BETA

14 Amendments of Kostas CHRYSOGONOS related to 2017/2139(DEC)

Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the budget of the Court of Justice is purely administrative, with approximately 75 % spent on persons working with the institution and the remainder on buildings, furniture, information technology and miscellaneous operating expenditure; stresses, however, that introducing performance-based budgeting should not apply only to the Court of Justice's budget as a whole but should include the setting of specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time- based (SMART) targets to individual departments, units and staffs' annual plans and to set relevant indicators for drawing up the institution's estimates; calls therefore on the Court of Justice to introduce the principle of performance- based budgeting more widely in its operations;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that out of the commitments of missions of EUR 295.500 only EUR 41.209 were used; points out that this under-investment could be avoided; requests the Court of Justice to improve its budgeting and accountability in regard to the mission budget and emphasises the need for the principle of missions to be cost-effective;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Court of Justice to consider in due time to reduce the number of official cars at the disposal of its members and staff; calls on the Court of Justice, furthermore, to improve its checks against the use of official cars for private purposes;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that 2015 was the year of adoption of the judicial architectural reform of the Court of Justice, which was accompanied by the development of new rules of procedure for the General Court; understands that, by virtue of the number of judges being doubled in a three-stage process extending until 2019, that reform will enable the Court of Justice to continue to deal with the increase in the number of cases; looks forward to analysing the achievements of that reform in the Court of Justice's capacity to deal with cases within a reasonable period and in compliance with the requirements of a fair hearing;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Notes the upcoming recast of the Code of Conduct for Members where the conditions for carrying out external activities and the publication of their financial interests shall be clarified;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Stresses that transparency is a key element to the public trust; calls on the Court of Justice to establish clear rules regarding "revolving doors" and to put in place effective measures and dissuasive penalties, such as the reduction of pensions or the prohibition to work at least three years in similar bodies, in order to prevent "revolving doors";
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Calls for a greater level of transparency on the external activities of each judge; requests that the Court of Justice provides information regarding other posts and paid external activities of the judges on its official website and its annual activity reports;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Considers that the Court of Justice should make available a general overview of the participants and the contents of its meetings with external parties other than the ones related to its judicial activity;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Asks the Court of Justice to provide without delay the discharge authority with a list of meetings with lobbyists, professional associations and civil society; asks moreover the Court of Justice to present in due time the minutes of those meetings;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)
7g. Asks the Court of Justice to enact the submission of declaration of interests, instead of declarations of the absence of conflicts of interests, as self-evaluation of conflicts of interests is, in itself, a conflict of interests; considers that the evaluation of situations of conflicts of interests must be done by an independent party; asks the Court of Justice to report without delay on the changes introduced and to indicate who is checking the situations of conflicts of interests;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 h (new)
7h. Regrets the fact that the Court of Justice's internal whistleblowing rules where adopted only in the beginning of 2016;recommends that the Court of Justice disseminate those rules among its staff so that all employees are aware of them; asks the Court of Justice to provide in due time details of the whistleblower cases in 2015, if any and of how they were handled and finalized;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)
7i. Calls on the Court of Justice to provide Parliament with the specific costs of translation according to the harmonised methodology agreed within the Interinstitutional Working Group on key interinstitutional activity and performance indicators;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 j (new)
7j. Welcomes the commitment of the Court of Justice to ambitious environmental targets; encourages the institution to apply the principles of green public procurement and calls for the establishment of rules and a sufficient budget for carbon offsetting;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 k (new)
7k. Calls on the Court of Justice to improve its communications policy towards the citizens of the Union, e.g. by organising training seminars for journalists or developing communication products on its activity in accordance with a more citizen centred approach;
2017/12/04
Committee: JURI