6 Amendments of Notis MARIAS related to 2017/2273(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the right to petition the European Parliament is a cornerstone of European citizenship, as enshrined in Articles 20 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 44 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, ranking second in importance to citizens according to recent surveys; underlines the importance of petitions as a means for citizens to express their concerns about instances of misapplication or violation of EU law and on potential lacunae, while at the same time highlighting these deficiencies to the Commission in recognition of its role as guardian of the Treaties;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that proper implementation of EU law is essential to achieving the EU policy goals defined in the Treaties and secondary legislation, and that lack of enforcement not only undermines the efficiency of the internal market, but also affects the credibility and image of the Union; underlines, in this regard, that implementation and enforcement are founded on the distribution of powers conferred by the Treaties, and that the Member States and the Commission therefore have a shared responsibility to implement and enforcefor the correct implementation of European law; points out, at the same time, that all EU institutions share the responsibility of ensuring implementation and enforcement of EU law, as provided for in the 2016 Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the increased transparency of, and the provision of more statistical information in, the Commission report for 2016, as compared to previous reports; regrets the fact, however, that it provides no precise information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of EU Pilot or infringement procedures; notes with regret that Parliament is not involved in these procedures; reiterates its call onurges the Commission to share with Parliament information on all EU Pilots opened and infringement procedures initiated in order to improve transparency, reduce the time frame for dispute settlement through the Committee on Petitions, build citizens’ trust in the EU project and, ultimately, enhance the legitimacy of the EU Pilot procedure; acknowledges the Court of Justice’s ruling on cases C-39/05 P and C- 52/05 P of May 2017, according to which documents within the EU Pilot procedure should not be disclosed publicly if there is a risk that such disclosure would affect the nature of the infringement procedure, alter its progress or undermine the objectives of that procedure;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the presentation in the report of the revised Commission strategy for monitoring the application of EU law, as this policy is outlined in the 2016 Communication ‘Better results through better application’; notes the intention of the Commission to direct petitioners to seek redress at national level when complaints do not concern issues of wider principle, do not raise systemic issues and can satisfactorily be dealt with by other mechanisms at EU or national level; notes the Commission’s intent to launch an EU Pilot procedure only where it could prove to be useful in a case, and to proceed with infringement procedures without relying on EU Pilots in order to expedite investigations of breaches of EU law; is very concerned, however, thatsince this approach maywill lead to ineffective investigation of complaints through petitions in cases where action at EU level could prove more appropriate; deplores the high number of infringement procedures in 2016; notes the distinctively decreasing trend in the number of EU Pilots launched in the same year;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that, according to Standard Eurobarometer 86, a majority of EU citizens favours a common EU policy in areas such as defence, migration and terrorism; recalls that, in order for such policies to be successful, it is paramount that they are implemented in a timely and uniform manner in all Member States; notes with concern that certain Member States such as Germany and France are disregarding their obligations with regard to asylum and migration, in particular where relocation of asylum seekers and immigrants is concerned;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomNotes the proactive work of the Commission on the application of union law under the Better Regulation Package, and the support offered to Member States through implementation plans for new directives; points out, however, that Member States should live up to their responsibility to enforce the rules they have jointly adopted.