73 Amendments of Cristian TERHEŞ related to 2021/2025(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the high number of petitions received from citizens concerned about the breaches of the rule of law in their respective countries and with the consequences of such breaches on their lives; stresses that full protection of Union citizens’ rights can be ensured throughout the Union only if all Member States comply with all the principles underlying the rule of law, as deficiencies in one Member State have an impact on otherned after a thorough analyses involving all Member States and the Union as a wholeir specificities;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, despite repeated requests by Parliament, the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report fails to encompass the areas of democracy and fundamental rights; cCalls on the Commission to ensure equal treatment of all the Union’s founding values in its next report; believes that the Commission must also involve independent experts in this annual exercise in order to guarantee full credibility, and also provide clear indications on follow-up actions for any shortcomings detected;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21
Citation 21
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 29
Citation 29
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 32
Citation 32
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, despite repeated requests by Parliament, the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report fails to encompass the areas of democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Commission to ensure equal treatment of all the Union’s founding values in its next report; believes that the Commission must also involve independent experts in this annual exercise as well as provide the name of the officials writing the report in order to guarantee full credibility, and also provide clear indications on follow-up actions for any shortcomings detected;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 33
Citation 33
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that the criteria applied to Member States in order to measure their compliance with the rule of law are not clear and identical, which creates a double standard and generates discrimination and mistrust; calls for the adoption of single criteria and equal evaluation standards for all Member States as underlined by both Commissioner Vice-President for Values and Transparency, Vera Jourova, and Commissioner for Justice, Didier Reynders, as well as many MEPs in the LIBE Committee debates countless times;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34
Citation 34
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 35
Citation 35
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Criticises the failure of the Council to make progress by applying sanctions in the ongoing procedures under Article 7 of the TEU, confirming that the Union remains structurally badly equipped to counter rule of law violations; hHighlights that, in any case, a full and effective use of all tools available at Union level, such as infringement procedures, the procedures enshrined in the Common Provisions Regulation and Conditionality Regulation1 , the Rule of Law Framework and Article 7 of the TEU, must be made to address breaches of the rule of law, following a specific well scrutinised procedure; underlines citizens’ high expectations expressed in petitions asking for a proper and rapid Union level response to put an end to such violations; _________________ 1 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.
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 37
Citation 37
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 39
Citation 39
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Criticises the failure of the Council to make progress by applying sanctions in the ongoing procedures under Article 7 of the TEU, confirming that the Union remains structurally badly equipped to counter rule of law violations; highlights that, in any case, a full and effective use of all tools available at Union level, such as infringement procedures, the procedures enshrined in the Common Provisions Regulation and Conditionality Regulation1 , the Rule of Law Framework and Article 7 of the TEU, must be made to address breaches of the rule of law; underlines citizens’ high expectations expressed in petitions asking for a proper and rapid Union level response to put an end to such violations; emphasises that any discussions about sanctions against a Member State must be based solely on objective and technical criteria and not on political evaluations or motivations; _________________ 1 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.
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 40
Citation 40
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 43
Citation 43
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 44
Citation 44
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Having regard to the implementation of the Rule of law report and in compliance with the European Commissioners narrative on this issue, calls for the end of the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism for Romania and Bulgaria;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 45
Citation 45
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets the institutional inactivity towards the international crime of illegal migration;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that reforms adopted in some Member States have seriously threatened the independence of the justice system, increasing the influence of the executive and legislative branch over its functioning, thus leading the Commission to launch infringement proceedings and raise concerns in the context of procedures under Article 7 of the TEU; underlines that, in order to safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, the justice system and the judges must be protected from any pressure, threat or interference, direct or indirect, from inside or outside the judiciary, including political authorities or intelligence agencies/secret services 1a 1b Paragraph22 of Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities (https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_de tails.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805afb78) 1bParagraph27 of CCJE Opinion No. 21 (2018) Preventing corruption among judges (https://rm.coe.int/ccje-2018-3e- avis-21-ccje-2018-prevent-corruption- amongst-judges/native/16808fd8dd) _________________ 1bParagraph 27 of CCJE Opinion No. 21 (2018) Preventing corruption among judges (https://rm.coe.int/ccje-2018-3e- avis-21-ccje-2018-prevent-corruption- amongst-judges/native/16808fd8dd )
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the values set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU); whereas democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are mutually reinforcing values which, when undermined, may pose a systemic threat to the Union; whereas Article 2 TEU applies not only and not even primarily to the Member States, but to the European Union and the rule of law should cover the EU institutions, all the more so that they have long been accused of democratic deficit;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes that in many Member States the judiciary has overturned a series of abusive measures implemented under the pretext of combating the spread of the Covid19 virus; deplores, at the same time, that in some Member States the judiciary has avoided, under various pretexts, to judge and rule on the legality and proportionality of the anti-Covid19 measures, leaving citizens exposed to abusive measures;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. regrets the inexplicable delays concerning murders committed from the extreme-left;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the annual rule of law review cycle is a welcomen addition to the tools available to preserve the Union’s values, by addressing the situation in all EU Member States based on four pillars, with a direct bearing on respect for the rule of lawthe Union; whereas it is intended as a yearly cycle to ensure the rule of law and to prevent problems from emerging or deepening;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. regrets the fact that the extreme- left violence and hate-speech have not been treated with equal attention in all Member States, compromising the citizens' trust to the Rule of Law;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Commission’s first Rule of Law Report (2020 report) is limitextended in scope, as it does not covercovers more than just rule of law as one of all Union values as provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; whereas the notion of the rule of law has different and distinct manifestations in the Member States and there is no definition of it at the EU level;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed the importance of strengthening independent journalism and access to pluralistic information as key enablers of rule of law and democratic accountability able to provide citizens with fact-checked information, thereby contributing to the fight against disinformation; deplores the fact that in a number of Member States, journalists have increasingly faced physical threats and online harassment, especially female journalists;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Deplores that in a number of Member States the governments have classified information on public procurement during the Covid19 pandemic which increased the risk of corruption for authorities and mistrust among citizens; calls on these Member States to reverse these abusive measures and provide full transparency in relation to journalists and citizens;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Notes with concern that the contracts signed by the European Commission with Covid19 vaccine companies have clauses that have not been made public yet; emphasizes that any official acts or contracts adopted or signed by the European entities or Member States that concern the health of European citizens must be public in its entirety;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. Whereas there have been complaints from NGOs and professional associations of magistrates about the objectivity of the 2020 Rule of Law Report and the sources of information chosen by the Commission for the report;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the Court of Justice of the European Union recently ruled2 that civil society organisations must be able to operate without unjustified interference by the state, acknowledging that the right to freedom of association constitutes one of the essential bases of a democratic and pluralist society; is seriously concerned that some NGOs active in the area of migration and LGBTI+ rights are subject to smear campaigns, and facedisregard national seovere restriction of the civic spaceignty wherever they can operate. _________________ 2Judgment of 18 June 2020, Commission v Hungary, C-78/18, EU:C:2020:476, paragraphs 112 and 113.
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the Court of Justice of the European Union recently ruled2 that civil society organisations must be able to operate without unjustified interference by the state, acknowledging that the right to freedom of association constitutes one of the essential bases of a democratic and pluralist society; is seriously concerned that some NGOs active in the area of migration and LGBTI+ rights are subject to smear campaigns, and face severe restriction of the civic space where they can operate. _________________ 2Judgment of 18 June 2020, Commission v Hungary, C-78/18, EU:C:2020:476, paragraphs 112 and 113.
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas the Covid-19 pandemic was used as an excuse by Member States to implement many non-transparent, non- democratic and even abusive measures at the expense of citizens' fundamental and democratic rights like the right to free movement, access to justice, access to public information, privacy etc.;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that in order to prevent foreign interference in the sovereignty of Member States democracies and meddling with the EU democratic institutions, the NGOs must make public their funding sources; underlines that, in order to respect the transparency principle and the right to know of the European citizens, all European bodies must disclose and publish a list of all the NGOs that they finance and with what amounts.
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the Commission’s first annual Rule of Law Report as part of the wider European rule of law monitoring and enforcement architecture, as it adds an important, potentially preventive tool to the Union’s rule of law toolbox;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls to the Commission's attention that when drafting the Rule of Law Report the sovereignty and constitutional order of each and every Member States have to be respected;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the potential preventive benefits of the annual Rule of Law Report; considers that a more thorough evaluation is needed to assess whether the report has had a preventive effect; considers that in any event this is clearly not the case as regards the Member States under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure; believes that the 2020 report should have provided more in-depth assessments, stating whether there is a risk of or actual breach of the Union values; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow- up actions and remedial measures and tools;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the annual reports shcould identify cross-cutting trends at Union level; believes that a Union-wide perspective is absent from the 2020 report; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain practices undermining the rule of law are becoming blueprints for others or when the gravity and scope of such practices have the potential to affect the Union as a whole;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes that the rule of law report does not have the name of the authors who wrote the report; calls on the Commission to be fully transparent about the report and disclaim in the report the name of the authors who wrote it;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomNotes the monitoring of the independence, quality and efficiency of the Member States’ justice systems; considers that the enabling environment to ensure access to justice for all should also be monitored, including access to justice at Union level; considers thatorganization and functioning of state bodies, in particular the judiciary is one of the areports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chaptersas in which the Member States have not transferred competences to the European Union and despite this, the Commission evaluates them;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the monitoring of the independence, quality and efficiency of the Member States’ justice systems; considers that the enabling environment to ensure access to justice for all should also be monitored, including access to justice at Union level; considers that the reports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chapters;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls to the Commission's attention for its following report on rule of law that in many Member States the judiciary has overturned a series of abusive measures implemented under the pretext of combating the spread of the Covid-19 virus; Deplores, at the same time, that in some Member States the judiciary has avoided, under various pretexts, to judge and rule on the legality and proportionality of the anti-Covid-19 measures, leaving citizens exposed to abusive measures;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls to the Commission's attention the ongoing attacks to the Constitutional Courts and Ombudsmen in different Member States; emphases that these are critical institutions to safeguard the rule of law and the fundamental rights of the citizens and must be protected;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Underlines that, in order to safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, the justice system and the judges must be independent, thus protected from any pressure, threat or interference, direct or indirect, from inside or outside the judiciary, including political authorities or intelligence agencies/secret services; 1a 2a _________________ 1aParagraph 22 of Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities (https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_de tails.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805afb78 ) 2aParagraph 27 of CCJE Opinion No. 21 (2018) Preventing corruption among judges (https://rm.coe.int/ccje-2018-3e- avis-21-ccje-2018-prevent-corruption- amongst-judges/native/16808fd8dd )
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is alarmed by the stark deterioration of the independence of some Member States’ justice systems, as reflected in some country chapters; calls on the Commission to clearly assess and designate such shortcomings and findings identified as a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of lawNotes with concern that, apart from the reporting (objective) elements, the report contains evaluative (subjective) elements, without clearly delineating them; rebukes that when assessing similar legal regulations in force in different Member States, the Commission often points to reforms planned in a given area in the Member States, differently assessing solutions designed in some and identical solutions already in use in other Member States;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Decries the fact that the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court of Justice of the EU has been declared unlawful in Member States subject to Article 7 of the TEU; is appalled byCourt of Justice of the EU more and more often goes beyond its Treaty competences and rules ultra vires; supports the growing resistance of some Member States to comply with CJEU rulings on the grounds of sovereignty or unconstitutionality; believes that these developments in the CJEU pose a systemic threat to the existence of the Union; considers, therefore, that forthcoming annual reports should consider challenges from the CJEU's side to the Union’s legal architecture and principles as serious violations in the assessment;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Emphasises that any discussions about sanctions against a Member State must be based solely on objective and technical criteria and not on political evaluations or motivations;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomNotes the dedication of a specific chapter to anti-corruption efforts in each country report; points out that while the existence of national anticorruption strategies can be considered progress, their effectiveness on the ground must also be assessed; notes that an assessment of the resilience of the anti-corruption framework to tackle corruption-related risks in the area of public procurement remains largely absent from the 2020 report; invites the Commission to place greater emphasis on the misuse of EU funds, particularly in view of the new conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomNotes the inclusion in the report of a specific chapter on monitoring media freedom and pluralism; urginvites the Commission to provide an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the national frameworks for the protection of media freedom and media pluralism;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. DeplorNotes the lack of assessment as regards the public media sector at national level and its degree of independence from government or any other interference and an assessment of transparency of media ownership; believes that proper implementation of Article 30 of the 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive19 should be closely monitored; _________________ 19 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69.
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Deplores that in a number of Member States the governments have classified information on public procurement during the Covid-19 pandemic, thus increasing the risk of corruption and mistrust among citizens; calls on these Member States to reverse these abusive measures and provide full transparency for journalists and citizens;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. WelcomNotes the report’s pillar on checks and balances and its examination of exceptional measures taken to fight the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Notes with concern that the contracts signed by the European Commission with the pharma companies developing the anti-Covid-19 vaccines have sections and provisions which have not been made public yet; emphasizes that any official acts or contracts adopted or signed by the European entities or Member States that concern the health of European citizens must be public in their entirety;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Encourages the Commission to consider including within the scope of future reports the application of all rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights; sStresses that any action taken by a Member State when acting within the scope of EU law must respect the rights and principles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Restates that, in order to avoid duplication with the rule of law report, the Verification and Cooperation Mechanisms for Romania and Bulgaria must be lifted;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. WelcomNotes the Commission’s announcement of its strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; believes that such an annual review should provide input for a comprehensive monitoring mechanism and that its methodology, cycle and scope should therefore be aligned with the annual reports;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that civil societythe Member States are key partners to identify rule of law violations and promote democracy and fundamental rights in countries where Union values have been eroded; considers that shadow reporting would bolster the efficiency and transparency of the processand therefore should hold a means of wielding influence on the reports’ final content; calls on the Commission to provide that each Member State, after the report has been prepared but before it has been published, have the opportunity to read it and raise objections or comments and the right of final acceptance of that part of the report that relates to themselves and any non- acceptance or dissent, as the case may be, should be indicated directly in the report;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Stresses that, in order to prevent foreign interference in the Member States' democracies and sovereignty as well as meddling with the EU democratic institutions, the NGOs must make public their funding sources; underlines that, in order to respect the transparency principle and the right to know of the European citizens, all European bodies must disclose and publish a list with all the NGOs they finance;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make mRecognises the leandingful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes that the Council’s hesitance to apply Article 7 of the TEU effectively is enabling continued divergence from the values provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; calls for a reflection at the Conference on the Future of Europe on a revision of the Article 7 TEU procedure in order to realign the majority requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 with a view to having super-majorities of four or five for both role of the Council in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes that the Council’s hesitance to apply Article 7 of the TEU effectively is enabling continued divergence from the values provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; calls for a reflection at the Conference on the Future of Europe on a revision of the Article 7 TEU procedure in order to realign the majority requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 with a view to having super-majorities of four or five for both procedures;
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. ReiteratStresses that the annual report should not serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate the procedure provided for in Article 7 of the TEU, whether to activate the Rule of Law Framework or whether to launch infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments concerning the protection of Union values;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls for the Commission to useStresses that the findings of the annual report in its assessment that forms the basis of the mechanism to protect the budget against breaches of the principle of the rule of law; reiterates its call on the Commission to dedicate a specific section of the annual report to an analysis of cases where breacheshould not constitute the basis for further assessments, findings or formulation of recommendations concerning individual Member States, made in areas of the principles ofr than the rule of law in a particular Member State could affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget in a sufficiently direct wa, e.g. in the field of economic and fiscal policy;
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the Commission to assessinform in successive reports how the issues identified in the areas analysed in previous reports have evolved;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29