3 Amendments of Jiří POSPÍŠIL related to 2020/2133(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that within the EU institutions different legislative measureand other provisions aimed at preventing conflicts of interest contain varying definitions of the term ‘conflict of interest’; believes therefore that the term should be uniformly understood to mean a conflict between the public duty and private interests of a public official, in which the public official has private- capacity interests which could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities; notes, however, that a definition of this kind has an evolving nature and that full transparency does not necessarily guarantee the absence of any which could improperly influence their activities and the decisions falling under their responsibility; notes that maximum transparency can help prevent conflicts of interest, nor does it guarantee public trust and increase public trust in the proper performance of public administration;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that for proper expertise to be acquired, the future ethics body should have a permanent, independent and collegiate structure, and that its composition could be based either on specific institutional positions, such as that of the Presidentthe members of this body could include, on the one hand, persons in specific positions providing a guarantee of professionalism and independence, such as the position of judge of the Court of Justice, or on the nomination of experts by each EU institutionf the European Union, and, on the other hand, persons appointed by the European Parliament in view of their reputation for increasing transparency in public administration and for detecting and combating conflicts of interest;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes furthermore that the mission of this future advisory body cshould also be entrusted with the broader task ofinclude examining conflicts of interest within the EU institutions and agencies in general, as well as among public officials at Member State level who are involved in the implementation of the budget under direct, indirect and shared management within the meaning of Article 61 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and that this body could playing, in a complementary and balanced way, a preventive role via awareness raising and ethical guidance powers on the one hand, and a compliance role as regards conflicts of interest on the other.