36 Amendments of Olivier CHASTEL related to 2021/2180(INI)
Amendment 3 #
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 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (the Conditionality Regulation) integrated the conditionality mechanism into a wider framework, requiring the Commission to use its own annual rule of law reports as a source for its assessments under the Regulation; calls, once again, on the Commission to implement the Conditionality Regulation without any further delay; recalls that for budget-related measures in the event of violations of the rule of law in a Member State, the competences of parliamentary committees should be determined on the basis of Annex VI of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure if the infringements under the Conditionality Regulation procedure are dealt with in Parliament;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Welcomes the European Court of Justice decision to reject the actions brought by Hungary and Poland against the Conditionality Regulation; deplores the time wasted since its entry into force by the European Commission, who unilaterally decided to abide by non- binding European Council conclusions, which led the European Parliament to take action under Article 265 TFEU for failure to act; highlights that the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report contains multiple and detailed examples of breaches of the rule of law that fall within the scope of the Conditionality regulation, which should have led the European Commission to trigger the conditionality mechanism a long time ago;
Amendment 8 #
1 b. Strongly regrets the fact that the Commission’s failure to act since January 2021 has let the rule of law situation to deteriorate in several Member States, as shown in the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls its resolution of 8 July 2021 on the creation of guidelines for the application of the Conditionality Regulation; insists that the Commission include in itsa more direct link between the Commission’s annual Rule of Law Report and the triggering of the Conditionality Regulation should be established, for example by including in the annual rule of law reports a section dedicated to cases where rule of law breaches in a Member State could affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the Union’s financial interests in a sufficiently direct way ;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Regrets that the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report is mostly descriptive and lacking clear conclusions, with precise follow-up actions and proposals of remedial measures ; regrets also the lack of prioritisation of the breaches of the rule of law listed in the report, with the same attention and tone given to systemic major breaches and to isolated minor ones; calls therefore on the Commission to address these shortcomings and improve the annual report to transform it into a comprehensive tool to be used by Member States to fix the identified rule of law breaches;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Regrets the mostly descriptive nature of the Commission's 2021 Rule of Law Report and calls on the Commission to address this aspect by including country-specific recommendations with regards to problems identified; furthermore asks the Commission to include yearly follow-ups on these matters until the full implementation of such recommendations;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. 3. Stresses that the four areas assessed in the 27 country chapters of the Commission’s 2021 rule of law report (the justice system, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism, and other institutional checks and balances) are key interdependent pillars for upholding the rule of law, fighting fraud and corruption and protecting the Union’s financial interests; is of the opinion that other important elements of the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist should be included into the evaluation, particularly a chapter on shrinking civic space; welcomes the evaluation of the effects of COVID-19 on the four issues assessed; highlights the importance of continuing this evaluation in future annual rule of law reports; points out that COVID- 19 pandemic has shortened legislative processes and reduced parliamentary debate and shortened or stopped consultation of civil society and other stakeholders;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Considers that the European Union should lead by example in its respect for the rule of law principles; reiterates therefore its call to the European Commission include in its annual Rule of Law Report an assessment of the EU institutions’ performance in the areas addressed by the report, where applicable;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that corruption prevention policies cover many fields, typically including ethical rules, awareness-raising measures, rules on asset disclosures, incompatibilities and conflicts of interest, internal control mechanisms, rules on lobbying, and revolving doors; reiterates the role of national measures in preventing fraud and corruption; calls for further corruption prevention measures at the European level including transparency of ownership structures, prohibition of involvement of offshore or shell companies into the spending of European funds; reiterates the role of national measures in preventing fraud and corruption but considers that the EU institutions need to be fully equipped to prevent and investigate fraud and corruption; welcomes the Commission's adoption of the anti-money laundering (AML) package of proposals; calls on the European institutions to be ambitious in their negotiations and to reach an agreement as quickly as possible, particularly on the creation of a new European AML authority with strong direct supervisory powers on the riskiest obliged financial entities and on clear rules on Beneficial Ownership transparency;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that corruption prevention policies cover many fields, typically including ethical rules, awareness-raising measures, rules on asset disclosures, incompatibilities and conflicts of interest, internal control mechanisms, rules on lobbying, and revolving doors; reiterates the role of national measures in preventing fraud and corruption; calls on further corruption prevention measures on European level including transparency of ownership structures, prohibition of involvement of offshore or shell companies into the spending of European funds; reiterates the role of national measures in preventing fraud and corruption but considers that the EU institutions need to be fully equipped to prevent and investigate fraud and corruption;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes with great concern the deteriorating situation of freedom of expression, protection of the right to information, and protection of journalists in 2021 compared to 2020 according to the Media Pluralism Monitor; recalls that media pluralism and media freedom is essential for the protection of the EU’s financial interests as investigative journalism is often at the source of the identification of issues such as corruption, fraud, or conflicts of interest in the use of EU funds;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Deeply regrets the fact that the safety of journalists across the EU has been deteriorating in 20201a; highlights the key role of investigative journalists in the fight against corruption, fraud and illegal activities that negatively impact the EU budget; reiterates in this regard the need to protect investigative journalists from strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) through a strong EU-wide legal framework, as well as against personal harassment, intimidation and threats to life in order to assure freedom of expression and the right to information and safeguard the journalistic profession. _________________ 1ahttps://rm.coe.int/final-version-annual- report-2021-en-wanted-real-action-for- media-freed/1680a2440e
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Is concerned about the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report’s findings that, in some countries, the state- sponsored harassment and intimidation of the LGBTI organisations is affecting their ability to access funding; calls on the Commission to take a closer look at the issue and to make sure that the non- discrimination principle governing the access to EU funds is fully complied with, everywhere in the EU; considers that these findings reinforce the long-standing position of Parliament that the scope of the Rule of Law report should be broadened to include all Article 2 TEU values;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Amendment 47 #
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 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the Commission’s annual rule of law reports and its findings to resolutely fight against systemic corruption and devise all effective instruments available under EU financial legislation and the applicable sector- specific and financial rules for preventing, combating and sanctioning corruption and fighting fraud, as well as for regularly monitoring the use of public funds, including recovery and resilience facility funds.
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Regrets the fact that the report fails to clearly recognise the deliberate process of the rule of law backsliding in Poland and Hungary which can result in further backsliding not only in the above mentioned Member States but it seriously risk affecting other Member States in the Union as well;
Amendment 53 #
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 70 #
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 119 #
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 143 #
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 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recalls that in some circumstances, Member States deliberately resorted to measures which question the principle of the rule of law, such as legislation adopted in fast track procedures without public consultations or even, in exceptional cases, constitutional changes as a way to legitimise discriminatory policies that could otherwise not be legislated upon, such as provisions that specifically aim at LGBTIQ persons; recalls the Member States have a responsibility towards citizens in condition of vulnerability and should provide them with safety and protection from discrimination;
Amendment 187 #
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 192 #
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; highlights that the intentional targeting of certain minority groups’ rights in some Member States have created and established a momentum elsewhere, as can be evidenced by backtracking on the rights of women and LGBTIQ persons.
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines its concern at the fact that women and people in vulnerable situations, including persons with disabilities, children, religious minorities, particularly at a time of rising antisemitism, antigypsyism and anti- Muslim hatred in Europe, Romani people and other persons belonging to ethnic and linguistic minorities, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, LGBTI+ persons and elderly people especially people living in marginalised settlements, continue to see their rights not being fully respected across the Union; emphasises the obvious link between deteriorating rule of law standards and violations of fundamental rights and minority rightis particularly concerned about the deterioration of the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights of women in some Member States, including the imposition of highly restrictive laws on abortion; emphasises the obvious link between deteriorating rule of law standards and violations of fundamental rights and minority rights; strongly reiterates its call on the Commission to include within the scope of future reports an in-depth assessment of the persistent violations of democracy and fundamental rights throughout the Union, including equality and the rights of persons belonging to minorities;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines its concern at the fact that women and people in vulnerable situations, including persons with disabilities, children, religious minorities, particularly at a time of rising antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred in Europe, Romani people and other persons belonging to ethnic and linguistic minorities, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, LGBTI+Q persons and elderly people, continue to see their rights not being fully respected across the Union; emphasises the obvious link between deteriorating rule of law standards and violations of fundamental rights and minority rights; recalls its recommendation from 2020 for future reports to assess the effect that hate crime and hate speech have on discrimination;
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Welcomes the infringement procedures initiated by the Commission against Hungary and Poland as part of the July 2021 infringement package concerning the respect for the human rights of LGBTIQ persons and breaches of EU law, which constitute the first time the Commission has specifically initiated infringements to safeguard their rights;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recalls that the exercise of fundamental freedoms, including the right to be critical in public, is an element of a free and democratic society; notes that strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) require a legislative European response that ensures the respect for democracy and fundamental rights and, inconsequence, also the rule of law; welcomes the Commission’s commitment to propose a directive against abusive litigation targeting journalists and rights defenders, emphasising that the scope must be comprehensive enough to encompass all those who are rights defenders, including individual activists;
Amendment 280 #
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 331 #
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 #
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 357 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls the importance of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation where breaches of the principles of the rule of law affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union; considers that the annual report is the most appropriate place to have a dedicated section and conduct a relevant analysis; urges the Commission to launch the procedure enshrined in Article 6(1) of that regulation at least in the cases of Poland and Hungary; calls on the Commission to explore the full potential of the Common Provisions Regulation and the Financial Regulation to protect the rule lawdemocracy, fundamental rights and the rule law, thereby ensuring that EU funds are not used for initiatives which are not in compliance with EU values;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Is concerned about the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report’s findings that, in some countries, the state- sponsored harassment and intimidation of the LGBTIQ organisations affects their ability to access funding; calls on the Commission to assess the issue more closely and to ensure through the necessary means that the non- discrimination principle governing access to EU funds is fully complied with everywhere in the EU; considers that these findings reinforce the long-standing position of the Parliament that the scope of the Rule of Law report should be broadened to include all Article 2 TEU values;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Highlights that constitutional checks and balances at EU level should also be independently assessed; commits, to that end, to request a Venice Commission opinion on key principles of democracy in EU governance, in particular the separation of powers, accountability and checks and balances;
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Is concerned by the persistent failure by some Members States to implement CJEU judgements, which contribute to the erosion of the rule of law; calls on the Commission to report on the respective country chapters about the implementation of judgements by Member States in cases of partial or lack of implementation; encourages the Commission to engage with authorities in order to find suitable solutions for complete implementation and to update the information on an annual basis; recalls that the failure by Romania to implement the Coman & Hamilton judgement1a resulted in the plaintiffs having to resort to the ECtHR for redress; _________________ 1a Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 5 June 2018 (C-673/16), Relu Adrian Coman and Others v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări and Ministerul Afacerilor Interne.