12 Amendments of Konstantinos ARVANITIS related to 2017/0360R(NLE)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 3 May 2018 on media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union,
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its deep concern that, despite three hearings of Poland having been held in the Council, alarming reports by the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and four infringements procedures launched by the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU; is of the opinion that discussions in the Council under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure have been neither regular nor structured, and have failed to address the substantial issues that warranted the procedure’s activation and to fully grasp the impact that the Polish government’s action is having on all Article 2 TEU principles;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Commission’s reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017 in accordance with Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding the rule of law in Poland: proposal for a Council decision on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law[16] has a limited scope, namely the rule of law situation in Poland in the strict sense of independence of the judiciary; sees an urgent need to widen the scope of the reasoned proposal by including clear risks of serious breaches of other basic valuescalls on the Commission and the Council to refrain from narrowly interpreting the rule of law principle, and to use the Article 7(1) of the TEU procedure to its full potential, namely to address the implications of the Polish government’s action for all the principles enshrined in Article 2 of the UnionTEU, especially democracy and respect for human rights;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (DRF) as put forward by Parliament in its resolution of 25 October 2016; recalls that if the Commission and Council continue to reject the establishment of a Pact for DRF, Parliament could take the initiative to launch a pilot DRF report and an interparliamentary debate;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Reiterates that media freedom and pluralism is inseparable from democracy and the rule of law and that the right to inform and the right to be informed are part of the core basic democratic values on which European Union is founded;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Is deeply concerned by the excessive use of libel cases by some politicians against journalists, including by sentencing with criminal fines and suspension from exercising the profession of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on the profession and independence of journalists and media46 ; calls on the Polish authorities to set up an independent and impartial regulatory body, in cooperation with journalists’ organisations, for monitoring, documenting and reporting on attacks against journalists as well as on lawsuits intended to silence or intimidate independent media and to guarantee access to the appropriate legal remedies; calls on the Polish authorities to fully implement Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors; _________________ 46Council of Europe Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March 2020, p. 42.
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
Paragraph 42 a (new)
42a. Stresses that age-appropriate and evidence-based comprehensive sexuality education is key to building young peoples’ skills to form healthy, equal, nurturing and safe relationships, free from discrimination, coercion and violence; believes that comprehensive sexuality education also has a positive impact on gender equality outcomes, including transforming harmful gender norms and attitudes towards gender-based violence, helping prevent intimate partner violence and sexual coercion, homophobia and transphobia, breaking the silence around sexual violence, sexual exploitation or abuse, and empowering young people to seek help; urges Poland to ensure access to scientifically accurate and comprehensive sexuality education for all primary and secondary school children in line with WHO standards;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, thereby virtually banning access to abortion care in Poland as most legal abortions are performed under this ground, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; _________________ 52See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. Stresses that women who decide to end a pregnancy either travel to another country to obtain safe and legal abortion services or undergo potentially unsafe procedures at home and might risk their lives during these procedures; reaffirms that the denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights services, including safe and legal abortion, is a form of violence against women and girls;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46a. Recalls its position outlined in its resolution of 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones, and condemns the law suits against the civil society activists who published the so called “Atlas of Hate” that documents the spread of homophobia in Poland, and rejects the way the current legal framework and courts and these lawsuits are being used to silence LGBTI activists and prevent them from exercising their right to free speech;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Calls upon the Council to resume the formal hearings on the situation in Poland - the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those hearings all the latest and major negative developments in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved, as well as to allow for a meaningful participation of civil society organisations in the matter;
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the Commission to continue to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved; also calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools mentioned and to consider further measures in the event of a repeated threat to the principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU by a Member State;