Training Network, so that they can focus on projects that promote the rule of law, particularly in Member States facing these types of problems;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes that considerable differences remain in the level of participation in training across Member States and types of legal professions; calls on the Commission to identify the reasons for those differences and address them in the upcoming European judicial training strategy and to assess the impact of those differences on the independence, quality and efficiency of Member States’ judiciaries; emphasises the need for closer cooperation among the bodies responsible for constitutional supervision; calls on the Commission to identify support measures to promote and strengthen the projects of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to promote faster digitalisation at all levels of the Member States’ judicial systems, to use artificial intelligence as a means of ensuring access to the justice system, and to assess ICT tools and other means put in place by Member States at the disposal of citizens to facilitate their access to justice, in particular citizens with disabilities or belonging to vulnerable groups, such as national minorities and migrants;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises the need to ensure that the EU instruments for ensuring the rule of law are consistent and complementary: the EU’s Rule of Law Report, the Justice Scoreboard, which forms the basis for both the EU Rule of Law Report and the Country-Specific Recommendations in the European Semester, the procedures laid down in Article 7 TEU, infringement actions, and the future conditionality of the MFF in relation to the rule of law;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Believes that the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism for Romania and Bulgaria should be reviewed in the light of the most recent judicial reforms in those two Member States;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Emphasises the need to replace the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism for Romania and Bulgaria with the EU Rule of Law Report in order to ensure equality among all the EU Member States; considers that the scope and the assessment methodology of the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism and the Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights are similar and would, therefore, lead to discrepancies in terms of the responsibilities of the Member States;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses the need to ensure adequate funding for the sectoral ‘Justice’ and ‘Rights and Values’ Programmes in the upcoming multiannual financial framework, as these programmes aim to promote and ensure the development of a common European culture of judicial systems, the rule of law and EU values.