Activities of Răzvan POPA related to 2018/0170(COD)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) as regards cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the effectiveness of OLAF investigations
Amendments (14)
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In view of their common goal to preserve the integrity of the Union budget, the Office and the EPPO should establish and maintain a close relationship based on sincere cooperation and aimed at ensuring the complementarity of their respective mandates and coordination of their action, in particular as regards the scope of the enhanced cooperation for the establishment on the EPPO. Ultimately, the relationship should contribute to ensuring that all means are used to protect and secure the financial interests of the Union and avoiding unnecessary duplication of efforts.
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 requires the Office, as well as all institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and competent national authorities, to report to the EPPO without undue delay suspected criminal conduct in respect of which the EPPO may exercise its competence. Since the mandate of the Office is to carry out administrative investigations into fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity affecting the financial interest of the Union, it is ideally placed and equipped to act as a natural partner and privileged source of information for the EPPO.
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 specifies the minimum elements that, as a rule, reports should contain. The Office may need to conduct a preliminary evaluation of allegations to ascertain these elements and collect the necessary information. The Office should conduct this evaluation expeditiously, with no unjustified delay and through means which do not risk jeopardising a possible future criminal investigation. Upon completion of its evaluation, it should report to the EPPO, with no unjustified delay where a suspicion of an offence within its competence is identified.
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In conformity with Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the Office should in principle not open an administrative investigation parallel to an investigation conducted by the EPPO into the same facts. However, in certain cases, the protection of the Union’s financial interests may require that the Office carry out a complementary administrative investigation before the conclusion of criminal proceedings initiated by the EPPO with the purpose of ascertaining whether precautionary measures are necessary, or financial, disciplinary or administrative action should be taken. These complementary investigations may be appropriate, inter alia, when necessary to recover amounts due to the Union budget subject to specific time-barring rules, when the amounts at risk are very high, or where there is the need to avoid further expenditure in risk situations through administrative measures.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The Office should actively and effectively support the EPPO in its investigations. In this regard, the EPPO may request the Office to support or complement its criminal investigations through the exercise of powers under this Regulation. In these cases the Office should perform these operations only within the limits of its powers and within the framework provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) These changes do not affect the procedural guarantees applicable in the framework of investigations. The Office is bound to apply the procedural guarantees of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013, Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/967 and those contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. This framework requires that the Office conducts its investigations objectively, impartially and confidentially, seeking evidence for and against the person concerned, and carries out investigative acts on the basis of a written authorisation and following a legality check. TBoth the EPPO and the Office must ensure the respect of the rights of persons concerned by itstheir investigations, including the presumption of innocence and the right to avoid self-incrimination. When interviewed, persons concerned have inter alia the rights to be assisted by a person of choice, to approve the record of the interview, and to use any of the official languages of the Union. Persons concerned also have the right to comment on the facts of the case before conclusions are drawn. _________________ 7 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial interests against fraud and other irregularities, OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2–5
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Economic operators shall be obliged to cooperate with the Office in the course of its investigations. The Office may request oral information, including through interviews, and written information from economic operators.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. In the exercise of these powers, the Office shall comply with the procedural guarantees provided for in this Regulation and in Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96. In the conduct of an on-the-spot check and inspection, the economic operator concerned shall have the right not to make self-incriminating statements and to be assisted by a person of choice. When making statements during the on the spot checks, the economic operator shall be provided with the possibility to use any of the official languages of the Member State where he is located. The right to be assisted by a person of choice for a limited and reasonable period shall not prevent access by the Office to the premises of the economic operator, and shall not unduly delay the start of the check.
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
At the request of the Office, the competent authority of the Member State concerned shall providguarantee the staff of the Office with the assistance needed in order to carry out their tasks effectively, as specified in the written authorisation referred to in Article 7(2).
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 3 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Where the staff of the Office finds that an economic operator resists an on-the-spot check or inspection authorised pursuant to this Regulation, the Member State concerned shall affordguarantee them the necessary assistance of law enforcement authorities so as to enable the Office to conduct its on- the-spot check or inspection effectively and without undue delay.
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The competent authorities of the Member States shall givuarantee the necessary assistance to enable the staff of the Office to fulfil their tasks in accordance with this Regulation effectively and without undue delay.;
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
(8) If an investigation cannot be closed within 12 months after it has been opened, the Director-General shall, at the expiry of that 12-month period and every six months thereafter, report to the Supervisory Committee, indicating the reasons and, where appropriate, the remedial measures envisaged with a view to speeding up the investigation.";
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Where the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies report to the EPPO in accordance with Article 24 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, they may insteadshall transmit to the Office a copy of the report sent to the EPPO.;
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013
Article 12 c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The Office shall not be bound to report to the EPPO manifestonly unsubstantiated allegations.