Activities of Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA
Plenary speeches (86)
Taking forward the Horizontal anti-discrimination Directive (debate)
The Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences (debate)
Search and rescue in the Mediterranean (debate)
International day to end impunity for crimes against journalists (debate)
Situation in the hotspots on the Greek islands, in particular the case of Moria (debate)
Public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones (debate)
Interference from other countries in our democracies and elections (topical debate)
Cross-border organised crime and its impact on free movement (debate)
European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)
Urgent humanitarian situation on Greek Islands, especially of children - ensuring protection, relocation and family reunification (debate)
Humanitarian situation of refugees at EU external borders (debate)
Migration situation at the Greek-Turkish border and the EU's common response to it (debate)
EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences (continuation of debate)
Emergency Legislation in Hungary and its impact on the Rule of Law and fundamental rights (continuation of debate)
Tackling Covid-19 disinformation and the impact on freedom of expression (debate)
The need for an immediate and humanitarian EU response to the current situation in the refugee camp in Moria (debate)
The establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (debate)
Serious security threats through the sale of EU passports and visas to criminals (debate)
Fighting terrorism and the right to freedom of expression and education (debate)
The impact of COVID-19 measures on democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law (debate)
Situation of Fundamental Rights in the European Union – Annual Report for the years 2018-2019 (debate)
Stocktaking of European elections (continuation of debate)
European Citizens’ Initiative – Minority SafePack (continuation of debate)
European Arrest Warrant and surrender procedures between Member States (debate)
Democratic scrutiny of social media and the protection of fundamental rights (debate)
Activities of the European Ombudsman – annual report 2019 (debate)
Government attempts to silence free media in Poland, Hungary and Slovenia (debate)
Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta (debate)
Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme 2021-2027 (debate)
Preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online (debate)
Recent deaths in the Mediterranean and search and rescue at sea (debate)
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights: interim report (debate)
New avenues for legal labour migration (debate)
Roma Equality, Inclusion and Participation (debate)
Parliament's right of inquiry (debate)
Regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (debate)
Breach of the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child and the use of minors by the Moroccan authorities in the migratory crisis in Ceuta
Foreign interference in democratic processes (debate)
The Pegasus spyware scandal (debate)
Reversing the negative social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic (debate)
Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters (debate)
State of EU cyber defence capabilities (debate)
Disinformation and the role of social platforms (debate)
The Rule of law crisis in Poland and the primacy of EU law (debate)
Condemning police violence against Romani people in the EU (debate)
One youth, one Europe (topical debate)
Citizenship and residence by investment schemes (debate)
Role of culture, education, media and sport in the fight against racism (debate)
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the EU (debate)
EU Citizenship Report 2020 (debate)
Cooperation and similarities between the Putin regime and extreme right and separatist movements in Europe (topical debate)
The follow up of the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)
Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report (debate)
Parliament’s right of initiative (debate)
The call for a Convention for the revision of the Treaties (debate)
The relations of the Russian government and diplomatic network with parties of extremist, populist, anti-European and certain other European political parties in the context of the war (debate)
Existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded (debate)
Situation of fundamental rights in the EU in 2020 and 2021 (debate)
Countering the anti-European and anti-Ukrainian propaganda of Putin’s European cronies (topical debate)
The Rule of Law in Malta, five years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia (debate)
Growing hate crimes against LGBTIQ people across Europe in light of the recent homophobic murder in Slovakia (debate)
Racial justice, non-discrimination and anti-racism in the EU (debate)
A high common level of cybersecurity across the Union (debate)
Resilience of critical entities (debate)
The need for a European solution on asylum and migration including search and rescue (debate)
The Commission’s reports on the situation of journalists and the implications of the rule of law (debate)
The 30th anniversary of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (debate)
Protecting the Rule of Law against impunity in Spain (topical debate)
EUCO conclusions: the need for the speedy finalisation of the Road Map (debate)
2022 Rule of Law Report - The rule of law situation in the European Union - Rule of law in Greece - Rule of law in Spain - Rule of law in Malta (debate)
Update of the anti-corruption legislative framework (debate)
Fighting cyberbullying of young people across the EU (debate)
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation - Election integrity and resilience build-up towards European elections 2024 (debate)
Recommendations for reform of the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption (debate)
Amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure with a view to strengthening integrity, independence and accountability (debate)
Parliamentarism, European citizenship and democracy (debate)
European Media Freedom Act (debate)
The new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+) (debate)
Rule of Law in Malta: 6 years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the need to protect journalists (debate)
Threat to rule of law as a consequence of the governmental agreement in Spain (debate)
Implementation of the Treaty provisions on national parliaments - Implementation of the Treaty provisions on EU citizenship (joint debate – Implementation of the Treaty provisions)
Implementation of the Treaty provisions on national parliaments - Implementation of the Treaty provisions on EU citizenship (joint debate – Implementation of the Treaty provisions)
Extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime (debate)
Extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime (debate)
Russiagate: allegations of Russian interference in the democratic processes of the European Union (debate)
Report on the Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law report (debate)
Reports (2)
REPORT on extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime
REPORT on the implementation of Treaty provisions on EU citizenship
Shadow reports (8)
REPORT on the situation of Fundamental Rights in the European Union - Annual Report for the years 2018 - 2019
REPORT on the implementation of the European Arrest Warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States
INTERIM REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
REPORT on the conclusion of an interinstitutional agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online
REPORT on a draft regulation of the European Parliament laying down the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (Statute of the European Ombudsman) and repealing Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom
RECOMMENDATION on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
REPORT on the draft implementing provisions for the Statute of the European Ombudsman
Opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on information security in the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union
Shadow opinions (11)
OPINION on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam
OPINION on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam
OPINION on the establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights
OPINION on the implementation of Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation in light of the UNCRPD
OPINION on the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union, repealing Directive (EU) 2016/1148
OPINION on the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report
OPINION on the proposal for a Council decision determining, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down measures for a high common level of cybersecurity at the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union
OPINION on public access to documents - annual report for the years 2019-2021
OPINION on the implementation of the Treaty provisions on EU citizenship
Institutional motions (29)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation at the USA-Mexican border
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Russia, notably the situation of environmental activists and Ukrainian political prisoners
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Hong Kong
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Venezuela
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation at the USA-Mexico border
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Hong Kong
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Russia, notably the situation of environmental activists and Ukrainian political prisoners
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Venezuela
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the proposed new Criminal Code of Indonesia
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Egypt
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION On the situation of LGBTI people in Uganda
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the proposed criminal code of Indonesia
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Egypt
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation of LGBTI people in Uganda
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
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures to combat gender-based violence
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the rule of law in Malta following the recent revelations surrounding the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the cultural recovery of Europe
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the breach of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the use of minors by the Moroccan authorities in the migratory crisis in Ceuta
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on media freedom and further deterioration of the rule of law in Poland
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Pandora Papers: implications for the efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Pandora Papers: implications for the efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on growing hate crimes against LGBTIQ+ people across Europe in light of the recent homophobic murder in Slovakia
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Russiagate: allegations of Russian interference in the democratic processes of the European Union
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Russiagate: allegations of Russian interference in the democratic processes of the European Union
Oral questions (8)
Facial recognition and identification in publicly accessible spaces
The use of contact tracing apps in the fight against the coronavirus
The use of contact tracing apps in the fight against the coronavirus
Human rights situation in Iran, in particular the situation of political prisoners sentenced to death
Restitution of plundered property to Holocaust victims and Jewish communities
Medicine shortages and strategic healthcare autonomy in the EU
European Parliament's right of inquiry
European Parliament's right of inquiry
Written explanations (11)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MZHG0JG (SYN-ØØØJG-2) (B9-0107/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido.La autorización que se opone, permite la comercialización de productos que contienen esta variedad de maíz, no su cultivo, variedades para las que la EFSA ha concluido no hay evidencias que demuestren que su consumo puede poner en peligro la salud. Además, la EFSA ha previsto un plan de vigilancia para controlar posibles efectos en el medioambiente, a fin de evitar daños en este otro ámbito.Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a votación en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean A2704-12 (ACS-GMØØ5-3) (B9-0105/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización que se opone renueva la autorización que ya existía a la comercialización de productos que contenían esa variedad de maíz.Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a votación en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 × DAS-40278-9 and genetically modified maize combining two, three or four of the single events MON 89034, 1507, MON 88017, 59122 and DAS-40278-9 (B9-0106/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización que se opone permite la comercialización de productos que contienen estas variedades de maíz, cuyo consumo es respaldado por la EFSA.Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a votación en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified cotton LLCotton25 (ACS-GHØØ1-3) (B9-0170/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización a la que se propone la oposición, renueva la autorización que ya existía a la comercialización de productos que contenían esa variedad de algodón. Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a voto en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean MON 89788 (MON-89788-1) (B9-0169/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización a la que propone la oposición, renueva la autorización que ya existía a la comercialización de productos que contenían esa variedad de soja. Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a voto en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 and sub- combinations MON 89034 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9, 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 and NK603 × DAS-40278-9 (B9-0171/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización a la que se propone la oposición, permite la comercialización de productos que contienen esta variedad de maíz, no su cultivo, variedades para las que la EFSA ha concluido no hay evidencias que demuestren que su consumo puede poner en peligro la salud. Además, la EFSA ha previsto un plan de vigilancia para controlar posibles efectos en el medioambiente, a fin de evitar daños en este otro ámbito. Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a voto en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × 1507 × 5307 × GA21 and genetically modified maize combining two, three, four or five of the single events Bt11, MIR162, MIR604, 1507, 5307 and GA21 (B9-0172/2019)
He votado en contra de esta oposición porque considero que el informe favorable emitido por la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA) se alinea con el principio de precaución, que siempre he defendido. La autorización a la que se propone la oposición, permite la comercialización de productos que contienen esta variedad de maíz, no su cultivo, variedades para las que la EFSA ha concluido no hay evidencias que demuestren que su consumo puede poner en peligro la salud. Además, la EFSA ha previsto un plan de vigilancia para controlar posibles efectos en el medioambiente, a fin de evitar daños en este otro ámbito. Analizaré con detenimiento, como siempre he hecho, una a una las oposiciones que se sometan a voto en el futuro, para garantizar que se respeta de forma escrupulosa el principio de precaución, pero también que se valoran adecuadamente las evidencias científicas que proporciona la Autoridad Europea para la Seguridad de los Alimentos (EFSA), organización de marcada orientación científica, cuyo objetivo máximo es proteger e informar a los consumidores.
2019 UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) (B9-0174/2019)
Me he abstenido en la votación de la enmienda 38 porque la posición de la Delegación de Ciudadanos del Parlamento, argumentada en los debates, no se ve recogida en las enmiendas relacionadas con la energía nuclear. Consideramos que las centrales nucleares actualmente existentes, juegan un papel importante a corto plazo, por su aportación al mix energético y por proveer seguridad de suministro e independencia energética. Por otro lado, creemos necesaria su progresiva sustitución, una vez acabada su vida útil, por alternativas que ya son competitivas en el mercado, como son las energías renovables. Ciudadanos apuesta por la innovación e investigación de alternativas bajas en emisiones y que no provengan de energías fósiles. En este sentido, el desarrollo e instalación de las baterías es fundamental para el almacenamiento de energía limpia. La UE debe seguir trabajando para dar garantías de suministro, en las más altas condiciones de seguridad, apostando siempre por la innovación y las energías limpias para así alcanzar nuestros objetivos de descarbonización a largo plazo.
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament (B9-0412/2021, B9-0413/2021)
En junio de 2021, el Parlamento húngaro votó a favor de las enmiendas propuestas por los diputados del Fidesz que restringen gravemente la libertad de expresión y los derechos de los niños. La Ley prohíbe la «representación y promoción de la identidad de género diferente al sexo asignado al nacer, el cambio de sexo y la homosexualidad» en las escuelas, los programas de televisión y los anuncios disponibles al público en cualquier plataforma para menores de 18 años, incluso con fines educativo. Descalifica tales contenidos para ser considerados anuncios de servicio público o de responsabilidad social, incluso si están destinados a los adultos. También introduce modificaciones en las leyes de Protección de la Infancia, Protección de la Familia, Actividad Publicitaria Empresarial, Medios de Comunicación y Educación Pública.Considero que esta Ley vulnera la legislación de la Unión y los derechos de los ciudadanos LGBTIQ en Hungría, en particular la libertad de prestación de servicios y la libertad de circulación de bienes, tal y como se establece en el Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea, la Directiva de Servicios de Medios Audiovisuales y la Directiva de Comercio Electrónico, junto con la Carta de Derechos Fundamentales. Por ello, he votado a favor de la Resolución.
Protection of animals during transport (Recommendation) (B9-0057/2022)
Compartimos el principal objetivo de las recomendaciones del informe de la Comisión ANIT sobre el transporte animal. Como sociedad, está en el interés común de los agricultores, consumidores y cadena de suministro que avancemos en la mejora del bienestar animal.Sin embargo, el texto final no es equilibrado en algunas de sus disposiciones, por lo que, desde la delegación de Ciudadanos, hemos votado en contra del informe. Concretamente, la limitación de trayectos máximos de 8 horas no solo amenaza la ganadería en zonas rurales de países con gran extensión territorial como España, sino que obligaría a subir y bajar a los animales de los camiones con mayor frecuencia, generando un estrés adicional en ellos.En lo relativo a limitar el transporte de los animales no destetados, defendemos que existen garantías para transportarlos eficientemente y que las medidas pondrían en peligro a sectores vitales en numerosas regiones españolas como en Castilla y León (i.e. cordero lechal, cabrito o lechón).Por último, el rango de temperaturas exigidas para el transporte (5-30 grados) es injusto con el sur europeo porque no tiene en cuenta su climatología. Los límites fijados harían inviable el transporte durante muchos meses del año, creando un agravio comparativo para países mediterráneos.
EU Digital COVID Certificate - Union citizens (A9-0138/2022 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
Desde la delegación de Ciudadanos Europa hemos votado a favor de la enmienda al Reglamento europeo sobre el certificado COVID digital. Consideramos que ha sido una herramienta útil para facilitar la libre circulación entre Estados miembros durante la pandemia y evitar una situación de arbitrariedad jurídica nacional en la que cada Estado miembro tenga sus propios requisitos de ingreso. Por ello, Ciudadanos fue uno de los principales propulsores de la iniciativa durante su tramitación parlamentaria.Consideramos que la actual mejora en los datos de infección y las tasas de vacunación no permite justificar la continuación del uso del certificado por parte de los Estados miembros, que continúa siendo una prerrogativa nacional. Por ello, damos la bienvenida al hecho de que, a día de hoy, solo tres países requieran la presentación de un certificado para ingresar al territorio nacional. Sin embargo, estimamos que no es descartable una nueva ola de contagios, por lo que deben seguir existiendo bases legales que permitan el uso del certificado en caso de que sea necesario en aras de mantener la libertad de movimiento.Adicionalmente, damos la bienvenida a la cláusula de revisión que permite una reevaluación de la propuesta en los próximos 6 meses.
Written questions (123)
Sponsorship of EU Council Presidency functions
Illegal use of Schengen information system database by UK authorities
Rule of law infringement in the UK
Infringement of the fundamental rights of children in Catalonia
Hearing of 16 September 2019 as part of the rule of law procedure against Hungary under Article 7(1) TEU
Vesuvius PLC closures
Inequality between married couples and couples in civil partnerships
Financial support for students with disabilities under the Erasmus+ programme
New Greek asylum law
Future European disability strategy
Illegal reforms to control the judiciary in Poland
Fraud affecting domestic workers in Spain
Rights of air passengers with disabilities
UK authorities’ concealed failure to alert the EU to 75 000 criminal convictions
EU aid to help repair damage caused by storm Gloria
Clearview
Morocco — Illegal delimitation of exclusive economic zone
Law on cinema in Catalonia
Alleged violation of Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 as a result of the unauthorised presence of Delcy Rodríguez on Member State territory
Educating Catalan speakers to speak Catalan, and not Spanish, to foreigners in Catalonia
Language barriers in the Autonomous Community of Valencia which hamper the free movement of workers in the EU
Failure to comply with environmental regulations at the Zaldibar landfill site in the Basque Country
The Baleares Parliament refuses to set up a committee of inquiry on the sexual exploitation of minors in care at the Mallorca Institute for Social Affairs
Conditions under which duty solicitors work in the legal aid scheme in Spain
Alleged 'LGBTI-free zones' in Poland
Extending the deadline for requesting CAP assistance in Spain
The impact of the coronavirus on the automotive industry
COVID-19 prevention and containment measures on the border between Turkey and Greece
Stockpile of basic medical equipment, and strategic storage thereof in the European Union
State aid to compensate for the COVID-19 crisis in the tourism and catering sector
Plan to repatriate European citizens in third countries
Funding for the broadcast of COVID-19 information on EU radio stations
Possible incompatibility with Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights
The use of the state of alarm to suppress freedom of expression and political pluralism in Spain
Protection of whistleblowers denouncing breaches of Union Law during the COVID-19 crisis
Good administration and transparency in management of the COVID-19 crisis in Spain
Protecting deaf-blind people and raising their profile in society
Regulating funeral services in the EU during the COVID-19 crisis
Infringement of the principle of the separation of powers in the Spanish Government
Operation Crossing the Strait during the COVID-19 crisis
Funds to strengthen care services for the most vulnerable in the aftermath of COVID-19
Breach of EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: ESF misuse in educational establishments in Valencia
Linguistic discrimination against young people in communities with two official languages
Pro-Kremlin media attempts to discredit the EU in war-torn Syria
Mass arrest of LGBTI activists in Poland
Evacuation of refugee camps on Greek islands in the Aegean
EU anti-squatting legislation
Task Force on Equality
Attacks on the separation of powers in Spain
Reform of the General Council of the Judiciary of Spain
Content inciting hate and violence on Spanish regional television
Terrorist glorification on Basque public television
Call for the proper transposition of Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism
Creation of an EU access board
Infringement of the right to good administration in the management of the COVID-19 crisis in Spain
Discrimination against pupils in Catalonia who have Spanish as their mother tongue
Mechanism for government surveillance and monitoring of disinformation in Spain
Spanish Government’s plan against disinformation
Extending the mandate of EPPO to cover cross-border terrorist crimes
Response to the arrival by sea of migrants in the Canary islands
Spain violating Convention on the Rights of the Child
Creation of a European citizenship statute
Data on elderly people living in nursing homes or alone in the EU
Harassment of journalists in Catalonia
Developing a common vaccination card in the EU in light of the COVID-19 pandemic
Accelerated reform of the CGPJ in Spain
Failings as regards press freedom in Spain and other Member States
Emergency support for distributing the COVID-19 vaccine in Spain following Storm Filomena and European support mechanisms
Closure of the infringement proceedings opened against the Catalan law on cinema
Obstacles to press freedom during the pandemic
Commission position on compulsory COVID-19 vaccination
Abandonment of security forces in Catalonia
Harmonising public guardianship laws and combating sexual exploitation in the Member States
Digital Green Certificate accessibility
Commission response to cyber attacks
Police interference in private and family lives in Spain
Media freedom and independence of the Polish competition authority
Inclusion of disability as a selection criterion for citizens’ panels in the Conference on the Future of Europe
Wave of migrants arriving in Ceuta
Belarusian state-sponsored air piracy and terrorism
Europol’s role in the investigation of an aircraft hijacked by Belarus
Towards a comprehensive European Mental Health Strategy
Proliferation of automated customer service systems and their impact on consumers’ rights
Protection of victims of terrorism in the EU and ban on paying homage to terrorists
Homage paid to terrorists in the EU
Attacks against pluralism at the UAB
Appointments within the Spanish Data Protection Agency: lack of transparency and impartiality
Delayed transposition of Directive 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law
Support from European Union agencies for the management of refugees fleeing as a consequence of the Russian war in Ukraine
Ukrainian refugees with disabilities
Transposition of European directives in Spain
Spanish courts on the brink of collapse
Politicisation of the General Council of the Judiciary in Spain
Independence of Spain’s statistics authorities
Access to EU funding for LGBTI organisations in Ukraine in the context of Russia’s invasion
Protection of freedom of expression
Consequences of the failure to implement the Whistle-Blower Protection Directive in Spain
Possible inaction by the Spanish Government following the sinking of the Villa de Pitanxo
Need for statistics on children under guardianship in the EU
The Kremlin’s investments in EU political parties
Crimes against the rule of law
European democracy action plan
Financial exclusion of the elderly
Combatting corruption in Spain
Misappropriation of EU funds
Illegal Chinese police stations on European territory
A European Citizenship Statute to compile and update citizens’ rights and freedoms
ESF-funded Sensei identitarian training programme
Accessibility of 112 emergency services for persons with disabilities
Response to Morocco regarding the autonomous cities of Ceuta and Melilla
Rise of antisemitism and hate speech in Bulgaria
Lack of public consultation on the EU citizenship report
Pardons for politicians convicted of corruption
Depoliticisation of the selection process for Spain’s General Council of the Judiciary
EU intervention to prevent a fraudulent change to Spain’s constitutional order
EU intervention to prevent a fraudulent change to Spain’s constitutional order
Deals involving EU funds in negotiations for Sánchez’s investiture
The misleading and divisive use of AI in political communication
Artificial intelligence leading to regulatory gaps
Discrimination against the Spanish National Police and Guardia Civil – dangers of the profession not being recognised
Spanish Government attacks on the judiciary
The occupational safety of law enforcement officers in the EU
Improving the Handbook on Victims of Terrorism
Amendments (1124)
Amendment 5 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Recital D a (new)
D a. Whereas the EDPB opinion on the European Commission Draft Implementing Decision on the adequate protection of personal data under the EU- US Data privacy Framework states that it does not expect the US data protection framework to replicate European data protection law, but rather ensure an “essentially equivalent” level of protection as also confirmed by the ECJ;
Amendment 10 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Recital F
F. whereas the ability to transfer personal data across borders has the potential to be a key driver of innovation, productivity and economic competitiveness; whereas these transfers should be carried out with a level of protection equivalent to that guaranteed in the EU in full respect for the right to the protection of personal data and the right to privacy; whereas one of the fundamental objectives of the EU is the protection of fundamental rights, as enshrined in the Charter;
Amendment 12 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Recital H
H. whereas mass surveillance, including the bulk collection of data, by state actors is detrimental toin the general interest of the protection of national or public security the bulk collection of data is legal provided that it is sufficiently justified, limited and proportionate to the aim, as confirmed by the EDPB and the Court; whereas, on the other hand, mass surveillance by state actors is illegal and impacts the trust of European citizens and businesses in digital services and, by extension, in the digital economy;
Amendment 17 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Recital J
J. whereas there is no federal privacy and data protection legislation in the United States (US); whereas the EU and the US have differingO supports the convergence between the EU and the US of the definitions of key data protection concepts such as principles of necessity and proportionality as supported by the EDPB in its opinion;
Amendment 25 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that privacy and data protection are legally enforceable fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter and the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as in laws and case-law; emphasises that they must be applied in a manner that does not unnecessarily hamper trade or international relations, but can be balanced only against other fundamental rights and not against commercial or political interestssuch as the right to security;
Amendment 31 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges the efforts made in the EO to lay down limits on US Signals Intelligence Activities, by referring to the principles of proportionality and necessity, and providing a list of legitimate objectives for such activities; points out, however, that these principles are long-standing key elements of the EU data protection regime and that their substantive definitions in the EO are not in line with their definition under EU law and their interpretation by the CJEUprovides for significant improvements to ensure that they are adequately equivalent under EU law; points out, furthermore, that for the purposes of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, these principles will be interpreted solely in the light of US law and legal traditions as is the case with adequacy decisions; points out that the EO requires that signals intelligence must be conducted in a manner proportionate to the ‘validated intelligence priority’, which appears to be a broad interpretation of proportionality;
Amendment 38 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 3
3. RegretNotes the fact that the EO does not prohibit the bulk collection of data by signals intelligence in certain justified cases, including the content of communications in line with ECJ rulings; notes that the list of legitimate national security objectives can be expanded by the US President, who can determine not to make the relevant updates public;
Amendment 53 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that e room for improvement on the following procedures and calls on the Commission to improve them in its final adequacy draft decision : -the decisions of the Data Protection Review Court (‘DPRC’) willshall not be classified and notshall be made public or available to the complainant; points out that the DPRC is part of the executive branch and not the judiciary; points out that -a complainant will be represented by a ‘special advocate’ designated by the DPRC, for whom there is noshall be a requirement of independence; points out that- the redress process provided by the EO is based on secrecy and does notit shall set up an obligation to notify the complainant that their personal data has been processed, thereby underminensuring their right to access or rectify their data; notes that- the proposed redress process does notshall provide for an avenue for appeal in a federal court and therefore, among other things, does not provide any possibility for the complainant to claim damages; concludes that the DPRC does not meet the standards of independence and impartiality of Article 47 of the Charter;
Amendment 57 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, while the US has provided for a new mechanism for remedy for issues related to public authorities’ access to data, the remedies available for commercial matters under the adequacy decision are insufficientunchanged; notes that these issues are largely left to the discretion of companies, which can select alternative remedy avenues such as dispute resolution mechanisms or the use of companies’ privacy programmes; Calls on the Commission to closely monitor the effectiveness of these redress mechanisms;
Amendment 66 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that European businesses need and deserve legal certainty; stresses that successive data transfer mechanisms, which were subsequently repealed by the CJEU, created additional costs for European businesses; notes that continuingacknowledges that legal uncertainty and the need to adapt to new legal solutions is particularly burdensome for micro, small and medium- sized enterprises;
Amendment 70 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that, unlike all other third countries that have received an adequacy decision under the GDPR, the US still does not have a federal data protection law; points out that the EO is not clear, precise or foreseeable in its application, as it can be amended at any time by the US President; is therefore concerned about the absence of a sunset clause which could provide that the decision would automatically expire four years after its entry into force; Therefore calls on the Commission to introduce such a clause in case of changes in the US law;
Amendment 79 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls on the Commission to monitor the proper implementation of the data protection rights as stated in the EO, especially as regards to the US agencies, who have until October 2023 to comply with the protection norms set in the executive order;
Amendment 89 #
2023/2501(RSP)
Paragraph 11
11. Concludes that the EU-US Data Privacy Framework fails to create actual equivalence in the level of protection; calls on the Commission to continue negotiations with its US counterparts with the aim of creating a mechanism that would ensure such equivalence andalls on the Commission to continue negotiations with its US counterparts in order to include the remarks for improvement listed in this resolution and in the opinion of the EDPB with the aim of creating a mechanism which would provide the adequate level of protection required by Union data protection law and the Charter as interpreted by the CJEU; urges the Commission not to adopt the adequacy finto amend its draft adequacy decision accordingly;
Amendment 83 #
2023/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that Member State government and EU officials should set an example by refraining from any corrupt practices and that there should be no government or political interference in corruption investigations; recalls that a government also engages in corrupt practices when it amends or adopts rules under "evasion of law" for the sole purpose of perpetuating itself in power; points out that EU officials as well may be involved in corruption, as demonstrated by ‘Qatargate’, therefore reiterates its demand for the annual report to also cover the EU institutions;
Amendment 88 #
2023/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Raises alert about the potentially corrupt and fraudulent practices carried out by the Government of Spain to obtain the necessary support to remain in power, including the future adoption of an Amnesty Law of dubious constitutionality, which would leave crimes and cases of embezzlement unpunished, against the rule of law, and even instances of terrorism and foreign interference; highlights the chain reaction of associations and organizations representing judges and prosecutors, lawyers, academics and senior civil servants against the Government of Spain to express their rejection of potentially corrupt practices that represent a de facto delegitimization of the judiciary and a violation of the principle of equality before the law;
Amendment 11 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that EU citizenship is closely linked to and dependent on the citizenship of a Member State, which is an exclusive competence of every Member State; firmly believespoints out that there can beis no other way to obtain EU citizenship than by obtaining the citizenship of a Member State, in accordance with its national requirements established in line with constitutional principles, traditions and values; recalls that national requirements to acquire to national citizenship shall be in accordance with the principles and values of the Union;
Amendment 12 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Considers that EU citizenship comprises the shared and common European democratic identity and the specific rights and freedoms attached to it, and that the exercise of those rights strengthens citizens’ link with the EU, as well as offering them additional rights and tools to develop a life anywhere in the Union;
Amendment 16 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Emphasises that EU citizens lack sufficient awareness, knowledge and understanding of the rights and freedoms deriving from their EU citizenship and that there are still substantial shortcomings in the practical application of EU citizenship, some of which are caused by the non-uniform implementation of EU legislation by the Member States;
Amendment 19 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Calls on the Commission to adopt a new communication clarifying certain key concepts contained in Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of EU citizens and their families to move and reside freely within the EU, in order to provide the Member States with up-to-date guidelines that could contribute to improving the Directive’s implementation at national level, thus benefiting EU citizens and their family members;
Amendment 20 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Calls for the EU to promote the adoption of a binding European Charter on Digital Rights, including digital citizenship rights, building on the European Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade;
Amendment 21 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1 e. Calls on the Commission to present, without further delay, a proposal to update and improve the Consular Protection Directive, including by giving EU delegations a more active role in assisting under-represented citizens;
Amendment 22 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1 f. Calls on the Member States to put an end to ‘golden visa’ programmes and investor schemes and any other similar national schemes that lead to the acquisition of their citizenship and involve the direct or indirect sale of EU citizenship, as these undermine the very concept of EU citizenship and violate of EU principles and values;
Amendment 25 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Member States to inform non-national Unionmobile EU citizens upon registration in their Member State of residence about their electoral rights and the electoral procedures regarding European and municipal elections, and to offer them the possibility to immediately register as a voter;
Amendment 39 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls to draw up an EU citizenship statute, on the basis of Article 25 TFEU, that compiles and updates existing citizenship rights and establishes new ones; recalls that both the drafting of the EU citizenship statute and the updating and creation of these new rights should be carried out within the framework of the Treaties;
Amendment 40 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls for a horizontal non- discrimination clause to be included in the EU citizenship statute as an additional safeguard of equality in the exercise of citizenship rights, with a view to ensuring non-discrimination and protecting citizens, in particular people at risk of digital exclusion, people with disabilities and members of vulnerable and marginalised groups, such as homeless people;
Amendment 43 #
2023/2085(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Calls on the Commission to take into account these proposals in the upcoming EU Citizenship Report 2023 and to take the necessary steps to implement them following the procedure under Article 25 TFEU;
Amendment 74 #
2023/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States to invest in adapting school curricula to teach the history of Europe and the European Union in order to promote active citizenship and common European values and increase awareness of the added value of being a European and an EU citizen;
Amendment 90 #
2023/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Reiterates the need to draw up an EU citizenship statute, on the basis of Article 25 TFEU, that compiles and updates existing citizenship rights and establishes new ones in order to make citizenship rights effectively enforceable and ensure citizens' equality, respond to social, economic, political and digital changes as well as codifying case law ; recalls that both the drafting of the EU citizenship statute and the updating and creation of these new rights should be carried out within the framework of the Treaties;
Amendment 93 #
2023/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Suggests the creation of new rights in the area of participation and political rights, freedom of movement and digital citizenship; suggests in particular: - Right to have a gender-balanced democratic representation on electoral lists; - Right to have permanent interactive digital platform through which citizens can channel their proposals and ideas in all EU official languages; - Right to recognition of periods of study, and not only qualifications and professional competences, as equivalent to be able to work in another Member State: - Right to universal Internet access, to ensure inclusion and equal accessibility of citizens to the digital environment; - Right to have an identity in the digital environment and to the management of one's own identity, going further than the protection that already exists in relation to personal data in the digital environment; - Right to the digital inheritance of the deceased person; - Rights concerning Artificial Intelligence systems to be safe, transparent, traceable and overseen by people;
Amendment 51 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas not all hate speech constitutes a crime but it does contribute to normalising manifestations of hatred and intolerance and whereas these must be combated by using other types of legal or social instruments where appropriate;
Amendment 61 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas political leaders have an important role and responsibility in the fight against hate speech and intolerance, they should lead by example and make responsible use of social media when articulating the public space and debate;
Amendment 69 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. Whereas hate speech in sport is in direct contradiction with the values of respect, diversity and integration that sport should represent; whereas the Union's commitments on violence in sport include the establishment of preventive measures and a context that discourages hate speech in sport;
Amendment 162 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that future EU legislation to cover hate speech and hate crimes must protect human dignity and combat hatred and intolerance irrespective of the motivation; recalls that protection must be universal, with a special focus on targeted persons, groups and communities which are particularly vulnerable; stresses that the characteristics and criteria of those vulnerable persons, groups or communities shall be clearly defined;
Amendment 168 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the criminal law applied to this type of conduct must be that which is indispensable, and must be used to the extent that it contributes to the achievement of a specific purpose; also recalls that freedom of expression should not be exploited as a shield for hate speech and hate crimes, but neither should it be unjustifiably restricted;
Amendment 187 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to actively counter hate crime and hate speech based on discrimination and exclusion that are politically or ideologically motivated;
Amendment 196 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to be particularly vigilant and to provide legislation and education that promotes diversity and equality to combat hate speech and hate crime in sport;
Amendment 205 #
2023/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish adequate data collection systems for obtaining solid and, homogenous data onand anonymous data on hate incidents, including hate crimes, in accordance with the relevant national legal frameworks and EU data protection legislation, as well as adequate monitoring mechanisms to assess the impact that policies and regulations have on the fight against hate speech and hate crimes;
Amendment 1 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights,
Amendment 99 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
Amendment 104 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Strongly condemns that in 2022 another global record for the number of imprisoned journalists was set; calls for a swift agreement on the anti-SLAPP directive, which should offer substantive and broad protection against abusive lawsuits; calls on the Member States to implement the Commission Recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings, specifically to remove prison sentences for defamation cases, decriminalize defamation and favour civil or administrative procedures instead; stresses that SLAPPs are only one method used to silence journalists and calls on the Commission to further investigate other practices and intervene;
Amendment 115 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that judicial independence and effective checks and balances, which can vary from one Member State to another, are key components of the rule of law; condemns any attempts by Member State governments to exert political influence on or control over the independent decision-making of the judiciary; recalls that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) had recently ruled against Spain, condemning its inaction in the renewal of the General Council of the Judiciary, a proof of the politicisation that exists around this question;
Amendment 138 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that in order to ensure the right to freedom of expression and information, which is foundational for any democracy, information must be universally accessible and diverse, and underscores that artistic freedom must be guaranteed; stresses the importance of media pluralism and journalistic freedom for a thriving democracy; denounces unjustified and disproportional interference into journalistic expression and editorial decision making by national regulatory authorities in some Member States; stresses that under Union law, national regulatory authorities and/or bodies must be functionally independant from their government and not seek or take any instructions from any other body;
Amendment 160 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Strongly condemns the widespread fundamental rights violations and use of disproportionate violence by national authorities at Union borders; is appalled by the use of pushbacks at land and sea borders; deplores any action that leads to leaving persons in distress at sea; is very concerned about Member States codifying the use of push-backs into their national law; stresses that under Union law pushbacks are never legal or justified; calls on the Commission to investigate and intervene in Member States where pushbacks are used;
Amendment 164 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes with concern the large population of stateless persons in the EU, especially children being born stateless; calls on the Commission to develop a comprehensive strategy and action plan to address statelessness within the EU, including accession to the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions and the introduction of an EU wide statelessness determination procedure; further calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States properly identify, recognize and protect stateless people through introducing safeguards in EU legislation addressing the specific vulnerabilities of stateless persons, such as protection from expulsion for those stateless persons that have been born in a Member State or have resided there for a durable time;
Amendment 168 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Highlights that Article 19 of the Charter provides for protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition and guarantees that every decision of expulsion is based on a specific examination and that no single measure can be taken to expel all persons having the nationality of a particular State; condemns the rejection of international protection application solely based on nationality in certain Member States;
Amendment 171 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Notes that several Member States use national security as a determinant for internal policy, such as migration; stresses that any measures taken on the basis of national security must be necessary and proportionate and not undermine the rights guaranteed by the Charter;
Amendment 196 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recalls that European legislation to cover hate speech and hate crimes shall protect human dignity and combat hatred and intolerance whatever their motivation is, so that protection must be universal, with special focus on persons, groups targeted and communities;
Amendment 200 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Deplores the tragic loss of life that takes place at Europe's sea borders, in particular in the Mediterranean Sea; recalls that Member States have the obligation under the international law of the sea to assist persons in distress; reiterates its call on Member States to fully abide by their international obligations and standards of relevant of international and Union law; calls in this respect for Member States to ensure effective search and rescue operations and quick disembarkation of persons rescued, including by maintaining nearest safe ports open to NGO vessels; further calls for the respect of right to apply to asylum of all persons rescued by an assesment of individual circumstances on a case-by-case basis; calls on Member States to ensure that asylum seekers have appropriate access to necessary services such as healthcare and education;
Amendment 216 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. It is deeply concerned by the effects of the digital divide and in particular by the violation of the fundamental rights of people whose digital skills are low or non-existent, such as elderly, people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups; recalls that technological addictions constitute a public health problem that particularly affects minors and their physical and mental integrity;
Amendment 230 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses the role of national and local administrations, the Member States’ parliaments and law enforcement authorities in promoting and protecting Charter rights; underlines the need for Member States to implement the Strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU; notes in this regard the FRA observation that Member States appear to lack a structured engagement with the implementation of the Charter Strategy, such as definitions of clear targets, milestones and timelines; calls on the Member States to fully implement the Strategy;
Amendment 232 #
2023/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Stresses that the Charter is a legally binding instrument addressed to the Member States only when they are implementing EU law; emphasizes that the limited scope of the Charter insufficiently protects fundamental rights and creates unclarity for persons whose rights have been breached; calls on the Member States to remove Article 51 from the Charter during the next Treaty revision, to ensure that fundamental rights are fully guaranteed throughout the entirety of the EU;
Amendment 23 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the conclusions of the CoFE call for more democracy and for representative democracy to be enhanced through greater citizen participation and for European Citizenship to be strengthened through the elaboration of a European Citizenship Statute establishing specific rights and freedoms;
Amendment 25 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. Whereas any measures to strengthen citizen participation and democracy must address the digital divide in the EU and the difficulties it creates for such participation to be effective;
Amendment 66 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. It recalls that European Citizenship reflects the democratic identity that connects citizens in the Union and that the Statute will serve to make the principles and values of the Union more tangible and will provide a new tool for citizens to defend it;
Amendment 92 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. It recalls that no progress on participation will be possible without addressing the problem of the digital divide and the difficulties it creates for effective participation in the Union;
Amendment 93 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. It calls for the necessary measures to be taken to avoid any kind of discrimination in access to participation infrastructures in the Union, in particular those related to the digital skills possessed by the individual;
Amendment 94 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. It proposes that applications to promote citizen participation should be simple and intuitive in order to minimise the digital divide and strengthen participation and democracy in a practical way;
Amendment 95 #
2023/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. It calls for the Digital Europe Programme (DIGITAL) and others aimed at promoting digital transformation in the EU to include simplifying access to administrations through the various services or the use of citizen participation applications among their objectives; it calls for research and investment lines aimed at facilitating such access in order to minimise the digital divide and maximise social and democratic quality;
Amendment 7 #
2023/0264(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Demands a 20 % increase in the resources devoted to Union citizenship, which have remained static despite repeated demands for policymaking and regulatory interventions, and a foreseeable need for further increases, including as a result of new Member States and treaty reforms. This is especially the case if calls for the creation of an EU citizenship statute are to be met. This initiative requires widespread public consultation and expert input ahead of the European elections. The process should be dynamic, linked to the European dimension of citizenship education and an expansion of citizenship-specific rights.
Amendment 93 #
2022/2898(RSP)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for a more systematic presentation of the contributions made by civil society, in particular those made by groups of qualitative value such as associations of judges, lawyers and prosecutors, in order to supplement the information provided by the governments of the Member States;
Amendment 109 #
2022/2898(RSP)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Welcomes the step taken by the Commission in including in its report the implementation of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decisions by Member States as an indicator of quality and respect for the rule of law; calls on the Commission to extend this analysis to the implementation of national court rulings;
Amendment 1 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
— Having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on improving the functioning of the European Union building on the potential of the Lisbon Treaty (A8-0386/2016),
Amendment 2 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Citation 8 b (new)
— Having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union (A8-0390/2016)
Amendment 3 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the unanimity requirement in the Council continues to be one of the biggest impediments in reaching rapid and effective EU decision- making processes; whereas some Member States have repeatedly used their right to veto to block or delay decisions, notably in order to raise concerns on other unrelated issuer even exert undue pressure on other unrelated issues; whereas this raises, in some cases, serious concerns related to the full respect of the principle of sincere cooperation; whereas this has affected the Union’s ability to act, notably to tackle crisis situations, and pursue its objectives in several areas;
Amendment 10 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas the allocation of Union financial resources to address the Covid- 19 and the consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine requires a mid-term review of the 2021-2027 MFF; Whereas the achievement of unanimity in Council on the mid-term review of the MFF might delay this process, to the detriment of citizens and businesses in need;
Amendment 11 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas passerelle clauses do not changecannot lead to an increase in nor to a modification of EU competences, but onlythey rather entail the streamlining of decision- making rulprocedures, allowing a move from unanimity to qualified majority voting (QMV) and/or from special legislative procedures to the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) in specific cases;
Amendment 16 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas passerelle clauses were already usedhave been used only once in 2004 to move to QMV and co-decision for specific decisions on visas, asylum, migration and free movement of persons3; whereas no passerelle clause has been activated since then entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; _________________ 3 Council decision 2004/927 providing for certain areas covered by Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be governed by the procedure laid down in Article 251 of that Treaty (OJ L 396, 31.12.2004, p. 4).
Amendment 18 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the Treaties foresee that the activation of passerelle clauses still requires unanimity in the Council or the European Council;
Amendment 20 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Union must be ableequipped with all necessary means to respond rapidly and effectively to the unprecedented challenges it is facing, instead of relying on emergency procedures requiring unanimity voting in Council with no formal involvement of Parliament in the negotiations ; regrets that, even though the Union has proven in specific cases to be able to act decisively, the unanimity voting requirement has often blocked EU action in different areas;
Amendment 25 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it urgent, therefore, to go beyond unanimity and move as soon as possible to QMV and OLP in key policy fields in order to improve the EU’s capacity to act;
Amendment 27 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomesHighlights that the use of the “untapped potential” of the Lisbon Treaty has often been instrumentalised to postpone an inclusive and constructive discussion on Treaty change, and cannot be further invoked as an alternative or a preliminary step ahead of Treaty revisions; Regrets, however, that such untapped potential has not been exploited satisfactorily; Welcomes in this respect the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe;, and reiterates its commitment to following them up effectively and its cthrough its proposall for amending the Treaties to be amended urgently55;Calls again on the Council to quickly forward this proposal to the European Council, and calls as well on the Commission to take its full responsibility on this matter pursuant to Article 48(2) TEU; _________________ 5 Resolution of 9 June 2022 on the call for a Convention for the revision of the Treaties.
Amendment 33 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that, if approvedwhile urgent, Treaty changes extending QMV to areas where unanimity is currently required would require time before coming into force;
Amendment 36 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that, under the current Treaties, passerelle clauses can be activated immediately but only following a vote by unanimity in theHighlights however that the activation of passerelle clauses requires paradoxically an unanimous vote in Council or in the European Council;
Amendment 39 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the fact that, in recent discussions in the Council, a majority of Member States have expressed their willingness to use passerelle clauses in certain fields and on a case-by-case basis; regrets that, unfortunately, no formal decision on their activation has yet been taken; Recalls that, in case of prolonged stalemate, the clause of enhanced cooperation should also be activated;
Amendment 47 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the Commission to recommend, where possible, the activation of passerelle clauses when issuing legislative proposals in policy areas where unanimity voting is required in Council, or where a special legislative procedure applies;
Amendment 48 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Notes that the activation of passerelle clauses could as well become part of yearly evaluations, whereby the Commission assesses in its work program the activation of passerelle clauses in the context of newly issued legislative proposals, or for those where a vote in Council is still pending;
Amendment 49 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Stresses that the Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) is one of the areas where a rapid capacity to act plays a decisive role for the effectiveness of decisions; Considers thus that passerelle clauses could be a useful tool to move towards QMV in specific fields of the CFSP, in particular for:
Amendment 64 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Highlights that the activation of the passerelle clauses would strengthen the Union’s strategic autonomy, and increase its credibility globally by allowing it to act on the basis of solid positions;
Amendment 70 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that moving from unanimity to QMV on certain tax matters, such as in largely integrated tax policies and the implementation of international agreements, would contribute to a more effective framework for collecting taxes and tackling tax evasion and avoidance andwhile addressing fraud concerns;, and would benefit the performance of the Union in reaching its economic, green, social and digital objectives
Amendment 74 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that moving to QMV and OLP for certain aspects of environmental and energy policies is particularly urgent, given the broader context of the environmental and climate emergency, notably the ones with fiscal nature, is particularly urgent for the implementation of the Green Deal, to facilitate the clean energy transition, and for offsetting the social and economic consequences of the ongoing energy crisis 6; _________________ 6 Resolution of 28 November 2019 on the climate and environment emergency (OJ C 232, 16.6.2021, p. 2).
Amendment 82 #
2022/2142(INI)
11. Underlines the neeat, in a context of evolving labour markets and fwor a dialogue between the Commission and Europeanking patterns impacted by the twin green and digital transition and demographic trends, it is becoming increasingly more important for the EU to deliver in terms of supporting and complementing Member States’ actions in tackling social issues; Stresses the need for a dialogue with the social partners on the possible use of passerelle clauses in the field of social policy; considers it important to evaluate the potential impact of using general passerelle clauses and the sector-specific clause provided forforeseen in Article 153(2) TFEU to strengthen the EU’s ability to implement measures to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (Article 19 TFEU) and take decisions onfor the protection of workers’ rights; .
Amendment 83 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Underlines the urgency of strengthening the EU’s ability to implement measures to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation through the activation of the passerelle clause enshrined in Article 19 TFEU;
Amendment 87 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the importance of evaluating the potential impact of moving to the OLP in areas related to the protection of fundamental rights in the Union, such as through the activation of the sector-specific passerelle clause related to family law with cross-border implications (Article 81(3)(2) TFEU);
Amendment 96 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the European Council to adopt a decision under Article 31(3) TEU establishing that restrictive measures against governments of non-EU countries, non-state entities and individuals (Article 29 TEU) are to be taken by QMV, particularly given the necessity to act rapidly in response to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine;
Amendment 101 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission, in light of the broader context of the climate and environmental emergencyobjectives set out by the European Green Deal, to present a proposal for the activation of the special passerelle clause provided for in Article 192(2)(2) to move to OLP for taxation matters with an environmental dimension;
Amendment 102 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Stresses that the treaty provisions governing the adoption and the review of the MFF Regulation entail long and cumbersome negotiations that slow down the adoption and the allocation of the Union budget; Calls on the European Council to adopt a decision in line with the sector-specific passerelle clause foreseen in Article 312(2)(2) TFEU to allow Council to adopt the Multiannual Financial Framework by QMV in view of the 2024 mid-term review;
Amendment 128 #
2022/2142(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Reiterate its call on the European Council8to adopt a decision in line withctivatethe sector-specific passerelle clause provided forforeseenin Article 312(2)(2) TFEU in order to allow theCouncil to adopt themalso for the adoption byCouncil of the nextMultiannual fFinancial fFramework through QMV instead of unanimity; _________________ 8 Resolution of 14 November 2018 on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021- 2027 — Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement (OJ C 363, 28.10.2020, p. 179).
Amendment 14 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the report by Jean-Claude Juncker of 11 April 2006 entitled 'A Shared Ambition for the European Continent',
Amendment 15 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
- having regard to the report by the Council of Europe High Level Reflection Group of October 2022,
Amendment 21 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the exclusion of Russia, a highly influential member country, means a major change for this organisation, not to say a paradigm shift for the future of the European continent;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Amendment 52 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) Supports the holding of the Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe and calls on the Secretariat to invite representatives of the European Union to attend with observer status; calls on the European Council also to consult the Council of Europe in the preparation of European Political Community summits and to invite it to attend them with observer status;
Amendment 57 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
(1) Believes that the appointment of high-level political figures to the posts of Secretary-General and Commissioner for Human Rights would not only enhance the visibility of the Council of Europe but also contribute to ensuring a balanced institutional relationship between the two organisations,
Amendment 58 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 2 – point 2 (new)
(2) Points out that institutional exchanges at all levels would be beneficial to both organisations;
Amendment 85 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. ACalls on the Commission to look into what steps are needed for the European Union to accede to the European Social Charter and to propose a time-frame for achieving that objective; advocates the EU’s broadest possible alignment with the CoE convention system through the finalisation of its accession to other CoE treaties, such as the Istanbul Convention and the Convention against Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment; calls on the Commission to look into what steps are needed for the European Union to accede to the European Social Charter and to propose a timeframe for achieving that objective;
Amendment 86 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
(1) Welcomes the fact that the overwhelming majority of conventions negotiated within the Council of Europe enable the EU to accede to them and stresses that many such conventions are negotiated by the Union itself;
Amendment 90 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the existing framework for cooperation between the EU and the CoE should be reviewed in order to take stock of the changes brought by the Lisbon Treaty and the evolving relations between the two organisations; suggests, in this regard, revisiting the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, notably by taking stock of what has worked and what has not, with a view to upgrading it into the main legal instrument coordinating EU-CoE cooperation in a comprehensive way; proposes, furthermore, complementing the Memorandum with agreements for action on specific issues;
Amendment 111 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 12 – point 1 (new)
(1) Calls for the EU's enlargement policy to afford a prominent role to the Council of Europe in assessing candidate countries' compliance with rule of law and human rights criteria;
Amendment 116 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 13 – point 1 (new)
(1) Recalls the remarkable work undertaken by the Council of Europe's institutions, which should serve as the foundations for the EU's projects;
Amendment 120 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 14 – point 1 (new)
(1) Calls for a common frame of reference for civic education to be set up, focusing on democracy, the rule of law and human rights;
Amendment 122 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Welcomes the success of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, which has become an essential tool for assessing language proficiency;
Amendment 134 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 16 – point 1 (new)
Amendment 137 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Acknowledges the grassroots work undertaken the Assembly, which deserves to be brought to the public's attention and has earned the respect of the European Union.
Amendment 139 #
2022/2137(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Concludes that, in view of the rising importance of the parliamentary democracy provided for by the Lisbon Treaty, the parliamentary cooperation between the EU and the CoE could be deepened, building ony conducting an assessment of the existing ‘Agreement for strengthened cooperation between Parliament and the PACE’ before implementing it;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Underlines the essential role played by investigative journalists in uncovering tax crimes, corruption and organised crime; highlights the vulnerability to threats and attacks of independent journalists and media workers in the absence of a strong European legislative framework to protect journalists; recalls that the number of threats and attacks against journalists has increased over the past years in the EU, with the most serious cases seeing the assassination of journalists and media workers; welcomes the Recommendation on ensuring the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists and other media professionals in the European Union; stresses nevertheless that this can only be considered a starting point and calls for urgent action on establishing binding measures ensuring the protection of journalists and media workers across the Union;
Amendment 4 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes the European Commission proposal of a Directive on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings, also known as the anti-SLAPP Directive; recalls the enormous financial and psychological burdens that strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) lay on the work of journalists and media workers, creating a chilling effect and leading to self censorship; underlines that a strong EU anti-SLAPP directive must entail clear provisions on early dismissal mechanisms and effective sanctions against SLAPP initiators, including of pecuniary nature; stresses that an effective anti-SLAPP framework cannot exist in the absence of coordinated complementary measures taken at national level; calls on national authorities to adopt anti-SLAPP legislation tackling domestic lawsuits against public participation;
Amendment 6 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Stresses that investigative journalists and media workers are often subject to intense financial pressure and encounter great difficulties in finding financial resources for projects investigating tax crime, corruption or organised crime; calls on the European Commission to explore further ways to increase funding available to the media sector, including by establishing a dedicated permanent fund for investigative journalism;
Amendment 11 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights that beneficial ownership transparency is fundamental for enhancing the fight against tax crime, stresses that the disclosure and publication of beneficial ownership information has legitimate public interest purposes; calls on Member States' authorities to ensure that investigative journalists and civil society have proper access to and are able to exercise scrutiny over this information;
Amendment 14 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls for the adoption of further initiatives that could enforce actions at EU and national level in AML/CTF, such as widening the competences of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) or the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and strengthening existing agencies such as the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol);
Amendment 15 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Stresses that the main challenge identified in respect to the application of the provisions of Directive (EU) 2015/849 is the lack of direct applicability of those rules and a fragmentation of the approach along national lines; additionally highlights the findings of the European Court of Auditors' (ECA) Special Report 13/2021, according to which “EU efforts to fight money laundering in the banking sector are fragmented and implementation is insufficient”; underlines that such fragmentation could seriously compromise the integrity of the Union’s financial system and cause serious vulnerabilities in the internal market; welcomes in this regard the European Commission proposals on a new European anti-money laundering legal framework, aiming to achieve the desired uniformity of application and to eliminate divergences and inconsistencies of implementation practices within Member States;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks the Commission to publish a list of assets frozen or confiscated following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; urges the Commission to provide precise information on Member States’ progress in repealing or withdrawing citizenship and residence permits granted on the basis of financial investment to Russian and Belarusian nationals subject to EU restrictive measures; calls for a total ban on suchall residence and citizenship by investment schemes across the EU;
Amendment 36 #
2022/2080(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls the important role of digital land registers in enhancing the fight against tax crime across the Union; calls on the European Commission to put forward an ambitious proposal requiring and assisting Member States to establish reliable digital land registers, enhancing transparency in the field of land ownership;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the proposals made by the plenary of the Conference on the Future of Europe (‘the Conference’) of 9 May 2022 in relation to the field of civil liberties, justice and home affairs1 ; reiterates its support for a proper follow-up to the Conference, with the aim of delivering on the Conference’s conclusions and on citizens’ expectations; calls upon the Union to more systematically uphold the rule of law principles and ensure fundamental rights protection, and to scrutinize respect for these values and principles, both in the accession of new members and continually across all Union policies and across the Member States; _________________ 1 In particular the following proposals: 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45.
Amendment 3 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the original idea behindconclusion of the Conference on the Future of Europe as regards citizens’ information and participation in democracy at Union level, aiming at making the Union more understandable and accessibla watershed moment for European democracy and a precedent for citizens’ participation in the Union's decision- making process for the years to come;
Amendment 4 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that citizens have identified at the Conference that the technological revolution and geopolitical upheaval pose new transnational challenges which are to be addressed; points out that for citizens to understand the added value of the Union, the European institutions need to be empowered to act more effectively;
Amendment 5 #
2022/2051(INL)
1 b. Recalls the joint commitment by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission to listen to Europeans and to follow up on the recommendations made by the Conference on the Future of Europe;
Amendment 6 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that manysome of the proposals endorsadopted by the Conference on the Future of Europe do not require Treaty change but instead call for the strengthening of existing policies and instruments; takes the view that the division of competences provided for in the Treaties, and in particular Articles 4 and 5 Tstresses that others can only be implemented through a substantial amendment of the Treaties, inter alia, concerning the simplification of the institutional architecture of the Union, more transparency and accountability in the decision-making process and a new reflection on Union competences, such as health and healthcare, defence, education, application of fundamental rights and citizenship; takes the view that these proposals together indicate a clear demand and mandate for an urgent and deep reform of the Union’s architecture and decision-making procedures; underlines that this reform necessarily includes a substantial amendment of the Treaties per Article 48 TFEU,; should remain unchangedtates that many of the petitions sent to the Parliament address situations that could be improved if those changes were made;
Amendment 13 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on the Commission to include in its set of concrete actions to deliver on the Conference proposals the consolidation of a European Citizenship Statute providing citizen-specific rights and freedoms, which would make the European values and rights more tangible for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 13 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. CPoints out that the adoption of legislative proposals in the area of freedom, security and justice has been slow or even blocked, despite the urgent need for action; calls for the abolishment of all unanimity requirements in the Treaties for adopting legislation in these area of freedom, security and justices, including for the use of passerelle clauses; calls for the Commission to prepare a report examining the cost of non-action at European level in these areas;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 21 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the right to petition is a citizen’s right which should plays a fundamental role as a direct participatory democracy tool in the Union’s decision- making; recalls that petitions can be used as means of creating opportunities for public debate and of initiating and evaluating policy and legislative changes; calls on the Member States and the Commission to do their utmost toall actors involved in the Treaty reform procedure to seize the occasion to strengthen citizens' participation in the Union's decision-making as well as the right to petition, inter alia by ensureing that petitions are given adequately followed up by the Union institutions; stresses that citizens themselves should have a substantial say in said Treaty reform procedure;
Amendment 26 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. NoteRegrets that the right to petition remains underused at Union level when compared with the situation, as underpinned by Articles 10 and 11 TEU and Articles 24 and 227 TEU, remains underused at Unational level; recalls, also, that about a quarter of the petitions submitted to the European Parliament are declared inadmissible, mainly because the matter falls outside the Union’s fields of activity, which points out the lack of understanding, among Union citizens, of the Union’s remit of competen; therefore calls to assess the division of competences set forth in the Treaties and more clearly define the Union’s remit so that the right to petition can be more effectively implemented in practice;
Amendment 28 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the Commission’s lack of initiative or effective action to address violations or non-application of Union law in the areas of freedom, security and justice, despite evidence of deteriorating situations in several Member States; notes that Parliament’s repeated calls for action have gone unanswered; therefore, considers it necessary to strengthen the Parliament’s means of scrutinising the Commission’s activities regarding the monitoring and enforcement of Union law;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes with concern the prevailing number of petitions on environmental matters reflecting citizen’s clear demands towards the Union as confirmed by the outcomes of the Conference on the Future of Europe; calls therefore for strengthening the weight of the environmental Chapter of the TFEU and for the enforcement and monitoring of the Union environmental legislation implementation taking into account citizen’s demands along with Union priorities in tackling climate and biodiversity crises, enhancing the quality, protection and restoration of the ecosystems and zero waste goals;
Amendment 37 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Treaties currently do not contain a legal basis to introduce legislation to defend the common values expressed in Article 2 TEU and that this absence has seriously limited the Union in creating suitable mechanisms to redress national threats to the common values; considers it essential for the protection of all Europeans that the Union has the ability to address effectively any democratic backsliding in the Member States; calls for the inclusion of such a provision, which would allow the Union, through the ordinary legislative procedure, to introduce new mechanisms for the structural monitoring and assessment of the developments as regards the common values in each Member State, including annual reports on the situation as regards the Article 2 TEU values in each of the Member States, and to issue country- specific recommendations and impose measures in case of lack of remedial action;
Amendment 40 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls for a European Citizenship Statute to be drawn-up, providing citizen- specific rights and freedoms, which would make the European values and rights more tangible for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 48 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Regrets that the Charter of Fundamental Rights only deploys its protection when rights are violated in application of EU law; states that this restriction leads to situations of impunity and places the most vulnerable sectors of the population, such as minors, in a situation of greater vulnerability; recalls that European citizens and the institutions have spoken out at the Conference on the Future of Europe and expressed their willingness to lift this restriction in order to make the Charter universally applicable, under certain conditions, to prevent national authorities from undermining the democratic principles and values enshrined in the Treaties
Amendment 51 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. CRecalls that the expectations of citizens go beyond the strict implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and that the objective should be to render fundamental rights as effective as possible; calls for a widening of the scope of application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in relation to the Member States; to that effect, Article 51(1) Charter could be revised so as to state that EU fundamental rights should protect Union citizens whenever Member States act within the scope of a Union competence, whether exclusive or shared, even if such a competence has not yet been exercised by the Union;5 _________________ 5 In light of AG Sharpston’s opinion of 30 September 2010 in Case C-34/09, Zambrano.
Amendment 54 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Points out that EU Citizenship is granted on the basis of nationality of a Member State, which restricts access for a considerable amount of Europeans, in particular stateless persons with EU long- term residency status; calls for a revision of Article 20(1) with a view to extending EU Citizenship rights to stateless persons with EU long-term residency status and ensuring greater equality amongst Europeans;
Amendment 56 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes that mobile Union voters do not enjoy full political rights in their host Member States, which is contrary to European democratic values; recommends extending the right of mobile Union voters to vote under the same conditions as nationals to regional elections in their host Member State; further recommends extending the right of mobile Union voters to vote to national elections in their host Member States, in particular for such voters that are deprived of their right to vote in national elections in the home Member State;
Amendment 83 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that horizontal EU legislation on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation has still not been adopted since the 2008 Commission initiative due to the absence of unanimity in Council; recommends thereforetherefore considers it necessary that EU action to combat discriminations on the basis of Article 19 TFEU be taken in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;
Amendment 45 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. urges the Commission, especially in view of the next European elections in 2024, to work with Member States in the European Cooperation Network on Elections to guarantee the democratic rights of people with disabilities, including people with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, by ensuring that voting procedures, materials and facilities are easy to access and participation in public and political life are actively promoted;
Amendment 67 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls, in this respect, that the COVID-19 crisis has fostered remote work, which could provide for wider access to employment for PwD, and urges the Member States to take serious measures to tackle unemployment and the payment gap in particular for women with disabilities11 ; _________________ 11 Petitions Nos 0608/2020, 1139/2021, 0226/21 and 0070/2022.
Amendment 82 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. calls on those Member States which still segregate students to provide sufficient financial and specialized support for inclusive education in schools, third level education and in programmes (including Erasmus+, Discover EU & European Solidarity Corps);
Amendment 95 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that PwD are exposed to discrimination most frequently, in particular those with intellectual, psychosocial and mental disabilities, and women and girls, migrants and members of the LGBTIQ community with disabilities; calls, in this respect, for anti-discrimination legislation to protect the rights of PwD and for the horizontal Anti-Discrimination Directive to be unblocked in the Council14 and ensure adequate follow-up of the European Framework for Action on Mental Health and Wellbeing and improve the EU Compass for Action on Mental wellbeing; _________________ 14 Petitions Nos 0164/2020 and 0226/2021.
Amendment 100 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses the need to harmonise the recognition of disability status among the Member States; calls on the Commission to extend the scope of the EU disability card to secure freedom of movement for people with disabilities;
Amendment 105 #
2022/2026(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the obligations under the CRPD and the recommendations of the CRPD Committee are also binding on all EU institutions, which are responsible for ensuring accessibility and non- discrimination, including for EU staff with disabilities and carers of PwD.; furthermore urges EU institutions to take the necessary measures to guarantee that people with disabilities can follow interpretation and easily access all online documents and underlines that in particular the Petitions Portal should be more accessible;
Amendment 8 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the Conference on the Future of Europe included among its proposals and measures on decision- making the guarantee of a wide right of access to documents;
Amendment 9 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Insists that the EU institutions have the obligation to implement Article 15(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in line with democratic principles, in particular those laid down in Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union; and Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; stresses that the EU institutions must work as closely as possible to citizens and that access to documents is a key tool in ensuring citizen’s trust in the Union;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that any update to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001Urges the Council to unblock the 2008 recast of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and emphasises that any update should faithfully integrate the principles established by the case law and adapt the regulation to technological developments without constituting a step back compared to, social, cultural and political developments with a view to enhancing transparency and accountability improving the current legislative framework;
Amendment 18 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Emphasises that increased transparency in the Union's decision- making is the result of democratic development and the culture of participation; recalls that a balanced framework is needed in which the interests of the Union are safeguarded and which is consistent for all institutions;
Amendment 24 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Invites the EU institutions to ensure the provision of data in an open, user- friendly machine- readable format, which is especially essential for numerical or financial data;
Amendment 26 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Invites Parliament’s own relevant bodies to ensure that documents are easily accessible to the publicimprove the accessibility of the documents to the public, irrespective of their medium;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for all EU institutions to fully comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case T- 540/152 on access to trilogue documents; remains ready to engage with the Council and the Commission to jointly define the legislative milestones for which access to documents must be ensured; _________________ 2 Judgment of 22 March 2018, Emilio De Capitani v European Parliament, T-540/15, EU:T:2018:167.
Amendment 32 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets the fact that the Council systematically refuses to grant access to its internal documents under the pretence of protecting its decision-making process; stresses that the lack of transparency affects both public scrutiny and the cooperation with the other institutions, notably the European Parliament;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists that the Council should improve its rules and procedures on legislative transparency, including the accessibility and classification of legislative documents with the aim of working as openly as possible;
Amendment 38 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recalls that a corruption scandal such as the one affecting the EU institutions may increase the interest of citizens and organisations in access to documents; calls on the institutions to prioritise transparency and avoid opaque practices;
Amendment 42 #
2022/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that the European Ombudsman plays an important role in facilitating citizens’ access to documents and has developed an important informal procedure with the institutions for submitt, notably when the access has been partially or completely refused by an EU institution or body, and welcomes the Fast-Track procedure for ‘access to documents’ complaints that can result ing a recommendation to the institution concerned about the full or partial disclosure of the requested document(s).
Amendment 22 #
2022/0903(NLE)
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Ombudsman 8.1. In accordance with the Ombudsman's duties as defined in Article 1(3) and in Article 3(3) of the Statute, the Ombudsman shall conduct own-initiative inquiries for which the Ombudsman finds grounds.
Amendment 23 #
2022/0903(NLE)
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Amendment 370 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) However, the finding of such a significant risk should in itself be insufficient to justify the issuance of a detection order, given that in such a case the order might lead to disproportionate negative consequences for the rights and legitimate interests of other affected parties, in particular for the exercise of users’ fundamental rights. Therefore, it should be ensured that detection orders can be issued only after the Coordinating Authorities and the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority having objectively and diligently assessed, identified and weighted, on a case-by-case basis, not only the likelihood and seriousness of the potential consequences of the service being misused for the type of online child sexual abuse at issue, but also the likelihood and seriousness of any potential negative consequences for other parties affected. With a view to avoiding the imposition of excessive burdens, the assessment should also take account of the financial and technological capabilities and size of the provider concerned.
Amendment 417 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) To ensure that online child sexual abuse material is removed as swiftly as possible after its detection, Coordinating Authorities of establishment should have the power to request competent judicial authorities or independent administrative authorities to issue a removal order addressed to providers of hosting services. As removal or disabling of access may affect the right of users who have provided the material concerned, providers should inform such users of the reasons for the removal, to enable them to exercise their right of redress, subject to exceptions needed to avoid interfering with activities for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of child sexual abuse offences.
Amendment 487 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74 a (new)
Recital 74 a (new)
(74a) The Technology Committee could therefore establish a certification for technologies which could be used by online service providers to detect child sexual abuse material on their request.
Amendment 515 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) obligations on providers of online search engines and any other artificial intelligence systems to delist or disable specific items of child sexual abuse, or both;
Amendment 555 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) “online search engine” means an intermediary service as defined in Article 3, point (j), of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;
Amendment 556 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) ‘intermediary service’ means a service as defined in Article 3, point (g), of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;
Amendment 557 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
(ec) ‘artificial intelligence system’ (AI system) means software as defined in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) .../... on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act);
Amendment 569 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv a (new)
(iva) an online search engine;
Amendment 570 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv b (new)
(ivb) an artificial intelligence system.
Amendment 581 #
2022/0155(COD)
(j) ‘child user’ means a natural person who uses a relevant information society service and who is a natural person below the age of 178 years;
Amendment 613 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services shall identify, analyse and assess, for each such service that they offer, the risk of use of the service for the purpose of online child sexual abuse., which requires a targeted and tailor-made response;
Amendment 628 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the existence and implementation by the provider of a policy and the availability of functionalities to prevent and address the risk referred to in paragraph 1, including through the following:
Amendment 634 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2 a (new)
Amendment 650 #
2022/0155(COD)
- – Functionalities enabling detection for known child sexual abuse material on upload; – Functionalities preventing uploads from the dark web;
Amendment 688 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 3 a (new)
- – Enabling users to create usernames that contain a representation about, or imply, the user’s age; – Enabling child users to create usernames that contain location information on child users; – Enabling users to know or infer the location of child users.
Amendment 693 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communication services put forward age assurance or age verification systems as mitigating measures, they shall meet the following criteria: (a) Protect the privacy of users and do not disclose data gathered for the purposes of age assurance for any other purpose; (b) Do not collect data that is not necessary for the purposes of age assurance; (c) Be proportionate to the risks associated to the product or service that presents a risk of misuse for child sexual abuse; (d) Provide appropriate remedies and redress mechanisms for users whose age is wrongly identified.
Amendment 734 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services shall take reasonable mitigation measures, tailored to their specific service and the risk identified pursuant to Article 3, to minimise that risk. Such measures shall include some or all of the following:
Amendment 741 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) Designing educational and awareness-raising campaigns aimed at informing and alerting users about the risks of online child sexual abuse, including child-appropriate information;
Amendment 775 #
2022/0155(COD)
1a. Providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services shall continue the voluntary use of specific technologies, as mitigation measures, for the processing of personal and other data to the extent strictly necessary to detect, report and remove online child sexual abuse on their services and to mitigate the risk of misuse of their services for the purpose of online child sexual abuse, including for the purpose of the solicitation of children, pursuant to the risk assessment conducted or updated in accordance with Article 3 and prior authorization from the Coordinating Authority;
Amendment 804 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of interpersonal communications services that have identified, pursuant to the risk assessment conducted or updated in accordance with Article 3, a risk of use of their services for the purpose of the solicitation of children, shall take the necessary and proportionate age verification and age assessment measures to reliably identify childdifferentiate between child users and adult users on their services, enabling them to take the mitigation measures and protect child users. Age assurance or age verification systems as mitigation measure shall be implemented only if they meet the criteria set in Article 3, paragraph 2a of this Regulation.
Amendment 838 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any mitigation measures taken and those that require prior authorization pursuant to Article 4.
Amendment 892 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall have the power to request the competent judicial authority of the Member State that designated it or another independent administrative authority of that Member State to issue a detection order requiring a provider of hosting services or a provider of interpersonal communications services under the jurisdiction of that Member State to take the measures specified in Article 10 to detect online child sexual abuse on a specific service.
Amendment 951 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall request the issuance of the detection order, and the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority shall issue the detection order where it considers that the following conditions are met:
Amendment 1162 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(da) not able to prohibit or make end- to-end encryption impossible.
Amendment 1171 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) take all the necessary measures to ensure that the technologies and indicators, as well as the processing of personal data and other data in connection thereto, are used for the sole purpose of detecting the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable, insofar as strictly necessary to use voluntary measures, when authorised, or execute the detection orders addressed to them;
Amendment 1269 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall have the power to request the competent judicial authority of the Member State that designated it or another independent administrative authority of that Member State to issue a removal order requiring a provider of hosting services under the jurisdiction of the Member State that designated that Coordinating Authority to remove or disable access in all Member States of one or more specific items of material that, after a diligent assessment, the Coordinating Authority or the courts or other independent administrative authorities referred to in Article 36(1) identified as constituting child sexual abuse material.
Amendment 1340 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1363 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1391 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. PAs referred to in Article 12 of the Digital Service Act Regulation, providers of relevant information society services shall establish a single point of contact allowing for direct communication, by electronic means, with the Coordinating Authorities, other competent authorities of the Member States, the Commission and the EU Centre, for the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 1541 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1
The choice of the location of the seat of the EU Centre shall be The Hague, The Netherlandmade in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, based on the following criteria: (a) it shall not affect the EU Centre’s execution of its tasks or the organisation of its governance structure; (b) it shall ensure that the EU Centre is able to recruit the high-qualified and specialised staff it requires to perform the tasks provided by this Regulation; (c) it shall ensure that it can be set up on site upon the entry into force of this Regulation; (d) it shall ensure appropriate accessibility of the location, the existence of adequate education facilities for the children of staff members, appropriate access to the labour market, social security and medical care for both children and spouses; (e) it shall enable close cooperation with EU institutions, bodies and agencies; (f) it shall ensure sustainability and digital security and connectivity with regards to physical and IT infrastructure and working conditions.
Amendment 1580 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b a (new)
(ba) Referring victims to the appropriate national child protection services;
Amendment 1593 #
2022/0155(COD)
(6a) support Member States in designing preventive measures, such as awareness-raising campaigns to combat child sexual abuse, with a specific focus on girls and other prevalent demographics, including by: (a) Acting on behalf of victims in liaising with other relevant authorities of the Member States for reparations and all other victim support programmes; (b) Referring victims to the appropriate child protection services, and to pro bono legal support services; (c) Facilitating access to care qualified health support services, including mental health and psychological support;
Amendment 1634 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. The EU Centre shall give providers of hosting services, providers of interpersonal communications services and providers of internet access services access to the databases of indicators referred to in Article 44, where and to the extent necessary for them to put in place voluntary measures, when authorised, and execute the detection or blocking orders that they received in accordance with Articles 7 or 16. It shall take measures to ensure that such access remains limited to what is strictly necessary for the period of application of the detection or blocking orders concerned as well as for the execution of the voluntary measures, when authorised, and that such access does not in any way endanger the proper operation of those databases and the accuracy and security of the data contained therein.
Amendment 1711 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 50 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) information resulting from research or other activities conducted by Member States’ authorities, other Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, the competent authorities of third countries, international organisations, research centres, hotlines and civil society organisations.
Amendment 1755 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1
Article 54 – paragraph 1
1. Where necessary for the performance of its tasks under this Regulation, the EU Centre may cooperate with organisations and networks with information and expertise on matters related to the prevention and combating of online child sexual abuse, including civil society organisations acting in the public interest, hotlines and semi-public organisations.
Amendment 1761 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The EU Centre shall cooperate with other organisations and bodies carrying out similar functions in other jurisdictions, such as the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (‘NCMEC’) and the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, among others, which serve the same purpose of this Regulation, as well as in order to avoid potential duplication of reporting obligations for providers.
Amendment 1778 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) appoint the members of the Technology Committee, of the Children's Rights and Survivors Advisory Board and of any other advisory group it may establish;
Amendment 1448 #
2022/0140(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. In the performance of their tasks, health data access bodies shall actively cooperate with stakeholders’ representatives, especially with representatives of patients, data holders and data users. Staff of health data access bodies shall avoid any conflicts of interest. To this end, it shall establish strict rules of incompatibility for its personnel and cooling-off periods for those who wish to access the bodies, as well as for those who are no longer in office. Health data access bodies shall not be bound by any instructions, when making their decisions.
Amendment 42 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The differences between Union institutions, bodies and agencies require flexibility in the implementation since one size will not fit all. The measures for a high common level of cybersecurity should not include any obligations directly interfering withsupport the exercise of the missions of Union institutions, bodies and agencies or encroaching onand take into account their institutional autonomy. Thus, those institutions, bodies and agencies should establish their own frameworks for cybersecurity risk management, governance and control, and adopt their own baselines and cybersecurity plans, while safeguarding the coherence and interoperability of their respective frameworks.
Amendment 43 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to avoid imposing a disproportionate financial and administrative burden on Union institutions, bodies and agencies, the cCybersecurity risk management requirements should be proportionatecorrespond to the risk presented by the network and information system concerned, taking into account the state of the art of such measures. Each Union institution, body and agency should aim to allocate an adequate percentage of its IT budget to improve its level of cybersecurity; in the longermedium term a target in the order of 10% should be pursued.
Amendment 45 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Union institutions, bodies and agencies should assess risks related to relationships with suppliers and service providers, including providers of data storage and processing services or managed security services, and take appropriate measures to address them. These suppliers and service providers should be vetted thoroughly, taking into account the full range of the supply chain and economic and political environment in which they operate. Where these relationships pose a risk to the integrity of democratic processes in the EU, these should be terminated without undue delay. These measures should form part of the cybersecurity baseline and be further specified in guidance documents or recommendations issued by CERT-EU. When defining measures and guidelines, due account should be taken of relevant EU legislation and policies, including risk assessments and recommendations issued by the NIS Cooperation Group, such as the EU Coordinated risk assessment and EU Toolbox on 5G cybersecurity. In addition, certification of relevant ICT products, services and processes could be required, under specific EU cybersecurity certification schemes adopted pursuant to Article 49 of Regulation EU 2019/881.
Amendment 46 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Many cyberattacks are part of wider campaigns that target groups of Union institutions, bodies and agencies or communities of interest that include Union institutions, bodies and agencies. To enable proactive detection, incident response or mitigating measures, Union institutions, bodies and agencies should notify CERT- EU of significant cyber threats, significant vulnerabilities and significant incidents and share appropriate technical details that enable detection or mitigation of, as well as response to, similar cyber threats, vulnerabilities and incidents in other Union institutions, bodies and agencies. Following the same approach as the one envisaged in Directive [proposal NIS 2], where entities become aware of a significant incident they should be required to submit an initial notification to CERT- EU within 24 hoursearly warning to CERT-EU without undue delay and in any event no later than within 24 hours. The Union institutions, bodies and agencies should be allocated sufficient resources to fulfil their reporting obligations quickly and efficiently to ensure that the system designed works correctly. Such information exchange should enable CERT-EU to disseminate the information to other Union institutions, bodies and agencies, as well as to appropriate counterparts, to help protect the Union IT environments and the Union’s counterparts’ IT environments against similar incidents, threats and vulnerabilities.
Amendment 51 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) As the services and tasks of CERT- EU are in the interest of all Union institutions, bodies and agencies, each Union institution, body and agency with IT expenditure should contribute a fair share to those services and tasks. Those contributions are without prejudicshould be proportionate to the budgetary autonomcapacity of the Union institutions, bodies and agencies.
Amendment 54 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The IICB, with the assistance of CERT-EU, should review and evaluate the implementation of this Regulation and should report its findings to the Commission. Building on this input, the Commission should report to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions at least every three years.
Amendment 65 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Each Union institution, body and agency shall establish its own internal cybersecurity risk management, governance and control framework (‘the framework’) in support of the entity’s mission and exercising its institutional autonomytaking into account the coherence and interoperability of their framework with those of other relevant institutions, bodies and agencies. This work shall be overseen by the entity’s highest level of management to ensure an effective and prudent management of all cybersecurity risks. The framework shall be in place by …. at the latest [15 months after the entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 68 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Each Union institution, body and agency shall have effective mechanisms in place to ensure that an adequate percentage of the IT budget is spent on cybersecurity. By ... [3 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], each Union institution, body and agency should ensure that at least 10 % of that budget is dedicated to cybersecurity
Amendment 71 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. The highest level of management of each Union institution, body and agency shall approve the entity’s own cybersecurity baseline to address the risks identified under the framework referred to in Article 4(1). It shall do so in support of its mission and exercising its institutional autonomytake into account the coherence and interoperability of their baseline, with those of other relevant institutions, bodies and agencies. The cybersecurity baseline shall be in place by …. at the latest [18 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] and shall address the domains listed in Annex I and the measures listed in Annex II.
Amendment 76 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Each Union institution, body and agency shall carry out a cybersecurity maturity assessment by ... [6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation], and at least every threewo years thereafter, incorporating all the elements of their IT environment as described in Article 4, taking account of the relevant guidance documents and recommendations adopted in accordance with Article 13.
Amendment 79 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Following the conclusions derived from the maturity assessment and considering the assets and risks identified pursuant to Article 4, the highest level of management of each Union institution, body and agency shall approve a cybersecurity plan without undue delay after the establishment of the risk management, governance and control framework and the cybersecurity baseline. The plan shall aim at increasing the overall cybersecurity of the concerned entity and shall thereby contribute to the achievement or enhancement of a high common level of cybersecurity among all Union institutions, bodies and agencies. To support the entity’s mission on the basis of its institutional autonomy, the plan shall at least include the domains listed in Annex I, the measures listed in Annex II, as well as measures related to incident preparedness, response and recovery, such as security monitoring and logging. The plan shall be revised at least every threewo years, following the maturity assessments carried out pursuant to Article 6.
Amendment 81 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The cybersecurity plan shall considermply with any applicable guidance documents and recommendations issued by CERT-EU.
Amendment 86 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) recommendinstruct a relevant audit service to carry out an audit.
Amendment 89 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. CERT-EU shall engage in structured cooperation with the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity on capacity building, operational cooperation and long-term strategic analyses of cyber threats in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Furthermore, CERT-EU may cooperate and exchange information with Europol’s Cybercrime Centre.
Amendment 95 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
The Head of CERT-EU shall regularly, at least once a year, submit reports to the IICB and the IICB Chair on the performance of CERT- EU, financial planning, revenue, implementation of the budget, service level agreements and written agreements entered into, cooperation with counterparts and partners, and missions undertaken by staff, including the reports referred to in Article 10(1).
Amendment 97 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. CERT-EU may cooperate with non- Member State counterparts including industry sector-specific counterparts, on tools and methods, such as techniques, tactics, procedures and best practices, and on cyber threats and vulnerabilities. For all cooperation with such counterparts, including in frameworks where non-EU counterparts cooperate with national counterparts of Member States, CERT-EU shall seek prior approval from the IICB. Any such cooperation shall respect the democratic integrity of the EU.
Amendment 98 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. CERT-EU may cooperate with other partners, such as commercial entities, international organisations, non-European Union national entities or individual experts, to gather information on general and specific cyber threats, vulnerabilities and possible countermeasures. For wider cooperation with such partners, CERT-EU shall seek prior approval from the IICB. Any such cooperation shall respect the democratic integrity of the EU.
Amendment 108 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
All Union institutions, bodies and agencies shall make an initial notificationprovide an early warning to CERT- EU of significant cyber threats, significant vulnerabilities and significant incidents without undue delay and in any event no later than 24 hours after becoming aware of them.
Amendment 114 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 116 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Union institutions, bodies and agencies shall further notifysend a notification to CERT-EU without undue delay, and in any event within 72 hours after having become aware of the incident, update the early warning and provide an initial assessment with the appropriate technical details of cyber threats, vulnerabilities and incidents that enable detection, incident response or mitigating measures. The notification shall include if available:
Amendment 117 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. No later than one month after submitting the incident notification, the Union institutions, bodies and agencies shall submit a final report to CERT-EU, including at least the following: (a) a detailed description of the incident, its severity and impact; (b) the type of threat or root cause that likely triggered the incident; (c) applied and ongoing mitigation measures; (d) where applicable, the cross-border impact of the incident;
Amendment 119 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. In duly justified cases, and in agreement with CERT-EU, the Union institution, body or agency concerned can deviate from the deadline laid down in paragraph 2a.
Amendment 122 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Amendment 124 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. The IICB, with the assistance of CERT-EU, shall periodicallyat least once a year report to the Commission on the implementation of this Regulation. The IICB may also make recommendations to the Commission to propose amendments to this Regulation.
Amendment 125 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall report on the implementation of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at the latest 4836 months after the entry into force of this Regulation and every threewo years thereafter.
Amendment 127 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex I – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 128 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) cybersecurity training of staff members;
Amendment 129 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) asset acquisition and management, including IT asset inventory and IT network cartography;
Amendment 131 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 9
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) incident management, including approaches to improve the preparedness, response to, compliance with and shortening timescales for reporting obligations and recovery from incidents and cooperation with CERT-EU, such as the maintenance of security monitoring and logging;
Amendment 132 #
2022/0085(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) The set up of a regular cybersecurity training of staff members
Amendment 40 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) While progress has been made towards more consistent rules for the protection of European Union classified information (‘EUCI’) and non-classified information, the interoperability of the relevant systems remains limited, preventing a seamless transfer of information between the different Union institutions and bodies. Further efforts should therefore be made to enable aAn interinstitutional approach to the sharing of EUCI and sensitive non-classified information should be set up, with common categories of information and common key handling principles. A baseline should also be envisaged to simplify pProcedures for sharing EUCI and sensitive non-classified information between Union institutions and bodies and with Member States should be simplified.
Amendment 42 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Therefore, relevant rules ensuring a common level of information security in all Union institutions and bodies should be laid down. They should constitute a comprehensive and coherent general framework for protecting EUCI and non- classified information, and should ensure equivalence of basic principles and common minimum standards.
Amendment 43 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) This Regulation lays down rules applicable to the administration of the all Union institutions and bodies, but it does not include the Commissioners, the Representatives of Member States acting within the Council, the Members of the European Parliament, the Judges of the Union Courts or the Members of the European Court of Auditors who are subject to their internal rules.
Amendment 48 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) In order to ensure the effectiveness of this Regulation it would be appropriate to assess whether the internal rules applicable to Commissioners, the Representatives of Member States acting within the Council, the Members of the European Parliament, the Judges of the Union Courts or the Members of the European Court of Auditors are in line with the common minimum level of protection established by this Regulation and make the modifications needed, if this is not the case.
Amendment 50 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 c (new)
Recital 3 c (new)
(3c) Access to information in a secure manner and in a context of mutual trust is essential for the European co-legislators to exercise their functions and not to be restricted in the exercise of their democratic functions; Members of the European Parliament exercise this legislative function and their access to information should therefore be governed by rules comparable in requirements to the common minimum standards established by this Regulation.
Amendment 63 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The principle of information security risk management should be at the core of the policy to be developed in the field by each Union institution and body. While the common minimum requirements laid down in this Regulation must be met, each Union institution and body should adopt specific security measures for protecting information in accordance with the results of an internal risk assessment. In the same way, the technical means to protect the information should be adapted to the specific situationneeds and specificities of each institution and body.
Amendment 67 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Since Union institutions and bodies frequently make use of contractors and outsourcing, it is important to establish common provisions relating to contractors’ personnel carrying out tasks related to information security. Such provisions should include, inter alia, a requirement in the tender procedures to undergo thorough vetting, taking into account the full range of the supply chain and economic and political environment in which the third parties operate. Where the relationships with third parties pose a risk to the integrity of democratic processes in the EU, they should be terminated without undue delay.
Amendment 75 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down common minimum information security rules for all Union institutions and bodies.
Amendment 79 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Regulation does not apply to the Commissioners, the Representatives of Member States acting within the Council, the Members of the European Parliament, the Judges of the Union Courts or the Members of the European Court of Auditors. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the Regulation and not to create any gap within the information security system or any discrepancies among people within the same institution, this institutions and bodies shall adopt internal rules aligned with this Regulation.
Amendment 86 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) integrity: the fact that the information is complete and completeness of information is unaltered and the fact that the technical infrastructure used to share information is protected from any foreign interference;
Amendment 90 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 92 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) monitor compliance by Union institutions and bodies with this Regulation as well as with the guidance documents established pursuant to point (c) through the adoption of a yearly evaluation report, which shall compile input from the relevant sub-groups.
Amendment 95 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7
Article 6 – paragraph 7
7. Union institutions and bodies shall bring to the attention of the Coordination Group any significant information security policy development within their organisation without undue delay.
Amendment 98 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Each Union institution and body shall designate a Security Authority to assume the responsibilities assigned by this Regulation and, where applicable, by its internal security rules monitor and ensure compliance by each Union institution or body concerned with the guidance documents adopted by the Coordination Group. In performing its tasks, each Security Authority shall have the support of the department or officer entrusted with Information Security tasks.
Amendment 101 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Union institutions and bodies mayshall mark with ‘PUBLIC USE’ the information referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 110 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) monitoring compliance by Union institutions and bodies with the relevant provisions of this Regulation as well as with the guidance documents adopted by the Coordination Group.
Amendment 113 #
2022/0084(COD)
2a. In the event of any doubt as to the confidential nature of an item of information or its level of classification or in the event of a disagreement in between the European institutions, they shall consult each other without any delay and before transmission of this item of information. In these consultations, institutions shall be represented by the chair of the body concerned or the responsible for security matters. In the event of a disagreement, the matter shall be referred to the Presidents of the institutions so that they may resolve the dispute.
Amendment 126 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) monitoring compliance by Union institutions and bodies with the relevant provisions of this Regulation as well as with the guidance documents adopted by the Coordination Group.
Amendment 142 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) monitoring compliance by Union institutions and bodies with the relevant provisions of this Regulation as well as with the guidance documents adopted by the Coordination Group.
Amendment 150 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 2
2. The sub-group on EUCI sharing and exchange of classified information shall be composed of representatives from the European Parliament, the Commission, the Council and the European External Action Service and shall work by consensus.
Amendment 156 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2
Article 60 – paragraph 2
2. All Union institutions and bodies that have been assessed either by Commission or, European Parliament, Council or EEAS before the [dd/mm/yyyy date of applicability], as suitable to handle and store EUCI, shall be considered as meeting the conditions referred to in Article 19(1).
Amendment 158 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1
Article 61 – paragraph 1
1. By [dd/mm/yyyy 32 years after the date of application] at the latest, the Commission shall present a report on the implementation of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 159 #
2022/0084(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2
Article 61 – paragraph 2
2. No sooner than [53 years after the date of application] and every 5 years thereafter, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and present a report on the main findings to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 108 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In pursuing its activities, the Agency should cooperate with other Union agencies and bodies, in particular the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA), and should take account of their activities in order to avoid duplication. Cooperation should also take place on an international level with relevant authorities and bodies in third countries, in particular candidate and potential candidate countries, as well as the countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy, and on the United Nations level.
Amendment 139 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) The national focal points should be one of the main data providers to the Agency. It is necessary to set minimum requirements for their creation by Member States and their certification by the Agency. In order to guarantee the adequate functioning of the national focal points, they should be set up on a permanent basis, with a dedicated budget, appropriate human resources and a certain degree of independence in carrying out their function.
Amendment 141 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) The Agency should be properlyIt is necessary to provide the Agency with the requisite human and financial resourceds to carry outfulfill its tasks and granted, objectives and responsibilities and to grant it an autonomous budget. It should be mainly financed by a contribution from the general budget of the Union. The Union budgetary procedure should be applicable as far as the Union contribution and any other subsidies chargeable to the general budget of the Union are concerned. The auditing of accounts should be undertaken by the Court of Auditors of the European Union.
Amendment 144 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Fees improve the funding of an agency and may be considered for specific issues that can be clearly separated from the core tasks of the agency. AnyThe fees levied by the Agency shall be established through a transparent methodology in order to ensure a predictable budget and should cover its costs for providing the respective services.
Amendment 149 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35 a) The Agency should establish close cooperation with experts on the ground and with relevant non-governmental and civil society organisations, recognising their important role in this field.
Amendment 168 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. The Agency shall develop a communication strategy and promote dialogue with non-governmental and civil society organisations in order to raise public awareness and actively disseminate information about its work.
Amendment 199 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) emerging trends in the drugs phenomenon in the Union and internationally as far as these impact on the Union; this shall include the monitoring of the use of new technologies for drug services or drug trafficking, and links to other crime areas, as relevantmoney laundering and any other relevant crime areas;
Amendment 277 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) cooperate actively with the organisations and bodies referred to in Article 53 and 55;
Amendment 280 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) support third countries, especially candidate countries, in developing their drug policies in accordance with the principles of the Union drug strategies, including through providing support to the independent evaluation of their policies.
Amendment 284 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. The international cooperation framework referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), shall take into account the relevant policy documents of the Union and consider the developments of the drug phenomenon, in particular trafficking routes and drug production areas. It shall set out the priority countries or regions for cooperation and the key outcomes of the cooperation. The Agency shall evaluate and review accordingly the international cooperation framework regularly.
Amendment 285 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The Agency shall transfer, at the request of the Commission and with the approval of the Management Board, its know-how and provide technical assistance to third countries, in particular candidate and potential candidate countries, as well as the countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy.
Amendment 288 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Cooperation with third countries and with international organisations shall be carried out in accordance with Articles 53, 54 and 545.
Amendment 295 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) onetwo independent experts particularly knowledgeable in the field of drugs designated by the European Parliament, with the right to vote;
Amendment 299 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. Members of the Management Board and their alternates shall be appointed in light of their knowledge in the field of drugs and drug addiction, taking into account relevant managerial, administrative and budgetary skills, as well as respecting the gender balance principle. All parties represented in the Management Board shall make efforts to limit turnover of their representatives, in order to ensure continuity of the Management Board's work. All parties shall aim to achieve a balanced representation between women and men on the Management Board.
Amendment 326 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency's budget shall be balanced in terms of revenue and of expenditure. The Agency's budget shall be adequate to ensure sufficient staff and equipment in order to allow it to achieve its objectives and tasks as set by this Regulation.
Amendment 337 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) certification of national bodies set up in third countries, in particular candidate countries, pursuant to Article 20(3);
Amendment 338 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) other customised services falling within its mandate and rendered at the request of a participating country which require the investment of additional resources in the support of national activities.
Amendment 340 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. At the proposal of the Executive Director, the Management Board of the Agency shall, using a transparent methodology, set the amount of the fees and the way in which they are paid.
Amendment 349 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Management Boardselected on the grounds of merit and documented high-level administrative, budgetary and management skills and shall be appointed by the Management Board, with the prior approval by the European Parliament, from a list of candidates proposed by the Commission, following an open and transparent selection procedure, which shall respect the principle of gender balance.
Amendment 360 #
2022/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1
The Agency shall maintain a close dialogue with relevantclosely cooperate with experts on the ground and with relevant non-governmental and civil society organisations active in the fields covered by this Regulation at national, Union or international level.
Amendment 17 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Regrets that the fundamental rights of women are still lagging in Europe; is deeply concerned with the increase in reactionary trends targeting women; reiterates its strong position on ensuring gender equality and protecting women’s rights, including sexual and reproductive health rights;
Amendment 21 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that LGBTIQ people face some of the biggest challenges as far as fundamental rights are concerned, and, in particular, the right to non- discrimination; is deeply concerned with the results of FRA survey on how LGBTIQ people experience human and fundamental rights1a, which show ‘little, if any, progress’ in past years and regrets the significant differences between Member States; stresses that the right of a person to self- determination of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity is inviolable; highlights that in spite of the progress made in recent years with regard to LGBTIQ social acceptance, which has increased in most Member States, the situation of LGBTIQ people in the EU remains critical, as they continue to be the targets of discrimination; _________________ 1a https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra _uploads/fra-2020-lgbti-equality-1_en.pdf
Amendment 30 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 33 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Stresses that the uses of the Charter in courtrooms can contribute to making the Charter relevant to people’s lives; regrets that knowledge of the Charter amongst national justice practitioners remains low3a and this can contribute to improper application of fundamental rights; calls on the Commission and Member states to increase training on the Charter for legal professionals; _________________ 3a European Commission Communication on Strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU - COM(2020) 711 final
Amendment 35 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the importance of the child’s best interests in cross-border family litigation; emphasises the importance of close cooperation and efficient communication between the different national and local authorities involved in child custody proceedings; calls on the Member States to introduce non- discriminatory monitoring and evaluation systems for child-related cases, which ensure full respect for the fundamental rights of the child, particularly the principle of the best interests of the child; calls on the Member States to respect the right of children to see their parents in spite of the restrictive measures linked totaken by Member States in case of exceptional circumstances, such as the pandemic, as long as this does not endanger the children’s safety and health;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Notes that restrictions imposed to tackle the pandemic have also hindered the work of civil society; stresses that civil society organisations play an important role in helping victims of fundamental right breaches, as well as in awareness- raising and prevention; calls on the Commission and Member States to provide support to civil society and to adopt measures that facilitates their work;
Amendment 67 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Expresses its concern about several exceptional actions taken by the Member States to combat the impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic; stresses that the urgency of the emergency situation shall not provide an excuse to bypass the democratic principles of the legislative process; calls on the Member States to ensure that all exceptional actions taken under the emergency situations are transparent and involve those concerned and to ensure that all emergency measures are necessary, strictly proportionate and in place only for necessary time; calls on the Commission to monitor the emergency measures put in place to deal with the pandemic in the light of the EU’s founding values as laid down in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, including fundamental rights, the rule of law and democracy;
Amendment 73 #
2021/2186(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Reiterates that everyone has the right to education as enshrined in the Article 14 of the Charter and stresses that this right must be guaranteed under all circumstances and for every child, including those from vulnerable and disadvantaged groups; is concerned about the impact that schools closures during the Covid-19 pandemic might have on mental health and future of children; calls on the Member States to ensure equal and quality education for all children even in times of crisis such as the pandemic; encourages Member States to exchange best practises in this regard;
Amendment 3 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
— having regard especially to the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Cases C-156/21 Hungary v Parliament and Council Press and Information and C-157/21 Poland v Parliament and Council;
Amendment 5 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the important role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying and flagging possible breaches of the rule of law, taking into account the numerous petitions received from citizens concerned about breaches of the rule of law in several Member States; strongly believes that full protection of all EU citizens can only be ensured throughout the Union if all Member States comply with all principles of the rule of law; stresses that the Rule of Law Report must be objective and assess all Member States according to the same criteria;
Amendment 9 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the rule of law includes principles such as legality, legal certainty, the separation of powers, the prohibition of the arbitrary exercise of executive power, effective judicial protection by independent and impartial courts in full respect of fundamental rights, the fight against impunity, the enforcement of judgments including the permanent subjection of all public authorities to established laws and procedures, and equality before the law;
Amendment 18 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that judicial accountability and, prosecutorial and judicial independence and the enforcement of judgments are crucial components of the rule of law; calls on the Commission to enforce these core EU values when they are infringed by Member States in order to increase citizens’ trust in the judiciaryor when Member States fail to act on violations carried out by sub-state entities, in order to increase citizens’ trust in the judiciary, and by using all means at their disposal, especially the rule of law conditionality mechanism, where applicable;
Amendment 19 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to develop proposals to further strengthening of the Rule of Law toolbox if, despite the current instruments and efforts, significant violations of the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU persist; proposes to expand the scope of the non- discrimination clause in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to render it universal, to enable the enforcement of the Rule of Law in Member States and the Union consistent with article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights; calls, in the meantime, on all EU institutions to give the non-discrimination clause the broadest possible legal interpretation;
Amendment 29 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that emergency regimes and decree-laws were urgently instated by governments in several Member States because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that this has affected the functioning of the national justice systems and the activity of the courts; draws attention toregrets the lack of participation and the non-involvement of national parliaments in the decision- making and the closure of parliaments in numerous Member States during the pandemic, which has increased the power of governments and has led to a lack of accountability and transparency;
Amendment 44 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is deeply concerned about the status of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, the close connection between prosecutors and the government (in particular the Public Prosecutor General/Minister of Justice) and the complete disregard for not only EU law requirements, but also European Convention on Human Rights and Polish Constitutional requirements2 ; is further concerned about the impartiality of the judiciary in Hungary3 and the iandependence of the judiciary in signs of weakening of the rule of law in Slovakia, Malta, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Spain4 ; _________________ 2 Petitions No 0559/2020, 1154/2020, 1246/2020, 1360/2020 and 0869/2021. 3 Petition No 1512/2020. 4 Petitions No 1180/2020, 1182/2020, 1326/2020, 1367/2020, 1561/2020 and 0353/2021.
Amendment 47 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities (Article 2 TEU values) and in the Copenhagen Criteria – values that are common to the EU Member States and to which candidate countries must adhere in order to join the Union and they cannot just be disregarded or reinterpreted after accession; whereas democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are mutually reinforcing values which, when undermined, may pose a systemic threat to the Union;
Amendment 50 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the indispensability of enforcing court sentences, both at national and EU level; condemns all national and regional governments on EU territory that refuse to follow judgments; emphasises that sentences of the Court of Justice of the European Union have to be implemented in a timely manner and as soon as possible in accordance with the Treaties, which the Member States agreed to comply with5 , in particular, those court sentences that seek to prevent discrimination on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation; _________________ 5 Petition No 0858/2017.
Amendment 53 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the principle of sincere cooperation in Article 4 (3) TEU provides for an obligation of Member States to actively seek compliance with the EU Treaties, to facilitate the achievement of Union tasks and to obtain from any contravening measures;
Amendment 69 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets the fact that that the safety of journalists is not universally guaranteed; underlines the importance of media pluralism and the need to protect journalists against threats and attacks in order to prevent self-censorship and to assure freedom of expression and the right to information and safeguard the journalistic profession; calls on the Commission to improve the instruments for assessing measures taken by governments that may undermine freedom of information and pluralism;
Amendment 70 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas without meaningful recommendations and effective follow- up, the rule of law report may fail to prevent, detect and effectively address systemic challenges and backsliding on the rule of law, as witnessed in several EU Member States in recent years;
Amendment 74 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Draws attention to the need for better regulation and more transparency regarding social networking sitemedia platforms9 ; takes note of the insufficiency of the horizontal assessment of the media sector and the lack of representation of online media in the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report (COM(2121)700); _________________ 9 Petitions No 1336/2020, 0036/2021, 0137/2021, 0691/2021 and 0719/2021.
Amendment 76 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Observes that fake news and the resulting misinformation aimed at EU citizens are a threat to our EU democracies10 ; notes, however, that overly extensive control of false information and the increased promotion of disinformation campaigns may lead, which must be combated with guarantees and without giving rise to any violation of Article 11(1) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which guarantees the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authorities and regardless of borders11 ; _________________ 10 Petitions No 1310/2019, 0268/2020, 0743/2020 and 1293/2020. 11 Petition No 1336/2020.
Amendment 81 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas it is necessary to strengthen and streamline existing mechanisms and to develop an effective EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights to ensure that Article 2 TEU values are upheld throughout the Union and prevent Member States from using the application of their domestic law to violate those values;
Amendment 88 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is concerned about the increase in hate crimes against minorities, in particular those related to religious beliefs, political ideas and sexual orientation12 ; is aware of the difficult balance between hate speech and freedom of expression and acknowledges that the boundaries are hard to define; calls on the Commission to continue its work to establish effective criteria against this problem, and to do so without affecting the pluralism of the system; _________________ 12 Petitions No 0354/2020, 0657/2020, 1038/2020, 0471/2021, 0480/2021, 0667/2021, 0704/2021, 0725/2021, 0820/2021, 0855/2021 and 0894/2021.
Amendment 101 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that the role of civil society organisations is of particular importance; calls on the Commission to foster debatesopen, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and with civil society organisations in order to take note of all their concerns and involve them more effectively in follow-up meetings; highlights the need to offer longer consultation periods to guarantee proper participation of all civil society organisations; urges the Commission, therefore, to step up and structure its monitoring of the situation of civic space in the Member States by creating a ‘European civic space index’ based on existing frameworks for measuring civic space, and by dedicating to civic space a fully-fledged chapter including country recommendations in its annual rule of law report.
Amendment 104 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Amendment 107 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Points out that on the 16 of February the Court of Justice of the European Union will release its judgement on the compliance of the conditionality requirement with the Treaty following the complaint filed by Poland and Hungary;
Amendment 119 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the judgements of the European Court of Justice of 16th of February 2022 and its conclusions that the EU indeed has competences regarding the Rule of Law in the Member States, that Rule of Law conditionality mechanism is in line with EU law, and that the actions brought by Hungary and Poland against the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation should be dismissed;
Amendment 125 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the functioning of justice systems, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space to a certain extent, are all part of the Commission’s annual report; regrets, however, that not all rule of law issues were covered in sufficient detail in the 2021 report; calls for the inclusion in the annual report of other important elements of the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist, such as the fight against impunity, judicial accountability, independence of prosecutors and judges, enforcement of sentences, and also others from the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist; also calls for an examination of Member States' violations or when Member States fail to act on violations carried out by sub-state entities; believes that civic space deserves a separate subheading in the report;
Amendment 130 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the functioning of justice systems, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space to a certain extent, are all part of the Commission’s annual report; regrets, however, that not all rule of law issues were covered in sufficient detail in the 2021 report; calls for the inclusion in the annual report of other important elements of the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist; believes that civic spacesituation of the civic space in the Member States deserves a separate subheadingchapter in the report; and deserves the creation of a ‘European civic space index’;
Amendment 143 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with satisfaction that the report contains country-specific chapters; commends the Commission’s efforts to engage with national governments and national parliaments, as well as civil society and other national actors; encourages the Commission to devote greater efforts to deepening the analysis, and invites the Commission to ensure proper resources for that; believes that more time and importance should be devotedgiven to the Commission’s country visits, including on siteespecially on site; calls on the Commission to raise greater awareness of these visits among the public in order to foster a rule of law culture at national level; furthermore it calls on the Commission to organise communication campaigns about the importance of respecting the Rule of Law;
Amendment 148 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is of the opinion that the Rule of Law report is currently a descriptive documentation of the situation in the Member States; stresses that a thorough analysis of the state of play in the Member States require an analysis and an overall evaluation of the Rule of Law in the Member States; calls on the Commission therefore to develop a Rule of Law index based on an objective and non- discriminative point system, which as a ‘traffic light’ assessment could signal the level of the rule of law in the Member States;
Amendment 172 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets the fact that the report fails to clearly recognise the deliberate process of the rule of law backsliding in Poland and Hungary; calls on the Commission to make clear that when the Article 2 TEU values are being deliberately, gravely, permanently and systematically violated over a period of time, Member States could fail to fulfilmeet all the criteria that define a democracy and become authoritarian or illiberal regimes;
Amendment 185 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets the fact that several Member States, in particular Hungary and Poland, had to be mentioned several times by the Commission as points of concern in the synthesis report; recalls that since June 2021 Parliament has also addressed the rule of law situation in Hungary, Poland and Slovenia in its plenary resolutions; further recalls that Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs’ Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group has also addressed similar issueproblems in Bulgaria, Greece, Malta, Slovakia and, Slovenia and Spain;
Amendment 187 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is strongly of the opinion that the Rule of Law cycle can be effective only if the principle of sincere cooperation set out in Art. 4 (3) TEU is equally respected and applied by the European institutions and the Member States;
Amendment 189 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the annual report should identify cross-cutting trends at EU level; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain measures or practices that undermine the rule of law in one Member State become blueprints for others, or when the gravity and scope of such deficiencies have the potential to affect the Union as a whole; calls therefore for an assessment of whether offences against the constitutional order, to which such practices and measures may give rise, should be included in the Union's list of serious crimes, given that they have a cross-border dimension or need to be combated on a common basis;
Amendment 248 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. UnderlinStresses witsh concern at the fact that women and people in vulnerable situations, including persons with disabilities, children, religious minorities, particularly at a time of that discriminatory practices continue to occur, based on grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social orisging antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred in Europe, Romani people, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or andy other persons belonging to ethnic and linguistic minorities, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, LGBTI+ persons and elderly people, continue to see their rights not being fully respected across the Unopinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation; emphasises the obvious link between deteriorating rule of law standards and violations of fundamental rights and minority rights;
Amendment 279 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the time limits for consultation with civil society is often too short and should be suitably adapted and flexible in order to allow for complete and comprehensive input; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders to prepare and plan their contributions and awareness-raising activities, in particular if the consultation coincides with winter holidays; calls on the Commission to allow multilingual submissionsubmissions in the official EU languages; notes that consultation can be improved by ensuring follow-up with civil society actors on the input they provide;
Amendment 280 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the time limits for consultation with civil society is often too short or ill-timed and should be suitably adapted and flexible in order to allow for complete and comprehensive input; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders to prepare and plan their contributions and awareness-raising activities, in particular if the consultation coincides with winter holiday due to the limits of their capacities and their financial resources; calls on the Commission to allow multilingual submissions; notes that consultation can be improved by ensuring follow-up with civil society actors on the input they provide;
Amendment 290 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that the Commission must take into account relevant information from pertinent sources and recognised institutions; recalls that the findings of relevant international bodies, such as those under the auspices of the UN, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, are of crucial importance; believes that EFRIS is a useful source of information in this regardshould be taken into account;
Amendment 295 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to invite the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) to provide methodological advice and conduct comparative research to add detail in key areas of the annual report, bearing in mind that the right to a fair trial, the fight against impunity, the freedom of expression and other fundamental rights have intrinsic links with the rule of law;
Amendment 305 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses the indispensability of enforcing court sentences, both at national and EU level; condemns all national governments and sub-state entities on EU territory that refuse to follow judgments; emphasises that sentences of the Court of Justice of the European Union have to be implemented in a timely manner and as soon as possible in accordance with the Treaties, which the Member States agreed to comply with, in particular, those court sentences that seek to prevent discrimination on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 331 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates that the annual report should serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate one or several relevant tools such as Article 7 TEU, the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, the Rule of Law Framework or infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the CJEU and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments; calls on the institutions to activate such tools without delay; reiterates its call on the Commission to create a direct link between the Annual Rule of Law reports and the Rule of Law Conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 348 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls that infringement procedures are the core instrument to protect and defend EU law and the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; notes with concern that the number of infringement procedures launched by the Commission has plummeted since 2004; is surprised by the fact that infringement procedures are not triggered systematically as soon as the relevant infringement is documented in the annual report; deplores the Commission’s reluctance to actively and systematically monitor the implementation of EU law and to exhaust the possibilities of infringement procedures against Member States as the instrument most tailored to resolve the issues efficiently and without delay; notes that this reluctance resulted in calls on Member States to initiate inter-State cases in accordance with Article 259 TFEU; is concerned that without systematic and timely application the preventive capacity of infringement procedures declines;
Amendment 7 #
2021/2114(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes the annual report for 2020 published by the EDPS in April 2021; notes the 17 % increase in its budget compared to 2019; notes that the budgetary execution was substantially lower than the previous year due to COVID-19 related restrictions; appreciates the insights given therein on all EDPS activities in 2020; highlights in particular EDPS' cooperation with the European Data Protection Board;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2114(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines the importance of achieving an appropriate balance between protecting the right to privacy and personal data and ensuring proper access to documents of public interest; highlights the essential supervisory and advisory role that the EDPS fulfils for the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies in this regard; stresses that achieving this goal has become even more relevant following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 16 #
2021/2114(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Welcomes the sustained commitment of the EDPS to generating and fostering global partnerships in the field of data protection through the organisation of a yearly, dedicated workshop to data protection in collaboration with international organisations; welcomes the EDPS’ initiative to address the specific challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 edition of that workshop, such as the protection of personal health data, contact tracing apps and the impact of remote working;
Amendment 8 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 12 February 2019 on the implementation of the Treaty provisions related to EU citizenship (2018/2111(INI)),
Amendment 12 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas Brexit has highlighted the importance of EU citizenship rights and their crucial role in the everyday lives of millions of EU citizens, and has raised awareness in the EU about the potential loss of these rights and its consequences, as revealed by the large number of petitions submitted by EU citizens living in the UK and by UK citizens residing in an EU country on the consequences of Brexit on their status of EU citizens;
Amendment 53 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that the withdrawal of the UK from the EU mostly affected those EU citizens residing in the United Kingdom and those UK nationals residing in one of the 27 EU Member States at the end of the transition period; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the correct implementation of Part Two of the Withdrawal Agreement on citizens’ rights in order to fully and effectively safeguard the rights of those citizens who exercised their freedom of movement before the end of the transition period;
Amendment 81 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses the need for comprehensive data on underrepresented categories of voters and calls on the Commission and the Member States to exchange and promote within the European Cooperation Network on Elections best practices on how to address the specific electoral needs of disadvantaged groups of citizens in order to ensure that they are empowered to effectively exercise their voting rights in the next European elections;
Amendment 91 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Underlines that the final objective of this exercise, following the procedure of Article 25 TFEU, would be to take concrete initiatives towards the consolidation of citizen-specific rights and freedoms under an EU Statute of Citizenship, similar to the European Pillar of Social Rights, including the fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, alongside the social rights set out in the European Pillar of Social Rights and the values established by Article 2 of the TEU as defining elements of the European ‘public space’, including among others the governance model relevant to that public space, dignity, freedom, the rule of law, democracy, pluralism, tolerance, justice and solidarity, equality and non- discrimination, which would be taken into account in a future or eventual reform of the Treaties;
Amendment 92 #
2021/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Recalls its support for the Conference on the Future of Europe; strongly believes that the Conference is an opportunity for bottom-up participation in the EU democratic process; reiterates its call for the Conference to produce concrete recommendations that will need to be addressed by the institutions and turned into actions; calls on all participants to the Conference to ensure a genuine follow-up of the outcome of the Conference;
Amendment 6 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Regrets the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation; Reiterates that the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation cannot be subject to the adoption of guidelines, and urges the Commission to avoid any further delay in its application;
Amendment 8 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that after the Commission has begun to draft guidelines on the application of the Regulation; requests that, if the Commission deems such guidelines necessary, Parliament be consulted prior to their adopdecided to preprare the Guidelines the Parliament in its resolution of 25 March 2021 on the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the rule-of-law conditionality mechanism requested the Commission to submit the guidelines by 1 June 2021 the latest; regrets that the Commission has handed over the draft guidelines on the application of the Regulation with 2 weeks delay; is of the opinion that the draft guidelines in its current form do not contain any additional information, which could contribute to the proper application of the regulation; concludes therefore that the Commission’s guidelines are partof its delaying tactic of the application of the regulation;
Amendment 13 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Deplores the time wasted by the Commission since the entry into force of the Regulation; urges the Commission to act without any further delay in the application of the Regulation and to investigate swiftly and thoroughly any potential breaches of the principles of the rule of law in the Member States that affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way; reiterates that the situation in some Member States already warrants immediate investigation under the Regulation;
Amendment 14 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Is strongly of the opinion that the Parliament has to continue its necessary preparations for potential court proceedings under Article 265 of the TFEU against the Commission; is of the opinion that non-action or slow action by the Commission is a strong political signal not only to the European institutions and the Member States but also to the European citizens;
Amendment 21 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Considers that the Commission’s annual Rule of Law report constitutes an objective, impartial, fair, and qualitative assessment of breaches of the principles of rule of law; believes that where the conclusions of the annual reports highlight individual or systemic breaches of the rule of law which affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way, they should be directly linked to the triggering of the Conditionality Mechanism; calls on the Commission to clarify a methodology to create a clear and direct link, when relevant, between the annual reports and the Conditionality Mechanism;
Amendment 27 #
2021/2071(INI)
3 b. Highlights that civil society, including independent NGOs and citizens, is at the forefront to identify potential breaches of the rule of law at local and national level, and should therefore be involved in their reporting; calls on the Commission to establish, in the guidelines, an efficient, user-friendly, and easily accessible online one-stop shop for citizens and civil society to report both fraud and corruption cases related to EU Funds, as well as individual or systemic breaches in their Member State, guaranteeing anonymity and leading, where deemed relevant by its services, to further investigations by the OLAF, the EPPO or the Commission;
Amendment 30 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Recalls that the Regulation provides a clear definition of the rule of law, which must be understood in relation to the other values of the Union, including fundamental rights and non- discrimination; is of the opinion that state-sponsored discrimination against minorities has a direct impact on the projects on which Member States decide or not to spend EU money, and therefore directly affects the protection of the financial interests of the Union;
Amendment 32 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. Believes that transparency is essential to foster the confidence of Member States and citizens in the Conditionality Mechanism:points out that each step of the procedure of the Regulation should therefore be taken in a fully transparent way; Calls therefore on the Commission to set-up the transparency rules and principles that it will apply when triggering the Conditionality Mechanism;
Amendment 57 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are lawsuits or other legal actions (e.g. injunctions, asset-freezing) based on civil and criminal law, as well as the threats of such actions, with the purpose of preventing acts of public participation including investigating and reporting on breaches of Union and national law, corruption or other fraudulent practices or of blocking public participationengaging in advocacy or activism through the exercise of legally guaranteed civil liberties;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas SLAPPs claims arise from the public participation of the defendant, on matters of public interest, which lack legal merits, are manifestly unfounded, and are characterised by the abuse of rights or of process by the plaintiff, exerting excessive claims in matters in which the defendant is exercising a legally protected right, therefore using the judicial process for purposes other than genuinely asserting, vindicating or exercising a right;
Amendment 78 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas SLAPPs have become an increasingly widespread practice used against journalists, academics, civil society and NGOsctors, NGOs and other actors engaging in public participation, as demonstrated by many cases throughout the Union, such as the chilling case of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was reportedly facing 47 civil and criminal defamation lawsuits, (resulting in the freezing of her assets) on the day of her strongly condemned assassination on 16 October 2017, and the lawsuits her heirs continue to face; whereas other illustrative and alarming cases include Realtid Media, which was repeatedly threatened with a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction from where the reporting in question took place, and Gazeta Wyborcza, which continues to be sued by a number of public entities and officials on a regular basis, or the Slovenian investigative news outlet Necenzurirano recently hit by 39 lawsuits, amongst others;
Amendment 89 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas SLAPPs are increasingly being used across the EU to target NGOs, civil society activists and rights defenders, including environmental activists, LGBTQI and women's rights defenders
Amendment 107 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas non-cross-border SLAPP cases are increasingly more used within the Member States, by both private companies and public entities, aiming to limit free speech and the right to information, producing a chilling effect against journalists, academics, civil society and NGO representatives, relying on psychologically and financially draining their targets in order to force them to abandon exposing matters of public interest;
Amendment 123 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that SLAPPs are a direct attack on the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms; underlines that fundamental rights and democracy are linked to upholding the rule of law, and that undermining media freedom and public democratic participation, including freedom of expression, of information, of assembly and of association, threatens Union values as enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU; welcomes the fact that the rule of law report includes SLAPP lawsuits in its assessment of media freedom and pluralism across the Union, and points to best practices in countering them; calls for the annual report to include a thorough assessment of the legal environment for the media, and investigative journalism in particular; calls on the Commission to also issue country-specific recommendations within the framework of the annual rule of law report for future years, including for issues concerning the situation of media freedom within the Member States;
Amendment 153 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights that the use of SLAPPs has a negative impact on the enjoyment of internal market freedoms by individuals and organisations engaging in public participation and vulnerable to such claims, such as journalists or civil society activists, as the absence of the same level of protection against these claims, within the jurisdictions of certain Member States, discourages them to operate confidently all across the Union;
Amendment 160 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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; stresses therefore that SLAPPs constitute an severe hampering of the effective access to justice;
Amendment 182 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that in recent years online hate speech has become increasingly widespread against journalists, NGOs, rights defenders, academics and other civil society actors, including those defending LGBTQI or women's rights, thus threatening media freedom, freedom of expression and public safety given that online hate speech can incite real-world violence;
Amendment 200 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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, harass, tire out, put psychological pressure on or consume the financial resources of those targeted, such as 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;
Amendment 212 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that an imbalance of power between the claimant and the defendant in terms of financial resources is a common feature of SLAPPs; highlights that unpredictably large damages' award claims in matters such as libel, are capable of producing a strong chilling effect against their targets and therefore the admissibility of laying such claims should require highly careful scrutiny and very strong justifications;
Amendment 219 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses, with regard to this problem, that all Member States lack harmonised minimum standards to protect journalists, academiclegislation on and harmonization of minimum standards to sufficiently protect SLAPP targets such as journalists, academics, rights defenders, activists, civil society actors and NGOs and to ensure that fundamental rights are upheld in the Member States;
Amendment 247 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 Ia and Rome II Regulations to be amendmentsed in order to prevent ‘libel tourism’ or ‘forum shopping’; urgently calls for the introduction of a uniform and predictable choice of law rule for defamation, as well as for proposals for binding Union legislation on establishing minimum standards, harmonised and effective safeguards for victims of SLAPPs across the Union, including through a directive or a regulation; argues that without such legislative action, SLAPPs will continue to threaten the rule of law and the fundamental rights tof freedom of expression, association and information in the Union; is concerned that if measures only address lawsuits regarding infordefamation, actions based on other civil matters or criminal procedures may still be used;
Amendment 260 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Affirms that legislative measures at Union level could be based on Article 81 of the TFEU (for cross-border civil lawsuits) and Article 82 of the TFEU (for threats of lawsuits in cross-border cases), and separately on Article 114 of the TFEU to protect public participation in order to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market by exposing corruption and other distortions; asserts that the latter measure could also address attempts to prevent investigation and reporting on breaches of Union law using the same legal base asa similar approach to the one that led to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 (the ‘Whistleblower Directive’);
Amendment 267 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that it is essential to adopt a legislative measure protecting the role of actors engaging in public participation, such as journalists, academics, civil society and NGOs in preventing breaches of Union law and ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market; urges the Commission to present a proposal for legislation that sets out safeguards for persons investigating and, reporting on or exposing these matters of public interest; highlights that such a proposal shall include rules on the early dismissal of abusive lawsuits, alongside deterrent measures aiming to disincentivise claims intended to suppress public participation such as civil penalties or administrative fines, including cost- shifting sanctions; underlines that these measures should apply to both cross- border and non-cross border cases of SLAPPs;
Amendment 291 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the Commission to present a proposal for a measure that develops judicial cooperation in civil matters so as to address cross-border SLAPP cases by providing for rules on the early dismissal of abusive lawsuits and other actions in court that have the purpose of preventing public participation, which should include dissuasive cost-shifting sanctions, consideration of abusive motives even if the lawsuit or action is not dismissed, costs and damages; calls on the Commission, further, to address questions giving rise to forum shopping and libel tourism in a forthcoming review of the Brussels Ia and Rome II Regulations;
Amendment 318 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the urgent need for a robust fund for supporting victims of SLAPPs; stress the importance for victims and potential victims of SLAPPs to have easy and accessible information about these type of cases, legal aid and support, including psychological support for victims and their family members;
Amendment 336 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls the importance of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, which has applied to all commitment and payment appropriations since 1 January 2021; calls on the Commission to make use of existing legal provisions within the Regulation and implement a regime of conditionality immediately, once conditions are met in any Member State;
Amendment 348 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 1a (new)
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 1a (new)
support for the creation of dedicated national networks of specialised lawyers, legal practitioners and psychologists, easily available for victims of SLAPPs and their families;
Amendment 348 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 1a (new)
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 1a (new)
support for the creation of dedicated national networks of specialised lawyers, legal practitioners and psychologists, easily available for victims of SLAPPs and their families;
Amendment 350 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
the creation of a specific Union fund to provide financial support to victims of SLAPPs and their family members, including in terms of financial aid, legal assistance and psychological support;
Amendment 350 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
the creation of a specific Union fund to provide financial support to victims of SLAPPs and their family members, including in terms of financial aid, legal assistance and psychological support;
Amendment 357 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 4
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 4
support for independent bodies (such as ombudspersons) able to deal with complaints from persons threatened or faced with SLAPP suits, and to provide assistance to them, and support for media self-regulatory bodies dealing with ethical complaints by the public and promoting the importance of ethics and professional journalistic practices;
Amendment 357 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 4
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 4
support for independent bodies (such as ombudspersons) able to deal with complaints from persons threatened or faced with SLAPP suits, and to provide assistance to them, and support for media self-regulatory bodies dealing with ethical complaints by the public and promoting the importance of ethics and professional journalistic practices;
Amendment 362 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 6
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 6
a ‘one-stop-shop’/support hub which victims of SLAPPs can contact and where they can receive guidance and easy access to information on and support against SLAPPs, including regarding ‘first aid’, legal aid, financial and psychological support, including through peer exchange networks;
Amendment 362 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 6
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 6
a ‘one-stop-shop’/support hub which victims of SLAPPs can contact and where they can receive guidance and easy access to information on and support against SLAPPs, including regarding ‘first aid’, legal aid, financial and psychological support, including through peer exchange networks;
Amendment 369 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 2 – part I – introductory part
Annex – point 2 – part I – introductory part
A legislative proposal for a general protection measure would have the dual aim of protecting persons investigating or report, reporting, or exposing matters of public interest concerning:
Amendment 369 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 2 – part I – introductory part
Annex – point 2 – part I – introductory part
A legislative proposal for a general protection measure would have the dual aim of protecting persons investigating or report, reporting, or exposing matters of public interest concerning:
Amendment 372 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 2 – part I – point a
Annex – point 2 – part I – point a
(a) possible breaches of Union law;
Amendment 372 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 2 – part I – point a
Annex – point 2 – part I – point a
(a) possible breaches of Union law;
Amendment 395 #
2021/2036(INI)
A proposal for a civil procedure measure applicable in both cross-border and non- cross-border cases should include:
Amendment 397 #
2021/2036(INI)
A proposal for a civil procedure measure applicable in both cross-border and non- cross-border cases should include:
Amendment 400 #
2021/2036(INI)
(b) the obligation for courts to summarily dismiss abusive lawsuits; at a very early stage;
Amendment 402 #
2021/2036(INI)
(b) the obligation for courts to summarily dismiss abusive lawsuits at a very early stage;
Amendment 409 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 3 – part II – point a
Annex – point 3 – part II – point a
(a) a bespoke rule concerning claims arising from public participation, distinguishing jurisdiction in such cases from ordinary torts, whereby the habitual residence of the defendant as the sole forum;
Amendment 410 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 3 – part II – point a
Annex – point 3 – part II – point a
(a) a bespoke rule concerning claims arising from public participation, distinguishing jurisdiction in such cases from ordinary torts, whereby the habitual residence of the defendant as the sole forum;
Amendment 416 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 3 – part II – point b
Annex – point 3 – part II – point b
(b) that the applicable law is the law of the place where the investigation or reporting took placeto which a publication is directed and, supplementary, the place of editorial control.
Amendment 418 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 3 – part II – point b
Annex – point 3 – part II – point b
(b) that the applicable law is the law of the place where the investigation or reporting took placeto which a publication is directed and, supplementary, the place of editorial control.
Amendment 3 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the high number of petitions received from citizens concerned about the breaches of the rule of law in their respective countries and with the consequences of such breaches on their lives; stresses that full protection of Union citizens’ rights can be ensured throughout the Union only if all Member States comply with all the principles underlying the rule of law, as deficiencies in one Member State have an impact on other Member States and the Union as a whole; stresses that inadequate implementation of rule of law principles jeopardises EU objectives in all policy areas, thus creating an environment where legislation indifferent policy sectors cannot be executed in a correct and timely manner;highlights in this regard the responsibility of the EU institutions in assisting and monitoring the application of the rule of law by Member States
Amendment 4 #
2021/2025(INI)
1 a. Invites the Commission to provide in its further reports an assessment of the impact of identified deficiencies and breaches on the subsequent allocation of the EU funds under the conditionality mechanism; stresses the crucial role of rule of law enforcement tools in achieving effective implementation of the values enshrined in Art.2 TEU; calls, therefore, on the Commission to guarantee effective operationalisation of the Report findings in concrete policy actions; calls on the Commission to provide a higher level of visibility of NGOs contributions and public consultation results when drafting its future Reports;
Amendment 15 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that more fact-finding missions need to be organised to assess the major rule of law concerns in relevant Member States;
Amendment 16 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the Commission’s report is a partial response to the Council’s failure to trigger the procedure under Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as requested by the Commission in 2017 and Parliament in 2018Parliament´s report on EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (2015/2254(INL)1a ; regrets that the Council has failed to resume hearings under Article 7 of the TEU since December 2019; notes that the failure to apply Article 7 of the TEU, also due to the requirement of unanimity for the sanctions mechanism, enables continued divergence from the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU; and weakens one of the most important instruments of the Union´s rule of law toolbox; _________________ 1aEuropean Parliament resolution of 25 October 2016 with recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (2015/2254(INL))
Amendment 23 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. RegretUnderlines that the report is a first step to reply to Parliament´s requests but fails to fully address all Union values set out in Article 2 of the TEU, such as democracy and fundamental rights; reiterates the need to have a single monitoring system for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, as proposed by Parliament1 ; calls on the Council and the Commission to engage in discussions to set up such a mechanism via an interinstitutional agreement; _________________ 1European Parliament resolution of 7 October 2020 on the establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0251).
Amendment 30 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the methodology of the report, which focuses on four pillars: independence of the judiciary, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism, and checks and balances; invites the Commission to include in the next editions an assessment of how the right to a fair trial is guaranteed in Member States, with particular attention paid to the right of defence, the fight against impunity and equality between prosecution and defence parties; believes that the report should go beyond monitoring and include preventive and corrective elements with a clear outline of enforcement measuresinvites the Commission to include in future reports data related to the level of compliance of Member States with CJEU rulings and to signal the cases of resistance to apply them;
Amendment 31 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. HCalls on the Commission to continue to assess rigorously and objectively whether press freedom is respected in all Member States; highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed the importance of strengthening independent journalism and access to pluralistic information as key enablers of rule of law and democratic accountability able to provide citizens with fact-checked information, thereby contributing to the fight against disinformation; deplores the fact that in a number of Member States, journalists have increasingly faced physical threats and online harassment, especially female journalists; regrets that such attacks often lead to self-censorship and undermine citizens' right to information;
Amendment 33 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed the importance of strengthening independent journalism, whistleblower protection and access to pluralistic information as key enablers of rule of law and democratic accountability able to provide citizens with fact-checked information, thereby contributing to the fight against disinformation; deplores the fact that in a number of Member States, journalists have increasingly faced physical threats and online harassment, especially female journalists;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Believes that the report should go beyond monitoring and include clear recommendations regarding preventive and corrective actions that must be adopted by concerned Member;
Amendment 40 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls on the Commission to further invest in tools for the collection and analysis of data, ensure the diversity of relevant information sources and ensure transparency about methodology and criteria when including or excluding facts, so as to further substantiate the findings in future reports;
Amendment 44 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the Court of Justice of the European Union recently ruled2 that civil society organisations must be able to operate without unjustified interference by the state, acknowledging that the right to freedom of association constitutes one of the essential bases of a democratic and pluralist society; is seriously concerned that some NGOs active in the area of migration and LGBTI+ rights are subject to smear campaigns, and face severe restriction of the civic space where they can operate.; deplores the stillpersistent phenomenon of strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP); highlights that politicisation in public procurement undermines good governance and underlines that the activities of NGOs and CSOs are crucial in countering this malpractice; believes that strong safeguard measures must betaken to prevent this phenomenon from occurring; _________________ 2Judgment of 18 June 2020, Commission v Hungary, C-78/18, EU:C:2020:476, paragraphs 112 and 113.
Amendment 45 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Underlines the necessity to raise awareness among the EU citizens and residents on the means and procedures available at national and EU level to safeguard the respect of the rule of law and to report its breaches, with petitions to the European Parliament being one of such instruments; underlines that the redress of justice for those who became victims of the rule of law breaches is an essential element of building trust towards institutions and must be guaranteed by the Member States; invites in this regard the Commission to provide concrete recommendations to the responsible authorities in order to compensate the impacted individuals for the breaches of their fundamental rights.
Amendment 46 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas ombudsperson institutions in the Member States play a critical role in safeguarding key principles of the Rule of Law, such as transparency, accountability and due process; whereas the COVID-19 crisis has brought about restrictions of fundamental rights that make it more important than ever to have effective checks and balances in place over the actions of the government and in defence of citizens' rights;
Amendment 47 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to use all tools at its disposal to counter violations of EU values, such as infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, actions to ensure compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice and applications for interim measures before the Court; welcomes the new rule of law conditionality mechanism and asks that it be fully enforced, without delay, with regard to all EU funds, including Next Generation EU;
Amendment 47 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Regrets that freedom of association and the shrinking space for civil society are not part of the 2020 report; reiterates that civil society is essential for democracies to flourish and that shrinking space for civil society contributes to violations of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; reiterates that the Union institutions should maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society.
Amendment 49 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Regrets that the application of Co- operation and Verification Mechanism still prevents some EU citizens from fully benefitting of the area of freedom, security and justice.
Amendment 50 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to develop proposals to further strengthening of the Rule of Law toolbox if, despite the current instruments and efforts, significant violations of the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU persist; proposes to expand the scope of the non- discrimination clause in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to render it universal, to enable the enforcement of the Rule of Law in Member States and the Union consistent with article 14 of the European Human Rights Convention; calls, in the meantime, on all EU institutions to give the non-discrimination clause the broadest possible legal interpretation;
Amendment 50 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Highlights that adequate rule of law standards should be guaranteed for the EU citizens and residents during their exercise of freedom of movement rights within the EU; stresses that social and medical protection, as well as effective access to justice, must be fully guaranteed to seasonal workers and cross-border workers when they pursue their professional activity in another Member State.
Amendment 51 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Highlights that the capacity of the EU and its Member States to uphold the rule of law determines its international image and the credibility in promoting rule of law, democracy and human rights in third countries; warns about the risk of the interference of third countries in all democratic processes at EU level through, inter alia, international corruption schemes, which jeopardise the rule of law in the EU; stresses that EU citizens living in third countries must be treated with respect to the rule of law in their interaction with the authorities in their MS, as well as with EU authorities.
Amendment 57 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s first annual Rule of Law Report as part of the wider European rule of law monitoring and enforcement architecture, as it adds an important, potentially preventive tool to the Union’s rule of law toolbox; encourages further development of this new tool for agenda-setting and preventive purposes;
Amendment 65 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that justice systems, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space to a certain extent, are all part of the Commission’s annual overview of the rule of law situation in the Member States; encourages the Commission to also highlight positive trends in Member States that could serve as good examples for others to follow;
Amendment 69 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that the 2020 report is overly descriptive and does not provide sufficient analysis; and the Commission do not draw any conclusions on the state of the Rule of Law in the Member States and in the Union in general; believes the 2020 report fails to provide clear assessments stating whether there are serious deficiencies or a risk of a serious breach of the Union values in each of the pillars under analysis in the country chapters; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow up actions and remedial tools; considers it necessary that the report contains country specific recommendations on how to address the identified concerns and benchmarks to be followed up;
Amendment 70 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Stresses that the analysis and the conclusions of the reports should be directly contributing to the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism; calls on the Commission to clarify in the methodology the link between the two mechanisms;
Amendment 73 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the potential preventive benefits of the annual Rule of Law Report; considers that a more thorough evaluation is needed to assess whether the report has had a sufficient preventive effect; considers that in any event this is clearly not the case as regards the Member States under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure; believes that the 2020 report should have provided more in-depth assessments, stating whether there is a risk of or actual breach of the Union values; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow-up actions and remedial measures and toolsformulate conclusions about the state of the rule of law and to identify follow-up actions and remedial measures and tools; calls on the Commission to include in the reports indication of such follow-up and remedial action, whose progress should be then illustrated in the following report;
Amendment 77 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the potential preventive benefits of the annual Rule of Law Report; considers that a more thorough evaluation is needed to assess whether the report has had a preventive effect; considers that in any event this is clearly not the case as regards the Member States undwhere the Article 7(1) TEU procedurerule of law is in crisis; believes that the 2020 report should have provided more in-depth assessments, stating whether there is a risk of or actual breach of the Union values; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow-up actions and remedial measures and tools;
Amendment 83 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for a more integrated analysis on the interlinkages between the four pillars included in the report and of how combined deficiencies may amount to systemic breaches of the rule of law; and signal if those are affecting or risk affecting the financial interest of the Union;
Amendment 84 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for a more integrated analysis on the interlinkages between the four pillars included in the report and of how combined deficiencies may amount to systemic breaches of the rule of law or risks thereof;
Amendment 89 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the annual reports should identify cross-cutting trends at Union level; believes that a Union-wide perspective is absent from the 2020 report; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain practices undermining the rule of law are becoming blueprints for others or when the gravity and scope of such practices have the potential to affect the Union as a whole; calls on the Commission to assess how such attacks compromise the quality of democracy in the Union and whether it is appropriate to reflect on the inclusion of offences against the rule of law and constitutional integrity in the Union's list of serious crimes;
Amendment 93 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Regrets that not all rule of law issues were covered in sufficient detail by the annual report; invites the Commission to develop its country-specific expertise and capacity to react more promptly to negative developments in the Member States; calls on the Commission to devote sufficient resources to the monitoring and enforcement of the rule of law in the EU;
Amendment 96 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses that the laws, the democratic institutions, their independence, the checks and balances, the rule of law in a Member State have to be functional not only de jure but also de facto;
Amendment 101 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the monitoring of the independence, quality and efficiency of the Member States’ justice systems; considers that including the national prosecution services as those are essential preconditions not only of the rule of law within the Member States but also of the protection of the Union’s financial interests; considers that the integrity of the judges and prosecutors and other persons working in the justice systems and the enabling environment to ensure access to justice for all should also be monitored, including access to justice at Union level; considers that the reports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chapters;
Amendment 103 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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; considers that the reports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chaptersany relevant information about the state of the rule of law in the country, as well as situate new developments in their political context;
Amendment 104 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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 and the efforts and resources devoted to fighting impunity; considers that the reports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chapters;
Amendment 106 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Commission to examine the levels of impunity in the Member States when assessing whether respect for effective judicial protection and systems of safeguards are adequate; reiterates that impunity is a systemic failure and that Member States must fight with all the means at their disposal to combat it; recalls that in a balanced judicial system, the level of protection for victims and defendants must be the same;
Amendment 116 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is alarmed by the stark deterioration of the independence of some Member States’ justice systems, as reflected in some country chapters; calls on the Commission to clearly assess and designate such shortcomings and findings identified as a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule ofn light of applicable standards in EU law;
Amendment 127 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Decries the fact that the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court of Justice of the EU has been declared unlawful in Member States subject to Article 7 of the TEUat the governments of Poland and Hungary have repeatedly attempted to prevent national courts from referring cases to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 TFEU; considers this practice to be in contravention of the Treaties and the CJEU's established interpretation of the relevant provisions; is appalled by the growing resistance of some Member States to comply with CJEU rulings on the grounds of sovereignty or unconstitutionality; believes that these developments pose a systemic threat to the Union; considers, therefore, that forthcoming annual reports should consider challenges to the Union’s legal architecture and principles as serious violations in the assessment;
Amendment 128 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Decries the fact that the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court of Justice of the EU has been declared unlawful in Member States subject to Article 7 of the TEU; is appalled by the growing resistance of some Member States to comply with CJEU rulings on the grounds of sovereignty or unconstitutionality; believes that these developments pose a systemic threat to the Union; invites the Commission to include in future reports detailed data on Member States' compliance with ECJ rulings; considers, therefore, that forthcoming annual reports should consider challenges to the Union’s legal architecture and principles as serious violations in the assessment;
Amendment 130 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls on the Commission to analyse in detail initiatives by Member States' governments that may jeopardise the independence of their national courts, in particular when a very high percentage of members of the judiciary or other involved party request it; recalls that the rule of law report must be objective and apply the same criteria when assessing all Member States;
Amendment 148 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
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 and make concrete recommendations for improving the situation; deems it important that the annual rule of law reports provide the basis for strong action on behalf of the European Commission in order to address the deficiencies identified;
Amendment 155 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Calls on the Commission to continue to assess rigorously and objectively whether press freedom is respected in all Member States; insists on the need to examine measures taken by any government to silence critical media and/or to undermine freedom and pluralism;
Amendment 159 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Deplores the lack of assessment as regards the public service media sector at national level and its degree of independence from government or any other interference and an assessment of transparency of media ownership; believes that proper implementation of Article 30 of the 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive19 should be closely monitoredand particularly its Article 30 should be closely monitored and infringement procedures should be initiated as a matter of priority; _________________ 19 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69.
Amendment 164 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
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; recalls that threats and intimidation against journalists, including with regard to the disclosure of information on violations of fundamental rights, not only persist but are on the increase, and often lead to self- censorship and undermine the public's right to information; 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 coexistence with hate crime and hate speech, and for the title of the pillar to be adapted accordingly;
Amendment 169 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Calls on the Commission to assess in future reports the effect that hate crimes and hate speech have on the rise of violent outbreaks and dynamics of discrimination in Member States; recalls that hate crimes and hate speech are becoming normalised in many Member States, fuelled by the rise of extremist movements and their rhetoric, including those in power;
Amendment 174 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the report’s pillar on checks and balances and its examination of exceptional measures taken to fight the COVID-19 pandemic; notes with concern that the shrinking space for civil liberties in response to the pandemic has led to growing frustration among many citizens; warns that the channelling of this frustration has sometimes resulted in protests against the authorities or street violence; calls on the Commission to analyse these phenomena in its next report;
Amendment 180 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Welcomes the reference to the role of ombudsperson institutions, as well as the fact that the Commission systematically included them in the fourth pillar of the country reports; calls on the Commission to pay more attention in the next annual cycle to the activities of national ombudspersons by going beyond acknowledging that ombudspersons institutions are established in Member States and looking more in depth into how they function, their degree of independence and their real contribution in terms of ensuring that adequate safeguards are in place;
Amendment 185 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission to define clear benchmarks on an enabling civic space; underlines the very important role civil society organisations play in defending the rule of law and European values on the ground, as well as in terms of providing valuable expertise; strongly believes that the Commission should institute a formal and continuous dialogue with civil society representatives on these issues and ensure their meaningful involvement in the elaboration of the annual rule of law report; highlights in this regard, based on the NGOs' experience from the 2020 cycle, that thematically structured consultations within the framework of the rule of law debates would increase the efficiency of the process and the amount of valuable feedback provided by the civil society; underlines that the deadlines imposed and the documents' formats used in the consultation process should be adequately adapted and flexible in order to allow for a complete and comprehensive input;
Amendment 187 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission to define clear benchmarks on an enabling civic space; Considers that, given the role of civil society in promoting, explaining, monitoring and holding governments accountable with regard to the realisation of Union values, including key building blocks of the rule of law, an additional chapter dedicated to monitoring the evolution of civic space in Member States should be added to each country report and the horizontal report;
Amendment 188 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission to define clear benchmarks con an enablingcerning the breadth and openness of civic space;
Amendment 189 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Calls on the Commission to assess in future reports whether the exercise of political rights by citizens is guaranteed in all Member States; recalls that hate speech, hate crimes and ideologically motivated harassment can lead to a spiral of silence and under-representation in the political sphere and thus undermine ideological pluralism and fundamental rights; calls on the Commission to assess in future reports the situation of ideological and political pluralism in the Member States; regrets that political freedom and freedom of thought, which underpin ideological pluralism, are increasingly under siege from parliamentary bodies and even regional or national governments; condemns harassment and attacks against individuals or parties on political grounds; notes that such acts increase tension, polarisation and the normalisation of the curve of violence, accelerating the deterioration of the rule of law;
Amendment 190 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Suggests therefore that such a chapter should focus on 1) the legal environment for the exercise of civic freedoms; 2) the framework for civic organisations’ sustainability and financial viability, including the issue of government-organized non-governmental organizations (GONGOs); 3) participation in decision-making, including the right to access to information; 4) safe space, including verbal and physical attacks, smear campaigns as well as legal, administrative and fiscal harassment, the chilling effect they trigger and the long term consequences in terms of active citizenship in the country;
Amendment 193 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14 b. Regrets that freedom of association and the shrinking space for civil society are not part of the current report; reiterates that civil society is essential for democracies to flourish and that a shrinking space for civil society contributes to violations of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; reiterates that the Union institutions should maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society;
Amendment 199 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Regrets the non-implementation, which in itself constitutes a serious violation of the rule of law, by a Member State subject to Article 7 of the TEUHungary of a CJEU ruling in relation to restrictions imposed on the financing of civil organisations by persons established outside that Member State; notes with concern that an increasing number of Member States are adopting legislation that severely impinges on the freedom of association and expression for civil society organisations;
Amendment 203 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Regrets the fact that the 2020 report fails to encompass fully the Article 2 TEU values of democracy and fundamental rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities and non- discrimination, including gender equality, sexual and reproductive rights and LGBTIQ rights, which are immediately affected when countries start backsliding on the rule of law;
Amendment 219 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
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 in its resolution of 7 October 2020, to cover the full scope of Article 2 TEU values;
Amendment 221 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 229 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement of its strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; believes that such an annual review should provide input for a comprehensive monitoring mechanism and that its methodology, cycle and scope should therefore be aligned with the annual reports, as well as the Democracy Action Plan; believes that the presentation of these reports should be aligned and interlinked as part of a broader annual monitoring cycle on Article 2 TEU;
Amendment 230 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. Proposes to expand the scope of the non-discrimination clause in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to render it universal, to enable the enforcement of the rule of law in the Member States and the Union consistent with Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights; calls, in the meantime, on all EU institutions to give the non-discrimination clause the broadest possible legal interpretation;
Amendment 231 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. Regrets that the Commission did not consult stakeholders, including Parliament, on the development of the report’s methodology and preparation process, and that it didn't seek to obtain feedback on their workability; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders, especially for civil society organisations, to prepare and plan their contributions as well as for the domestic awareness-raising activities they intend to pursue for the launch of the report;
Amendment 243 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that civil society are key partners to identify rule of law violations and promote democracy and fundamental rights in countries where Union values have been eroded; considers that shadow reporting would bolster the efficiency and transparency of the process; urges therefore the Commission to build on the good practice of the UN’s Universal Periodic Review process, and adapt the preparation process by requiring Member State contributions to be public and setting a deadline for public consultation well after the publication of all Member State contributions so as to enable effective shadow reporting;
Amendment 252 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Calls on the Commission to regularize the schedule pertaining to the annual report's production, including the deadline for stakeholders' submissions, to make the process predictable for all institutions and stakeholders; calls on the Commission to ensure sufficient time for the preparation of stakeholders' submissions;
Amendment 258 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls onRegrets that the Commission and the Council to respond positively tohave so far refused to engage with Parliament’'s call in its resolution of 7 October 2020 forto establish, through an interinstitutional agreement, an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;
Amendment 264 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Considers the existing institutional arrangement behind the annual report to fall short of the Parliament's expectations; expects the Commission to create a permanent interinstitutional Working Group as proposed by the Parliament in its resolution of 7 October 2020;
Amendment 266 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24 b. Invites the Commission and the Council to enter without delay into negotiations with Parliament on an interinstitutional agreement in accordance with Article 295 TFEU; considers the proposal set out in the Annex to Parliament's resolution of 7 October 2020 on the establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights to constitute an appropriate basis for such negotiations;
Amendment 274 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes that the Council’s hesitance to apply Article 7 of the TEU effectivelyTEU is enabling continued divergence from the values provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; condemns the Council's reluctance to organize Article 7 TEU hearings under the pretext of the COVID-19 pandemic; calls for a reflection ats part of the Conference on the Future of Europe on a revision of the Article 7 TEU procedure in order to realign thevoting majorityies requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 with a view to having super-majorities of four or five for both proceduresd by Article 7 TEU in order to render its procedure more effective;
Amendment 280 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates that the annual report should serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate the procedure provided for in Article 7 of the TEU, whether to activate the Rule of Law Framework or whether to launch infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments concerning the protection of Union values; stresses that the report should be in any case accompanied by actionable recommendations, including deadlines for implementation;
Amendment 290 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Calls for a strategic use of funding opportunities under the Regulation establishing the Rights and Values Programme in order to counteract threats to the rule of law identified in the annual report and more broadly support civil society organizations promoting the values listed in Article 2 TEU;
Amendment 301 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Stresses the importance of promoting the findings of the annual report at the national level; encourages the Commission to foster debate around the report in national parliaments and engage with civil society organizations in the follow-up to the report;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. In this regard the Regulation should be amended to clarify that the respect for EU fundamental values should apply to both the EUPP itself as well as its member parties.
Amendment 92 #
2021/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Insists that different categories of party membership be recognised, that the affiliation of members from candidate countries for accession to the Union, from the European Free Trade Association, from EU neighbourhood countries and from former Member StatesMember States of the Council of Europe, from former Member States and countries in the European Neighbourhoud Policy be allowed, and that European political parties and foundations be allowed to legally collect membership fees from them;
Amendment 115 #
2021/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Is of the opinion that the introduction of a general obligation to report publicly on any donation received regardless of its value would make any external influences on European political parties more transparentstrengthened scrutiny by the Authority of reported aggregate donations under 500 Euros would make any external influences on European political parties more transparent; the Authority should focus such scrutiny to cases where it observes significant and sudden increases in the aggregate number of small donations;
Amendment 121 #
2021/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Is, moreover, of the opinion that in order to strengthen the transparency of funding, donations by the same donor to a European political party, its national member parties and their regional substructures should be considered to be a single donation and subject to publication by the European political parAuthority;
Amendment 130 #
2021/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 9 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The electoral procedure related to municipal elections falls within the competences of the Member States that organise them reflecting their specific traditions and in accordance with international and European standards. In line with International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as the law of the European Convention on Human Rights, Member States should not only recognise and respect the right of Union citizens to vote and to stand as a candidate but also ensure easy access to their electoral rights by removing as manyll obstacles to their participation in elections as possible.
Amendment 18 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to facilitate the exercise by non-national Union citizens of their right to vote and to stand as a candidate in their country of residence, suchMember States should be encouraged to allow for automatic registration. Where automatic registration is not available, non-national Union citizens should be entered on the electoral roll in sufficient time in advance of polling day. The formalities applicable to their registration should be as simple and as similar across Member States as possible. It should be sufficient for the Union citizens concerned to produce a valid identity card and a formal declaration that include elements evidencing their entitlement to participate in the elections. Once registered, non- national Union citizens should remain on the electoral roll under the same conditions as Union citizens who are nationals of the Member State concerned, for as long as they satisfy the conditions for exercising the right to vote. Additionally, Union citizens should provide the competent authorities with contact information, enabling those authorities to keep them informed on a regular basis.
Amendment 21 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Determining the right to vote or stand as a candidate for municipal elections as regards non-nationals who reside within their territory falls within the competences of the Member States that organise them. In line with Article 40 of the Charter, Member States must uphold the principle of non- discrimination on the basis of nationality. For this reason, nationality should not in itself constitute grounds for the prohibition of voting or standing as a candidate for municipal elections.
Amendment 44 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to improve the accessibility of electoral information, such information should be made available in at least onetwo other official languages of the Union than that or those of the host Member State, broadly understood by the largest possible number of Union citizens residing on its territory. Member States may use different official languages of the Union in specific parts of their territory or their regions depending on the language understood by the largest group of Union citizens residing therein.
Amendment 59 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Data regarding the exercise of rights and the application of this Directive can be useful in the identification of measures necessary to ensure the effective exercise of Union citizens’ electoral rights. In order to improve and harmonise the collection of data for municipal elections, it is necessary to introduce regular monitoring and reporting of implementation by Member States, which should include, besides statistical data based on common indicators, information on the measures taken to support participation in elections of non- national Union citizens. The Commission should assess the application of the Directive , including any changes in the electorate that have taken place since its entry into force and submit a report in this connection to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 71 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Where Member States decide to grant third-country nationals who reside within their territory the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in municipal elections, such rights shall not be taken away from certain third-country nationals solely on the basis of their nationality.
Amendment 114 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States tshatll endeavour to provide for the possibility for nationals toies to vote by means of vote by means of advance voting, postal voting, and electronic and internet voting in municipal elec. Member States that provide such means of voting for nationals shall ensure that such means of voting are also available under the same conditions to voters pursuant to Article 3.
Amendment 128 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall designate a national authority with responsibility for taking the necessary measures to ensure that non-national Union citizens are informed in a timely mannermmediately upon their registration and in a timely manner ahead of elections of the conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in municipal elections.
Amendment 132 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Member States shall ensure that the designated authority pursuant to paragraph 1, shall, immediately upon their registration, directly and individually communicate to voters and persons entitled to stand as candidates pursuant to Article 3, the following information:
Amendment 143 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The information on conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in municipal elections and theany information referred to in paragraph 2communicated pursuant to the provisions of this Directive shall be provided in clear and plain language.
Amendment 153 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that information on conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in municipal elections and any information referred to in paragraph 2communicated pursuant to the provisions of this Directive is made accessible to persons with disabilities and older persons by using appropriate means, modes and formats of communication.
Amendment 159 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Within three years of the entry into force of this Directive and every four years thereafter, the Member States shall report to the Commission on the application of this Directive in their territory, including on the application of Article 5(3) and (4). The report shall contain statistical data on the participation in municipal elections of voters and candidates pursuant to Article 3 and a summary of measures taken in that regard. The statistical data shall be based on common indicator and harmonised at Union level.
Amendment 166 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission is empowered to adopt implementing acts concerning the form of the data referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 16a, (2).
Amendment 169 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Within two years after the 20294 elections to the European Parliament, the Commission shall assess the application of this Directive and produce an evaluation report on the progress towards achievement of the objectives contained herein. The evaluation shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
Amendment 176 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16a Committee procedure 1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.
Amendment 54 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The freedom of Union citizens to choose the Member State in which to take part in elections to the European Parliament must be respected, while taking the appropriate measures to ensure that no one may vote more than once or stand as a candidate in more than one country.
Amendment 55 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In line with International and European standards, including, the requirements of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights, Member States should not only recognize and respect the right of Union citizens to vote and to stand as a candidate but also ensure easy access to their electoral rights by removing as manyll obstacles to participation in elections as possible.
Amendment 59 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to facilitate the exercise by non-national Union citizens of their right to vote and to stand as a candidate in their country of residence, suchMember States should be encouraged to allow for automatic registration. Where automatic registration is not available, non-national Union citizens should be entered on the electoral roll in sufficient time in advance of polling day. The formalities applicable to their registration should be as simple and as similar across Member States as possible. It should be sufficient for the Union citizens concerned to produce a valid identity card and a formal declaration that includes elements evidencing their entitlement to participate in the elections. Once registered, non- national Union citizens should remain on the electoral roll under the same conditions as Union citizens who are nationals of the Member State concerned, for as long as they satisfy the conditions for exercising the right to vote. Additionally, Union citizens should provide the competent authorities with contact information, enabling those authorities to keep them informed on a regular basis.
Amendment 60 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure equal treatment of non-national Union citizens seeking to exercise the right to stand as candidates for election in their Member State of residence, such citizens should be required to produce solely the same supporting documents as those required from candidates who are nationals of the Member State concerned. However, in order toMember States have a genuine interest in establishing that such citizens are beneficiaries of the right laid down in Article 20(2)(b) and Article 22(2) TFEU,. For this reason Member States should, extraordinarily, be able to require the production of a formal declaration that includes elements necessary to evidence their entitlement to stand in the elections in question.
Amendment 63 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to facilitate the accurate identification of voters and candidates registered both in their home Member State and in their Member State of residence, the list of data to be required from Union citizens, when submitting an applicacompleting the formal declaration of their intention to enter the electoral rolls or to stand as candidates in the Member State of residence, should include the personal identification number or the serial number of a valid identity or travel document.
Amendment 65 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Union citizens who have been deprived of their right to vote and to stand as candidates, on the basis of an individual civil law or criminal law decision taken by the competent authority, should be precluded from exercising that right in the Member State of residence in elections to the European Parliament. WUpon automatic registration or when receiving an application for registration as a voter, Member States may require from the citizen concerned a formal declaration confirming that they have not been deprived of their right to vote. When receiving an application for standing as a candidates in their country of residence, Union citizens should be requir, Member States may require the citizen concerned to produce a statement confirming that they have not been deprived of the right to stand in the elections to the European Parliament.
Amendment 67 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to prevent multiple voting or instances where the same person would stand as a candidate more than once at the same elections, Member States should exchange information gathered from the formal declarations produced by Union voters and Union citizens entitled to stand as candidatesbe required to exchange information on non- national Union citizens registered to vote or stand as candidates in a Member State of residence. As Member States rely on different data to identify citizens, a common set of data should be envisaged in order to accurately identify Union voters and Union citizens entitled to stand as candidates and stop them from voting or standing as a candidate more than once. The personal data exchanged should be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve these purposes.
Amendment 68 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The lack of adequate information, in the context of electoral procedures, affects citizens in the exercise of their electoral rights as part of their rights as Union citizens. It also affects the capacity of competent authorities to exercise their rights and to deliver on their obligations. Member States should be required to designate authorities with special responsibilities for providing appropriate information to Union citizens on their rights under Article 20(2), point (b), and Article 22(2) TFEU and, the national rules and procedures regarding participation in and the organization of elections to the European Parliament, and the national political system. In order to ensure the timeliness and effectiveness of communications, information should be provided in clear and comprehensible terms, and sufficiently in advance of elections, taking into account that electoral rolls are to be closed 14 weeks and candidates to be announced 12 weeks before polling day.
Amendment 74 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to improve the accessibility of electoral information, such information should be made available in at least onetwo other official languages of the Union than that or those of the host Member State, broadly understood by the largest possible number of Union citizens residing on its territory. Member States may use different official languages of the Union in specific parts of their territory or their regions depending on the language understood by the largest group of Union citizens residing therein.
Amendment 79 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Data regarding the exercise of rights and the application of this Directive can be useful in the identification of measures necessary to ensure the effective exercise of Union citizens’ electoral rights. In order to improve and harmonise the collection of data for elections to the European Parliament, it is necessary to introduce regular monitoring and reporting of implementation by Member States on the basis of common indicators. In parallel, the Commission should assess the application of this Directive, and submit a report including such an assessment to the European Parliament and to the Council, after each election to the European Parliament.
Amendment 80 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is necessary that the Commission conduct its own evaluation of the application of this Directive within a reasonable timeframe after at least twothe next elections to of the European Parliament, accompanied, if appropriate by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
Amendment 96 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable a Union voter who has expressed the wish to be registered as a voter to be entered on the electoral roll sufficiently in advance ofno later than 14 weeks before polling day.
Amendment 107 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall designate a national authority with responsibility for taking the necessary measures to ensure that non-national Union citizens are informed in a timely mannermmediately upon their registration of residence and in a timely manner ahead of elections of the conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in elections to the European Parliament.
Amendment 111 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Member States shall ensure that the authorities designated pursuant to paragraph 1, shall directly and individually communicate to Union voters and Union nationals entitled to stand as candidates immediately upon their registration, the following information:
Amendment 113 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) description of the political system of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 119 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The information on conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in elections to the European Parliament and theany information referred to in paragraph 2communicated pursuant to the provisions of this Directive shall be provided in clear and plain language.
Amendment 121 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The information referred to in the first subparagraph shall, in addition to being communicated in one or more of the official languages of the host Member State, also be accompanied by a translation in at least onetwo other official languages of the Union that isare broadly understood by the largest possible number of Union citizens residing on its territory, in accordance with the quality requirements of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 . _________________ 30 Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 1).
Amendment 127 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall exchange the information required for the implementation of Article 4 , sufficiently in advance of polling day and with due regard to the dates for announcing candidates and closing the electoral rolls for the election. To that end, the Member State of residence shall begin supplying the home Member State, no later than sixteen weeks before the first day of the electoral period referred to in Article 10(1) of the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage the set of information provided in Annex III , . The home Member State shall, in accordance with its national legislation, take appropriate measures to ensure that its nationals do not vote more than once or stand as candidates in more than one Member State.
Amendment 130 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Member States tshatll endeavour to provide for the possibilities of advance voting, postal voting, and electronic and internet voting, in elections to the European Parliament. Where possibilities of advance voting, postal voting, and electronic and internet voting are available in elections to the European Parliament to their nationals, the Member States concerned shall ensure the availability of those voting methods to Union voters under similar the same conditions as the ones applicable to their own nationals.
Amendment 134 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall designate an authority with responsibility for collecting and providing relevant statistical data to the public and the Commission, on the participation of Union citizens who are not nationals in elections to the European Parliament. Such statistical data shall be based on common indicators and harmonised at Union level.
Amendment 136 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Commission is empowered to adopt implementing acts concerning the form of the data referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 19.
Amendment 141 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Within six months after each election to the European Parliament Member States shall send information to the Commission on the application of this Directive in their territory. In addition to general observations, the report shall contain statistical data on the participation in elections to the European Parliament of Union voters and Union citizens entitled to stand as candidates as referred to in Article 15 and a summary of the measures taken to support it.
Amendment 144 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Within two years after the 20294 elections to the European Parliament, the Commission shall assess its application and produce an evaluation report on the progress towards achievement of the objectives contained herein. The evaluation shall also include a review on the functioning of Article 13. The evaluation shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
Amendment 153 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 4 a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 4 a (new)
I have not been deprived of the right to vote in my home Member State.
Amendment 206 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The fulfilment of the Authority's objectives relies on adequate resourcing and staffing at Union level, while insufficient funds for personnel and equipment of FIUs risk to highjack the entire rationale of the Authority, therefore the good cooperation of the Member States is an essential condition to achieve the best results;
Amendment 230 #
2021/0240(COD)
(14a) In the context of its supervisory tasks, the Authority should also actively cooperate with competent FIUs and have the possibility to consult with EU law enforcement agencies. Where the Authority, in the course of its supervisory and oversight activities, discovers facts, that could be related to money laundering, to a predicate offence or to terrorist financing, it should ensure that the information is promptly made available to the competent FIUs within their respective areas of competence.
Amendment 240 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The first category of credit and financial institutionor non-financial institutions, including crypto-asset service providers, or groups of such institutions should be assessed every three years, based on a combination of objective criteria related to their cross-border presence and activity, and criteria related to their inherent ML/FT risk profile. Only large complex financial groups present in a number of Member States that could be more efficiently supervised at Union level should be included in theDuring subsequent selection process. With respect to credit institutions, minimal cross-border presence for inclusion in the selection process should be based on the number of subsidiaries and branches in different Membunds, the Authority should assess those institutions based on residual risk benchmarks in order to better States, because risky banking activitrget the riskiest of significant volume require a local presence in a form of an establishment. Other financial sector entities may, in contrast, carry out activities that can be sufficiently risky from an ML/TF perspective by means of direct provision of services, for example via a network of agents, but may not have established subsidiaries or branches in a large number of Member States. Therefore, applying the samethose obliged entities. In order to ensure that direct supervision by the Authority has added value, only cross- border criteria, that is to say the one related to freedom of establishment, would result in scoping out large financial sector entities that can have a significant risk profile in a number of Member States, without being established there. Since the volume of activities via direct provision of services is generally smaller than the volume of activities carried out in a branch or a subsidiary, it is appropriate to consider only groups that are established in at least two Member States, but provide services directly or via a network of agents in at least eight more Member Statesentities operating in a minimum number of Member States, either through having an establishment or as a result of the freedom to provide services, should fall within the remit of the Authority.
Amendment 249 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
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, while avoiding de-risking and other unintended consequences, such as financial exclusion and discriminatory policies.
Amendment 251 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The final selection criterion should warrant a level playing field among directly supervised obliged entities, and to that end, no discretion should be left to the Authority or supervisory authorities in deciding on the list of obliged entities that should be subject to direct supervision. Therefore, where a given assessed obliged entity operates cross-border and falls within the high risk category in accordance with the harmonised methodology in a minimum number of Member States, it should be deemed a selected obliged entity. In case of credit institutions, the cross- border aspect should be addressed by including those credit institutions that are classified as high risk in at least four Member States and where in at least one Member State of those four the entity has been under supervisory or oGeographical balance should also be taken into account, with at least one selected entity per Member State. This will enhance ther public investigation for material breachesrevention of AML/CFT requirements. In case of other financial institutions, the cross-border aspect should be addressed by including those financial institutions that are classified as high risk in at least one Member State where they are established and at least five other Member States where they operate by means of direct provision of servicand ensure that supervisory practices are aligned across the Union, while avoiding reputational impact for particular Member States or entities.
Amendment 274 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36a) The implementation of EU restrictive measures following the Russian war on Ukraine shows the complexity of identifying assets owned by oligarchs, who hide them across different jurisdictions through complex legal and financial structures. An inconsistent enforcement of restrictive measures undermines the Union's ability to speak with one voice It is therefore paramount that EU restrictive measures are fully implemented and the violation of those measures must not be allowed to pay off. It must be ensured that the assets of individuals and entities that violate the restrictive measures can be effectively confiscated in the future. AMLA can play an important role in this regard. The Authority should be responsible for a European Asset Registry. It will be tasked with creating and maintaining an interoperable interface, which acts as an access point. The Authority should also be able to define the standards for data format and accessibility regarding the list of assets as defined by [please insert reference – 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive].The Authority should also cooperate with Asset Recovery Offices in Member States and contribute towards attaining the goals set in [please insert reference –Proposal for a Directive on asset recovery and confiscation, COM(2022) 245 final].
Amendment 283 #
2021/0240(COD)
(41) The Chair of the Authority should chair the General Board meetings and have a right to vote when decisions are taken by simple majority. The Commission and the Parliament should be a non-voting member on the General Board. To establish good cooperation with other relevant institutions, the General Board should also be able to admit other non-voting observers, such as a representative of the Single Supervisory Mechanism and of each of the three European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA) for the General Board in its Supervisory Composition and Europol, the EPPO and Eurojust for the General Board in its FIU composition, where matters that fall under their respective mandates are discussed or decided upon. To allow a smooth decision making process, decisions of the General Board should be taken by a simple majority, except for decisions concerning draft regulatory and implementing technical standards, guidelines and recommendations which should be taken by a qualified majority of Member State representatives in accordance with voting rules of the TFEU.
Amendment 285 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The governing body of the Authority should be the Executive Board composed of the Chair of the Authority and of five full time members, appointed by the General Board based on the shortlist by the Commission. With the aim of ensuring a speedy and efficient decision making process, the Executive Board should be in charge of planning and execution of all the tasks of the Authority except where specific decisions are explicitly allocated to the General Board. In order to ensure objectivity and appropriate rapidity of the decision-making process in the area of direct supervision of the selected obliged entities, the Executive Board should take all binding decisions addressed to selected obliged entities. In addition, together with a representative of the Commission the Executive Board should be collectively responsible for the administrative and budgetary decisions of the Authority. The consentopinion of the Commission should be required when the Executive Board is taking decisions related to the budget administration, procurement, recruitment, and audit of the Authority, given that a portion of funding of the Authority will be provided from Union budget.
Amendment 287 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) To allow for swift decisions, all decisions of the Executive Board, including the decision where the Commission has a right to vote, should be taken by simple majority, with the Chair holding a casting vote in case of a tied vote. To ensure sound financial management of the Authority, the Commission’s consentopinion should be required for decisions related to budget, administration and recruitment. The voting members of the Executive Board other than the Chair should be selected by the General Board, based on a short-list established by the Commission.
Amendment 293 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) The Executive Director of the Authority should be appointed by the Executive Board, after approval by the European Parliament, based on a shortlist from the Commission. The Executive Director of the Authority should be a senior administrative official of the Authority, in charge of the day-to-day management of the Authority, and responsible for budget administration, procurement, and recruitment and staffing.
Amendment 296 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) It is necessary to provide the Authority with the requisite human and financial resources so that it can fulfil its objectives, tasks and responsibilities under this Regulation. To guarantee the proper functioning of the Authority, funding should be provided, depending on its tasks and functions, by a combination of fees levied on certain obliged entities and a contribution from the Union budget, depending on the tasks and functions, with a transparent methodology for the levies in order to ensure a predictable budget for the Authority. The budget of the Authority should be part of the Union budget, confirmed by the Budgetary Authority on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. The Authority should submit to the Commission a draft budget and an internal financial regulation for approval.
Amendment 304 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Public-private partnerships (‘PPPs’) have become increasingly important cooperation and information exchange fora between FIUs, various national supervisory and law enforcement authorities and obliged entities in some Member States. Where the Authority would act as direct supervisor of selected obliged entities which are part of a PPP in any Member State, it could be beneficial for the Authority to also participate therein, on conditions determined by the relevant national public authority or authorities that set up such PPP, and with their explicit agreement. The Authority should also be empowered to initiate such partnerships, if necessary for attaining the objectives set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 306 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61 a (new)
Recital 61 a (new)
(61a) For the purposes of this Regulation, when the notion of competent authorities refers to investigating and prosecuting authorities, it shall be interpreted as including the central and decentralised levels of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) with regard to the Member States that participate in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the EPPO.
Amendment 313 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -1 (new)
Article -1 (new)
Article -1 Subject matter This Regulation establishes: (a) A European system of AML/CFT supervision in order to ensure a consistent high-quality application of AML/CFT supervisory duties over obliged entities, to develop a single supervisory methodology and to promote an efficient cooperation between all competent authorities; (b) A European system of FIUs in order to prevent, detect and effectively combat money laundering and terrorist financing in the internal market.; (c) A European system on targeted financial sanctions in order to ensure an effective preparation, adoption, supervision and enforcement of measures related to targeted financial sanctions.
Amendment 322 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘selected obliged entity’ means a credit institution, a financial or non- 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 which is under direct supervision by the Authority pursuant to Article 13 ;
Amendment 328 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘non-selected obliged entity’ means a credit institution, a financial or 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;
Amendment 337 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
(5a) 'AML Compliance Entity' means an entity or digital platform that fully complies with GDPR and contributes to effective compliance with the objectives and obligations set out in this Regulation and in the legislative acts referred to in Article 1 paragraph 2.
Amendment 357 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) collect information fromon a regular basis from financial obliged entities and crypto-asset service providers, its own supervisory activities and those of the supervisors and supervisory authorities on weaknesses identified in the application of AML/CFT rules by obliged entities, their risk exposure, the sanctions administered and the remedial actions applied;
Amendment 360 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) establish a central AML/CFT database of information collected from supervisors and, supervisory authorities and obliged entities, and keep up to date;
Amendment 363 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) establish and maintain an interoperable interface to access the registers of certain movable and immovable assets defined by an implementing act as referred to in [please insert reference – 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive], providing a minimum set of information, in a predefined format, including beneficial ownership information available at least to competent authorities;
Amendment 367 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) monitor and support the implementation of asset freezetargeted financial sanctions under the Union restrictive measures across the internal market, as well as publishing information on asset freezes and confiscations;
Amendment 374 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) ensure group-wide compliance with the requirements applicable to the selected obliged entities pursuant to legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2), and any other legally binding Union acts that impose AML/CFT-related obligations on financial institutions, including targeted financial sanctions;
Amendment 407 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 416 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
(ia) organise visits to the FIUs, on a case-by-case basis, to monitor the capacity and compliance with the AML/CFT requirements and assess the different needs to be recommended for the Member States to address in order to improve the fight against anti-money laundering and financing of terrorism.
Amendment 425 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) to carry out mediation upon a request from the supervisors and supervisory authorities or on its own initiative;
Amendment 427 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) to settle a disagreement between supervisors and supervisory authorities with binding effect in cross border situations, and to take supervisory decision directly applicable to obliged entities concerned in accordance with Article 30a.
Amendment 428 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. With respect to competent authorities in charge of preparation, adoption, supervision and enforcement relating to targeted financial sanctions, the Authority shall have the following powers: (a) to receive data and analyses from competent authorities, third countries, international organisations and other reliable sources in view of preparing new targeted financial sanctions; (b) to collect information and statistics in relation to the tasks and activities of the competent authorities in charge of supervision and enforcement of targeted financial sanctions; (c) to receive information on possible violations, circumvention and evasion of targeted financial sanctions; (d) to issue guidelines and recommendations.
Amendment 432 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. For the purposes of carrying out the tasks set out in Article 5(1), the Authority shall have the following powers:
Amendment 433 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. When exercising the powers provided for in paragraph 4, and in accordance with Article 24 of Council Regulation(EU) 2017/1939, the Authority shall without undue delay inform the EPPO of any criminal conduct in respect of which it could exercise its competence in accordance with Article 22 and Article 25(2) and (3) of that Regulation. Pursuant to Article 8 of Regulation 883/2013 , the Authority shall transmit to OLAF without delay any information relating to possible cases of fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union. Following-up on the initial information, on its own initiative or upon request and in accordance with the respective legal framework, the Authority shall provide the EPPO, or the competent national judicial or law enforcement authority, with any other connected information.
Amendment 435 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The Authority shall consult with the EPPO, or the competent national judicial or law enforcement authority, where it conducts investigations under Article 17 and before taking supervisory measures under Article 20 and imposing pecuniary sanctions or penalty payments under Article 21 and 22 where the EPPO is conducting an investigation into the same facts. The modalities shall be laid down in the working agreement with the EPPO under Article 80(2).
Amendment 436 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. In duly justified cases where necessary to preserve the confidentiality of an ongoing or future criminal investigation, the Authority shall take into account any grounds raised by the EPPO, or the competent national judicial or law enforcement authority, against the opening or the continuation of an investigation, supervisory measures, the imposition of pecuniary sanctions or penalty payments by the Authority, or to the performance of certain acts pertaining to them.
Amendment 438 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -7 (new)
Article -7 (new)
Amendment 478 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Authority shall publish the information collected pursuant to paragraph 2 points (a), (b), (g) and (h). A summary of non-confidential findings regarding the information collected pursuant to paragraph 2 point (c), (d), (e) and (f) shall be made available to obliged entities and to the public.
Amendment 484 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Competent authorities may share 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.
Amendment 486 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
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.
Amendment 496 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. Any supervisory authority or any non-AML authority may address to the Authority a reasoned request for information collected pursuant to paragraph 2this article that is relevant for its supervisory activities. The Authority shall assess those requests and provide the information requested by the supervisory authorities or non-AML authorities on a need-to-know basis and confidential basis and in a timely manner. The Authority shall inform the authority that has initially provided the requested information, of the identity of the requesting supervisory or other authority, the identity of an obliged entity concerned, the reason for the information request as well as whether the information has been provided to the requesting authority.
Amendment 498 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Authority shall make available to all supervisors consolidated information of obliged entities which may be relevant for supervisory purposes and to inform benchmarks in the risk assessment process.
Amendment 502 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11a Requests for information from obliged entities 1. The supervisory authorities and the Authority shall provide each other with all the necessary information regarding selected and non-selected obliged entities to carry out their respective duties. 2. Where information is not available or is not made available under paragraph 1, the Authority may request supervisory authorities to gather the necessary information or address a request directly to the relevant obliged entities or associations of obliged entities. The request shall be duly justified, include the legal basis of the request, specify what information is required and fix a reasonable time-limit within which the information is to be provided. Where the information is requested by the Authority directly from obliged entities, the supervisory authority shall receive a copy of the request. 3. The addressees of such a request shall provide the Authority, within the time limit specified in the request, with clear, accurate and complete information. Upon a duly justified request, the Authority may decide to extend the deadline. The Authority may, pursuant to this Article, request any type of information that it requires to fulfil its legal mandate and to exercise its powers effectively. 4. The Authority may use confidential information received pursuant to this Article only for the purposes of carrying out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation and applicable Union law. 5. The Authority shall submit the draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [1 January 2025]. The Commission is empowered to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 38 of this Regulation.
Amendment 508 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 b (new)
Article 11 b (new)
Article 11b Information sharing with FIUs Where, in the course of its supervisory activities carried out on the obliged entities by the Authority under Section 3, 4 and 5 of this Chapter, or otherwise, the Authority discovers facts that are clearly related to money laundering, to a predicate offence or to terrorist financing, it shall ensure that the information is made promptly available to the competent FIUs. In the case of facts having a cross- border relevance, the information, if it has elements of the offence of money laundering as set out in Article 3 of the Directive(EU) 2018/1673 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, shall also be promptly communicated to Europol _________________ 1a 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)
Amendment 513 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes of carrying out the tasks listed in Article 5(2), the Authority shall carry out a periodic assessment of the following obliged entities, based on criteria and following the process specified in paragraphs 2 to 6 of this Article and in Article 13: on credit institutions, financial and non-financial institutions and crypto- asset service providers referred to in paragraph 4 where they operate via establishments referred to in Article 2 (8) of [proposal for 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive -COM/2021/423 final] or as a result of the freedom to provide services in at least four Member States, including the Member State of establishment.
Amendment 521 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 529 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 535 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where, in a Member State no obliged entity meets the criteria referred to in the first paragraph, the periodic assessment shall be carried out based on the same criteria and following the same process on all credit institutions, other financial and non-financial institutions and crypto asset service providers referred to in paragraph 3 which are established in that Member State.
Amendment 563 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – point a
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 and jurisdictions identified and designated as referred to in Chapter III Section 2 of [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation];
Amendment 583 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. For the risk assessment as referred to in paragraph1 regarding crypto-asset service providers, The Authority shall define a separate set of benchmarks, where the indicators for risk profile may differ from those defined by paragraph 4. The benchmarks shall take into account the specificities of these providers, as well as the cross-border and pseudo- anonymised nature of crypto-assets.
Amendment 590 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. The Authority shall review the benchmarks and methodology at least every three years, as well as the adequate resources required to apply them. Where amendments are required, the Authority shall submit amended draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission.
Amendment 593 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The following obliged entities shall qualify as a selected obliged entity: For the first selection process, the 40 obliged entities assessed pursuant to Article 12 that have their highest inherent risk profile in at least two Member States shall qualify as a selected obliged entity. For the second selection process, the 45 obliged entities assessed pursuant to Article 12 that have their highest residual risk profile in at least two Member States shall qualify as a selected obliged entity. As of the third selection process, the number of obliged entities may be increased up to 10% for each selection process. To that end the Commission shall provide an impact assessment taking into account the budgetary impact of this increase.
Amendment 599 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 606 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 612 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The lists drawn up by the Authority should also take into consideration the criterion of geographical balance and ensure that at least one entity is selected from each Member State. Where in a Member State no obliged entity has been selected pursuant to paragraph 1, the obliged entity with the highest risk profile assessed pursuant to article 12 (2) shall qualify as a selected obliged entity.
Amendment 651 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. In order to carry out the tasks conferred on it by this Regulation, the Authority may, subject to prior notification to the financial supervisor concerned, conduct all necessary on-site inspections at the business premises of the natural and legal persons referred to in Article 16. Where the proper conduct and efficiency of the inspection so require, the Authority may carry out the on-site inspection without prior announcement to those legal persons.
Amendment 653 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The staff of the Authority and other persons authorised by the Authority to conduct an on-site inspection may enter any business premises and land of the natural and legal persons subject to a decision on investigation adopted by the Authority and shall have all the powers provided in Article 20.
Amendment 655 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. The natural and legal persons referred to in Article 16 shall be subject to on-site inspections on the basis of a decision of the Authority.
Amendment 675 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point i a (new)
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.
Amendment 711 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. The Authority shall disclose to the public every administrative measure, administrative pecuniary sanction and periodic penalty payment that has been imposed on a selected obliged entity pursuant to Articles 20,21 and 22, unless such disclosure to the public would cause disproportionate damage to the parties involved. The publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach.
Amendment 712 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The disclosed information shall at least be available on the website of the Authority. The Authority shall transmit without delay, on a confidential basis, at least to the European Parliament all relevant information on administrative measures, administrative pecuniary sanctions and periodic penalty payments that has been imposed on a selected obliged entity pursuant to Articles 20, 21 and 22. Any personal data contained in the publication shall be deemed compatible with the relevant data protection framework.
Amendment 716 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 8
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. The Authority shall also transmit information to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office where such information 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.
Amendment 719 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
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. As part of each assessment the Authority shall assess the extent to which a financial supervisor monitors effectively, and takes the necessary steps to ensure, compliance by the obliged entities it supervises with applicable Union law. 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 and the Council.
Amendment 739 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
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. Financial supervisors shall provide regular updates to the Authority on the type of measures they have implemented in response to the report. 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.
Amendment 787 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 6
Article 30 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall have one month from the date of receipt of the request from the Authority to adopt a decision whether to authorise the transfer of the relevant tasks and powers or to oppose it. The decision, adopted by the Commission after verifying that the requirements in paragraph 5 are met, shall be notified to the Authority, which 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.
Amendment 805 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(da) where relevant, the effectiveness and the degree of the tasks performed by the authority overseeing self-regulatory bodies as laid down in Article 38 of [please insert reference – proposal for 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final]
Amendment 812 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7
Article 31 – paragraph 7
7. For the purposes of this Article, the Executive Board shall adopt a peer review work plan every two years, which shall reflect the lessons learnt from the past peer review processes and discussions held in the General Board in supervisory composition. The peer review work plan shall constitute a separate part of the annual and multiannual working programme and shall be included in the Single Programming Document. The peer review work plan shall take into account geographical balance and shall aim to cover the majority of the Member States. In case of urgency or unforeseen events, the Authority may decide to carry out additional peer reviews.
Amendment 834 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -33 (new)
Article -33 (new)
Article -33 Cooperation within the European System of FIUs 1. The Authority and FIUs shall constitute the European System of FIUs in order to prevent, detect and effectively combat money laundering and terrorist financing in the internal market. The FIUs and the Authority shall perform their tasks and carry out their activities in accordance with this Regulation and applicable Union law. 2. FIUs shall participate in, and contribute to, the activities of the European System of FIUs in accordance with this Regulation and applicable Union law. In particular: (a) the FIU shall be able to participate in joint analyses as an integral part of its tasks, as well as in other activities undertaken by the Authority pursuant to its mandate; (b) the FIU shall provide the Authority with the relevant data and information required to fulfil its tasks, as well as to implement the Authority´s indications in accordance with this Regulation and applicable Union law. All information obtained through the participation in the activities of the Authority shall be covered by the strictest confidentiality.
Amendment 835 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -33 a (new)
Article -33 a (new)
Article -33a FIU Executive Secretariat 1. A permanent Executive Secretariat shall be set up to carry out the tasks entrusted to the EU Support and Coordination Mechanism, to perform necessary operational activities, to submit proposals and, where appropriate, prepare draft decisions, in the following tasks: (a) supervise, coordinate and, where necessary, direct joint analysis to be performed with the relevant FIUs pursuant to Article 33 and Article 5(5) points (a) to (d); (b) support cooperation among FIUs, pursuant to Articles 5(5)(a) and 36 and Article 24 [please insert a reference to the AMLD], in particular by developing best practices, methods and formats; (c) elaborate methods and procedures, and coordinate and facilitate the planning, organization and conduction of joint analyses, pursuant to Articles 5(5) (b), (c), (d), 33 and 34; (d) develop expert knowledge on detection analysis and dissemination methods, pursuant to Article 5(5)(f); (e) develop criteria for the identification of cross-border cases that FIUs are required to share, pursuant to Article 24 [please insert reference to the AMLD]; (f) prepare indicators, formats, contents for the detection and reporting of STRs pursuant to Article 50 [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final] and other disclosures received by FIUs; (g) follow the management, maintenance and update of FIU.net and the development of IT and artificial intelligence services and tools for secure information sharing, pursuant to Articles 5(5)(e) and 37; (h) follow the work of international and European fora on FIU-related matters. 2. The permanent Executive Secretariat shall also facilitate the implementation of the decisions taken by the Executive Board and General Board in FIU composition. 3. The permanent Executive Secretariat shall be composed of staff of the Authority. It shall have dedicated human, financial and IT resources. It shall operate independently and carry out its functions autonomously from the supervisory functions provided in Chapter II, Section 2 to 6 of this Regulation. 4. When performing its duties, the permanent Executive Secretariat shall closely cooperate with FIUs and the FIU Delegates.
Amendment 869 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Amendment 875 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter II – Section 6 a (new)
Chapter II – Section 6 a (new)
Amendment 898 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. The General Board shall have, alternatively, the supervisory composition as laid down in paragraph 2 or, the FIU composition as laid down in paragraph 3 or the targeted financial sanctions composition laid down in paragraph 3a.
Amendment 902 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) one representative of the European Parliament, without the right to vote;
Amendment 904 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) where matters that fall under their respective mandates are discussed or decided upon, one representative of EBA, EIOPA or ESMA, without the right to vote.
Amendment 910 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) one representative of the European Parliament, without the right to vote;
Amendment 912 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) where matters that fall under their respective mandates are discussed or decided upon, one representative of Europol, Eurojust or EPPO, without the right to vote.
Amendment 914 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 915 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The General Board in targeted financial sanctions composition shall perform the tasks and adopt the decisions pursuant to Section 6a of Chapter II.
Amendment 920 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 4
Article 49 – paragraph 4
4. The General Board shall adopt the draft regulatory and implementing technical standards, opinions, recommendations, guidelines and decisions of the Authority referred to in Section 7 of Chapter II, in an appropriate composition, depending on the subject-matter of the instrument. Where a given instrument concerns both FIU and supervision-related matters, adoption shall be required by both compositions of the General Board independently. Where a given instrument concerns both authorities competent for targeted financial sanctions and supervision-related matters, adoption shall be required by both compositions of the General Board independently. The draft regulatory and implementing technical standards, opinions, recommendations, and guidelines shall be adopted based on a proposal of the relevant internal committee.
Amendment 953 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 1
1. The Chair of the Authority shall be selected on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge, recognised standing and experience in the area of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism and other relevant qualification, following an open selection procedure, which shall respect the principle of gender balance, which shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Commission shall draw up a shortlist of two qualified candidates for the position of the Chair of the Authority. The Council, after approval by the European Parliament, shall adopt an implementing decision to appoint the Chair of the Authority.
Amendment 965 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 4
Article 58 – paragraph 4
4. The Executive Director shall be selected on the grounds of merit and documented high-level administrative, budgetary and management skills, following an open selection procedure, which shall respect the principle of gender balance, which shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union, and, as appropriate, other press or internet sites. The Commission shall draw up a shortlist of two qualified candidates for the position of the Executive Director. The Executive Board shall appoint the Executive Director after approval by the European Parliament.
Amendment 980 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Authority’s budget shall be adequate to ensure sufficient staff and equipment in order to allow the achievement of its objectives and tasks set by this Regulation.
Amendment 981 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the fees paid by the selected and non-selected obliged entities in accordance with Article 65, for tasks mentioned in Article 5(1), points (b) and (c). and specified in a delegated act in accordance with Article 86;
Amendment 984 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) any voluntary financial contribution from the Member States. including from the Member State where the Authority´s seat is located;
Amendment 985 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) agreed charges for publications, training and for any other services where they have been specifically requested by one or more obliged entities or competent authorities.
Amendment 990 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 65 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Authority may levy fees on any obliged entity for other services provided.
Amendment 995 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 65 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. The Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 86 to supplement this Regulation by specifying the methodology for calculating the amount of the fee levied on each selected and non-selected obliged entity subject to fees in accordance with paragraph 1, and the procedure for collecting these fees. When developing the methodology for determining the individual amount of fees the Commission shall take into account the following:
Amendment 1014 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 76 a (new)
Article 76 a (new)
Amendment 1034 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 79 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 79 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where relevant for the fulfilment of its tasks, the Authority may also take the initiative for setting up cooperation agreements with selected obliged entities, as well as other obliged entities in the financial and non-financial sector. These cooperation arrangements may also provide for the participation of supervisory authorities, FIUs, Europol, data protection authorities at national and Union level, as well as, when appropriate of AML Compliance Entities. The Authority shall make sure that these arrangements are in full compliance with data protection rules.
Amendment 1054 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 87 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 87 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The decision on the location regarding the headquarters of the Authority shall take into account the equal geographic coverage of the decentralised agencies in the Union
Amendment 22 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure compliance within Union law or national law compliant with Union law, service providers should communicate their intent to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets to Member Statehave to register with the Member States before they are able to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets. Any natural or legal persons should be able to submit a complaint if they have concerns regarding the use by a relying party of the European Digital Identity Wallets. That will allow Member States to protect users from fraud and prevent the unlawful use of identity data and electronic attestations of attributes as well as to ensure that the processing of sensitive data, like health data, can be verified by relying parties in accordance with Union law or national law. In order to facilitate the registration procedure, a successful registration for using the European Digital Identity Wallets should enable expedited processing of registrations for similar uses.
Amendment 26 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services. Without prejudice to Member States’ prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR-codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. The users should have access to a simple interface that would allow them to have an overview over their current and previous authorisations of sharing of personal data or electronic attestation of attributes and have the possibility to withdraw their consent. Relying on the level of assurance “high”, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e-mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and a high level of security. Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 44 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Service providers use the identity data provided by the set of person identification data available from electronic identification schemes pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 in order to match users from another Member State with the legal identity of that user. However, despite the use of the eIDAS data set, in many cases ensuring an accurate match requires additional information about the user and specific unique identification procedures at national level. To further support the usability of electronic identification means, this Regulation should require Member States to take specific measures to ensure a correct identity match in the process of electronic identification. For the same purpose, this Regulation should also extend the mandatory minimum data set and require the use of a unique and persistent electronic identifier in conformity with Union law in those cross-border cases where it is necessary to legally identify the user upon his/her request in a unique and persistent way. However, given the potential risks to privacy inherent to a unique and persistent identifier, its use shall be restricted in all other cases.
Amendment 114 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) securely request and obtain, store, select, combine and share, in a manner that is transparent to and traceable by the user, the necessary legal person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes to authenticate online and offline in order to use online public and private services, while ensuring that selective disclosure is possible;
Amendment 116 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point aa
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point aa
(a a) view and manage the transactions or uses of person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes that the user has agreed to;
Amendment 122 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint 2
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint 2
(2) for relying parties to request and validate person identification data and electronic attestations of attributes in accordance with the registration procedure outlined in Article 6b(1);
Amendment 161 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6b – paragraph 1
Article 6b – paragraph 1
1. Relying parties shall not rely upon European Digital Identity Wallets unless they have registered in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph. Where relying parties intend to rely upon European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with this Regulation, they shall communicate it toregister with the Member State where the relying party is established to, which shall ensure compliance with requirements set out in Union law or national law for the provision of the specific services. When communica for which registration is requested. When submitting their intenregistration tofor rely ing upon European Digital Identity wallets, they shall also inform about the intended use of the European Digital Identity Walletrelying parties shall inform about the intended use of the European Digital Identity Wallet. The registration system shall allow for an expedited procedure for cases where a similar use of the European Digital Identity wallets has previously been registered. Member States shall provide a mechanism that allows for the reception and investigation of complaints regarding the compliance of relying parties with the Union or national law for the provision of a service. Where relying upon the European Digital Identity Wallets for the provision of a specific service violates Union or national law, registration shall be revoked.
Amendment 175 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 10a – paragraph 1
Article 10a – paragraph 1
1. Where European Digital Wallets issued pursuant to Article 6a and the validation mechanisms referred to in Article 6a(5) points (a), (b) and (c) are breached or partly compromised in a manner that affects their reliability or the reliability of the other European Digital Identity Wallets, the issuing Member State shall, without delay, suspend the issuance and revoke the validity of the European Digital Identity Wallet and inform the other Member States and the Commission accordingly. The issuing Member State shall endeavour to remedy the breach or compromise as soon as possible.
Amendment 207 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – point f
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – point f
(f) to cooperate with supervisory authorities established under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular, by informing them without undue delay, about the results of audits of qualified trust service providers, whereany breaches of personal data protection rules have been breached and aboutand security breaches which constitute personal data breaches; or suspicion thereof that they become aware of in the performance of their tasks;
Amendment 212 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Where there is reason to believe that personal data protection rules appear tocould have been breached, the supervisory body shall inform the supervisory authorities under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the results of its auditswithout undue delay and shall provide the results of its audits as soon as they are available.;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2272(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Proposes that the annual report will include information on registrants who have been convicted for fraud, corruption, non-payment of tax or social security obligations, or who are based in the list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2272(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Proposes that the annual report will include information on registrants who have been investigated and finally removed from the register because of non- compliance with the Code of Conduct;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2272(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for the inclusion of an analysis of the effects that new rules of transparency have on decision-making procedures and the impact that these rules have on the perception that citizens have of the Union institutions;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2272(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that observance of the code of conduct, set out in Annex III to the Agreement is part of the eligibility criteria and that registrants are to take into account confidentiality requirements and rules applicable to the former members and staff of the institutions which apply to them after leaving office; considers that a reference to the values and principles of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) should be included in the Code of Conduct;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2272(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the undertaking to increase resources for maintenance, development and promotion of the register, as well as the Council’s formal contribution to the secretariat; believes that such commitments to the joint scheme should enhance the capacity of the Secretariat to provide timely guidance to the registrants and support them in the registration and update of the requested data; nevertheless, insists, in particular, that human resources are very limited in proportion to the number of registrants in comparison with similar national schemes and that that limitation hampers the efficiency of the operation of the register; calls on the institutions to ensure the provision of the resources necessary in order to guarantee the proper functioning of the Secretariat and the Management Board;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2221(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that in its study the Commission identifies 9 main criminal markets and estimates that the annual revenues of these markets represented 139 billion in 2019; Stresses in particular that the markets for trafficking in human beings for sexual exploitation and migrant smuggling represent 7.185 billion and 289 million respectively; Stresses the importance of the collection of data by the relevant agencies in order to better assess the situation.
Amendment 11 #
2020/2221(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. HRegrets the lack of harmonisation in national legislation to combat organised crime; highlights that organised criminal groups take advantage of the different laws in individual Member States, and that the development of a harmonised anti-fraud approach at EU level is complicated by differing definitions of organised crime; reiterates therefore its previous calls for the revision of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008, and the need to establish a common definition of organised crime, which should also take into account the use of new technologies and the use of violence, corruption or intimidation by criminal groups to obtain control of economic activities or public procurement, or to influence democratic processes;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2221(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that the Commission's study identifies six main threats that could within five years significantly alter the way organised crime operates; highlights among these the impact of the coronavirus prompting a change in the modus operandi of organised crime cells; notes that this is also linked to the accelerated use of cryptocurrencies and non-banking payments; notes also that Europol has observed an increase in coronavirus-related criminal activity in the form of online crime, fraud or counterfeiting.
Amendment 16 #
2020/2221(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Recalls that in order to tackle the coronavirus pandemic and to ensure the sustainable transition of our economies, the Commission is making available EUR 672.5 billion in the form of loans and grants to support the reforms and investments undertaken by the Member States through the Recovery and Resilience Facility; stresses the need to pro-actively ensure that the money is well used but also to provide the necessary resources to the control and audit institutions in order to ensure that the money is used in the interest of all European citizens.
Amendment 20 #
2020/2221(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the start of operations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) on 1 June 2021; reiterates the need to ensure that the EPPO has all the necessary resources to carry out its functions, in order to protect the EU’s financial interests; responsible for investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgment crimes against the financial interests of the EU including several types of fraud, VAT fraud with damages above 10 million euro, money laundering, corruption, etc; reiterates the need to ensure that the EPPO has all the necessary resources to carry out its functions, in order to protect the EU’s financial interests; regrets that five Member States have not yet joined the EPPO; recalls the importance of cooperation with other EU bodies and agencies such as OLAF, Eurojust and Europol.
Amendment 194 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the introduction of a joint constituency from which forty-six members of the European Parliament shall be elected and in which lists are headed by each political family’s candidate for the post of President of the Commission could offer an opportunity to enhance the democratic and transnational dimension of the European elections; believes that the goal of establishing a joint constituency is achievable only if geographical, demographic and gender balance is ensured, by guaranteeing that smaller Member States are not put at a competitive disadvantage compared to the larger Member States; suggests in this respect by introducing bminding demographic representation in the lists for the joint constituency, such as maximum thresholds for candidates residing in the same Member State and a minimum obligatory representation of nationals of different Member Statesimum and maximum obligatory representation of nationals of different Member States; suggests in this respect introducing binding demographic representation in the lists for the joint constituency; encourages that European parties and movements to appoint candidates in the joint lists coming from all Member States;
Amendment 227 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Proposes to allow for a temporary replacement of a Member in the case of maternity leave, parental leave or severe illness;
Amendment 306 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Recital 9
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Recital 9
(9) A European Electoral Authority should be established for the management of the Union-wide constituency. Such a European Electoral Authority would be essential for coordinating information on the European elections and monitoring the implementation of the common standards of the European electoral law, by ensuring an efficient exchange of information and best practices between national bodies. In addition.
Amendment 318 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Recital 11
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Recital 11
(11) Citizens of the Union have the right to participate in its democratic life, in particular by voting or standing as candidates in elections to the European Parliament. Member States should take the measures necessary to allow those of their citizens residing or working in third countries outside the Union, those who are, travellers, homeless or who are serving a prison sentence in the EU, to exercise the right to vote in elections to the European Parliament. Access to polling stations should also be facilitated for all citizens, and in particular for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 398 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 5
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 5
Member States shall ensure that all citizens of the Union, including those living or working in a third country outside the Union, travellers and those who are homeless or who are serving a prison sentence in the EU, are entitled to and are able to exercise their right to vote in elections to the European Parliament, and, with regard to those citizens serving a prison sentence, without prejudice to national law or court decisions handed down in accordance with national law.
Amendment 404 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 6 – paragraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. No one shall vote more than once in any election of members of the European Parliament in the national constituencies, as well as not more than once in the election of members of the European Parliament in the Union-wide constituency.
Amendment 416 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 8 – paragraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for postal voting in elections to the European Parliament, including for citizens living in a third countryoutside the Union, and shall adopt measures that ensure that postal voting is accessible, in particular for persons with disabilities. Member States shall adopt all necessary measures to ensure the reliability and secrecy of the vote, and the protection of personal data in accordance with applicable Union law.
Amendment 440 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 484 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 5
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 5
Amendment 486 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 6
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 6
Amendment 490 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 7
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 7
Amendment 492 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 8
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 8
Amendment 504 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 13
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 13
13. For candidates living in a third country outside the Union, the candidate’s place of residence for the purposes of the composition of the list shall be their one before leaving the European Union. For citizens of the Union born and resident in a third country outside the Union, the place of residence for the purposes of drawing up of the list shall correspond to that of the candidate’s Member State of nationality.
Amendment 506 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 14
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 14
14. The lists of candidates for the Union-wide constituency shall include a number of candidates equal to the number of mandates as provided for in paragraph 1, and at least 27 candidates residing in each of the Member States.
Amendment 508 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 15
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 15
Amendment 515 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 17
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 17
Amendment 523 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 18
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 18
Amendment 536 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 22 – point c a (new)
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 22 – point c a (new)
(ca) To ensure that the transnational seats are truly European, a correction mechanism will be introduced so that the Members chosen via the transnational lists stem from all Member States. Starting from the 46th seat upwards candidates-elect will be substituted by the next candidate-elect of the same list originating from a Member State that has not yet been included in the results. Starting with a candidate from the least populated Member State until at least one of the Members elected on the European lists originates from each of the 27 Member States.
Amendment 537 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 22 – point c b (new)
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 22 – point c b (new)
(cb) In order to prevent an overrepresentation of elected Members from the EU-wide constituency residing in a single Member State, there will be a ceiling of 6 seats for any given Member State rounded upwards. If more than 6 seats are filled with elected Members from a single Member State, the other Members-elect from the same Member State will be substituted by a candidate from the same European list who falls within the criterion of the ceiling.
Amendment 540 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 23
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 23
23. In the event of death, resignation, loss of political rights or withdrawal of the mandate of a member of Parliament elected in the Union-wide constituency, the vacancy shall be filled by the next candidate ion the list of candidates inof which the member who has died, resigned or withdrawn was originally elected.
Amendment 551 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Each European electoral entity permitted by the European Electoral Authority to table a list of candidates for members of the European Parliament in the Union-wide constituency shall appoint a general electoral administratorn official campaign accountant responsible for drawing up a general accounting plan for the income and expenses of the electoral campaign.
Amendment 553 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 2 –subparagraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 2 –subparagraph 1
2. The general electoral administratorofficial campaign accountant shall be a citizen of the Union who has not been convicted of crimes resulting in their disqualification from election or employment in public office in their Member State of residence.
Amendment 554 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 –paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 –paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The general electoral administratorofficial campaign accountant shall not be a candidate for elections.
Amendment 558 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 4
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 16 – paragraph 4
Amendment 620 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 19 – paragraph 2
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may not officially make public the results of their count until after the close of polling in the Member State whose electors are the last to vote until thepublish results before the close of the polling time indicated in paragraph 1.
Amendment 648 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 26 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 26 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Parliament may on the request of the member concerned, and in full agreement with the Member State concerned or the Electoral authority, propose a temporary replacement for a member linked to parental leave or a severe illness.
Amendment 664 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Authority shall exercise all the functions related to the electoral process of the Union-wide constituency and liaise with the authorities referred to in Article 18. It may also provide assistance in case of difficulties related to the interpretation of the lists submitted by the National authorities.
Amendment 676 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. The Authority shall be composed of one member appointed by each Member State, who shall be professors of law or political science. The members of the Authority will elect its president, vice- president, and secretary by simple majority, in a separate vote. The Authority shall take decisions by consensus or, if that is not possible, by simple majority.
Amendment 681 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The members of the Authority shall not be members of the European Parliament, national parliament or government, hold any electoral mandate or be a current or former employee of any EU institution or of any European political party or movement, or of any European political foundation.
Amendment 694 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 5
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 5
The five-year term of the Authority shall begin 30 days after the beginning of the parliamentary term as referred to in Article 20, except for the first term of the Authority which will start a year before the elections of 2024 and will exceptionally last 6 years.
Amendment 704 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 27 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
7. The European Electoral Authority shall be financed by the general bugdget of the European Union, including the remuneration of the members of the Authority during the electoral period.
Amendment 715 #
2020/2220(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 30
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 30
Amendment 3 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas according to several Eurobarometer surveys, a large proportion of EU citizens are not satisfied with the way democracy works in the EU and tend to distrust the EU institutions; whereas not only is this perception presentmeasured at EU level, but also at national level;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas Article 11 (1) of the TEU provides that institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Amendment 17 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas online public consultations carried out by the Commission are mostly aimed at a particular target group, are not widely disseminated and run for a limited amount of time, meaning that they do not reach a significant proportion of the population;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the European Court of Auditors in a comprehensive review of the Commission's consultation policy in 2019 recommended that the Commission should improve the way it reaches out to citizens to promote greater participation;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the existing participatory instruments, such as the ECI, public consultations and Citizens’ Dialogues, do not provide very effective means for citizens to influence EU decision-making; whereas this is largely due to the lack of effective follow-up in the decision-making process at institutional level;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas most forms of participation are generally used by organised interest groups and not by individual citizens; whereas individual citizens are largely unaware of the existing participatory instruments and therefore underrepresented in views and data collected through the existing instruments;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the current participatory instruments do not maximise the potential of citizens’ participation when it comesand therefore insufficiently contribute to strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the EU and increasing citizens’ sense of ownership towards an EU that reflects their needs and visions;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas there is a need to enhance the European dimension of citizenship education, by improving theircitizens' understanding of the EU, in order to enable citizens’their participation;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the benefits of engaging with citizens in the development of a European public sphere and in the reinforcement of the democratic legitimacy of the EU;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that the EU institutions have to be informed of citizens’ concerns and need to be more attentive to these concernmust provide appropriate follow-up in the ensuing decision-making process;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2201(INI)
8. Recalls that citizens’ dialogues should intend to provide a means for individuals to express their ideas and concerns; underlines the fact that they have to be participatory, inclusive, open, deliberate, transnational, transparent, accountable, effective, visible and attractive;
Amendment 109 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that the outcome of the participatory process must be clearly defined, so that it can be subject to ainstitutions must actively provide assistance to the participants throughout the participatory process enabling an appropriate legally binding follow-up; proposes that participants should be provided with written feedback at the end of such exercises, since they ensure the accountability of the institutions and the credibility of such processes;
Amendment 116 #
2020/2201(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights the need to establish a proper follow-up mechanism forframework for the follow-up on citizens’ dialogues in order to take citizens’ input seriouslyeffectively into account; proposes that part of the follow- up could be to translate the outcome into initiative reports and public hearings and to involve citizens throughout these steps;
Amendment 1 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Recalls the conclusions of the first opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the final report of the Committee on Budgetary Control which led to the decision to postpone the granting of discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2019 until these elements have been clarified and properly presented by the Agency, and until the OLAF investigation has been completed; emphasizes that by postponing the discharge, the Parliament has given the Agency an additional six months to respond to the various elements that were developed in the discharge report voted on the 28th April of 2021; is concerned about the resumption of our work in committee and the short period of time after the first vote in plenary;
Amendment 2 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with concern the findings of the Court of Auditors’ (the Court) in its special report1 ; takes the view that any future special report by the Court on the Agency's activities should n° 08/2021 on Frontex's support for the management of external borders; points out that the audit period runs from the end of 2016, when the Agency's new mandate comes into force, to the end of 2020; recalls, however, that the opinion should only consider elements for the year 2019; invites the Court in future to include an analysis regardingof respect for and the protection of fundamental rights; _________________ 1 https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocu ments/SR21_08/SR_Frontex_EN.pdf in any future special report on the Agency's activities;
Amendment 9 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with regret the weaknesses detected with respect to the Agency’'s primary activities in support of the fight against irregular immigration and the fight against cross-border crime which are caused by an incomplete implementation of the 2016 mandate and the failure of the Agency to take the measures necessary to adapt its organisation to fully implement that mandate; notes that not all of the Agency's responsibilities as a result of its 2016 mandate changes have yet been implemented; notes with concern that the Court identifies a significant risk that the Agency will struggle to carry out the mandate given to it by Regulation (EU) 2019/18962 ; acknowledges the gaps and inconsistencies of the information exchange network and further acknowledges the weaknesses in Member States’ implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 establishing the European border surveillance system (EUROSUR); _________________ 2Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Counnotes in particular ongoing issues of data completeness and quality in the data- collection process of Frontex's vulnerability assessment, despite Member States' obligation to provide the information Frontex needs; emphasizes that the Agency has accepted the recommendations made by the Court in its special of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1).report and that a series of changes are in the process of being implemented or have already been implemented since the release of the report; recalls that Frontex defined 30 actions based on FRaLO Working Group recommendations and that these actions are excepted to be implemented by 31 August 2021 in order to fulfill its mandate;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned that the Agency dicould not provide information about the impact or cost of its activities, more particularly about the real cost of its joint operations, either aggregated or disaggregated by operation (maritime and aerial) and type of costs (e.g. human resources and light equipment, or heavy equipment); notes that the Agency only presents costs based on estimates that can reveal significant differences; is disappointed that the Agency’s operational reporting means that decision makers are not adequately informed;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the recruitment of the fundamental rights officer, who took office on 1 June 2021, and the appointment of 20 fundamental rights monitors; notes regrets that 15 of those appointments were made at AST level which is not in keeping with the Agency’'s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/1896; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors by 5 December 2020; insists that the Agency swiftly recruits the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors and does so in AD positions;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the OLAF investigation into Frontex is still ongoing; notes also that the European Ombudsman’'s inquiry with respect to the Agency’'s complaints mechanism, case OI/5/2020/MHZ, was closed on 15 June 2021, concluding that there were no grounds for further investigation while identifying many areas for improvement in the operation of the Agency; finding, among other things, a regrettable lack of transparency; notes in addition that the Agency’'s management board has closed its investigation on 13 incidents in the Aegean Sea; recalls that Parliament’'s Frontex Scrutiny Working Group has not yet completed its report on the allegations of violations of fundamental rights by the Agency;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. ConcludStresses that the increased competences and budget for the Agency need to be accompanied by a corresponding increase in accountability and transparency; stresses that discharge for the Agency is conditional on such accountability and transparency, especially on the Agency's commitment to Union law; stresses in this context the need for a full clarificawelcomes the establishment of the transparency register on 5 May 2021 to make public interactions of the alleged violations of fundamental rights at the external borFrontex agents with third- party stakeholders;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Stresses that discharge for the Agency is conditional on such accountability and transparency, especially on the Agency's commitment to Union law; stresses in this context the need for full compliance with fundamental rights at the external borders; expects the fundamental rights monitors to carry out their mission thoroughly and support the implementation of the action plan;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Declares that, as all of the above issues have not been adequately clarified and presented by the Agency to Parliament, including the issues set out in the recent special report of the Court, and until the OLAF investigation is completed, the Parliament is not in a position to grant discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2019e need to provide a revised discharge report by the Budgetary Control Committee to analyse the evolution of elements in regard of the conclusion of the European Parliament Frontex Scrutiny Working Group, a thorough assessment of the implementation of Frontex's roadmap by 31 August 2021 and the conclusions from the OLAFs investigation when they become available.
Amendment 6 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that high standards of transparency and integrity in theall EU institutions are essential to enabling citizens to exercise their democratic right to participate in the EU’s decision-making process and thus to enhancing the democratic legitimacy and credibility of the Union while restoring confidence in the European integration process; ; highlights that all EU institutions should abide by high standards of ethics and transparency and calls on all EU institutions to conclude an agreement on establishing a common ethical framework, to reflect these standards; recalls that, in her Political Guidelines for the 2019- 2024 Commission, the President of the Commission stressed that if citizens were to have faith in the EU, its institutions should be open and beyond reproach on ethics, transparency and integrity; recalls that the right to petition provides citizens with the most accessible way to enter into and maintain a direct dialogue with representatives from the EU institutions and thus contributes to improving openness, responsiveness and accountability while bridging the gap between citizens and EU institutions;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that a high level of transparency of the legislative process is essential to enabling citizens to hold their elected representatives and governments accountable; reiterates, therefore, its call on the Council to improve its rules and practices on transparency of its legislative process in line with the recommendations of the European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman, which have been overwhelmingly supported by Parliament in its resolution of 17 January 2019 on the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry OI/2/2017 on the transparency of legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the EU4 , which was based on the joint report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the Committee on Petitions; _________________ 4 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2019)0045. 4
Amendment 33 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that the current self- regulatory ethical framework has proven insufficient, has led to a fragmented approach and to different ethical standards within the different EU institutions; highlights that in order to restore and maintain high levels of confidence in the EU institutions, all EU institutions must abide by the highest ethical standards; recalls in this respect the recommendations of the European Court of Auditors concerning the establishment and implementation of a common ethical framework for all EU institutions;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Underlines that public officials are not in a position to self-declare themselves out of conflict of interest or to provide self-assessment with regards to respecting ethical standards; highlights that this task should fall under the competence of an independent specialised third party, in the form of an Independent Ethics Body (IEB) for all the EU institutions, agencies, bodies and offices;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the EU institutions should apply the highest ethical standards to prevent any episodes of revolving doors and any conflicts of interests, also with regard to the appointments to senior positions in the EU institutions and agencies; expresses its concern that any such episodes, even if legally admissible, are undermining the overall credibility of the EU institutions and often used by anti- European propaganda as a means of introducing euro-scepticism to the public; calls for the establishment of an Independent Ethics Body for all EU institutions that would overlook the implementation of a future common ethical framework, and have competence over the common rules on the content and publication of declarations of interests, avoidance of conflicts of interest and revolving doors, acceptance of gifts and entertainment, protection of whistle- blowers and victims of harassment, transparency of lobby meetings, public procurement and meeting calendars of senior staff, and use of transparent bank accounts for public funds;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the important role that the European Ombudsman plays in ensuring high standards of transparency and integrity in the EU institutions; calls on its Committee on Constitutional Affairs committee to consider and to take into account the experience provided by the European Ombudsman when reflecting on the possible establishment ofing an independent ethics body; suggests the setting up of an EU interinstitutional working group that is tasked with discussing and formulating recommendations on all aspects related to the subject matter;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 76 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 87 #
2020/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers, as the committee most directly engaged with the public opinion and public response to the institutions’ transparency and integrity, that the democratic approach and political responsibility remains the strongest control mechanism in any constitutional democracy, as well as in the EU; stresses the need for further strengthening of the democratic accountability mechanisms at EU level and in this regard encourages the establishment of a common ethical framework for all EU institutions and of an Independent Ethics Body in charge of its implementation.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2020 on the European Parliament’s position on the Conference on the Future of Europe,
Amendment 2 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Commission’s use of its right of legislative initiative has been neither constructive nor productive in recent years, especially as the Commission too often tailors legislative initiatives to the wishes of the Member States; believes that the same holds true of the frequent use of recast procedures and the lack of proper impact assessment;
Amendment 2 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 18 June 2020 on the European Parliament’s position on the Conference on the Future of Europe,
Amendment 11 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Strongly recommendurges therefore making furtherpro-active use of Parliament’s powers under the Treaties and for a Treaty revision to be considered to give Parliament an enhanced direct right of legislative initiative, as it directly represents the European people and not just national interests, which need to be counter- balanced; deplores the fact that this possibility has been regularly deferred to a future Treaty revision;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the European Council has a de facto right of initiative when defining the strategic guidelines for legislative planning within the area of freedom, security and justice, which does not constitute a level playing field between Parliament and the Council; underlines moreover the early influence by the Member States via their participation in numerous Commission advisory bodies; deplores that the Commission withdraws legislative proposals mostly because the Council cannot manage to agree and that this effectively rewards the often obstructionist attitude of the Council to legislative initiatives;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it deeply regrettable that only one-third of Parliament’s legislative and non-legislative initiative procedures can be considered successful, and that most legislative initiative (INL) reports adopted since 2011 did not result in a positive reply from the Commission1 ; considers it regrettable also that the deadlines for the Commission to react to parliamentary resolutions and to come forward with legislative proposals have consistently not been respected; expects the Commission’s response to and implementation of an INL report to be automatic, as pledged by the current Commission President when she sought support from Parliament for her appointment; _________________ 1 ‘The European Parliament’s right of initiative’, Andreas Maurer, University of Innsbruck, Jean Monnet Chair for European Integration Studies and Michael C. Wolf, University of Innsbruck, July 2020, p. 55 and 57.
Amendment 45 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that these developments are part of a wider trend whereby aforementioned institutions increasingly usurp decision-making power in all EU policy fields; stresses that this practice erodes the institutional balance of the EU as established by the Treaties; believes that the balance should be restored in favour of democratic legitimacy through equivalent rights for Parliament;
Amendment 54 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Regrets that, until 2019, the follow- up on Parliament’s legislative initiative reports adopted pursuant to Article 225 of the TFEU showed that the Commission had only delivered legislative proposals following Parliament requests in a minority of cases8 ; further regrets that the deadlines for the Commission to respond to Parliament requests and to put forward legislative proposals were not adhered to in most casespractically never adhered to; _________________ 8 Study entitled ‘The European Parliament’s right of initiative’, p. 54 (see footnote 7 above).
Amendment 65 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Strongly believes that when the Treaties are next revised, Parliament, as the only directly elected EU institution, should be granted the right to initiate legislationa genuine and general right to initiate legislation; such right of initiative should at least apply in those policy fields in which Parliament is empowered to enact legislation as co- legislator;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is deeply convinced that a general and direct right of initiative would further strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the Union and empower Union citizens; believes that it would reflect the evolution over time of the competences of the Union and its institutionstowards a genuine European democracy, and is of the opinion that Parliament, as the only directly elected EU institution, should be granted the right to propose legislation and policy initiatives, as national parliaments may, when the Treaties are next revised;
Amendment 75 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Welcomes in the strongest terms the support from Commission President von der Leyen for a right of initiative for the European Parliament, as expressed during her speech on the eve of her election as President of the Commission;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Considers that, where equivalent rights of initiative concur, an interinstitutional framework should be set up to enable the coordination of policy initiatives; calls on the three institutions to reflect on how concurrent rights of initiative could effectively co-exist and be implemented in practice;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Commits to continue exploring the full potential offurther strengthen Parliament’s indirect right of initiative as provided for in the Treaties and further developed in interinstitutional agreements and through the commitment of President von der Leyen; calls on the Commission and the Council to jointly evaluate the functioning of the 2010 Framework Agreement and to engage in discussions on a revision to ensure its provisions and timeframes can be effectively upheld;
Amendment 98 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers it appropriate to review its internal rules, procedures and requirements, also with regard to the drafting of legislative initiative reports under Article 225 of the TFEU to ensure that proposals are focused and well- substantiated; points, in this regard, to the need to address requests to the Commission alone and to ensure that the content of legislative initiative reports remains within the scope of the subject matter of the authorised report; underlines that the adoption of focused and well- substantiated reports under Article 225 of the TFEU by the Parliament requires that the necessary technical and administrative capacity therefor is ensured;
Amendment 99 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Recognises that legislative own- initiative reports (INL) find their basis in Art. 225 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union, and therefore commits to favour these instruments as the primary means to request the submission of legislative proposals by the Commission;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Calls for the extension of the 3- month timeframe for the response of the Commission established by Art. 16 of the 2010 Framework Agreement; Considers that a more realistic timeframe might improve the overall credibility of the process, as well as improve the quality of the response by the Commission;
Amendment 103 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Believes that the Commission, when assessing the subsidiarity, proportionality and better lawmaking principles as part of its follow-up on Parliament requests for legislative proposals under Article 225 of the TFEU, should take due account of the accompanying analyses concerning ‘European added value’ and the ‘cost of non-Europe’ produced by Parliament; points out that under the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, the Commission is already obliged to respond to any issues raised by the co-legislators in relation to such analyses; believes, furthermore, that the Commission should clearly refer to Parliament’slink draft proposals adopted under Article 225 of the TFEU when such proposals are followed by a legislative initiativeto the relevant INL or INI reports, providing a clear “legislative influence footprint”;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Commits to foster a stronger coordination with the Committee of the Regions and with the Economic and Social Committee by giving due account to their opinions into legislative own- initiative reports. Believes that, given the specific nature of these requests, a revised Framework Agreement should incentivize the Commission to transpose these own- initiative reports into a legislative proposal;
Amendment 106 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Amendment 112 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Recalls the importance of citizens’ and civil society participation for the democratic legitimacy of the EU; calls on all EU institutions to involve them in a meaningful way in decision-making at all stages of the policy cycle;
Amendment 113 #
2020/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)
Paragraph 30 b (new)
30 b. Recalls that the Conference on the Future of Europe provides the opportunity to assess the EU’s institutional status quo and give new impetus to European democracy; calls on all participants to the Conference to consider a genuine right of initiative for the European Parliament;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas Article 41(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states that “every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union”;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)
Recital B (new)
Bb. whereas Article 43 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights states that “any citizen of the Union and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State has the right to refer to the European Ombudsman cases of maladministration in the activities of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role”;
Amendment 7 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas it is essential that European citizens have enough information to be able to follow EU policy and law making, and participate meaningfully in the European democratic processes; whereas people’s trust in public administrations is enhanced when they can see that institutions are working for the public good and maintain high ethical standards;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas 2020 marks the 25th anniversary of the institution of the European Ombudsman; whereas since its opening, the Office has dealt with 57000 complaints leading to over 7300 inquiries; whereas the continuous efforts of the Office and its staff towards respecting and upholding transparency, ethics and accountability in the EU administration should be duly recognized and commended;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas in 2019 the European Ombudsman opened 458 inquiries, of which 2 were opened on its own-initiative, while closing 560 inquiries (552 complaint-based and 8 own-initiative); whereas the greater part of the inquiries concerned once again the Commission (274 inquiries or 59,7 %), the next largest number concerned the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) (44 inquiries or 9,6 %), the EU agencies (33 inquiries or 7,2 %) and the rest were distributed as follows: Parliament (21 inquiries or 4,6 %), the European External Action Service (EEAS) (17 inquiries or 3,7 %), the European Investment Bank (7 inquiries or 1,5 %), and other institutions (54 inquiries or 11,8 %);
Amendment 36 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ApprovWelcomes the annual report for 2019 presented by the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 99 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Acknowledges the raise in the number of people helped by the European Ombudsman Office compared to 2018 (19619, up from 17996), as well as the efforts to find practical solutions to citizens' problems, either through advice given through the interactive guide on the website, replying to requests for information or handling of new complaints (2201 such complaints in 2019); points out the need to ensure the Office has the necessary budgetary and personnel resources so that it continues to help adequately and efficiently the European citizens;
Amendment 109 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Notes that the number of complaints falling outside the Ombudsman mandate has remained relatively stable (1330 cases in 2019, compared to 1300 cases in 2018); takes the view that better and coordinated communication at the level of all EU institutions as to the competencies of the European Ombudsman could help reduce the number of complains falling outside its mandate and streamline the response to citizens’ problems;
Amendment 115 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Welcomes that, on average, the length of inquiry of cases closed by the European Ombudsman in 2019 was less than 7 months; notes, however, that for some cases it can take up to 18 months before they are closed; calls on all EU institutions to improve their cooperation with the office of the Ombudsman in the interest of the European citizens who expect swift answers to their problems;
Amendment 121 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Acknowledges the important contribution made by the European Network of National and Regional Ombudsmen to the exchange of best practices and information on the remit and competences of its members and the proper implementation of European law; suggests that this network could be more closely involved in overseeing the proper use of EU funds; suggests that it could also offer support to national or regional ombudsmen who come under strong pressure from their governments, particularly in connection with violations of fundamental rights, including LGBTI rights; stresses that the Network could also contribute to the edification of a culture of good administration at the level of the Member States by enhancing cooperation and raising the awareness of the national ombudsmen to the importance of defending the rights of citizens; points out that resources allocated to the Network should be strengthened;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2086(INI)
2a. Points out that inclusive education is a necessary prerequisite for fostering participation in society and access to the labour market for people with disabilities;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2086(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that the promotion of equality in the field of employment and occupation can be effective only if discrimination is comprehensively combated in all areas of life; calls for measures to combat preconceived notions regarding the skills and abilities of people with disabilities, ensuring that they have equal access to jobs and do not suffer discrimination based on such prejudices;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2086(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for the elimination of physical, digital, logistical and social barriers at the workplace, ensuring that the principle of accessibility is correctly applied;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2086(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that the COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated the growing importance of teleworking in the future, facilitating large-scale access to employment for many people with disabilities; calls for people with disabilities to be given special consideration regarding teleworking rules and policies;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2086(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses the need to step up research and innovation in the field of accessible technology, in order to make more effective progress in integrating people with disabilities into the labour market;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2072(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Insists that the Annual Monitoring Cycle should be governed, at all its stages, by the principles of transparency, impartiality, and equality between Member States, be based on objective evidence, protected from any malicious disinformation strategy and lead to effective and realistic measures;
Amendment 91 #
2020/2072(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that the Conference on the Future of Europe provides a momentum for better understanding the need to protect Union values in this context; therefore, in the event of Treaty changes being made and address the crisis of the Union founding values in this context; proposes to enhance the effectiveness of the Article 7 by ensuring the future, the effectiveness of the Article 7 procedure should be enhancedpresence of the Parliament in Article 7 hearings, and in the event of Treaty changes being made in the future, by removing the requirement for unanimity and reinforcing the sanction mechanism;
Amendment 233 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 4 – point 6
Annex I – paragraph 4 – point 6
(6) The Annual Monitoring Cycle should consist of a preparatory stage, the publication of an annual monitoring report on Union values including recommendations, and a follow-up stage. The Annual Monitoring Cycle should be conducted, at all its stages, in a spirit of transparency and openness, impartiality and openness, be based on objective evidence and protected from any malicious disinformation strategy.
Amendment 54 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that petitions offer the opportunity to the European Parliament and other EU institutions to maintain a direct dialogue with EU citizens and legal residents who are affected by the misapplication of EU law; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and lead committees, the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities on inquiries or proposals regarding implementation of and compliance with EU law; urges the Commission to take steps to ensure that the interpretation of the scope of Article 51 is as coherent and wide as possible; reminds that the expectations of most petitioners in relation to the rights conferred on them by the Charter are high and go beyond their current scope of application;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that transparency and public access to the documents of the EU institutions should be the rule in order to ensure the highest levels of protection of the democratic rights of citizens; points out that current Regulation 1049/2001 does not reflect the actual situation anymore; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a recast of the 2001 Regulation with a view to enhance transparency and accountability by promoting good administrative practice;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2044(INI)
6a. Notes that the Committee on Petitions frequently receives complaints about rule of law violations by certain authorities; recalls that ensuring the effective, equal and uniform application of EU law is crucial for upholding the rule of law, which is one of the founding values of the Union and its Member States, pursuant to Article 2 of the TEU; while respecting the subsidiarity principle, calls on the Commission to respect the commitments made in its 2019 communication entitled ‘Strengthening the rule of law within the Union: A blueprint for action’(COM(2019)0343), in order to promote a culture of respect for the rule of law, reinforce cooperation with national authorities and ensure an effective common response to actual threats within the Union;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls the specific role of protection played by the Committee on Petitions within the EU in the framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; points to the committee’s important ongoing work in connection with petitions concerning issues relating to disabilities; notes that the number of petitions on disability decreased in 2019 in comparison with the previous year; notes however, that moaccessibility and discrimination remain among the main challenges faced by persons with disabilities; recalls that in 2019 the Committee on Petitions paid specific attention to the discussion of petitions on inclusive education for disabled children; calls for a new skills agenda at the very heart of Europe and concrete proposals on how to foster inclusiveness and facilitate the recognition and portability of skills within Europe;
Amendment 1 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the fundamental principle of protection of citizens’ rights; stresses, furthermore, that our aim should be to maintain the closest possible links between British and European citizens;
Amendment 2 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union does not exempt the United Kingdom from its responsibilities to safeguard EU citizens’ rights as guaranteed by the EU- UK Withdrawal Agreement (‘the Agreement’); notes that the Agreement lays down provisions for safeguarding the status and rights stemming from Union law for EU and UK citizens and families affected; calls on the Commission to ensure that these provisions are included in the future partnership between the EU and the United Kingdom;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. calls on the Ombudsman to continue her work, which began at the time of the negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, to ensure that the negotiations concerning a future partnership between the EU and the United Kingdom are transparent;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the system proposed by the UK Home Office (‘the registration procedure’) for EU-27 nationals to apply for residence status is not as transparent and simple as it should be; considers that it creates unnecessary and unfair administrative burdens on citizens of the EU-27; considers that the system should be changed to an automatic registration procedure, which is the only way of reducing the administrative burden and of guaranteeing that EU citizens' status and rights are recognised;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the United Kingdom has decided that the principle of free movement of persons between the Union and the United Kingdom will no longer apply after the transition period; insists on the need for the future partnership to include ambitious provisions on the movement of persons, based on full reciprocity and non-discrimination among Member States; wishes to emphasise that rights with regard to the free movement of persons go hand in hand with the other three freedoms; reiterates the fact that access by the United Kingdom to the Single Market must be conditional on its compliance with the principle of free movement of persons;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that mobility agreements, including visa-free travel for short stays, should be based on non-discrimination between Member States of the Union and full reciprocity; considers, furthermore, that such agreements should include European acquis on mobility, specifically concerning workers and, in particular, the rules on the posting of workers and on the coordination of social security systems;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that better regulation of the conditions of entry and residence for purposes such as research, study, training and youth exchanges should be taken into account; regrets, for this reason, the statements made by the British authorities that the United Kingdom wishes to pull out of mobility programmes such as Erasmus+; calls on the Commission to continue to allow the United Kingdom to participate in European programmes for the benefit of European and British citizens, fulfilling the necessary financial commitments in return.
Amendment 13 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to the Joint Communication of 10 June 2020 entitled 'Tackling COVID-19 disinformation - Getting the facts right' (JOIN(2020) 8),
Amendment 51 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
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;
Amendment 103 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas disinformation related to COVID-19 may have dangerous consequences on public health, cause panic and social unrest and needs to be addressed; whereas measures to combat disinformation cannot be used as a pretext for introducing disproportionate restrictions on press freedom;
Amendment 115 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
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;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2009(INI)
3. Strongly reiterates its call on the Commission to treat attempts by Member State governments to damage media freedom and pluralism as constituting a serious and systematic abuse of powers and as going against the fundamental values of the EU as enshrined in Article 2 TEU; welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s intention to include a specific chapter on monitoring media freedom and pluralism in its Annual Report on the Situation of the Rule of Law within the EU; encourages the Commission to actively cooperate with the Council of Europe, exchanging best practices and making sure that measures undertaken are complementary; urges the Commission to take into account the impact of the emergency measures taken in 2020 in the context of COVID-19 on press freedom, media pluralism and safety of journalists; in this context, recalls Parliament’s repeated call for a permanent, independent and comprehensive mechanism covering democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the EU;
Amendment 136 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the irreplaceable role of public service media and stresses that it is essential to ensure and maintain their independence from political interference; condemns attempts by Member State governments to silence critical media and undermine media freedom and pluralism, in particular attempts to control public service media; deplores the fact that in some Member States public broadcasting has become an example of single political party propaganda, which often excludes opposition and minority groups from society and even incites violence; stresses that safeguarding independent authorities and ensuring strong independent oversight of audiovisual media against undue state and commercial intervention is crucial; highlights that the frameworks for financing public service media should ensure the editorial independence and the sustainability of these outlets; calls on Member States to use financing models where public service media is financed from sources independent of political decision-making such as monthly or annual dedicated taxes;
Amendment 156 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
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;
Amendment 187 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is concerned about attempts to take advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic to punish independent and critical media and introduce restrictions on the media’s access to and scrutiny of government decisions and actions, hampering proper and informed debate on those actions; stresses the role of journalism and the free flow of information as essential to the EU’s efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic; points out that journalism plays a crucial function at a moment of public health emergency; calls on the Commission to comprehensively monitor such practices by national governments and to include the results in its upcoming Annual Report on the Rule of Law;
Amendment 197 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes with concern that the envisaged budgetary envelope for the Creative Europe programme under the revised MFF/ recovery proposals of 27 May 2020 brings a 100 million Euros decrease in allocations, compared to the initial Commission proposal of 2018, and now amounts to 1.3 billion Euros less than the allocations initially proposed by the European Parliament; furthermore, notes with regret that funding available under the Justice, Rights and Values programme has also been decreased by 100 million Euros within the revised Commission budget proposal and now stands at 1.2 billion Euros less than the figures proposed by the European Parliament; urges the Commission to revise these figures and present new proposals, in line with the position adopted by the European Parliament;
Amendment 232 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
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; highlights that measures combatting disinformation should focus on fostering a plurality of opinions, through the promotion of high- quality journalism, delivering reliable, fact-based, verified information, as well as on building media literacy, and that any such measures must provide guarantees for the freedom of information and the freedom of expression;
Amendment 238 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Highlights that upholding the editorial independence within central and local media outlets, and developing media literacy projects, are essential elements for building resilience, raising awareness and strengthening education in efficiently combatting propaganda, disinformation and manipulations; calls on the Commission to actively engage in the promotion of reliable, fact-based and fact- checked information, enhancing media distribution channels in order to improve access to such information, empowering Union citizens to better identify and deal with disinformation; calls on Member States to fully implement the provisions of the revised Audio-visual Media Service Directive requiring them to promote and develop media literacy skills;
Amendment 244 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that political profiling, disinformation and manipulation of information may be used by political parties and private or public entities, and reiterates its concern about the fact that evidence of interference is continuously coming to light, often with indications of foreign influence, in the run-up to all major national and EU elections, with much of this interference benefiting anti-EU, extreme right-wing and populist candidates and targetthose who promote identitarian speeches, whether from the extreme right or the extreme left- wing, populists in any case, who seek to polarise and nullify ideological pluralism and manipulate the majority, using specific minorities and vulnerable groups;
Amendment 260 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that different forms of misinformation and disinformation, as well as other forms of information manipulation relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, continue to proliferate around the world and have potentially harmful consequences for public security, health and effective crisis management; welcomes the Joint Communication on Tackling COVID-19 disinformation, of 10 June 2020; recalls that all measures to combat disinformation, including those taken in the context of the COVID-19 emergency, need to be necessary, proportionate and subject to regular oversight, and may under no circumstances prevent journalists and media actors from carrying out their work or lead to content being unduly blocked on the internet;
Amendment 268 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to present a European Democracy Action Plan that aims to counter disinformation and to adapt to evolving threats and manipulations, as well as to support free and independent media; emphasises in this respect that protecting free and independent media while combating hate speech and disinformation is a fundamental factor in terms of the defence of the rule of law and democracy in the EU; notes with concern that according to a GDI research, websites spreading disinformation in the EU receive more than 70 million Euros in ad revenues every year; calls on the Commission to further engage with the digital platforms and step up the efforts towards ending such practices, as well as towards combatting the strategic, automated amplification of disinformation through the use of bots or fake profiles online, and towards increasing transparency in respect to the financing and the distribution of online advertising;
Amendment 1 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Regrets that the proposed commitment appropriations for the “Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme” at EUR 90 600 000 are much lower than initially requested by the Parliament, and represents a decrease of - 9,9% on commitment appropriations and - 17,8% on payment appropriations compared to 2020; requests, in line with the first reading position of the Parliament adopted on 17 April 2019, that commitment appropriations are increased to EUR 265 000 000 and that a new budget line to “promote and protect Union values“ (EUR 120 000 000 in commitment appropriations) is created; calls, in line with the partial agreement reached with Council, to increase the commitment appropriations under the “Daphne” budget line to EUR 37 100 000 and to earmark EUR 27 300 000 of this amount for the fight against gender-based violence by creating a subline “Combating all forms of gender-based violence”; calls further for an increase of the commitment appropriations of the budget line “Promote citizens engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union” to EUR 70 600 000, to rename the budget line “Promote equality and rights” to “Promote equality, rights and gender equality” and to earmark EUR 10 300 000 to “Promote gender equality and gender mainstreaming” by creating a new subline;
Amendment 6 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls that independent and qualitative investigative journalism is an essential component of a well-functioning democracy, by bringing quality fact-based information, combating disinformation, raising awareness to citizens, and revealing wrongdoings or crimes; stresses that journalism across Europe faces strong challenges, in particular the lack of financial resources, hence threatening their independence or survival; calls for ambitious funding programmes in the European budget in this field;
Amendment 12 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the small increase (+0.5%) of commitment and payment appropriations of the Justice programme; requests, in line with position of the Parliament on the financial envelope for the Justice programme included in the European Parliament resolution of 14 November 2018 on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027, to further increase the funding of that programme in 2021 by a total of EUR 6 800 000 to EUR 50 500 000; stresses that Justice is a key component of a Security Union as defended by the President of the European Commission, and that judicial cooperation should be strengthened with the help of European JHA agencies, in particular to fight organised crime and terrorism;
Amendment 13 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 14 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Is deeply concerned by the continuing loss of lives in the Mediterranean in the absence of functioning SAR capacities; believes that SAR is a state responsibility that cannot be left to non-state actors; calls on the Commission to urgently create a fund to support the setting up of a EU Search and Rescue mission for the Mediterranean;
Amendment 15 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the small funding increase (+1.8%) proposed for the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction will not be sufficient to comply with its legal obligations deriving from the Staff Regulations as well as its rental contracts; emphasises, moreover, that additional funding should be provided for the Centre to fully deploy its operational capacity and to effectively respond to the most recent developments of the drug phenomenon, including effects of Covid-19 outbreak; highlights that the drug retail value in Europe is estimated at 30 billion euros per year, and that 100 tonnes of cocaine were seized in the EU in 2019; requests, therefore, to increase the Centre’s budget to EUR 18 100 000;
Amendment 16 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
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; reminds that the AgencyEuropol is requested to provide increased analysis and 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, tools and innovation to Member States’ law enforcement authorities, in areas such as countering terrorism and its financing, radicalisation and extremism, migrant smuggling, drugs trafficking or cybercrime, 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; also stresses the increase of criminal activities during the pandemic, such as cyberattacks and cybercrimes, online child abuse and exploitation, goods counterfeiting, and the surge of new activities in the recent years like environmental crimes, showing the adaptability and flexibility of criminals and the need for Europol to adapt likewise; 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;
Amendment 22 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of integrated border management to ensure the functioning of the Schengen area; highlights the important role of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) in this regard andnotes that the Covid-19 outbreak showed to which extent borders management has implications in various areas, not only in security and migration, but also in mobility; highlights the important role of the European Border and Coast Guard (Frontex) in this regard; regrets that Commission’s proposal is below the anticipated budget in the financial statement of the Agency’s regulation, hence putting at risk the ability of Frontex to deliver the European standing corps of border by 2024, as requested by the President of the European Commission; underlines that the recruitment, training and deployment of 10,000 border and coats guards requires exceptional resources that cannot be reduced; calls for a significant budget increase for 2021 to EUR 838 000 000 to allow the Agency to build and train its standing corps as well as to purchase own equipment, thereby allowing a successful and timely deployment and operational support to the Member States at the external borders;
Amendment 27 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Takes note of the decrease in commitment appropriations (-5%) and the increase in payment appropriations (12%) for eu-LISA; highlights the important role of the Agency in the proper implementation and operational management of EU large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (EES, ETIAS, ECRIS-TCN, EURODAC, VIS, SIS) and to provide interoperability between these systems for faster and more reliable data to border management and law enforcement authorities; regrets that Commission’s proposal does not meet eu-LISA’s request in terms of staff; requests 14 additional staff to support the securing information networks and databases, the project for the extension of the operational sites of the Agency and the activities of the management board;
Amendment 30 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 33 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that the Recovery plan is a new opportunity for criminals to make profits and misappropriate funds intended to saving jobs and supporting the legal economy in Europe; considers that the fight against fraud to EU’s budget, corruption, money laundering, criminal financing should be strengthened in 2021; in this context, stresses the importance of adequate funding for European JHA agencies, in particular Europol, EPPO, CEPOL, OLAF and Eurojust;
Amendment 34 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Welcomes the new Security Union Strategy published by the Commission on 24 July, focusing on critical infrastructure protection, the fight against cybercrime, responding to hybrid threats and organised crime; also notes the three action plans presented on online sexual abuse against children, on firearms and on drugs; considers therefore that adequate funding is necessary in the Union’s budget and for the European JHA agencies to pursue these objectives;
Amendment 37 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the reduction of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’ budget by 0.4%; requests instead to increase Agency’s commitment and payment appropriations to EUR 24 600 000; calls for adding two AD6 and two contractual agent function group IV posts to the Agency establishment plan; highlights that without adequate financial and staff resources, the Agency may not be able to implement projects that respond to identified needs, in particular in countering discriminations and racism, defending individuals data protection and fundamental rights, including at the external borders, protecting migrants and refugees, supporting justice and victims’ rights;
Amendment 39 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers the proposed increase of appropriations for the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) insufficient in light of the challenges faced by the Agency with regard to digitalisation and the continuously growing caseload; requests to provide the Agency with 217 additional posts and to increase its budget accordingly to EUR 43 800 000;
Amendment 41 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the proposed increase of the European Asylum Support Office’s commitment and payment appropriations by 16.5% but regrets that the number of posts in its establishment plan have not been increased accordingly; requests therefore to reinforce the establishment plan of the Office by an additional 50 posts; recalls that Office plans to keep the same level of staff as requested for 2021 throughout the new programming period but stresses that additional staff will be needed if the new Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum is adopted; recalls that EASO’s operational activities have increased considerably in the recent years to address the challenge of the migration crisis and to assist Member States for the reception of asylum seekers and the processing of asylum procedures, in particular in EU hotspots; stresses that EASO has also been tasked with a number of new missions, in the fields of disembarkation or relocation; highlights that the additional staff will reinforce field operations, development and delivery of trainings, information and analysis, practical tools, governance activities and administrative functions, while the pressure on EU migration and asylum systems remains high.
Amendment 144 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks, content-sharing platforms, search engine, livestreaming platforms, messaging services or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of another service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.
Amendment 146 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. Accordingly, where access to information requires registration or admission to a user group, such information should only be considered to be publicly available when users seeking to access such information are automatically registered or admitted without human intervention to decide or select the users to whom access is granted. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service, including a messagings service, should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a finite number of pre- determined persons. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information. _________________ 39Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36
Amendment 159 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not affect the possibility of injunctions of different kinds against providers of intermediary services, even where they meet the conditions set out as part of those exemptions. Such injunctions could, in particular, consist of orders by courts or administrative authorities requiring the termination or prevention of any infringement, including the removal of illegal content specified in such orders, issued in compliance with Union law, or the disabling of access to it. Such orders, in particular where they require the provider to prevent that illegal content reappears, must be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular with the prohibition of general monitoring obligations, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content. Member states should however have the possibility to require from service providers, who host information provided by users of their service, to apply diligent duty of care.
Amendment 171 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to thto ensure the effective processing of those orders.
Amendment 187 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should prevent the reappearance of the notified illegal information. The provider should also inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means that have been proven to be efficient, proportionate and accurate, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) As Party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD), provisions of the Convention are integral part of the Union legal order and binding upon the Union and its Member States. The UN CRPD requires its Parties to take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems, and other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. General Comment No 2 to the UNCRPD further states that “The strict application of universal design to all new goods, products, facilities, technologies and services should ensure full, equal and unrestricted access for all potential consumers, including persons with disabilities, in a way that takes full account of their inherent dignity and diversity1a”.Given the ever-growing importance of digital services and platforms in private and public life, in line with the obligations enshrined in the UN CRPD, the EU must ensure a regulatory framework for digital services which protects rights of all recipients of services, including persons with disabilities. Declaration 22 annexed to the final Act of Amsterdam provides that the institutions of the Union are to take account of the needs of persons with disabilities in drawing up measures under Article 114 TFEU. __________________ 1aGeneral comment No. 2 (2014) on Article 9: Accessibility of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Amendment 197 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake, Union action to harmonise accessibility requirements for intermediary services across the internal market is vital to avoid market fragmentation and ensure that equal right to access and choice of those services by all consumers and other recipients of services, including by persons with disabilities, is protected throughout the Union. Lack of harmonised accessibility requirements for digital services and platforms will also create barriers for the implementation of existing Union legislation on accessibility, as many of the services falling under those laws will rely on intermediary services to reach end- users. Therefore, accessibility requirements for intermediary services, including their user interfaces, must be consistent with existing Union accessibility legislation, such as the European Accessibility Act1a and the Web Accessibility Directive1b, so that no one is left behind as result of digital innovation. This aim is in line with the Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 and the Union’s commitment to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. __________________ 1aDirective (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services 1bDirective (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
Amendment 198 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Action against illegal content can be taken more quickly and reliably where online platforms take the necessary measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the notice and action mechanisms required by this Regulation are treated with priority, without prejudice to the requirement to process and decide upon all notices submitted under those mechanisms in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Such trusted flagger status should only be awarded to entities, and not individuals, that have demonstrated, among other things, that they have particular expertise and competence in tackling illegal content, that they represent collective interests and that they work in a diligent and objective manner. Such entities can be public in nature, such as, for terrorist content for instance, internet referral units of national law enforcement authorities or of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (‘Europol’) or they can be non-governmental organisations and semi- public bodies, such as the organisations part of the INHOPE network of hotlines for reporting child sexual abuse material and organisations committed to notifying illegal racist and xenophobic expressions online. For intellectual property rights, organisations of industry and of right- holders could be awarded trusted flagger status, where they have demonstrated that they meet the applicable conditions. The rules of this Regulation on trusted flaggers should not be understood to prevent online platforms from giving similar treatment to notices submitted by entities or individuals that have not been awarded trusted flagger status under this Regulation, from otherwise cooperating with other entities, in accordance with the applicable law, including this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council.43 _________________ 43Regulation (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
Amendment 201 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and, proportionate and reliable safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) An online platform may in some instances become aware, such as through a notice by a notifying party or through its own voluntary measures, of information relating to certain activity of a recipient of the service, such as the provision of certain types of illegal content, that reasonably justify, having regard to all relevant circumstances of which the online platform is aware, the suspicion that the recipient may have committed, may be committing or is likely to commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, notably when it concerns vulnerable users such as children, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 . In such instances, the online platform should inform without delay the competent law enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion. This Regulation does not provide the legal basis for profiling of recipients of the services with a view to the possible identification of criminal offences by online platforms. Online platforms should also respect other applicable rules of Union or national law for the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals when informing law enforcement authorities. _________________ 44Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 209 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have an easy access to information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision- making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.
Amendment 210 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, t specifically regarding disinformation, misinformation, hate speech or any other types of harmful content. There being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.
Amendment 213 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause real societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures.
Amendment 216 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or, hampering competition or the way platforms' terms and conditions including content moderation policies, are enforced, including through automatic means. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discoursefundamental rights, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 223 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions as well as making content moderation policies, as well as the way they are enforced fully transparent for the users. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 229 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate, efficient and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.
Amendment 241 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms, such as the dissemination of illegal and harmful content, brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation, and encourage online platforms to follow those codes. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.
Amendment 249 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area forspect which needs to be considerationed is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation, harmful content, in particular hate speech, or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.
Amendment 251 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, since the Commission willhas issued guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan, in May 2021.
Amendment 253 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross- border response in the online environment in the public interest. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable information. In light of the important role of very large online platforms in disseminating information in our societies and across borders, such platforms should be encouraged in drawing up and applying specific crisis protocols. Such crisis protocols should be activated only for a limited period of time and the measures adopted should also be limited to what is strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstance. Those measures should be consistent with this Regulation, and should not amount to a general obligation for the participating very large online platforms to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal content.
Amendment 367 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
— a statement of reasons explaining the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasonspecific reasons such as ones related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;
Amendment 445 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned and shall create an obligation on behalf of the notified provider of hosting services to remove or disable access to the notified information expeditiously.
Amendment 455 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where theydecisions to remove or disable information are taken, they shall extend to preventing the reappearance of that information. Where providers of hosting services use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment 557 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content. , unless those manifestly illegal contents were due to wrongful notices and complaints as described in point 2 of this article.
Amendment 578 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where an online platform becomes aware of any information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or is likely to take place, it shall remove or disable the content and promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide all relevant information available.
Amendment 591 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing clearly between suspensions enacted for the provision of manifestly illegal content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints;
Amendment 610 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.
Amendment 628 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) Audiovisual Services Directive (EU) 2018/1808.
Amendment 630 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
(bb) Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act).
Amendment 632 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how and whether their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 640 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to address the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:
Amendment 739 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1), which is in the public interest.
Amendment 740 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(qa) ‘persons with disabilities’ means persons within the meaning of Article 3 (1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882.
Amendment 785 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall encourage the development of the codes of conduct within one year following the date of application of this Regulation and their application no later than six months after that date. The Commission shall supervise the monitoring of the application of those codes two years after the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 892 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – title
Chapter III – title
Due diligence obligations for a transparent, accessible and safe online environment
Amendment 906 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Amendment 1223 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities, through electronic communication technology;
Amendment 1233 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient, accessible for persons with disabilities, and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;
Amendment 1825 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) accessibility of elements and functions of online platforms and digital services for persons with disabilities aiming at consistency and coherence with existing harmonised accessibility requirements when these elements and functions are not already covered by existing harmonised European standards.
Amendment 1900 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) displaying prominent information on the crisis situation provided by Member States’ authorities or at Union level which are accessible for persons with disabilities;
Amendment 1902 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
(fa) measures to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities during implementation of crisis protocols, including by providing accessible description about these protocols.
Amendment 104 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The Union should, where appropriate, conclude international agreements, in accordance with Article 218 TFEU, with third countries or international organisations, allowing and organising their participation in some activities of the Cooperation Group and the CSIRTs network. Such agreements should ensure adequate protection of dataWhen personal data is transferred to a third country or international organisation, Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply.
Amendment 105 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Member States should contribute to the establishment of the EU Cybersecurity Crisis Response Framework set out in Recommendation (EU) 2017/1584 through the existing cooperation networks, notably the Cyber Crisis Liaison Organisation Network (EU-CyCLONe), CSIRTs network and the Cooperation Group. EU- CyCLONe and the CSIRTs network should cooperate on the basis of procedural arrangements defining the modalities of that cooperation. The EU-CyCLONe’s rules of procedures should further specify the modalities through which the network should function, including but not limited to roles, cooperation modes, interactions with other relevant actors and templates for information sharing, as well as means of communication. For crisis management at Union level, relevant parties should rely on the Integrated Political Crisis Response (IPCR) arrangements. The Commission should use the ARGUS high-level cross- sectoral crisis coordination process for this purpose. If the crisis concerns two or more Member States and is, or may be, suspected to be of criminal nature, the activation of the EU Law Enforcement Emergency Response Protocol should be considered. If the crisis entails an important external or Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) dimension, the European External Action Service (EEAS) Crisis Response Mechanism (CRM) should be activated.
Amendment 124 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Where it is suspected that an incident is related to serious criminal activities under Union or national law, Member States should encourage essential and important entities, on the basis of applicable criminal proceedings rules in compliance with Union law, toshould report incidents of a suspected serious criminal nature to the relevant law enforcement authorities. Where appropriate, and without prejudice to the personal data protection rules applying to Europol, it is desirable that coordination between competent authorities and law enforcement authorities of different Member States be facilitated by the EC3 and ENISA.
Amendment 134 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 78 a (new)
Recital 78 a (new)
(78a) The European Commission should support Member States to design educational programmes on cybersecurity, to enable members of the management body of entities falling within the scope of this Directive to receive or recruit cybersecurity specialists and technicians in order to comply with the obligations arising from this Directive.
Amendment 138 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1 a Protection and processing of personal data 1. Any processing of personal data in the Member States pursuant to this Directive shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679and Directive 2002/58/EC.2. Any processing of personal data by the Commission and ENISA pursuant to this Directive shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2018/1725.
Amendment 155 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Before 31 December 2021, the Commission shall publish a legislative proposal to include Union institutions, offices, bodies and agencies (EUIs) in the overall EU-wide cybersecurity framework, with a view to achieving a uniform level of protection through consistent and homogeneous rules.
Amendment 174 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) a policy on education to develop training programmes on cybersecurity to provide entities with specialists and technicians;
Amendment 190 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Cooperation Group shall be composed of representatives of Member States, the Commission and ENISA. The European External Action Service and the European Cybercrime Centre at Europol shall participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group as an observer. The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) in accordance with Article 17(5)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXXX [the DORA Regulation] may participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Cooperation Group shall be composed of representatives of Member States, the Commission and, ENISA and the EDPB. The European External Action Service shall participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group as an observer. The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) in accordance with Article 17(5)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXXX [the DORA Regulation] may participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group.
Amendment 194 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The CSIRTs network shall be composed of representatives of the Member States’ CSIRTs and CERT–EU. The Commission and the European Cybercrime Centre at Europol shall participate in the CSIRTs network as an observer. ENISA shall provide the secretariat and shall actively support cooperation among the CSIRTs.
Amendment 195 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. EU-CyCLONe shall be composed of the representatives of Member States’ crisis management authorities designated in accordance with Article 7, the Commission and ENISA. The European Cybercrime Centre at Europol shall participate in the activities of EU- CyCLONe as an observer. ENISA shall provide the secretariat of the network and support the secure exchange of information.
Amendment 197 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. EU-CyCLONe shall cooperate with the CSIRTs network on the basis of agreed procedural arrangements, and with law enforcement in the framework of the EU Law Enforcement Emergency Response Protocol.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that members of the management body and cybersecurity specialists in charge, follow specific trainings, on a regular basis, to gain sufficient knowledge and skills, in order to apprehend and assess cybersecurity risks and management practices and their impact on the operations of the entity.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities shall take appropriate and proportionate technical and organisational measures to manage the risks posed to the cybersecurity of network and information systems which those entities use in the provision of their servicesused for the provision of their services, and in view of assuring continuity of these services and to manage the risks posed to the rights of individuals when their personal data are processed. Having regard to the state of the art, those measures shall ensure a level of cybersecurity of network and information systems appropriate to the risk presented.
Amendment 209 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission, after consulting with the Cooperation Group, The European Data Protection Board and ENISA, shall identify the specific critical ICT services, systems or products that may be subject to the coordinated risk assessment referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities notify, without undue delay, the competent authorities or the CSIRT in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4 of any incident having a significant impact on the provision of their services, and to the competent law enforcement authorities if the incident is of a suspected or known malicious nature. Where appropriate, those entities shall notify, without undue delay, the recipients of their services of incidents that are likely to adversely affect the provision of that service. Member States shall ensure that those entities report, among others, any information enabling the competent authorities or the CSIRT to determine any cross-border impact of the incident.
Amendment 217 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 6
Article 20 – paragraph 6
6. Where appropriate, and in particular where the incident referred to in paragraph 1 concerns two or more Member States, the competent authority or the CSIRT shall inform the other affected Member States and ENISA of the incident. If the incident concerns two or more Member States and is, or may be, suspected to be of criminal nature, the competent authority or the CSIRT shall inform EUROPOL. In so doing, the competent authorities, CSIRTs and single points of contact shall, in accordance with Union law or national legislation that complies with Union law, preserve the entity’s security and commercial interests as well as the confidentiality of the information provided.
Amendment 222 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. ENISA, after having consulted the EDPB, in collaboration with Member States, shall draw up advice and guidelines regarding the technical areas to be considered in relation to paragraph 1 as well as regarding already existing standards, including Member States' national standards, which would allow for those areas to be covered.
Amendment 227 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD provide access to specific domain name registration data upon lawful and duly justified requests of legitimate access seekerspublic authorities, including competent authorities under this Directive or supervisory authorities under Regulation(EU) 2016/679, in compliance with Union data protection law. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD reply without undue delay to all lawful and duly notified requests for access. Member States shall ensure that policies and procedures to disclose such data are made publicly available.
Amendment 240 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Where the competent authorities have indications that the infringement by an essential or important entity of the obligations laid down in Articles 18 and 20 entails a personal data breach, as defined by Article 4(12) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be notified pursuant to Article 33 of that Regulation, they shall inform the supervisory authorities competent pursuant to Articles 55 and 56 of that Regulation within a reasonable period of timeout undue delay.
Amendment 244 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall periodically review the functioning of this Directive every 3 years, and report to the European Parliament and to the Council. The report shall in particular assess to what extent the Directive has contributed to achieve the highest level of security and integrity of networks and information, while giving an optimal protection to private life and personal data, and the relevance of sectors, subsectors, size and type of entities referred to in Annexes I and II for the functioning of the economy and society in relation to cybersecurity. For this purpose and with a view to further advancing the strategic and operational cooperation, the Commission shall take into account the reports of the Cooperation Group and the CSIRTs network on the experience gained at a strategic and operational level. The first report shall be submitted by… [54 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive].
Amendment 6 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the legal basis of this instrument requires at this stage the unanimity of the Council and the approval of the Parliament, which results in the limited involvement of the Parliament in this reform;
Amendment 40 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Considers that the emergence of illiberal democracies in the European Union, the growing risks around democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights and the emerging threats posed by new actors justify a reform of the founding Regulation of FRA to turn it into a stronger and independent agency, by defining the tools it may rely on and the mandate it is given;
Amendment 43 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that hate crime and hate speech, as well as discrimination based on any grounds such as race, colour, ethnic or social origin, language, religion or belief, political opinion, minority status, disability or sexual orientation is a prevalent and pressing issue; condemns the increase and normalisation of hate speech and different forms of racism, boosted by the rise of extremist movements; notes with serious concern the increase in anti-semitic hate speech; stresses that antisemitism is a complex phenomenon and requires a holistic response across policy areas; recalls that the rise of Jew-hatred and antisemitism poses a threat to our democratic values; notes with serious concern the increase in antisemitic hate speech; stresses the need for action in that regard;
Amendment 55 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. ARegrets the choice of legal basis and small involvement of the European Parliament in the reform and asks for exploring how to turn it into an ordinary procedure; strongly asks the Council to take into account the following considerations when amending the FRA Regulation:
Amendment 67 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point ii – paragraph 1
Observer membership should not be restricted to candidate countries or countries with a Stabilisation and Association Agreement, but should be open to other third countries, such as European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association countries, and the UK post- Brexit and countries covered by the European neighbourhood policy;
Amendment 76 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
In addition to the fight against any kind of discrimination, racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, the fight against antisemitism should be specifically mentioned in the areas of activities of the FRA, and not only in the recital; this would be very much in line with the activities carried out by the FRA in relation to antisemitic incidents since 2009, with yearly updates on the situation in each Member State;
Amendment 81 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iv – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point iv – paragraph 1
The proposal by the Commission to discontinue the previous five-year Multiannual Framework should be taken on board; t and abandon the establishment of thematic restrictions for each 5 years period; the multiannual programming document will set out the areas and specific projects on which the Agency is to work for a three-year period. This should enable the Agency to plan its work and thematic focus over time and to adapt it annually to emerging priorities. The FRA should prepare its programming in close consultation with the FRA national liaison officers, in order to coordinate the work in the best possible way with the respective national authorities; the draft programming document should be sent to the competent Council preparatory body and the European Parliament for discussion, and in the light of the outcome of these discussions, the Director of the FRA must submit the draft programming document to the FRA Management Board for adoption;
Amendment 101 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Upon the request of the Council, the Commission or Parliament, the FRA should be able to carry out scientific research, surveys, and preparatory and feasibility studies and formulate and publish conclusions and opinions on specific thematic topics; this should also be possible on the initiative of the FRA, and not only upon the request of an EU institution; furthermore, individual Member States or a group of Member States should have the right of initiative; the FRA should be able to receive and investigate complaints and to carry out country specific assessments;
Amendment 107 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1 a (new)
(iv) FRA´s role in the EU mechanism on Democracy, Rule of law and fundamental Rights. The inclusion of a reference to a role for FRA in the EU mechanism on Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights, considering tasking the Agency with regular monitoring of Member States' compliance with Article 2 TEU, to identify the main positive and negative developments in each Member State and contribute to the preparation of the Commission Annual Report and recommendations;
Amendment 109 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1 b (new)
(v) FRA´s role in the article 7 TEU procedure. The inclusion of a reference to a role for FRA in the framework of Article 7 TEU. The Fundamental Rights Agency should contribute with periodic - semestral- reports on the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the Member States subject to an Article 7 TEU procedure;
Amendment 23 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas sustainable returns and successful reintegration are important indicators in the assessment of the effectiveness of returns; whereas currently post-return monitoring is not sufficiently comprehensive and accurate; whereas evidence has emerged that not all returns are sustainable, especially in relation to unaccompanied minors, due to a lack of a personal reintegration plan or support upon return;
Amendment 53 #
2019/2208(INI)
3. Stresses that the Commission’s statement that the return rate decreased from 46 % in 2016 to 37 % in 2017 may not present the full picture, as people who received a return decision were not necessarily returned within the same year, some Member States issue more than one return decision to one person, or to people whose whereabouts are unknown, and return decisions are not withdrawn if the return does not take place owing to difficulties in cooperation with third countries or for humanitarian reasons, or people return voluntarily without their return being registered; stresses than an effective return policy is a key element of a well-functioning EU asylum and migration policy;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Member States to allocate adequate capacity, including human resources and sufficient training, to authorities responsible for taking return decisions and implementation, so as to invest in the quality of them;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that the Commission has stated that the lack of third country identification and readmission of returnees is one of the main reasons for non-return; stresses the need for improving the relations with third countries in a constructive migration dialogue to ensure a mutually beneficial cooperation for effective and sustainable returns;
Amendment 72 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Regrets the informalisation of cooperation with third countries; calls on the Member States to support the Commission to conclude formal EU readmission agreements, thereby coupled with EU parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight; stresses that incentives, including financial, should be offered to facilitate cooperation;
Amendment 85 #
2019/2208(INI)
5. Stresses the importance of ensuring compliance with return decisions and recalls the key principle enshrined in the directive that voluntary returns should be prioritised over forced returns; as they prove to be more sustainable;
Amendment 112 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that a broad definition of the risk of absconding may lead to Member States frequently refraining from granting a period for voluntary departure; recalls that lifting the voluntary departure period also leads to the imposition of an entry ban, which may further undermine voluntary departure; stresses the need for enhanced implementation of the current legal framework in order to step up successful voluntary returns;
Amendment 116 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the need for more cooperation on return between the Member States, including information sharing and the application of Directive2001/40/EC on the mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third country nationals, in line with fundamental rights guarantees; underlines the need for support, including operational, by the relevant Union agencies; stresses the need for increased cooperation between the Member States and Frontex;
Amendment 120 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Highlights the importance of providing individual case management and assistance, tailored to the individual circumstances and prospects of the returnee when assisting in assisted voluntary return in all stages of the process, with particular attention for unaccompanied minors;
Amendment 149 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes with regret the limited use of Article 6(4) of the directive; is concerned about the failure of Member States to issue a temporary residence permit where return has proven not to be possible; underlines the fact that granting residence permits to individuals who cannot return to their coRecalls that Article 6(4) of the directive provides Member States with the possibility to grant an autonomous residence permit to a third-country national staying irregularly on their territory; stresses the importance of successfully exhausting the options provided in the directive to enforce return decisions, highlighting voluntary of origin could help to prevent protracted irregular stays and facilitate individuals’ social inclusion and contribution to societyreturn; notes however with regret the limited use of Article 6(4) of the directive where return has proven not to be possible;
Amendment 187 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes differences in the transposition into national legislations of the definition ofRecalls that Article 3(7) of the directive states that the ‘'risk of absconding’ and reiterates that Article 3(7) of the directive provides that the existence of such a risk should always be assessed on the basis of objective criteria defined by law' means the existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteria defined by law to believe that a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond; notes differences in the transposition into national legislations of the definition of the ‘risk of absconding’;
Amendment 194 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is concerned that the legislation of several Member States includes extensive and sometimes divergent lists of ‘objective criteria’ for defining the risk of absconding, which are often applied in a more or less automatic way, while individual circumstances are of marginal consideration; underlines the need for a harmonized and exhaustive common Union list of objective criteria to establish the risk of absconding;
Amendment 17 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and in particular its judgment of 9 July 2019 in the case Romeo Castaño v. Belgium;
Amendment 19 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas judicial cooperation in the Union is a relevant factor in achieving strategic autonomy and the environmental, social, economic and digital challenges posed;
Amendment 25 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EAW is in general a success and has replaced extraditions with transfers; whereas transfers have been shortened to 40 days on average where the individual does not consent;
Amendment 27 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas of the 150 000 EAWs issued between 2005 and 2016, only 43 000 were executed, and whereas refusal to execute an EAW is not unusual;
Amendment 30 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas mutual recognition is not new but was developed in the area of free movement of goods, persons, services and capital (Cassis de Dijon logic); whereas any move away from applying the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters may have negative consequences and affect its application in other fields, such as the internal market;
Amendment 32 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas mutual recognition means the direct recognition of judicial decisions from other Member States with non- recognition as an exception; whereas it also entails cooperation between the competent judicial authoritiesapplication of mutual recognition is not compatible with the revision, on grounds not provided for in the Framework Decision, of decisions taken by other Member States; whereas cooperation and mutual trust between the competent judicial authorities has to prevail in application of this instrument;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas mutual recognition is a consequence of mutual trust based on a common understanding of the rule of law and fundamental rights; whereas the European Union needs this trust most particularly at this historic and crucial moment in order to tackle successfully common challenges; whereas reinforcing trust is key for the EAW to operate smoothly;
Amendment 37 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the establishment of the EU mechanism on democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights will constitute a basis for recovery of this mutual trust; whereas the time has come to set out concrete ways of supporting mutual recognition in the implementation of the Framework Decision, binding its implementation to results stemming from the mechanism; whereas the inadequate and incoherent implementation of the Framework Decision by some Member States is not helping to reinforce this mutual trust;
Amendment 54 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas mutual recognition needs harmonisation ois facilitated if criminal material law and procedure are sufficiently harmonised; whereas progress has been made in the last few years, such as the six directives on procedural rights, Directive 2012/29/EU on victims’ rights20, and the harmonisation of criminal offences; _________________ 20 OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57.
Amendment 73 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the EAW is a major achievement and an effective and indispensable instrument; states that the EAW has substantially improved cooperation on surrenders; points out, however, that in these 20 years the world has been going through a digital transformation that has changed crime's ecosystem, and advises an update of legal rights to be protected;
Amendment 77 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the existence of particular problems; finds that these do not call the system into questionplace the system at risk, but they do need to be addressed to avoid certain blind spots that weaken the system; states that in addition to creating opportunities for citizens, the Schengen area and digital transformation have opened up new channels for the perpetration of criminal acts and facilitated the presence of transnational elements in many serious crimes;
Amendment 81 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that such problems relate to prison conditions, proportionality, the execution of custodial sentences23, time limits24 and in absentia decisions; acknowledges that certain cases raised the issue of double criminality25; detects, in other cases, inconsistency in the application of grounds for refusing to execute EAWs; highlights too the absence of a comprehensive data system enabling the establishment of reliable qualitative and quantitative statistics on the issue, execution or refusal of EAWs; _________________ 23 CJEU, C-579/15, Popławski. 24 CJEU, C-168/13 PPU, Jeremy F. 25With guidance from C-289/15, Grundza, referring to Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA.
Amendment 87 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that some issues were solved by a combination of soft law (EAW handbook), mutual assessments, the assistance of Eurojust, CJEU case law and supplementing legislation (Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA and Directive 2013/48/EU), although others continue to exist;
Amendment 92 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the EAW should be enhanced as all Member States take part in it; recalls that any weakening of mutual recognition in criminal matters can only lead to its weakening in other areas, which would be prejudicial to tackling common policies, such as the internal market, effectively;
Amendment 97 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the EAW should not be misused for minor offences; urges the use of less intrusive legal instruments where possible; points out that issuing authorities should carry out proportionality checks, taking into account (i) the seriousness of the offence, (ii) the likely penalty imposed if the person is found guilty ofthe alleged offence, (iii) the likelihood of detention of the person in the issuing Member State after surrender, (iv) the impact on the rights of the requested person and his or her family, and (v) the interests of the victims of the offence;
Amendment 103 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls that a refusal on the basis of violation of fundamental rights in the Issuing State has to be based on a real and identified risk; points out that the ill- founded application of this ground for refusal produces legal uncertainty and weakens the system for monitoring and verifying that Member States are complying with fundamental rights; is concerned by the existence of instances of ill-founded refusals to execute EAWs which have given rise to impunity, as the competent legal authority has subsequently confirmed26 a; _________________ 26 aSee, for example, the ECHR judgment of 9 July 2019 in Case 8351/17, Romeo Castaño v. Belgium, on the refusal to surrender Natividad Jauregui.
Amendment 104 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to provide for understandable data as the existing data is confusing and can offer a false impression of the (non)efficiency of EAWs; calls on Member States to collect and transfer data to the Commission; the Commission to set out the method for establishing that Member States have an obligation to collect and transfer data to the Commission; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of creating a common database on EAWs, which would become a smart and efficient instrument for assessing judicial cooperation, identifying weak points and being better prepared for any adjustments; recalls that judicial cooperation is a key element in guaranteeing European strategic autonomy and social, economic, environmental and digital stability;
Amendment 113 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to carry out a formal and substantive consistency assessment of the list of 32 categories not requiring a double criminality check; notes that greater legal certainty must be provided to all involved in implementation, thereby avoiding unnecessary disputes;
Amendment 117 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the benefits of drawing up a homogeneous list that does not lump together specific offences, categories of offence and interests protected by law, as is currently the case; recommends also the inclusion of an annex containing definitions for each list entry to facilitate interpretation; suggests, finally, that each Member State list the types of criminal offence existing within their legal systems that can be subsumed in the list of 32 categories;
Amendment 118 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to analyse common offences in the Member States and to assess the possibility of expanding the list of offences that do not require a double criminality check, including criteria such as the gravity of the offence, its cross-border dimension or its harmful effect in undermining the fundamental values of the Union; highlights the importance of assessing the inclusion of additional offences such as particular environmental crimes (e.g. ship-source pollution offences), hate crimes, sexual abuse, offences committed through digital means such as identity theft, offences against public order and the constitutional integrity of the Member States, crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; stresses that closer judicial cooperation regarding offences of this nature would help the Union to achieve its own priority objectives, while at the same time strengthening the notion of respect for democracy and rule of law in the Union;
Amendment 136 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to clarify accessory or related offences by means of the EU instruments in the field of harmonisation of criminal law;
Amendment 146 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Member States to implement the EAW and alternativeFramework Decision and the relevant judgments of the Court of Justice on the EAW as well as additional legal instruments on criminal matters in a timely and proper fashioncomprehensive manner;
Amendment 158 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to ensure adequate funding for Eurojust and EJN for facilitating and coordinating the EAW; notes that the Commission’s current budgetary plaappropriations for Eurojust would have led to a stagnation in financing despite an increased workare insufficient in light of the challenges faced by the Agency with regard to the continuously growing caseload;
Amendment 161 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide appropriate funding for the training of EAW practitioners, including police, prosecutors, the judiciary and defence lawyers; notunderlines the value of EJTN programmes, such as EAW simulations and language training;
Amendment 173 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. 26a. Stresses that Member States shall ensure that every person, such us the requested person or victim, whose rights and freedoms are violated by a decision, action or omission including errors in the application of an EAW has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. If such a remedy is exercised in the executing state and has suspensive effect, the final decision on such a remedy shall be taken within the time limits set by the applicable mutual recognition instrument or, in the absence of explicit time limits, with sufficient promptness to ensure that the purpose of the mutual recognition process is not jeopardised.
Amendment 177 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that although implementation of the procedures provided for under Article 7(1) TEU can affects mutual recognition, according to the CJEU, the executing authority must assess in each specific case whether there are substantial grounds for believing that, following the surrender, the person will run the risk of having their fundamental rights contravened; underlinespoints out that the triggering of Article 7(1) and (2) TEU does not amount to automatic non-recognition; recommends, therefore, the introduction of a system of precautionary measures, including suspension of the instrument, to underpin the guarantees provided, while enhancing confidence and mutual recognition between Member States;
Amendment 185 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Reiterates the importance of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, in the form of an interinstitutional agreement consisting of an annual independent and evidence-based review to assess the compliance of all EU Member States with Article 2 TEU, plus country-specific recommendations, so as to enhance mutual recognition between the Member States; stresses the importance of linking refused enforcement arising from a possible breach of fundamental rights with the annual results obtained through the mechanism;
Amendment 203 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Points out that shortcomings with the EAW can lead to a denial of access to justice and a lack of protection for victims; emphasises that impunity, as a result of deficiencies in judicial cooperation, has a very negative impact on the rule of law, judicial systems and society, public confidence in the institutions and the victims themselves;
Amendment 214 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to provide for a coherent policy on mutual recognition to avoid different answers to the same issues and to formulate new mechanisms to ensure the uniform implementation of grounds for refused enforcement arising from a possible breach of fundamental rights;
Amendment 215 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Calls in particular for the establishment of mandatory grounds for refused enforcement arising from a possible breach of fundamental rights that are based on the results obtained through the EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights and that, in the interests of improved legal certainty, replace examination of each individual case by the Member State of enforcement; calls in addition for a system of precautionary measures to be incorporated into the Framework Decision in order to underpin the guarantees provided, thereby enhancing trust and mutual recognition between Member States where Article 7(1) or (2) of the TEU has been activated and confidence in the Member State concerned is being drastically eroded;
Amendment 216 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission to conduct a cross-case study of instruments so as to prevent abnormalities, as with the rules on transfer of prisoners and EAWs; urges in particular that the practical implementation of the instrument in different countries be observed, with a view to identifying good practices that result in a high degree of compliance with warrants issued by certain countries and the specific difficulties encountered in countries where the level of non- compliance with European European arrest warrants is particularly high;
Amendment 220 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Calls on the Commission to carry out a regular assessment of non-executed EAWs and consider whether they, together with the corresponding SIS, Interpol and Europol alerts, should be withdrawn. There should be an automatic link between the withdrawal of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and the removal of such alerts.
Amendment 9 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Suggests to amend the tasks of the European Agency for Fundamental Rights to allow it to alert the Court of Justice to the European Union in case Member States do not adhere to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Amendment 24 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to propose an urgent solution to resolve the flagrant cases of human rights violations in reception centres for refugees and migrants on European soil;
Amendment 26 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Urges the Commission and the Council to start the procedure to close the registration centres for asylum seekers based in European territory, where thousands of vulnerable people, including hundreds of children, have no access to basic services (health, education, etc.) and are subjected to intolerable subhuman conditions inside the EU;
Amendment 28 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Suggests that the Conference on the Future of Europe should consider providing the Court of Justice of the European Union with jurisdiction over all aspects of EU law, in accordance with the principle of separation of powers; points out that extending the jurisdiction of the Court would also facilitate the accession of the EU to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Amendment 31 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses the importance of ensuring, in all Member States, effective and coherent protection of the rule of law and prevention of infringements of fundamental rights, and acknowledges that the rule of law plays a key role in preventing infringements of fundamental rights; recalls that fundamental rights are part and parcel of the EU's values and that Article 7 of the TEU contains a mechanism for responding to any serious, persistent breach or clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2 of the TEU, and highlights that Article 7 should be applied uniformly to all Member States to ensure equality of treatment;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Recalls however, that the major obstacle in applying Article 7(2) of the TEU, in case of the existence of a serious and persistent breach of the fundamental values of the European Union in a Member State in accordance with Article 7(2) of the TEU, is the requirement of unanimity in Council;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Proposes that the Conference of Europe reviews the sanctions mechanisms provided by Article 7(3) of the TEU in order to better guarantee the protection of rule of law and of fundamental rights; recalls that the proposal for a regulation on the protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards to the rule of law in the Member States1 would allow introducing sanctions aimed at Member States whose disregard of the rule of law endangers the sound implementation of the EU budget and the financial interests of the EU; highlights, however, the need for changes to the EU Treaty in order to reinforce the overall sanctions mechanisms provided by Article 7 (3); 1COM(2018)0324 -2018/0136(COD)
Amendment 35 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that the access to justice and the right of defence are both, fundamental rights; the disrespect of any of them lead to impunity and injustice, respectively; stresses that fight against impunity has to be a priority for European and national institutions; calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to improve the effectiveness of the European instruments of judicial cooperation, in particular the European Arrest Warrant, to ensure the equally protection of victims and suspects or accused persons;
Amendment 36 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. Insists that the respect of the rule of law should be included as binding and enforceable criteria in the treaties concluding the accession of new Member States to the EU;
Amendment 37 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to setup legal mechanisms to criminalise the glorification of a specific act of terrorism and crimes against humanity, as it humiliates the victims and causes secondary victimisation by damaging the victims’ dignity and recovery;
Amendment 47 #
2019/2199(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to ensure the right to education for all children in the EU and the respect of the best interests of the child and protect them from any discrimination; points out that education systems with language immersion schemes may compromise learning, especially for those children with any disability involving language development problems, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD);
Amendment 60 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
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
Amendment 97 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 40 a (new)
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),
Amendment 113 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
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;
Amendment 116 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas persistent racist, xenophobic and homophobic attitudes are starting to be seen as normal in the Member States and are embraced by opinion leaders and politicians across the EU, fostering a social climate that provides fertile ground for racism, discrimination and hate crimes;
Amendment 129 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas hate speech and hate crimes motivated by intolerance from far- right and far-left extremisms are growing;
Amendment 135 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas an independent judiciary, freedom of expression and information and media pluralism are crucial components of the rule of law;
Amendment 166 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Roma women are particularly affected as regards women’s rights and often face exacerbated forms of verbal, physical, psychological and racial harassment in reproductive health care settings, as has found to be the case in Bulgaria19 ; whereas Roma have also experienced in that Member State, ethnic segregation in maternal health care facilities, and are placed in segregated rooms with segregated bathrooms and eating facilities20 ; whereas in some Member States, such as the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic, Roma have been subjected to systematic practices of forced and coercive sterilisation and have been unable to obtain adequate reparations, including compensation, for the resulting violations of their human rights21 ; __________________ 19Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Europe, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2017, pp. 42-44; Decision of the European Committee of Social Rights of 5 December 2018, European Roma Rights Centre v Bulgaria, Complaint No. 151/2017 ; European Roma Rights Centre, Romani woman harassed by racist hospital staff during childbirth wins case, European Roma Rights Centre, 18 January 2017, http://www.errc.org/press- releases/romani-woman-harassed-by- racist-hospital-staff-during-childbirth- wins-case 20Decision of the European Committee of Social Rights of 5 December 2018, European Roma Rights Centre v Bulgaria, Complaint No. 151/2017. 21Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Slovakia, 18 October 2019, E/C.12/SVK/CO/3, paras. 44-45; Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Concluding observations on the combined twelfth and thirteenth periodic reports of Czechia, 19 September 2019, CERD/C/CZE/CO/12-13, paras. 19-20; Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Concluding observations on the combined eleventh and twelfth periodic reports of Slovakia, 12 January 2018, CERD/C/SVK/CO/11-12, paras. 23- 24; Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the fourth report of Slovakia, 22 November 2016, CCPR/C/SVK/CO/4, paras. 26-27.;
Amendment 171 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the values referred to in Article 2 of the TEU are in serious risk, whereas the development of education and training to foster critical thinking, to give tools to identify all forms of discrimination and intolerance and promote digital literacy, is crucial;
Amendment 185 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 193 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas many instances of disproportionate use of force against peaceful demonstrators continue to be reported across the EU, including the beating of demonstrators; whereas law enforcement authorities in some Member States such as Romania23 , Spain and France24 are increasingly using less lethal weapons, such as batons, tear gas, hand- held sting grenades, electroshock weapons, water cannons and rubber bullets to control or disperse crowds of demonstrators; whereas the number of persons seriously wounded in demonstrations in recent years as a result of the use of rubber bullets is particularly striking; __________________ 23European Parliament resolution of 13 November 2018 on the rule of law in Romania (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0446) 24Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Shrinking space for freedom of peaceful assembly, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2019; Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Memorandum on maintaining public order and freedom of assembly in the context of the ‘yellow vest’ movement in France, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2019; Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Protection of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly during last week’s demonstrations in Catalonia, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2019;
Amendment 203 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 218 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. wWhereas pushbacks constitute a violthe EU has an obligation ofunder EU and international law and prevent migrants from benefiting from the legal guarantees firmly laid down in such law; whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights expressed grave concern about consistent reports of violent pushbacks by Croatian law enforcement officials25 to help those who come to the EU seeking asylum; whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights also expressed concerns regarding the practice of ‘summary returns’ in the enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla in relation to the ECtHR cases N.D. v Spain and N.T. v Spain26 ; __________________ 25 Letter from the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe to the Prime Minister of Croatia of 20 September 2018; Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Bosnia and Herzegovina must immediately close the Vučjak camp and take concrete measures to improve the treatment of migrants in the country, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2019 26Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights of 22 March 2018, N.D. v Spain and N.T. v Spain, CommDH(2018)11.grave concern about consistent reports of violent pushbacks;
Amendment 227 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. Whereas the significant shortcomings inherent in the European asylum system lead to the violation of the fundamental rights of individuals throughout their journey; highlights the problems of migrants’ access to rights, especially at the registration centres at the EU’s external borders; recalls that the European Parliament has adopted negotiating mandates on all of the Commission’s legislative proposals on the 2016 asylum package;
Amendment 233 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas access to justice is a fundamental right and impunity represents an important obstacle for recovery and protection of victims;
Amendment 257 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that the EU plays an important role in preventing poverty and social exclusion in the Member States, and calls on the Commission and the Council to make macroeconomic decisions based onscrupulously respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter when presenting proposals and making decisions;
Amendment 260 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 261 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
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;
Amendment 269 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the effects of austerity measureconomic policies have deeply impacted in the social fabric of the EU in many Member States and that this continues today – exacerbating alreadyand that European institutions and the Member States have the tools to avoid widening inequalities and breaching fundamental rights – and affects women, migrants, Roma, Travellers and other disadvantaged groups with a particular ferocity;
Amendment 274 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that citizens shall have equal opportunities to access jobs and that employment is, as general principle, the best way to lift people out of poverty;
Amendment 282 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that housing is not a commodity, but a necessity, without which citizens cannot fully participate in society and access fundamental rights; calls on the Commission and the Member States to integrate the recommendations made by the Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner in her comment of 23 January 2020 entitled ‘The right to affordable housing: Europe’s neglected duty’, particularly the recommendatiand place among that all Member States should promptly accept to be bound by Article 31 of the revised European Social Charter on the right to housing, and step up investment in social and affordable housing to eradicate the burden of high housing costeir priorities of social policies the right to adequate housing for citizens, particularly amongto protect disadvantaged and vulnerable groups;
Amendment 290 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights Article 37 of the Charter, which affirms that measures to protect the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union, and believes that this must be the guiding principle for all macroeconomic policies, above any other economic consideration to deal with the most significant threat facing humanity and to ensure that all people have the right to a futurethe environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union; emphasises the need of including relevant environmental concerns into the decision-making process of upcoming actions and policies and within the European semester (environmental mainstreaming);
Amendment 293 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that not all Member States address the phenomenon of discrimination and segregation affecting the schooling of Roma children and children belonging to minorities, emphasizes that European and all national laws prohibit both discrimination and segregation; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take action against such practices urgently and effectively both through legal responses and by promoting mutual understanding and social cohesion; strongly encourages Member States to include respect for diversity, intercultural understanding and human rights into school curricula and to promote inclusive education from an early age in schools;
Amendment 297 #
Amendment 298 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to ensure the right to education for all children in the EU and the respect of the best interests of the child and protect them from any discrimination; points out that education systems with language immersion schemes may compromise learning, especially for those children with any disability involving language development problems, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD);
Amendment 299 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Member States to ensure that migrant and refugee children are granted access to formal and informal education swiftly after their arrival in the European Union territory;
Amendment 300 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Calls on the Member States to include in school curricula education about the value of tolerance, in order to provide children with the tools they need to identify all forms of discrimination and the features of hate speech and incitement to violence;
Amendment 301 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Highlights that children face new risks in the digital world and that they have to be educated about their fundamental rights to make this environment safer for them; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote digital literacy, including media and information literacy, as a part of the basic education curriculum and from the earliest years of schooling;
Amendment 302 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Stresses that political profiling, disinformation and manipulation of information represent a threat to the EU’s democratic values; calls on the Commission and the Member States to contribute to the development of education and training in critical thinking that citizens can form their own opinion to face these risks;
Amendment 309 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Condemns any discrimination based on any grounds, such as prejudice against someone’s sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation, as stated in Article 21 of the Charter, or any other form of intolerance or xenophobia and recalls Article 2 of the TEU;
Amendment 311 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 g (new)
Paragraph 4 g (new)
4g. Stresses that sexism and gender stereotypes, which have led discrimination against women, have a severe impact on women’s fundamental rights in all spheres of life;
Amendment 332 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Condemns the present visible and organised backlash at global and European level against gender equality and women’s rights, including sexual and reproductive health and rights, including a concerning trend of retrogressive policy and legislative proposals in several Member States to restrict sexual and reproductive health and rights;
Amendment 369 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Council to urgently conclude the EU ratification of the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, on the basis of a broad accession, without any limitation;
Amendment 373 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Emphasises that women face all types of gender-based discrimination in sport jobs; calls on the Commission and Member States to reinforce their commitment to end up with these practises;
Amendment 376 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Regrets the rise of number of cases of LGBTI people experiencing bullying and harassment and suffering from discrimination in different aspects of their lives;
Amendment 377 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Strongly condemns all discriminations against LGBTI people and their fundamental rights, including by public authorities and also the growing number of attacks and hate speech against the LGBTI community, motivated by homophobia and transphobia, that are currently on the rise across in the EU, including coming from the State, State officials, Governments at the national, regional and local levels, and politicians;
Amendment 380 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Calls on the Member States to implement the appropriate policies to ensure that the elderly can fully enjoy their social, political and economic rights to avoid their exclusion from society and ensure that life in old age is defined just as much by choice, control and autonomy as in other stages of life;
Amendment 382 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 f (new)
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Recalls that the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) is a legally binding international treaty, signed and ratified by the EU, the aim being to ensure equal opportunities regarding accessibility, participation, equality, employment, education and training, social protection, health, and EU external action; calls the Member States to implement the appropriate policies to ensure that people with disabilities can fully enjoy their social, political and economic rights;
Amendment 385 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 387 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. CondemnRecalls thate crime and hate speech violence motivated by racism, xenophobia or religious intolerance, or by bias on the grounds of disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, sexual characteristics or minority status constitutes instances of hate crimes; condemns any form of racism, xenophobia and discrimination and any occurrence of hate crime and hate speech in Europe; warns against their increasing presence and normalisation in many Member States, boosted by the rise of far- right movements and rhetoric, including the spreading of racist, xenophobic, anti- LGBT and other forms of discriminatory discourse by government representatives in certain Member States;
Amendment 394 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – point a (new)
Paragraph 8 – point a (new)
(a) Considers that Member States should adopt an intersectional approach to combat all forms of discrimination against children, taking into account the vulnerability of – in particular, but not limited to – children with disabilities, migrant children, children with a migrant background, children from minorities and religious groups, LGBTI children, children of LGBTI parents, children of single parents and stateless or undocumented children, who are disproportionately discriminated against for many reasons and who therefore require a specialised approach to meet their specific needs
Amendment 396 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to uphold its proposal for an Equal Treatment Directive and urges the Council to resolve the deadlock that has been obstructing the adoption of this directive in the last decade; calls on Member States to fully implement the Race Equality Directive[1] and the Employment Equality Directive[2]; calls on the Commission to actively fight segregation and discrimination including by initiating infringement procedures with relation to these Directives and to foster the effective application of the Framework Decision on combating certain forms of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law; recalls that these measures should be accompanied by proper national integration strategies; [1] COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin [2] COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation
Amendment 397 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
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;
Amendment 406 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2 a (new)
Subheading 2 a (new)
Racism, xenophobia and related intolerance
Amendment 407 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Condemns the persistence in many Member states of hate speech, hate crime, segregation, exclusion and discrimination of Roma people, including segregation of Roma children in schools, discrimination in the housing sector, access to healthcare and employment; is strongly concerned by the fact that certain governments and political parties seek political gain by encouraging hatred and discrimination against Rome people; calls on the Commission to accelerate infringement procedures in this domain, and especially with regard to the segregation of Roma children in schools; expresses its concern that 2018-2019 saw no major improvement in terms of achieving the goals of the National Roma Integration Strategies; points out that ESIF resources often increase the differences between Roma and non-Roma and calls on the Commission to link ESIF resources to the execution of National Roma Integration Strategies in order to strengthen cohesion and to effectively reduce inequalities;
Amendment 412 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Condemns hate crime and hate speech motivated by racism, xenophobia or religious intolerance or prejudice against someone´s political or any other opinion, or by bias on the grounds of disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, sexual characteristics or minority status;
Amendment 420 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Emphasises that hate speech and hate crimes motivated by intolerance from far-right and far-left extremisms, are growing and must be addressed;
Amendment 425 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Condemns the normalisation of hate speech sponsored or supported by authorities, political parties or political leaders and reported by social media that is putting in risk the European values;
Amendment 430 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Calls on the Commission in this context to propose a recast of the Council Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism, homophobia and xenophobia by means of criminal law in order to cover other forms of bias crime;
Amendment 436 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Emphasises the need to encourage victims to report hate crimes or discrimination, and to give them appropriate protection and support;
Amendment 452 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Freedoms of expression, information, association and media freedom
Amendment 454 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Recalls that Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights grants everyone the right to freedom of expression, including the right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers; recalls that Article 12 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights enshrines everyone’s right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association at all levels, in particular in political, trade union and civic matters; points out that these rights constitute a bedrock of democracy, as they contribute to quality public debate, pluralism and civic participation in democratic processes;
Amendment 456 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Condemns attempts by governments to silence media outlets that criticise them and to eliminatealls on Member States to protect and develop a vibrant, independent, pluralist and free media sector; condemns in this respect any measures aimed at silencing critical media and undermining media freedom and pluralism, including in sophisticated ways that do not typically lead to an alert being submitted to the Council of Europe Platform for the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, such as the buying up of; condemns practices consisting in concentrating commercial media outlets byin government members and their cronies and the hijacking of public service media outlets to serve partisan interests-friendly hands and creating government-controlled bodies federating large parts of a country’s media landscape; calls on the European Commission to examine the compliance of such practices with competition law and to take action where necessary; condemns the hijacking of public service media outlets to serve partisan interests; urges Member States to guarantee the highest level of independence of their media authorities and calls on the European Commission to ensure that national media authorities comply de jure and de facto with EU requirements in terms of independence;
Amendment 458 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls the fundamental role of investigative journalism in acting as a watchdog in a democratic society, strengthening public oversight of political actors, including in the domain of corruption; condemns the persistence and increase in many Member States of violence, threats and intimidation against journalists, which often lead to self- censorship and undermine citizens’ right to information; calls on law enforcement authorities to step up their efforts to prevent such violence, threats and intimidation; urges the EU and Member States to urgently take the necessary legal and policy steps to establish a safe environment for journalists to operate and to create a permanent programme and funding to support investigative journalism in the EU; expresses its gravest concerns about the fact that investigations linked to the murder of journalists in the EU progress at a very slow pace; urges law enforcement authorities of the Member States concerned to urgently step up their efforts so as to yield significant results in these cases;
Amendment 463 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests the Commission to put forward a proposal for strong and comprehensive mechanisms to protect and strengthen the freedom of speech, the freedom of the media and enhance the protection of journalists, including by improving the transparency of media- ownership, adopting an EU-wide anti- SLAPP directive, creating a permanent EU fund for investigative journalists and establishing a rapid reaction mechanism for journalists in danger;
Amendment 467 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on public institutions to prevent and penalise attacks on journalists in the exercise of their work because of their language, media or editorial line;
Amendment 469 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Recalls the fundamental role played by whistle-blowers in making public interest information available and in fostering transparency of both public and private entities; calls on Member States to fully transpose into national law the provisions of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law as a matter of urgency so as to maximise its effects as soon as it enters into force; calls on Member States to complement such measures to also protect whistle-blowers in cases when they report breaches outside the scope of EU law;
Amendment 470 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Expresses its concern about the threat that fake news pose to freedom of speech and expression and to the independence of the media, while underlining the negative effects that the spread of false news might have on the quality of political debate and on the well- informed participation of citizens in democratic society; calls on the Commission to pursue its actions aimed at preventing these practises and guaranteeing data protection, transparency and cybersecurity;
Amendment 472 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Points out the persistence of the threat posed by disinformation in terms of quality of public debate, interference in electoral processes and mass manipulation; calls on the commission to strengthen its action to oppose the spread of disinformation by promoting and investing in the strengthening of media literacy, actively supporting quality journalism, supporting the development of new methods to detect disinformation, fostering cybersecurity and data protection and creating a more transparent online ecosystem while safeguarding media freedom and pluralism.
Amendment 473 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Strongly condemns the increasing restrictions on freedom of assembly caused by intolerants during elections periods; reaffirms the crucial role of these fundamental freedoms in the functioning of democratic societies, and calls on the Commission to take an active role in promoting these rights in line with international human rights standards;
Amendment 476 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Emphasises the key role of whistle- blowers in safeguarding the public interest and in promoting a culture of public accountability and integrity in both public and private institutions; underlines the fact that whistle-blowing is an essential element for investigative journalism and media freedom;
Amendment 481 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Condemns the use of violent and disproportionate interventions by law enforcement authorities during peaceful demonstrations; recalls that force must be used as a last resort, and respect the principles of necessity and proportionality, as required under international law and Member State constitutions; encourages the relevant national authorities to ensure a transparent, impartial, independent and effective investigation when the use of disproportionate force is suspected or has been alleged; recalls that law enforcement agencies are fully accountable for the fulfilment of their duties and their compliance with the relevant legal and operational frameworks;
Amendment 485 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is deeply concerned about the increasingly shrinking space for independent civil society in some Member States; recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support civil society activitiesRecalls the essential role at local, national, EU and international levels that civil society plays to represent the interest of citizens, to strengthen the voices of those minorities which are not properly represented and to defend and promote the principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU, including respect for human dignity, equality, human rights, democracy and the rule of law; is deeply concerned about the increasingly shrinking space for independent civil society in the EU as a whole;
Amendment 486 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is deeply concerned about the increasingly shrinking space for independent civil society in some Member States; recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support civil society activities; Calls upon the European Commission and the Council to increase EU support for civil society organisations defending the values of Article 2 TUE in the European Union through the Rights and Values Programme, the funding of which should be significant, as asked by the European Parliament;
Amendment 493 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that children of LGBTI families and children of single parents, as well as their parents, are victims of human rights violations in the EU and are subject to restrictions on their freedom of movement within the EU as a result of the refusal of some Member States to recognise homosexual parenthood; urges, therefore, the Member States and the Commission to adopt laws that recognise the free movement of public documents and the mutual recognition of the effects of civil status documents in the European Union
Amendment 497 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on Member States to refrain from taking measures which, deliberately or not, adversely affect the functioning and operations of civil society, including unreasonable administrative burdens, limiting access to funding, fiscal policy or security and anti-terrorism laws; condemns the harassment, bullying, smearing and threatening of civil society in certain Member States, especially human rights defenders and promoters of democracy; expresses its deepest concerns regarding the self-censorship and chilling effects that result from such practices;
Amendment 499 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
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;
Amendment 503 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Insists that regular and comprehensive monitoring and analysis are crucial to understand the challenges faced by civil society across Europe; calls on the European Commission to include relevant indicators related to civic space, freedom of expression and freedom of association in its annual Rule of Law report, to propose a plan of action to protect and promote civil society, including the adoption of Guidelines for the application of freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of peaceful assembly as well as the protection of human rights defenders at risk and to establish an emergency fund for their protection;
Amendment 506 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Calls on both the European Commission and Member States to systematically assess the impact of new legislation on civil society; calls for a revision of the mandate of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency which would enable it to receive and investigate complaints and carry out country specific assessments when negative trends are identified; calls for the creation of an EU- level status for non-profit organisations in order to facilitate cross-borders donations and to provide an alternative in countries where civil society is being threatened;
Amendment 510 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11d. Recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support civil society activities; in this respect calls on the Council to significantly increase the budget allocated to the Rights and Values programme, including by making available easily accessible direct funding for the operations of civil society organisations defending democracy and human rights.
Amendment 511 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 e (new)
Paragraph 11 e (new)
11e. Calls on the European Commission to adopt a comprehensive set of measures, including legislation and legal funds for victims, to deter Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), protecting the fundamental freedoms not only of media actors but also of academia, trade unionists, activists, civil society organisations and individual citizens, including human rights defenders, affected by SLAPPs.
Amendment 526 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to resume, without delay, negotiations with the European Parliament on a reform of the European asylum policy, which respects the fundamental rights of individuals, especially minors.
Amendment 528 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to propose an urgent solution to resolve the flagrant cases of human rights violations in reception centres for refugees and migrants on European soil;
Amendment 530 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on the Council and the Commission to close centres for registering asylum seekers on European territory, in which thousands of people at risk do not have access to basic services (healthcare, education, etc.) and are exposed to inhuman living conditions within the EU; calls, in parallel, for new centres to be opened to ensure a dignified reception at external borders, with support from the EU.
Amendment 531 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Urges the Commission and the Council to start the procedure to close the registration centres for asylum seekers based in European territory, where thousands of vulnerable people, including hundreds of children, have no access to basic services (health, education, etc.) and are subjected to intolerable subhuman conditions inside the EU;
Amendment 532 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Considers that each individual arriving at a registration centre for asylum seekers at the EU’s external borders should have access to a lawyer before any interview with a national or European authority, in order to inform them of the procedures in place (e.g. the asylum procedure) and of their rights;
Amendment 533 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Points out that almost a third of asylum seekers are children and are particularly vulnerable; calls on the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to prevent unaccompanied minors from going missing and end up being victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation;
Amendment 539 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses grave concern about consistent reports of violent pushbacks by law enforcement officials in several Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to investigate the matter and take effective measures to ensure that such policies and practices are scrapped, including by putting on hold funds for border surveillance and ensuring the independent monitoring of border control activities by national ombudsmen and NGOs; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide a broad framework to enable orderly migration and avoid pushing migrants to use irregular migration channels;
Amendment 547 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
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;
Amendment 552 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4 a (new)
Subheading 4 a (new)
Artificial intelligence and data protection
Amendment 554 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to address the “digital gap” derived from the change of social paradigm introduced by the artificial intelligence and ensure the access to public administration and public services of all citizens, in particular those with disabilities, digital deficits or greater vulnerability; stresses that elderly people are one of the most affected groups by the “digital gap”;
Amendment 557 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
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;
Amendment 562 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Express concern about the risk of complexity of algorithms that may lead to bias, since algorithms apply their bias more consistently than humans do; points out that biased data can lead to biased outputs and to discrimination based on social, economic, ethnic, racial, sexual, gender, disability status or other factors;
Amendment 564 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Highlights that further safeguards to ensure privacy and data protection are needed in light of the development of new technologies; notes that, aside from ethical implications from emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and big data, fundamental rights need to be considered;
Amendment 575 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13d. Regrets the lack of ambitious actions, from the Commission and the Council, regarding the respect of rule of law in the European Union ; calls on the Commission and the Council to make full use of the tools available to address a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of law and to move forward with the Article 7 on-going procedures and to present the EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, without delay;
Amendment 576 #
Amendment 580 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 e (new)
Paragraph 13 e (new)
13e. Call on the Commission to provide Union citizens and residents with information about citizens’ rights to judicial redress and litigation routes in cases relating to violations of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights by national, regional, governments or EU institutions;
Amendment 583 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 f (new)
Paragraph 13 f (new)
13f. Stresses the importance of ensuring effective prevention of infringements of fundamental rights as a tool to truly protect the rule of law in the EU; underlines the importance of Parliament sending ad hoc delegations to Member States when there is clear evidence of serious breaches of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;
Amendment 600 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Points out that the access to justice and the right of defence are both, fundamental rights; the disrespect of any of them leads to impunity and injustice, respectively; stresses that fight against impunity has to be a priority for European and national institutions; calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to improve the effectiveness of the European instruments of judicial cooperation, in particular the European Arrest Warrant to ensure the equal protection of victims and suspects or accused persons;
Amendment 604 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to setup legal mechanisms to criminalise the glorification of a specific act of terrorism and crimes against humanity, as it humiliates the victims and causes secondary victimisation by damaging the victims’ dignity and recovery;
Amendment 606 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Strongly condemns the upsurge in the trafficking of human beings and urges the Member States to increase cooperation and step up their fight against organised crime, including smuggling and trafficking in human beings, but also exploitation, forced labour, sexual abuse, and torture, all while protecting victims;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that, in accordance with Article 31 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the EU has an obligation to ensure that all workers enjoy working conditions which respect their health, safety and dignity; recalls, also, that in implementing their policies the Commission and the Member States must take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of a decent standard of living and adequate social protection for all, the fight against poverty and social exclusion and a high level of education and training in accordance with Article 9 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 7 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the high number of petitions received by Committee on Petitions alerting it to the precarious nature and abusive use of fixed-term contracts in both the public1 and private2 sectors; calls on the Commission to examine these petitions and to provide a better response, in line with its competences and those of the Member States, in order to effectively tackle in-work poverty, social exclusion and precarious work; _________________ 1These include petitions 0240/18, 0328/18, 0365/18, 0374/18, 0396/18, 0419/18, 0829/2018, 0897/2018, 1161/2018, 0290/19, 0310/2019, 0335/2019, 0579/19, 0624/19, 0652/19, 0683/2019, 0737/2019, 1017/19, 1045/2019, 1241/2019, 1318/2019 and 0036/2020. 2These include petitions 1378/2013, 0019/2016, 0020/2016, 0021/2016, 0099/2017, 1162/2017, 0110/2018 and 0335/2019.
Amendment 14 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to monitor in particular sectors characterised by a high degree of job insecurity, in order to prevent the abuse of workers in areas such as temporary work in the agricultural sector, where seasonal workers face abusive employment conditions that in some cases violate not only labour rights, but also workers’ fundamental rights; calls on the Member States to take measures, in line with the Council recommendation of 2018, to ensure that all workers and self-employed persons have access to adequate social protection;
Amendment 16 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that these new forms of work, including platform work, present not only opportunities in terms of employability and access to the labour market, but also challenges in terms of fair working conditions and access to social protection; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to work to improve the working conditions of these workers;
Amendment 20 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern that, according to the European Social Policy Network, some 9.4 % of workers in the EU are at risk of poverty, representing some 20.5 million people; highlights the important differences between the Member States, and underlines the need to establish policies and law at EU level to reverse this situation, in order to prevent further social polarisation in the EU; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s consultation with the social partners on a European framework for minimum wages; calls on the Commission, therefore, to present as soon as possible a legal instrument for upward social convergence in accordance with national traditions, so that every worker in the European Union benefits from a fair minimum wage; warns that this situation will be aggravated as a result of the COVID-19 crisis, and urges the Commission to protect these workers by guaranteeing their jobs and wages and also their working conditions;
Amendment 33 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that women continue to earn 16 % less than men in the EU and have the highest rates of job insecurity; calls on the Member States to put legislation and strategies in place to ensure equality, and urges the Commission to pay particular attention to compliance with EU labour law; calls on the Member States and the Union to ensure pay transparency, including by introducing a wage equality index comparing women and men;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make fighting unemployment and insecure employment of young people a priority and to make full use of financial instruments such as the Youth Guarantee and European programmes such as Erasmus+ in order to tackle youth unemployment and enhance the employability of young people;
Amendment 6 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Istanbul Convention is the first legally binding international instrument on preventing and combating violence against women and girls, establishing a comprehensive framework of legal and policy measures for preventing violence against women, supporting victims and punishing perpetrators;
Amendment 30 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates its call for the Council and the Commission to swiftly adopt the Horizontal Anti-discrimination Directive; welcomes the Commission's intention to propose additional anti-discrimination legislation as set out in the political guidelines for the 2019-2024 European Commission and calls on the Commission to swiftly come up with it;
Amendment 37 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern at the widespread prevalence of GBV in all its forms and the lack of full access to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR); condemns serious violations of women's and children's rights within and beyond the EU, including female genital mutilation (FGM), forced abortion and sterilisation, early and forced marriage and other harmful practices against women and girls; calls for an EU-wide action plan to prevent and combat all forms of GBV; to this end calls for the appointment of a coordinator to implement this action plan; harmful practices against women and girls;
Amendment 51 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the EU to accede toIs deeply concerned that 33% of women in the EU have experienced physical and/or sexual violence; deplores that six member states - Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia and Slovakia - still have not ratified the Istanbul Convention; finds that the failure of the EU to accede to the Istanbul Convention impacts its credibility and ability to be a normative power in the world; urges the EU to accede to and all member states to ratify the Istanbul Convention without delay; commends the Commission on its commitment to propose measures to achieve the same objectives if accession to the Convention remains blocked;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 77 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on Member States to ensure and improve access to justice, inter alia by training law enforcement and judicial staff on GBV and hate crimes, including those committed online; calls on Member States to ensure safe conditions for reporting, combat under-reporting, and provide legal aid as well as integrated support services and shelters; urges the Member States to tackle the impunity for sexual and gender-based violence;
Amendment 85 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes with concern the issue of shrinking civic space in relation tofor civil society organisations and human rights defenders working on gender equality, minority and women’s rights and SRHR. and calls for intensified measures to address the shrinking space for civil society;
Amendment 91 #
2019/2169(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Underlines that gender stereotypes are a root cause of gender inequality and that traditional gender roles and stereotypes are formed in early childhood; believes therefore that preventive measures are key to realising gender equality and women and girls empowerment and that schools are a good environment to challenge gender roles and stereotypes; welcomes that the Commission will launch an EU-wide communication campaign combatting gender stereotypes, focussing on youth engagement; finds however that the EU and Member States should make better use of education systems to prevent the development of gender stereotypes in early childhood;
Amendment 15 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the crucial role of national parliaments in the pre-legislative scrutiny of draft EU laws and in their correct implementation by the Member Statesso that Member States are then better able to implement them correctly and promptly;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Regrets that there has been a 20% increase in the number of infringement proceedings on EU single market related legislation since December 2017, including 15.6% since 2018, and calls on Member States to transpose EU law quicker and more diligently;
Amendment 37 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes with concern that the EU average for transposition delays has increased with directives in 2019 having taken three months longer to be transposed into national legislation than in 2018;
Amendment 38 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Underlines the importance of the principle set out in paragraph 43 of the Inter-Institutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, that when the Member States, in the context of transposing directives into national law, choose to add elements that are in no way related to that Union legislation (also known as ‘gold- plating’), such additions should be made identifiable either through the transposing act(s) or through associated documents; notes that this information is often still lacking; calls on the Commission and the Member States to act jointly and consistently to tackle the lack of transparency and other problems related to ‘gold-plating’ as this practice can put unnecessary burdens on citizens, businesses and administrations;
Amendment 39 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Reaffirms that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the exclusive competence to interpret EU law;
Amendment 43 #
2019/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the European Commission to launch infringement procedures if a Member State does not apply or respect the fundamental values referred to in Article 2 TEU, including the rule of law;
Amendment 4 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Deplores that the Commission continuously uses money from existing budget lines to finance newly created funds, which are outside the Union budget and are thus not subject to parliamentary scrutiny;
Amendment 16 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Draws attention that the Hungarian elections were held on 3 April 2022 without addressing recommendations of the ODIHR and GRECO related to campaign finance legislation what negatively affected the transparency and accountability of campaign finances;
Amendment 39 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas changes brought to the electoral code over the years through constituency reshaping and winner compensation are disadvantaging opposition parties; whereas in response to worries over the fairness of the elections and appeals from civil society, the OSCE decided to send a full-scale international election observation mission for the general elections held 3 April 2022, which is a rare occurrence regarding EU Member States;
Amendment 40 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Draws attention to the consequences of the war in Ukraine and the need for immediate responses from Member States. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the need for immediate responses does not lead to unnecessary flexibility and reduced impact of the instruments for upholding the rule of law in the Union, pursuant to both Article 7 TEU and the budgetary conditionality regulation;
Amendment 70 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Amendment 74 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas on 5 April 2022, the Commission President announced that Commissioner for Budget Johannes Hahn had informed the Hungarian authorities about the Commission’s plans to move on to the next step and formally trigger the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation5 , mainly over corruption concerns; whereas on 27 April 2022, the Commission finally started the formal procedure against Hungary under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation by sending a written notification; _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1.
Amendment 77 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Ka. whereas on 24th of July 2020 the removal of Hungary’s top independent news portal index.hu editor-in-chief prompted the collective resignation of more than 70 journalists who were denouncing clear interference and governmental pressure on their media outlet; whereas in recent years critical voices have been silenced, most independent outlets have either gone out of business, or have been bought by government allies and received lucrative flows of state advertising;
Amendment 78 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas the consolidation of over 470 media outlets under KESMA (Central European Press and Media Foundation) has had dramatic impacts in terms of shrinking of the space available for independent and opposition media and access to information for the Hungarian citizens; whereas the funds spent for public media and KESMA are essentially used for government propaganda and discrediting the opposition and non- governmental organizations; whereas the manipulation of media ownership, state capture of regulators and formerly independent outlets, government advertising revenue and the granting of licenses are methods by which the media environment can be skewed in favour of the government and are already exported in other parts in Europe;
Amendment 80 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K c (new)
Recital K c (new)
Kc. whereas according to the study financed by the European Commission conducted by the European federation of Journalists (EFJ), the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) at the European University Institute in Florence, Mapping Media Freedom, released in July 2020, the coronavirus crisis had arguably the biggest effect on media freedom in Hungary; whereas the new legislation against the spreading of “false” or “distorted” information, passed during the state of emergency in Hungary, caused uncertainty and self- censorship among media outlets and actors;
Amendment 83 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K d (new)
Recital K d (new)
Kd. whereas in July 2021 the investigative portal Direkt36 revealed, based on a leaked database, that about 300 Hungarian citizens - among which journalists, lawyers, politicians, businesspeople critical of the government, former state officials- were targeted by the Pegasus spyware of the Israeli NSO Group between 2018 and 2021; whereas these revelations raised concerns about politically motivated surveillance against Hungarian citizens and the abuse of the NSO spyware;
Amendment 94 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas Hungary ranks 69 out of 139 countries in the World Justice Project 2021 Rule of Law Index (down two places compared to the previous year) and occupies the last place (31 out of 31) in the EU, EFTA, and North America region;
Amendment 97 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)
Recital L b (new)
Lb. whereas Hungary ranks 73 out of the 180 countries and territories covered by the Transparency International 2021 Corruption Perception Index (down by one place compared to the previous year) and its ranking has been constantly declining since 2012;
Amendment 99 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L c (new)
Recital L c (new)
Lc. whereas Hungary ranks 85 out of the 180 countries and territories covered by the Reporter without Borders 2022 World Press Freedom Index and is listed in the analysis for the Europe -Central Asia region as one of the countries that have intensified draconian laws against journalists;
Amendment 101 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)
Recital L d (new)
Ld. whereas there is increasing expert consensus that Hungary is no longer a democracy; whereas according to the University of Gothenburg V-Dem Democracy Index 2019, Hungary became the EU’s first ever authoritarian Member State; whereas Hungary was identified as a “hybrid regime,” having lost its status as a “semi-consolidated democracy” in the 2020 Freedom House Nations in Transit Report; whereas Hungary is rated as a "flawed democracy" and ranks 56 out of 167 countries (one position below its 2020 ranking) in the Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2022 Democracy Index; whereas according to the V-Dem Democracy Index 2022, among the Union members, Hungary and Poland are among the top autocratizers in the world over the last decade;
Amendment 104 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L e (new)
Recital L e (new)
Le. whereas the Hungarian government continued attacks on academic freedoms; whereas on 31st of August 2020 the management of Hungary’s prestigious University of Theatre and Film Arts (SZFE) resigned in protest over the imposition of a government-appointed board; whereas a law passed by parliament in 2020 had transferred the ownership of the state-run theatre school to a private foundation whose members have close links to the Orban government; whereas the Ministry of Technology and Innovation appointed five members to the new board of trustees, rejecting members proposed by the university’s senate; whereas in recent years the actions of the government aimed at exerting control over academia and sciences in an effort to root out teaching or scientific research that counter the government’s conservative agenda; whereas another example in this regard is stripping the Academy of Sciences of its autonomy through the controversial bill adopted in July 2019; whereas the EU should act more forcefully in order to safeguard the autonomy of universities in Hungary;
Amendment 107 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L f (new)
Recital L f (new)
Lf. whereas two thirds of the 33 public interest asset management foundations performing public duties (KEKVAs) that have been created by the end of 2021 will manage higher education institutions previously run by the state; whereas civil society and Hungarian independent intellectuals have warned against the massive privatisation in the field of higher education and the threat it poses for freedom of research and teaching;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L g (new)
Recital L g (new)
Lg. whereas on 15 June 2021, the Hungarian Parliament adopted a law originally intended to fight paedophilia, which, following amendments proposed by Members from the ruling Fidesz party, contains clauses prohibiting the portrayal of homosexuality and gender- reassignment to minors; whereas the law prohibits homosexuality and gender reassignment from being featured in sex education classes, and stipulates that such classes can now only be taught by registered organisations; whereas changes to the Business Advertising Law and to the Media Law require that adverts and content featuring LGBTI people must be rated as Category V (i.e. not recommended for minors); whereas the association of sexual orientation and gender identity with criminal acts such paedophilia is unacceptable and leads to further discrimination and stigmatisation of sexual minorities;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L h (new)
Recital L h (new)
Lh. whereas civil society, and especially public interest non- governmental organizations (NGOs), have been facing increasing pressure in Hungary; whereas, although the government repealed the bill previously declared incompatible with EU law by the ECJ, according to the new law, these organizations can now be subjected to regular financial inspections by the State Audit Office; whereas civil society organizations are concerned that the Audit Office, whose main function is to monitor the use of public funds, not private donations, will be used to put more pressure on them; whereas civil society organisations have warned that with the new NGO law, the state interferes with the autonomy of association of organisations established on the basis of the right of association, the privacy of citizens who stand up for public interest and that it is detrimental to the exercise of freedom of expression and to the democratic public as a whole;
Amendment 213 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that, taken together, the facts and trends mentioned in Parliament’s resolutions represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 TEU and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof; strongly condemns the systematic threats to the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights that have been brought about by the Hungarian government to the detriment of its own people and expresses deep regret that the lack of decisive EU action has contributed to turning Hungary into a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, according to the relevant indices;
Amendment 219 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Strongly regDeplorets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; stresses that Member States have the obligation to act together and put an end to attacks on core EU values; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be duly respected;
Amendment 220 #
2018/0902R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to devote more attention to systemic changes that have been brought about by the government in its systematic dismantling of Rule of Law, as well as to the interplay between the various breaches of EU values identified in its resolutions; underlines that leaving Rule of Law breaches unchecked undermines democratic institutions and eventually affects the human rights and lives of everyone in the country,
Amendment 6 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas it is recognized that illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing constitutes an organised crime of the seas with disastrous worldwide environmental and socio-economic impacts;
Amendment 10 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the EU is the world’s largest trader of fishery and aquaculture products in value terms, reaching a trade volume of more than EUR 2,3 billion in 2017;
Amendment 11 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas Vietnam is the fourth biggest world fish producer, followed by the European Union;
Amendment 13 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas according to EUMOFA, the EU imports cover 68% of the EU domestic consumption;
Amendment 15 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Reminds that in 2017 the European Union issued a "yellow card" to Vietnam as a non-cooperating country in the fight against illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing due to its serious deficiencies in its control system; highlights that serious labour abuses in the Vietnamese fishing industry have been reported.
Amendment 17 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Highlights that trade agreements are connected with the EU IUU policy and emphasises the need to ensure a level playing field in order to avoid a situation of unfair competition between the EU and imported products which would jeopardize the competitiveness of the EU fishing industry;
Amendment 19 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. AppreciatesTakes note of the adoption by the Vietnamese Government of a new framework law for the fisheries sector and the setup of coordinated monitoring, control and enforcement structures committed to effectively tackling and deterring IUU fishing; reminds that further efforts need to be deployed by the Vietnamese authorities in order to ensure an effective implementation an enforcement of the new legal framework;
Amendment 30 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. EncouraUrges the Vietnamese authorities to closely monitor the country’s fishing fleet and to implement measures to ensure the full traceability of fisheries products destined for export to the EU market;
Amendment 50 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Regrets that Vietnam has not ratified yet the ILO Work in Fishing Convention (ILO C188)and urges the Vietnamese authorities to ratify it before the entry into force of the FTA agreement.
Amendment 59 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the CommissionExpresses strong concerns about the EU signing a FTA with Vietnam considering the country has not yet effectively tackled and implemented tools to fight IUU fishing, a necessary precondition to achieve sustainable fisheries. Calls on the Commission to suspend preferential tariffs on fisheries products until the yellow card' has been lifted, while continuing to carry out IUU audits and to make use of all the tools ats its disposal, including the ‘"red card’", should Viet Nnam fail to fulfil the conditions for sustainable fisheries.
Amendment 147 #
2018/0329(COD)
(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, provide. This should always be under the condition that the full scope of the principle of non-refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure and that the return procedure is automatically suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection.
Amendment 168 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
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 existsa closed, harmonized and exhaustive list of proven, Union-wide objective criteria defined by law.
Amendment 180 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
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 should be granted. Exceptionally, a period for voluntary departure of no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of voluntary return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted where it has been individually assessed, in line with the exhaustive list of objective criteria as outlined in this Directive, that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have or 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.
Amendment 188 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which mayshould include support for reintegration in third countries of return tailored to the individual circumstances and prospects of the returnee, with particular attention for unaccompanied minors, taking into account the common standards on Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration Programmes developed by the Commission in cooperation with Member States and endorsed by the Council.
Amendment 203 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The deadline for lodging an 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. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding fivebetween ten and fifteen 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.
Amendment 216 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An appeal against a return decision should always have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulementexcept where judicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non-refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached.
Amendment 224 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stakejudicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non- refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached, appeals against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect. The judicial authorities should be able to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a return decision in individual cases for other reasons, either upon request of the third- country national concerned or acting ex officio, where deemed necessary. Such decisions should, as a rule, be taken within 48 hours. Where justified by the complexity of the case, judicial authorities should take such decision without undue delay.
Amendment 232 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the full assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law already took place and judicial remedy was effectively exercised as part of the asylum procedure carried out prior to the issuing of the related return decision against which the appeal is lodged, unless the situation of the third-country national concerned would have significantly changed since.
Amendment 265 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
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,A maximum period of detention of three 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. This period may not be prolonged, except for twice for a period of up to three months each, each after judicial review, and only in cases where, regardless of all the reasonable efforts by the Member State authorities, the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to a lack of cooperation by the third-country national concerned.
Amendment 322 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return – and where relevant the reintegration – of illegaland post- return monitoring of irregularly staying third- country nationals.
Amendment 365 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of specific reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteriaand specific criteria strictly defined by law to believe that a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond;
Amendment 372 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender based violence.
Amendment 381 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) respect the principle of non- refoulement., best interest of the child, family life and state of health (Article 5)
Amendment 383 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions concerning minors;
Amendment 478 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals aboutin writing in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language on the basis of a standard template which shall be developed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and in a language that the applicant understands. Where necessary, this information shall, in addition, be supplied orally and in a visual form through videos or pictograms, and shall take into account the individual circumstances, especially for vulnerable persons. This information shall include, at least, a clear overview of the return procedure, the rights and obligations during the procedure, the consequences of not complying with thean obligation referred to in paragraph 1. to return following a return decision, and the contacts of non-governmental and international organisations that can provide advice, and the options for sustainable returns, such as support and reintegration measures.
Amendment 507 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after the adoption of a decision ending a legal stay of a third- country national, including a decision not granting a third-country national refugee status or subsidiary protection status in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Qualification Regulation], only where the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure.
Amendment 521 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
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 exception referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such a period shall be granted only followingAs a general rule, Member States shall grant such a period, without an application byfrom the third- country national concerned. In such a case,being required. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an applicationof this period for voluntary departure.
Amendment 533 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall not grant aIn exceptional cases, a shorter period for voluntary departure inof no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted if an individual assessment has found that the following cases are applicable:
Amendment 573 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
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 with due consideration being given to the best interests of the chiland the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration and the guardian or legal representative who is appointed to assist the unaccompanied minor shall be consulted.
Amendment 603 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process all the necessary information for implementing this Directive, in particular as regards the management of individual cases as well as of any return- related procedure, including post-return monitoring and support to ensure sustainable returns.
Amendment 609 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The national system shall be set up in a way which ensures technical compatibility allowing for communication with the central system established in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. and in full compliance with all relevant EU data protection law, in particular the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive. The Commission shall adopt a delegated act to establish the specific legal framework for this central system and the communication with this system, including clearly identifying the purposes of the processing via this centralised system and of the categories of personal data to be processed for each of these purposes.
Amendment 614 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Such assistance mayshall include support for reintegration in the third country of return which follow up on personal reintegration plans of returnees where legally and practically possible, to ensure sustainable returns, especially taking into account the specific circumstances of each third country national, and giving full attention to the cases of vulnerable persons. Member States shall ensure a follow up of these plans by dedicated and independent monitoring bodies.
Amendment 634 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), before a competent judicial authority. Member states shall allocate to judicial authorities the capacity required for the proper implementation of this directive, including human resources and training, so as to guarantee the quality and expediency of judicial review
Amendment 643 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing thean appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the set period, during the examination of the appeal, where there is a risk to breachgainst that decision during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on appeal has been notified to the third country national. An appeal against a return decision shall have an automatic suspensive effect except in cases where judicial authorities have assessed the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, t under European and international law and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached. The enforcement of the return decision shall notcan also be suspended unlesswhen a court or tribunal decides otherwiseto do so, taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.
Amendment 656 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall grant a period not exceeding fivebetween ten and fifteen 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].
Amendment 672 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States may only keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular when:
Amendment 696 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 5
Article 18 – paragraph 5
5. Detention shall be maintained for as long a period as the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and it is necessary to ensure successful removal. Each Member State shall set a maximumlimited period of detention of not less than three months and not more than sixwhich may not exceed three months.
Amendment 699 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for two consecutive times of each a limited period not exceeding each a further twelve3 months in accordance with national law, and always after judicial review, in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:
Amendment 715 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall onlynot be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of timend will be provided with adequate, humane and non-custodial alternatives to detention when in the best interest of the child and where necessary to guarantee their protection.
Amendment 721 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacyMember States shall therefore establish appropriate care arrangements and accommodate minors and families with minor children. Appropriate care arrangements and reception measures for minor children and their families shall be community based, the least intrusive possible and respect the right to privacy and family life. These care arrangements should provide for personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons their age. Minors 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. 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.
Amendment 726 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Amendment 728 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Amendment 735 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of thealternatives to detention ofor minors pending removal.
Amendment 738 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. In situations where an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals to be returned places an unforeseen heavy burden on the capacity of the detention facilities of a Member State or on its administrative or judicial staff, such a Member State may, as long as the exceptional situation persistfor a period of maximum three months, decide to allow for periods for judicial review longer than those provided for under the third subparagraph of Article 18(2) and to take urgent measures in respect of the conditions of detention derogating from those set out in Articles 19(1) and 20(2). The Member States shall, within three months, and under coordination by the Commission and EU Agencies, take all necessary measures to ensure adequate capacity.
Amendment 752 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall report every three years to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and, if appropriate, propose amendments. Such report shall be accompanied by a full Commission impact assessment of the transposition and implementation of this Directive by each Member States.
Amendment 466 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Orders provided for by this Regulation shall not be issued to obtain data protected under the law of a Member State by immunities and privileges. Such protected data, which was unintentionally obtained through the Orders provided for by this Regulation, shall not be admissible as evidence.
Amendment 468 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Authorities of a Member State which is subject to a procedure referred to in Article 7(1) or 7(2) of the Treaty on European Union may issue European Preservation Orders and may not issue European Production Orders.
Amendment 520 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point i
(i) the grounds for the necessity and proportionality of the measure, taking due account of the impact of the measure on the fundamental rights of the person whose data is sought.
Amendment 534 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point g
(g) the grounds for the necessity and proportionality of the measure, taking due account of the impact of the measure on the fundamental rights of the person whose data is sought.
Amendment 567 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 586 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. UIn cases where the European Production Order concerns subscriber data or access data, upon receipt of the EPOC, the addressee shall ensure that the requested data is transmitted directly to the issuing authority or the law enforcement authorities as indicated in the EPOC at the latest within 3 days upon receipt of the EPOC, unless the issuing authority indicates reasons for earlier disclosure. In cases where the European Production Order concerns transactional data or content data, upon receipt of the EPOC, the addressee shall ensure that the requested data is transmitted directly to the issuing authority or the law enforcement authorities as indicated in the EPOC at the latest within 10 days upon receipt of the EPOC, unless the issuing authority indicates reasons for earlier disclosure.
Amendment 12 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22
Citation 22
— having regard to the four infringement procedures launched by the Commission against Poland in relation to the reform ofchanges to the Polish judicial system, of which the first two resulted in judgments of the Court of Justice finding violations of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union enshrining the principle of effective judicial protection, while the two other procedures are still pending,
Amendment 21 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the scope of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is not limited to the obligations under the Treatiescomprises all foundational principles of the European Union referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, as indicated in the Commission Communication of 15 October 2003, and whereas the Union can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competences;
Amendment 24 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. Underlines that the Member States of the European Union have, in accordance with Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union, freely and voluntarily committed themselves to the common values referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 48 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a complementary and, preventive and binding Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as put forward by Parliament in its resolution of 25 October 2016;
Amendment 81 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is concerned, while recognising the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, about the amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections which change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 and which moreover run counter to the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal when constitutional review was still effective; stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult to organise a genuine election campaign giving an equal share of attention and equal opportunities to all candidates and programmes and allowing for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ; _________________ 23Regulation (EU) 2016/679 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 and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020.
Amendment 84 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6
Subheading 6
Amendment 85 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises that while the organisation of the justice system is a national competence; reiterates that, all the same,in the Member States falls within their competence, the Member States are required to comply with their obligations under Union law when exercising this competence, as repeatedly held by the CJEU; reiterates that national judges are essentially also European judges, applying Union law, which is the reason why the Union, including the CJEU, has to watch over the independence of the judiciary in all the Member States as one of the exigencies of the rule of law and as laid down inmaking their independence a common concern for the Union, including the Court of Justice; calls on the Polish authorities to uphold and maintain the independence of Polish courts; calls on the Commission and the Council to take all necessary measures to ensure that Polish courts remain independent and are able to ensure effective judicial protection as required by Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter;
Amendment 90 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the acts concerning the Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 December 2015 and 22 July 2016 seriously affected the Constitutional Tribunal’s independence and legitimacy and were therefore declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls that those judgments were not published at the time nor implemented by the Polish authorities; seriously deplores the lack of independent and effective constitutional review in Poland25 ; invites the Commission to consider launching an infringement procedure in relation to the legislation on the Constitutional Tribunal, its current unlawful composition and its active role in preventing compliance with the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 19 November 2019; _________________ 25Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520.
Amendment 100 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recalls that the CJEU found in its judgment of 24 June 201928 that lowering the retirement age of sitting judges of the Supreme Court is contrary to Union law and breaches the principle of the irremovability of judges and thus that of judicial independence, after it had earlier granted the Commission’s request for interim measures on the matter by order of 17 December 201829 ; notes that the Polish authorities passed an amendment to the act on the Supreme Court in order to comply with the CJEU’s Order, the only instance so far in which they undid a reform ofchanges to the justice system following a decision by the CJEU; _________________ 28Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 June 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531. 29Order of the Court of Justice of 17 December 2018, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18 R, ECLI:EU:C:2018:1021.
Amendment 110 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls that it is up to the Member States to establish a council for the judiciary, but that, where such council is established, its independence must be guaranteed in line with European standards and the constitution; recalls that, following the 2017-2018 reform of the NCJ, the body responsible for safeguarding the independence of the courts and judges in accordance with Article 186(1) of the Polish Constitution, the judicial community in Poland lost the power to delegate representatives to the NCJ, and hence its influence on recruitment and promotion of judges; recalls that before the 2017 reform, 15 out of 25 members of the NCJ were judges elected by their peers, while since the 2017 reform, those judges are elected by the Polish Sejm; strongly regrets that, taken in conjunction with the immediate replacement in early 2018premature termination in early 2018 of the mandates of all the members appointed under the old rules, this measure led to a far-reaching politicisation of the NCJ34 ; _________________ 34Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinions of the Bureau of 7 April 2017 and 12 October 2017; OSCE/ODIHR, Final Opinion on Draft Amendments to the Act of the NCJ, 5 May 2017; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, p. 5-7; GRECO, Ad hoc Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 19-23 March 2018 and Addendum of 18-22 June 2018; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 42 and 61.
Amendment 118 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Commission to start infringement proceedings against the act of 12 May8 December 20117 on the NCJ and to ask the CJEU to suspend the activities of the new NCJ by way of interim measures;
Amendment 125 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Deplores the abuse of disciplinary proceedings against judges and prosecutors in Poland; is deeply concerned by the motion filed by the National Prosecution Office to the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court to waive the immunity of Judge Igor Tuleya; is similarly concerned by the disciplinary proceedings initiated against other judges, including Krystian Markiewicz, Chairperson of the Polish Judges’ Association “Iustitia”, and Paweł Juszczyszyn; calls on Polish authorities to stop using disciplinary proceedings to disguise politically motivated reprisals against specific judges and prosecutors for applying EU law or their public defence of the rule of law in Poland;
Amendment 133 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Concurs with the Commission, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and, the Group of States against Corruption and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers that the aforementioned separate reformchanges to the judicial system, considering their interaction and overall impact, amount to a serious, sustained and systemic breach of the rule of law, enabling the legislative and executive powers to influence the functioning of the judiciary in a critical manner, thereby significantly weakening the independence of the judiciary in Poland43 ; _________________ 43Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; condemns the destabilizing impact on the Polish legal order of the measures taken and appointments made since 2016; _________________ 43Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; United Nations, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Statement of 25 June 2018; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.
Amendment 142 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Is concerned that, since the entry into force on 14 February 2020 of the amendments to the act on the Supreme Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber, whose independence and impartiality itself is in question, can decide whether a judge or tribunal or court is independent and impartial, hence depriving citizens of an important element of judicial review at all other instances45 ; _________________ 45Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59; recalls that according to the case law of the Court of Justice, the right to a fair trial obliges every court to check of its own motion whether it fulfils the criteria of independence and impartiality; 45a _________________ 45Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59. 45aJudgment of the Court of Justice of 26 March 2020, Simpson v Council and HG v Commission, Joined Cases C-542/18 RX-II and C-543/18 RX-II, ECLI:EU:C:2020:232, para 57.
Amendment 155 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Expresses concern over use and threat of libel litigation against academics and the Polish Ombudsman; calls on Polish authorities to respect freedom of speech and academic freedom; denounces attempts to silence the Polish Ombudsman, an independent institution enshrined in the Polish Constitution;
Amendment 228 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination; notes the lack of any improvement in the situation of LGBTI people in Poland since;
Amendment 235 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Notes that the lack of independence of the judiciary in Poland has already started affecting mutual trust between Poland and other Member States, especially in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters; points out that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured; considers the threat to the uniformity of the Union legal order posed by rule of law deconsolidation in Poland to be particularly serious;
Amendment 241 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Calls on the Polish government to comply with all provisions relating to the rule of law and fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and international human rights standards, and to engage directly in honest dialogue with the Commission; calls on the Polish government to swiftly and fully implement the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law;
Amendment 242 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to refrain from narrowly interpreting the rule of law principle, and to use the Article 7(1) TEU procedure to its full potential by addressing the implications of the Polish government’s action for all the principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU, including democracy and fundamental rights, such as freedom of association, women’s rights, media freedom and the right to free and fair elections;
Amendment 246 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Calls upon the Council to resume the formal hearings - the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those hearings all the latest and major negative developments in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved; furthermore on the Council to commit to assessing the implementation of these recommendations in a timely manner and, should conditions warrant it, move forward under Article 7(2) TEU; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved; points out the need for informing, in a transparent manner, about the proceedings in the Council in order to allow for meaningful participation and oversight by all European institutions and civil society;
Amendment 469 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the Member State authority or EU bodies and the individual user of the ESP, including the ESP profile used as referred to in Article 8;
Amendment 474 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Each Member State and EU body shall keep logs of queries of the authority and the staff duly authorised to use the ESP.
Amendment 478 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The logs may be used only for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring datafor self- monitoring, and for ensuring the proper functioning and the data integrity and security pursuant to Article 42. Those logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased onetwo years after their creation, unless they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun.
Amendment 482 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Where it is technically impossible to use the ESP to query one or several EU information systems referred to in Article 9(1) or the CIR, because of a failure of the ESP, the users of the ESP shall immediately be notified by eu-LISA.
Amendment 485 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Where it is technically impossible to use the ESP to query one or several EU information systems referred to in Article 9(1) or the CIR, because of a failure of the national infrastructure in a Member State, that Member State's competent authority shall immediately notify eu-LISA and the Commission.
Amendment 486 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where it is technically impossible to use the ESP to query one or several EU information systems referred to in Article 9(1) or the CIR, because of a failure of the infrastructure of an EU body, that EU body shall immediately notify eu-LISA and the Commission.
Amendment 493 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. A shared biometric matching service (shared BMS) storing biometric templates and enabling querying with biometric data across several EU information systems is established for the purposes of supporting the CIR and the multiple-identity detector and the objectives of the EES, the VIS, Eurodac, the SIS and [the ECRIS-TCN system], while fully respecting the principles of necessity and proportionality.
Amendment 506 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 532 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The logs may be used only for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring data security pursuant to Article 42. Those logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased onetwo years after their creation, unless they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun. The logs referred to in paragraph 1(a) shall be erased once the data is erased.
Amendment 538 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. A common identity repository (CIR), creating an individual file for each person that is recorded in the EES, the VIS, [the ETIAS], Eurodac or [the ECRIS-TCN system] containing the data referred to in Article 18, is established for the purpose of facilitating and assisting the correct identification of persons registered in the EES, the VIS, [the ETIAS], the Eurodac and [the ECRIS-TCN system], of supporting the functioning of the multiple- identity detector and of facilitating and streamlining access by law enforcement authorities to non-law enforcement information systems at EU level, where necessary for the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of serious crime, while fully respecting the principles of necessity and proportionality.
Amendment 539 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where it is technically impossible to query the CIR for the purpose of identifying a person pursuant Article 20, for the detection of multiple identities pursuant Article 21 or for law enforcement purposes pursuant Article 22, because of a failure of the CIR, the users of the CIR shall be immediately notified by eu-LISA.
Amendment 553 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where a Member State police authority has been so empowered by national legislative measures as referred to in paragraph 2, it may, solely for the purpose of identifying a person, query the CIR with the biometric data of that person taken during an identity check. Such query may be carried out in principle in the presence of the person, solely where a Member State police authority was unable to identify a person on the basis of a travel document or with the identity data provided by that person following rules and procedures provided for in national law or where there are doubts as to the authenticity of the travel document or the identity of its holder or where the person is unable or refuse to cooperate, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person is not telling the truth about his or her identity. Such query shall not be allowed against minors under the age of 12 years old.
Amendment 559 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where a Member State police authority has been so empowered by national legislative measures as referred to in paragraph 2, it may, solely for the purpose of identifying unknown persons who are not able to identify themselves or unidentified human remains, in the event of a disaster or an accident query the CIR with the biometric data of those persons.
Amendment 588 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the national file referencreference to the national investigation or case;
Amendment 591 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) the name of the authorityindividual and unique user identifiers of both the competent authority and the person consulting the CIR;
Amendment 592 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Europol shall keep logs of queries of the staff duly authorised to use the CIR pursuant to Article 22.
Amendment 593 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 6
Article 24 – paragraph 6
6. The logs referred to in paragraphs 1, 5 and 5a may be used only for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a request and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring datafor self- monitoring, and for ensuring the proper functioning and the data integrity and security pursuant to Article 42. They shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased onetwo years after their creation, unless they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun.
Amendment 594 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The competent national authorities in charge of checking whether or not access is lawful, monitoring the lawfulness of data processing, self- monitoring and ensuring the proper functioning, data integrity and security, shall have access, within the limits of their competence and at their request, to these logs for the purpose of fulfilling their duties.
Amendment 595 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. For the purposes of self- monitoring and ensuring the proper functioning of the CIR, data integrity and security, the EU-Lisa shall have access, within the limits of its competence, to those logs.
Amendment 596 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 7 c (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall have access, within the limits of its competence and at its request, to those logs for the purpose of fulfilling its tasks.
Amendment 600 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. A multiple-identity detector (MID) creating and storing links between data in the EU information systems included in the common identity repository (CIR) and the SIS and as a consequence detecting multiple identities, with the dual purpose of facilitating identity checks and combating identity fraud, is established for the purpose of supporting the functioning of the CIR and the objectives of the EES, the VIS, the ETIAS], Eurodac, the SIS and [the ECRIS-TCN system], while fully respecting the principles of necessity and proportionality.
Amendment 673 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Each EU body shall keep logs of queries of the authority and the staff duly authorised to use the MID.
Amendment 674 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. The logs may be used only for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a request and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring datafor self- monitoring, and for ensuring the proper functioning and the data integrity and security pursuant to Article 42. The logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased onetwo years after their creation, unless they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun. The logs related to the history of the identity confirmation file shall be erased once the data in the identity confirmation file is erased.
Amendment 721 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice to the notification and communication of a personal data breach pursuant to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 30 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, or both, Member States shall notify the Commission, eu- LISA, the national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor of security incidents. In the event of a security incident in relation to the central infrastructure of the interoperability components, eu-LISA shall notify the Commission and the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Amendment 727 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The European Commission shall carry out annual evaluations to ensure that Member States are in full compliance with the obligations under each respective IT-systems. The concrete findings of the evaluations shall be communicated to the European Parliament and the Council, and in case of a breach, appropriate measures shall be taken thereafter.
Amendment 735 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to the right of information referred to in Articles 11 and 12 of Regulation (EC) 45/2001 and Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, persons whose data are stored in the shared biometric matching service, the common identity repository or the multiple-identity detector shall be informed by the authority collecting their data, at the time their data are collected, about the processing of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation, including about identity and contact details of the respective data controllers, and about the procedures for exercising their rights of access, rectification and erasure, as well as about the contact details of the European Data Protection Supervisor and of the national supervisory authority of the Member State responsible for the collection of the data. Persons whose data is stored should also be informed of retention periods, automated decision- making and the fact that personal data is not transferred or made available to third countries, international organisations of private parties, with the exception of transfers to Interpol.
Amendment 755 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State responsible for the manual verification of different identities as referred to in Article 29 or the Member State to which the request has been made shall reply to such requests within 45 days ofout undue delay and no longer than 45 days within the receipt of the request.
Amendment 763 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Article 47 – paragraph 4
4. Where, following an examination, it is found that the data stored in the multiple-identity detector (MID) are factually inaccurate or have been recorded unlawfully, the Member State responsible or, where applicable, the Member State to which the request has been made shall correct or delete these data. The Member State shall send a written confirmation to the data subject.
Amendment 766 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 47 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Any person shall have the right to lodge a complaint and the right to a legal remedy in the Member State which refused the right of access to or the right of correction or deletion of data relating to him or her, in accordance with national or Union law;
Amendment 778 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Personal data stored in or accessed by the interoperability components shall not be transferred or made available to any third country, to any international organisation or to any private party. Any breach to this shall be considered a serious security incident and shall be immediately reported and addressed in accordance with Article 44.
Amendment 786 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 793 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The European Commission, the European Parliament and Member States shall ensure that the European Data Protection Supervisor has sufficient resources to fulfil the tasks entrusted to it under this Regulation.
Amendment 819 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) fully complying with the rules of each IT-system to ensure the security and integrity of personal data;
Amendment 820 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) reporting any security incidents involving personal data to the Commission, eu-LISA, the national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor
Amendment 824 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 a (new)
Article 55 a (new)
Article 55 a Penalties Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 901 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 66 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States and EU bodies shall organise for their staff authorised to process data from the interoperability components, appropriate training programme about data security, data quality, data protection rules and the procedures of the data processing.
Amendment 902 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 66 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Common training courses about data security, data quality, data protection rules and the procedures of the data processing shall be organised at EU level at least once a year to enhance cooperation and exchange of best practices between staff of Member States and EU bodies authorised to process data from the interoperability components.
Amendment 904 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1
Article 68 – paragraph 1
1. eu-LISA shall ensure that procedures are in place to monitor the development of the interoperability components and the integration of the existing national infrastructures and the connection to the national uniform interface in light of objectives relating to planning and costs and to monitor the functioning of the interoperability components in light of objectives relating to the technical output, cost-effectiveness, security and quality of service.
Amendment 907 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Six months after the start of the operations of each interoperability component, eu-LISA shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the state of play of the connection of Member States to the communication infrastructure of the ESP and the CIR and the integration of the existing national systems and infrastructures with the ESP, shared BMS, MID and the CIR.
Amendment 908 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. During the development phase of the interoperability components, the Commission shall evaluate the necessity of further harmonisation of national systems and infrastructures of Member States at external borders. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council. These evaluation reports shall include recommandations, an impact assessment and an assessment on their cost for the EU budget.
Amendment 912 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Article 68 – paragraph 4
4. FourTwo years after the start of operations of each interoperability component and every four years thereafter, eu-LISA shall submit to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission a report on the connection of Member States to the communication infrastructure of the ESP and the CIR and the integration of the existing national systems and infrastructures with the ESP, shared BMS, MID and the CIR, as well as on the technical functioning of the interoperability components, including the security thereof.
Amendment 914 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
In addition, one year after each report from eu-LISAeach year, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the components, including:
Amendment 916 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) an examination of the results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, particularly the use of CIR with biometric data taken during an identity check;
Amendment 918 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) an assessment of the security of the connection of Member States to the communication infrastructure of the ESP and the CIR and the security of the integration of the existing national systems and infrastructures with the ESP, shared BMS, MID and the CIR.
Amendment 926 #
2017/0352(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State shall prepare annual reports containing information and statistics on the access to data stored in the common identity repository for identification pursuant to Article 20.
Amendment 214 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Children and vulnerable persons merit specific protection with regard to their personal data, as they may be less aware of the risks, consequences and safe guards concerned and their rights in relation to the processing of personal data. The interoperability components should pay particular attention to the protection of children and ensure that their rights and integrity are being fully respected.
Amendment 260 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to ensure the correct identification of a person, Member State authorities competent for preventing and combating irregular migration and competent authorities within the meaning of Article 3(7) of Directive 2016/680 should be allowed to query the common identity repository (CIR) with the biometric data of that person taken during an identity check. Such query should be carried out in principle in the presence of the person, solely where a Member State police authority was unable to identify a person on the basis of a travel document or with the identity data provided by that person following rules and procedures provided for in national law or where there are doubts as to the authenticity of the travel document or the identity of its holder or where the person is unable or refuses to cooperate, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person is not telling the truth about his or her identity. Such query should not be allowed against minors under the age of 12 years old.
Amendment 261 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
(27a) In order to identify unknown persons who are not able to identify themselves or unidentified human remains, in the event of a disaster or an accident, Member States should be allowed to query the CIR with the biometric data of those persons.
Amendment 324 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) The implementation of the interoperability components provided for in this Regulation and the integration of the existing national systems and infrastructures with those components will have an impact on the way checks are carried out at border crossing points. These impacts will result from a combined application of the existing rules of the Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council60 and the rules on interoperability provided for in this Regulation. _________________ 60 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.
Amendment 328 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57 a (new)
Recital 57 a (new)
(57a) It would be appropriate that, during the development phase of the interoperability components, the Commission assess the necessity of further harmonisation of national systems and infrastructures of Member States at external borders. Those recommendations should also include an impact assessment and an assessment on their cost for the EU budget.
Amendment 356 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation, together with [Regulation 2018/xx on interoperability police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration], establishes a framework to ensure the interoperability between the Entry/Exit System (EES), the Visa Information System (VIS), [the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS)], Eurodac, the Schengen Information System (SIS), and [the European Criminal Records Information System for third-country nationals (ECRIS-TCN)] in order for those systems and data contained in those systems to supplement each other.
Amendment 377 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) contribute to the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences.
Amendment 387 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) improving judicial cooperation in the areas of freedom, security and justice;
Amendment 423 #
Amendment 425 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
The protection of natural persons in relation to the processing of personal data is a fundamental right. Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and Article 16(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide that everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her. Processing of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation by any user shall not result in discrimination against persons on any grounds such as sex, colour, social, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. It shall fully respect human dignity and integritypolitical or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, genetic features, language, disability, age or sexual orientation. It shall fully respect human dignity and integrity and fundamental rights, including the right to respect for one’s private life and to the protection of personal data. Particular attention shall be paid to children, the elderly and persons with a disability. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.
Amendment 434 #
2017/0351(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. A European search portal (ESP) is established for the purposes of ensuring that Member State authorities and EU bodies have fast, seamless, efficient, systematic and controlled access to the EU information systems, the Europol data and the Interpol databases that they need to perform their tasks in accordance with their access rights and of supporting the objectives of the EES, the VIS, [the ETIAS], Eurodac, the SIS, [the ECRIS- TCN system] and the Europol data, while fully respecting the principles of necessity and proportionality.
Amendment 83 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39a
Recital 39a
(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. WhereBy way of exception, the examination procedure should not be accelerated when 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. An applicant who 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 acceleratedshould also be exempt from the accelerated examination procedure, including after it has begun, where the competent authorities find that the grounds for such a procedure do not apply. Vulnerability of applicants should be assessed throughout the border procedure and where applicable cause the exclusion from the border procedure . 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.
Amendment 299 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 6
Article 41 – paragraph 6
6. Applicants subject to the border procedure shall not be authorised to enterllowed to move freely within the territory of the Member State, without prejudice to paragraphs 9 and 11. In accordance with Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive recast], a Member State shall take proportionate measures to ensure that applicants in the border procedure shall not be allowed to move freely within their territory not putting an applicant in detention until the applicant’s case been individually assessed and effectively considered alternatives to detention or less coercive measures. Validation of detention shall be applied according to the Member State legislation
Amendment 417 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
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 proceduresinternment of asylum seekers, asylum procedures, including free legal assistance, 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, such as people who have been resettled;
Amendment 464 #
2016/0131(COD)
2. The Agency shall set up teams of experts for each monitoring exercise, including for the on-site visits as necessary. The teams of experts shall be composed of experts from the Agency's own staff and Commission representatives. The team of experts shall be responsible for drawing up a report based on the findings of on-site visits and information provided by Member States, the UNHCR and NGOs working on the ground.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) It is necessary to specify the objectives of the Entry/Exit System (EES) and its technical architecture, to lay down rules concerning its operation and use and to define responsibilities for the system, the categories of data to be entered into the system, the purposes for which the data are to be entered, the criteria for their entry, the authorities authorised to access the data and further rules on data processing and, the protection of personal data and the right to privacy.
Amendment 212 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
Amendment 255 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) Access to data contained in the EES should in no circumstances be used by Member States as a ground to circumvent their international obligations under the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, and should not be used to deny asylum seekers safe and effective legal avenues to Union territory to exercise their right to international protection.
Amendment 630 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the third country or international organisation agrees to use the datais able to guarantee and prove that the data are used only for the purpose for which they were provided;
Amendment 708 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1
Article 64 – paragraph 1
1. eu-LISA shall ensure that procedures are in place to monitor the development of the EES in light of objectives relating to planning and costs and to monitor the functioning of the EES in light of objectives relating to the technical output, cost-effectiveness, security, data protection and quality of service.
Amendment 714 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 5
Article 64 – paragraph 5
5. Three years after the start of operations of the EES and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the EES. This overall evaluation shall include an examination of results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale, the application of the Regulation, the security of the EES and any implications on future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council, the Council, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Agency for Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 3 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Maintains that the citizens of the Union may feel confident about Union law and can benefit effectively from its correct application in the Member States only ifwhen Union law is established in full compliance with the principle of conferral andTreaties; recalls that the principles of conferral and subsidiarity and proportionality, asre set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Unionthe Treaties (article 5 TEU);
Amendment 8 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that it is important for both the Member States and the Commission to respect their own roles and responsibilities, the former with regard to the timely and accurate transposition of directives and the proper application of EU law, and the latter with regard to the efficient monitoring of the applicationand enforcement of EU law;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Reiterates the provision in the recently adopted IIA on Better Law- Making that calls on Member States when transposing EU directives into national law where they choose to add elements that are in no way related to that Union legislation to make these additions identifiable either through the transposing act or through associated documents;
Amendment 12 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that Member States should express their political concerns at an early stage, through actively engaging in the legislative process as foreseen in the Treaties, rather than postponing the timely transposition of Union law;
Amendment 2 #
2015/0907(APP)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GDeclines to gives its consent to the draft Council decision;
Amendment 147 #
2014/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recommends that a justification should be providedcalls on Frontex fundamental rights officer to provide a justification to the complainant should no follow-up procedure be initiated by Frontex;