Activities of Magdalena ADAMOWICZ related to 2022/0117(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Protection of journalists and human rights defenders from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)
Amendments (52)
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) provides, inter alia, for the rights to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), freedom of expression and information, which includes respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media (Article 11), freedom of assembly and of association (Article 12) and to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47).
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Right to freedom of expression is a fundamental right that should be exercised with sense of responsibility, taking into account people’s fundamental right to obtain impartial information as well as the respect for the fundamental right to respect for one’s privacy.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists, publishers, academics, civil society representatives and human rights defenders, against court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Journalists play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that theyndependent, impartial, professional and responsible journalism, as well as access to pluralistic information, are key pillars of democracy. It is essential that journalists are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively and without fear to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Investigative journalists in particular play a key role in combatuncovering organised crime, corruptionabuse of power, corruption, fundamental rights violations and extremism. Their work carries particularly high risks and they are experiencing a growing number of attacks, intimidation and harassment. A robust system of safeguards isand protection, including to protect life and investigate assassinations, are needed to enable them to fulfil their crucial role as watchdogs on matters of legitimate public interest, without fear of punishment for searching for the truth and informing the public.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) provides, inter alia, for the rights to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), freedom of expression and information, which includes respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media (Article 11), freedom of assembly and of association (Article 12) and to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47).
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) Right to freedom of expression is a fundamental right that should be exercised with sense of responsibility, taking into account people’s fundamental right to obtain impartial information as well as the respect for the fundamental right to respect for one’s privacy.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life, promote accountability and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights or religious freedoms. Other participants in public debate, such as academics and researchers, also deserve adequate protection.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Academics and researchers, exercising both their right and obligation to express themselves within their area of expertise, contribute fundamentally to public discourse and dissemination of knowledge, as well as ensure that the democratic debate can happen on an informed basis. Legal intimidation that attempts to prevent them from communicating on matters related to their scientific activities is a direct violation of academic freedom and jeopardises the crucial role of scholars in combatting disinformation and misinformation.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists, publishers, academics, civil society representatives and human rights defenders, against court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Journalists play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that theyndependent, impartial, professional and responsible journalism, as well as access to pluralistic information, are key pillars of democracy. It is essential that journalists are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively and without fear to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Investigative journalists in particular play a key role in combatuncovering organised crime, corruptionabuse of power, corruption, fundamental rights violations and extremism. Their work carries particularly high risks and they are experiencing a growing number of attacks, intimidation and harassment. A robust system of safeguards isand protection, including to protect life and investigate assassinations, are needed to enable them to fulfil their crucial role as watchdogs on matters of legitimate public interest, without fear of punishment for searching for the truth and informing the public.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect jonaturnalists and human rights defenderlegal persons from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate and prevent investigation and reporting on breaches of Union and national law, corruption or other abusive practices, typically using harassment and intimidation.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life, promote accountability and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights or religious freedoms. Other participants in public debate, such as academics and researchers, also deserve adequate protection.
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations and state organ, public officials and publicly controlled entities. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation.
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) Academics and researchers, exercising both their right and obligation to express themselves within their area of expertise, contribute fundamentally to public discourse and dissemination of knowledge, as well as ensure that the democratic debate can happen on an informed basis. Legal intimidation that attempts to prevent them from communicating on matters related to their scientific activities is a direct violation of academic freedom and jeopardises the crucial role of scholars in combatting disinformation and misinformation.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of journalists, academics and human rights defenders and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on journalists, academics and human rights defenders. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect jonaturnalists and human rights defenderlegal persons from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate and prevent investigation and reporting on breaches of Union and national law, corruption or other abusive practicies, typically using harassment and intimidation.
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations and state organ, public officials and publicly controlled entities. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of journalists, academics and human rights defenders and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on journalists, academics and human rights defenders. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Public participation should mean any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information or academic freedom on a matter of public interest, such as the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works, and any preparatory activities directly linked thereto. It can also include activities related to the exercise of the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, such as the organisation of or participation to lobbying activities, demonstrations and protests or activities resulting from the exercise of the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, such as the filing of complaints, petitions, administrative and judicial claims and participation in public hearings. Public participation should also include preparatory, supporting or assisting activities that have a direct and inherent link to the statement or activity in question and that are targeted to stifle public participation. In addition, it can cover other activities meant to inform or influence public opinion or to further action by the public, including activities by any private or public entity in relation to an issue of public interest, such as the organisation of or participation to research, surveys, campaigns or any other collective actions.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as delaying proceedings, making excessive claims, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats and in case of death of the defendant such abusive lawsuits might be even inherited by the members of the family.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Public participation should mean any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information or academic freedom on a matter of public interest, such as the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works, and any preparatory activities directly linked thereto. It can also include activities related to the exercise of the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, such as the organisation of or participation to lobbying activities, demonstrations and protests or activities resulting from the exercise of the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, such as the filing of complaints, petitions, administrative and judicial claims and participation in public hearings. Public participation should also include preparatory, supporting or assisting activities that have a direct and inherent link to the statement or activity in question and that are targeted to stifle public participation. In addition, it can cover other activities meant to inform or influence public opinion or to further action by the public, including activities by any private or public entity in relation to an issue of public interest, such as the organisation of or participation to research, surveys, campaigns or any other collective actions.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) SLAPPs are consistently characterised by imbalance of power between the claimant and the defendant in terms of financial and legal resources. This imbalance of power causes particular concern if the abusive lawsuits are funded directly or indirectly from the state budgets and are combined with other indirect and direct state measures against independent media outlets, independent journalism and civil society.
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as delaying proceedings, making excessive claims, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats and in case of death of the defendant such abusive lawsuits might be even inherited by the members of the family.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover procedural costs and/or damages, when the court considers that even if the claim is not manifestly unfounded, there are elements indicating an abuse of procedure and the prospects for success in the main proceedings are low. A security does not entail a judgement on the merits but serves as a precautionary measure ensuring the effects of a final decision finding an abuse of procedure and covering the costs and damage caused to the defendant. It should be for Member States to decide whether a security should be ordered by the court on its own motion or upon request by the defendant.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20 a) SLAPPs are consistently characterized by imbalance of power between the claimant and the defendant in terms of financial and legal resources. This imbalance of power causes particular concern if the abusive lawsuits are funded directly or indirectly from the state budgets and are combined with other indirect and direct state measures against independent media outlets, independent journalism and civil society.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest at stake is relevant to more than one Member State. That includes for instance public participation inacts which have a cross border dimension, such as events organised by Union institutions, such as appearances in public hearings, or statements or activities on matters that are of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such aswidely disseminated publications. It shall also include statements or activities on matters which the public of more than one Member State may legitimately take an interest on, and therefore are or may become of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such as cross-border enjoyment or abuse of fundamental rights or freedoms under EU law, cross-border pollution or allegations of money laundering with potential cross- border involvement. The second situation where a matter should be considered to have cross- border implications is when the claimant or associated entities have initiated concurrent or previous court proceedings against the same or associated defendants in another Member State. These two types of situations take into consideration the specific context of SLAPPs.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover procedural costs and/or damages, when the court considers that even if the claim is not manifestly unfounded, there are elements indicating an abuse of procedure and the prospects for success in the main proceedings are low. A security does not entail a judgement on the merits but serves as a precautionary measure ensuring the effects of a final decision finding an abuse of procedure and covering the costs and damage caused to the defendant. It should be for Member States to decide whether a security should be ordered by the court on its own motion or upon request by the defendant.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) This Directive is complementary to the Commission recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”). This recommendation is addressed to Member States and it provides a comprehensive toolbox of measures including training, awareness-raising, support to targets of abusive court proceedings and data collection, reporting and monitoring of court proceedings against public participation. When transposing this Directive, Member States should pay particular attention to the implementation of the Commission’s recommendations as regards, in particular, the inclusion of safeguards similar to those provided for by the Directive for domestic cases not covered by the Directive’s scope, and the provision of legal assistance to defendants in an affordable and easily accessible manner, and consider the inclusion in their national transposition laws of targeted provisions to that effect.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters with cross- border implications brought against natural and legal persons, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, on account of their engagement in public participation.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and association or academic freedom on a matter of public interest, and preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto. This includes complaints, petitions, administrative or judicial claims and participation in public hearings, as well as exercise of public scrutiny and dissemination of public information in form of creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works;
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) fundamental rights, public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rightsmedia freedom and pluralism, the environment or climate;
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) This Directive is complementary to the Commission recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”). This recommendation is addressed to Member States and it provides a comprehensive toolbox of measures including training, awareness-raising, support to targets of abusive court proceedings and data collection, reporting and monitoring of court proceedings against public participation. When transposing this Directive, Member States should pay particular attention to the implementation of the Commission’s recommendations as regards, in particular, the inclusion of safeguards similar to those provided for by the Directive for domestic cases not covered by the Directive’s scope, and the provision of legal assistance to defendants in an affordable and easily accessible manner, and consider the inclusion in their national transposition laws of targeted provisions to that effect.
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e
(e) activities aimed to fight disinformation and foreign interference in democratic processes;
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters with cross- border implications brought against natural and legal persons, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, on account of their engagement in public participation.
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
3. ‘abusive court proceedings against public participation’ mean court proceedings brought in relation to public participation that are fully or partially unfoundedcharacterised by elements indicative of an abusive use of the judicial process for purposes other than genuinely asserting, vindicating or exercising a right and have as their main purpose to prevent, restrict or penalize public participation. Indications of such a purpose or effect can be:
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a This Directive lays down minimum rules, thus enabling the Member States to adopt or maintain provisions more favourable to persons engaged in the public participation, including national provisions establishing more effective procedural safeguards relating to freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and association or academic freedom. The transposition of this Directive cannot constitute grounds for a reduction in the level of safeguards already granted by the Member States in the matters covered by this Directive.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and association or academic freedom on a matter of public interest, and preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto. This includes complaints, petitions, administrative or judicial claims and, participation in public hearings, as well as excercise of public scrutiny and dissemination of public information in form of creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works;
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) parties’ imbalances in bargaining powers in terms of financial and legal resources;
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) fundamental rights, public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rightsmedia freedom and pluralism, the environment or climate;
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) the litigation tactics deployed by the claimant, including as regards the choice of jurisdiction and the use of dilatory tactics;
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
3. ‘abusive court proceedings against public participation’ mean court proceedings brought in relation to public participation that are fully or partially unfoundedcharacterised by elements indicative of an abusive use of the judicial process for purposes other than genuinely asserting, vindicating or exercising a right and have as their main purpose to prevent, restrict or penalize public participation. Indications of such a purpose or effect can be:
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall provide that measures on procedural safeguards in accordance with Chapters III and IV can be taken by the court or tribunal seised of the matter ex officio.
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
(c a) parties’ imbalances in bargaining powers in terms of financial and legal resources;
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
(c b) the litigation tactics deployed by the claimant, including as regards the choice of jurisdiction and the use of dilatory tactics;
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest against which court proceedings are initiated is relevant to more than one Member State, either due to the cross- border dimension of the act itself, or due to the legitimate interest which the public in different Mamber States may take in the matter of public interest concerned by the act; or
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall provide that measures on procedural safeguards in accordance with Chapters III and IV can be taken by the court or tribunal seised of the matter ex officio.
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide the Commission with all relevant information regarding the application of this Directive by [53 years from the date of transposition]. On the basis of the information provided, the Commission shall by [64 years from the date of transposition] at the latest, submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of this Directive. The report shall provide an assessment of the evolution of abusive court proceedings against public participation and the impact of this Directive in the Member States. If necessary, the report shall be accompanied by proposals to amend this Directive.
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation can beis ordered to bear all the costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant, unless such costs are excessive.
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide the Commission with all relevant information regarding the application of this Directive by [53 years from the date of transposition]. On the basis of the information provided, the Commission shall by [64 years from the date of transposition] at the latest, submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of this Directive. The report shall provide an assessment of the evolution of abusive court proceedings against public participation and the impact of this Directive in the Member States. If necessary, the report shall be accompanied by proposals to amend this Directive.
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [2 year18 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.