BETA

Activities of Franco ROBERTI related to 2020/2027(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on the liability of companies for environmental damage
2021/04/06
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2020/2027(INI)
Documents: PDF(265 KB) DOC(124 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Antonius MANDERS', 'mepid': 4560}]

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on liability of companies for environmental damage
2020/12/21
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2020/2027(INI)
Documents: PDF(136 KB) DOC(75 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Saskia BRICMONT', 'mepid': 197470}]

Legal basis opinions (0)

Amendments (53)

Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the EU’s coordinated environmental strategy encourages cooperation and ensures that EU policies are consistent with each other; whereas the European Green Deal sets the ambition of zero-pollution, to be delivered through a cross cutting strategy to protect citizens’ health from environmental degradation and pollution while at the same time calls for a just transition that leaves nobody behind;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas ensuring the liability for environmental damage is key to making European businesses more sustainable over the long term; whereas such an achievement is closely interlinked through the development of related legislation on corporate due diligence, corporate social accountability and sustainable corporate governance;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas environmental damage, chemicals and climate change cause significant risks to human health from air, soil and water pollution; whereas environmental monitoring data reveals that substantial proportions of the Union’s urban population remain exposed to levels of noise and air pollution that exceed WHO based guidance;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas ex-post liability rules complement ex-ante safety regulation and market-based instrument (such as environmental taxation) aiming at the reduction of environmental harm in order to fulfil the objectives of prevention and compensation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. Whereas the current regime for environmental liability, by not encompassing diffuse pollution by companies whose activities result in the production, use or release of hazardous chemicals, nanoplastics, pesticides, CO2 and other greenhouse gases emissions, is not adequate to fully ensure a high level of protection of the environment;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
B c. Whereas there is an increasing number of cases where victims of pollution caused by subsidiaries of European companies try to bring environmental liability lawsuits against parent companies before courts in the EU;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the ELD established ‘a framework of environmental liability based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, to prevent and remedy environmental damage; whereas the ELD complements main pieces of EU environmental legislation, to which it is directly or indirectly linked, in particular the Habitat Directive9 , the Birds Directive10 , the Water Framework Directive11 , the Marine Strategy Framework Directive12 and the Offshore Safety Directive13 ; _________________ 10Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7. 11Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 12Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 13Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66. 9Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the ELD, which established a framework of environmental liability based on the Polluter-Pays principle to prevent and remediate environmental damage, complements main pieces of EU environmental legislation, to which it is directly or indirectly linked, in particular the Habitat Directive9 , the Birds Directive10 , the Water Framework Directive11 , the Marine Strategy Framework Directive12 and the Offshore Safety Directive13 ; _________________ 9Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. 10Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7. 11Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 12Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 13Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas it appears that the majority of Member States do not provide for mandatory financial security instruments in their legislation, but several countries do require them15 ; whereas, where implemented, these instruments seem to have proved their worth, showing the interest of an harmonised mandatory financial security regime at EU level; _________________ 15 Directorate-General for Environment, Outcome of the Specific Contract 'Support for the REFIT actions for the ELD – phase 2', European Commission, Brussels, 2019, p. 17.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas although sufficient insurance cover is available in most markets, including for complementary and compensatory remediation, demand is generally low due to a lack of reported incidents, sub-optimal enforcement and slower developments in emerging markets16 ; ; whereas this as such does not form an obstacle to introducing mandatory financial guarantees; _________________ 16REFIT Evaluation of the Environmental Liability Directive, p. 47.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas operator insolvency as a consequence of major accidents remains a problem in the EU, thereby resulting in the disregard for the “’polluter pays’ principle;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
H a. Whereas the impact of environmental damages and crimes adversely affects not only biodiversity and the climate system but also human rights and notably human health; whereas there is a need for a comprehensive review that considers the risks of the transboundary nature of environmental damage, serious organised crime and corruption together with the risks to human rights and the environment;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to assess and bridge gaps in the implementation of the ELD and the ECD across the Member States;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. ObservesPoints out that the discretionary powers set out in the ELD, the lack of awareness and information about the ELD, insufficient resources and expertise and the weak mechanisms for securing compliance and effective governance at national, regional and local level have led to implementation deficiencies, considerable variability between Member States in the number of cases, and an uneven playing field for operators; is therefore of the opinion that additional efforts are required to ensure regulatory standardisation in the EU and increased public confidence in the effectiveness of EU laws;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that in many Member States, the budgets of environmental inspectorates have stagnated or decreased due to the financial crisis and that even large, well-resourced authorities can find it difficult to independently develop knowledge of the best ways to ensure compliance; is thus of the opinion that stronger support at EU level is needed and, therefore, calls on the Commission to support Member States in the development of tools for operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers, for example through accessible information portals, commonly used networks (EU networks for practitioners), best practice information and guidance, additional training programmes, training materials and guidance on skills, as this could increase the pressure on ‘black sheep’ companies and, benefit companies that respect the law and would enable stakeholders, operators and the public to become more aware of the existence of the ELD regime and its enforcement and thus contribute to better prevention and remediation of environmental damages;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Regrets that environmental crime is one of the most prevalent criminal activities in the world, benefiting from low detection probability, low prosecution rates and low penalties for environmental damages; calls on the Member States to increase the level of expertise of prosecutors and judges in environmental crimes and its effects, with a view to more efficiently prosecuting environmental crime; calls on Member States to set up or reinforce specialised units within their national police services at the appropriate levels for the investigation of environmental offences and to provide them with sufficient human, financial and technical resources, with a view to reinforcing their inspection and enforcement capacity in combating environmental crime;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to allocate the appropriate financial and human resources to prevent, investigate, prosecute and to ensure appropriate environmental crisis management procedures at both national and transnational levels;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that one of the various causes of the insufficient harmonisation of the ELD is the failure to provide for the application of a standard administrative procedure for notifying competent authorities of imminent threats of or actual environmental damage; regrets therefore that there is no obligation to publish such notifications or information about how cases are dealt with; notes that some Member States have identified this limitation in their national legislation and have consequently set up databases for notifications, incidents and cases; points out, however, that the practice varies greatly from Member State to Member State and is rather limited; stresses that, the revised ELD should ensure that entities operating in the public interest, including NGOs and affected communities, have a full access to information and data and can play an effective role in commencing and pursuing environmental liability actions in the EU;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Points outreiterates that reliable data on environmental incidents giving rise to the application of the ELD or other administrative, civil or criminal instruments should be collected and should be made public in order to establish whether a combination of different legal instruments could adequately respond to environmental harm, or whether serious gaps still exist that need to be remedied; asks for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD and calls the Commission and all the Member States to develop public available databases for reporting on ELD cases in order to create better trust in the ELD system and better implementation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the ELD to be revised as soon as possible and to be transformed into a fully harmonised regulation in order to achieve a level playing field for EU industry; emphasises that EU rules for liability of companies for environmental damage are currently not providing a level playing field , thereby distorting the proper functioning of the EU’s internal market;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the opinion that enforcement should be harmonised and that an EU ELD task force made up of highly qualified experts and Commission officials should be created to support the Member States, upon request, with the implementation and enforcement of the directive on the one hand, and to support and advise victims of environmental damage on the available options for legal action at EU level on the other (comparable to SOLVIT); further calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of establishing an EU-based agency vested with monitoring and enforcement powers, in order to enhance legal certainty for operators, enhance uniform implementation of the EU environmental liability regime and deter incorrect application thereof across Member States;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Stresses the need to improve access to justice for victims of environmental harm, including through collective actions, representative actions and redress mechanisms; stresses that barriers to access to remedies should be lifted, including insufficient court powers to order effective redress; recognizes the importance of the reversal of the burden of proof as a necessary precondition for effective remedies in case of diffuse environmental damage; emphasises the key role of environmental NGOs in raising awareness and taking legal actions to ensure the respect of environmental laws; accordingly, stresses the need to improve access to justice for NGOs, notably in case of widespread pollution, including by removing litigation barriers to initiate legal actions, in particular related to legal standing and costs of litigation; further considers that, in order to generally improve access to justice, regulations prohibiting lawyers to charge result-based fees should be abrogated, victims of environmental corporate abuse should be given priority in bankruptcy proceedings, and third party funding of litigation should be allowed;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Stresses that the objective of reaching effective accountability for environmental damage can be significantly undermined when public participation is threatened by companies’ recourse to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and other abusive legal claims; calls on the Commission to introduce additional preventive measures, procedural safeguards and exemplary sanctions against companies bringing abusive lawsuits aimed at deterring public participation and intimidating victims in the context of environmental damage;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9 c. Considers that the environmental liability framework should provide effective mediation and remedies to victims of environmental damage and associated human rights violations, including operational-level grievance mechanisms; believes that special protections should be provided to indigenous peoples, environmental whistle-blowers, and human rights defenders; also stresses that protection should in any event be granted to individuals obliged to leave their habitual home due, in whole or in part, to sudden or progressive business-induced environmental damages that adversely affect their life or living conditions;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9 e. Considers that the framework should oblige companies to have an effective environmental reporting mechanism that should be transparent, accessible and trustworthy; Reiterates in this regard the need to strengthen standards in terms of mandatory disclosure of information by undertakings in the remit of the revision of Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on non-financial reporting, notably by including an enforcement and sanctioning mechanism to support the reporting requirements;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 f (new)
9 f. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to set up protection and support schemes for the victims of environmental damage and to ensure their full access to justice, information and compensation; emphasises the key role of environmental NGOs in raising awareness, representing the victims’ interests, and taking legal action; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide them with the appropriate financial support;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that most definitions in the ELD should be further clarified and broaden, to make the directive fair and clear to all stakeholders, such as operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers and to keep pace with the rapid evolution of pollutants; welcomes therefore the current efforts to develop a common understanding document (CUD) on key ELD definitions and concepts; regrets, however, that the Commission and the ELD government expert groups did not reach an agreement on its format, meaning that the CUD remains a document produced by the consultancy which was hired by the Commission to support the implementation of the 2017-2020 Multi- annual ELD Work Programme;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Points out that the different interpretations and application of the “significance threshold” for environmental damage has been identified as a main reason for the uneven application of the ELD; calls, therefore, for a more consistent application and better clarification and guidance of the threshold of “significant damage” in the context of the ELD; calls for the clarification and harmonisation of the “significant” damage to biodiversity threshold and the criteria for its definition, and the alignment of the environmental liability regime to the Habitats Directive Article 6(2);
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Further considers that diffuse form of pollution should also be effectively incorporated in a comprehensive revision of the liability framework; stresses in particular that companies and their subsidiaries whose activities notably result in the production, use or release of hazardous chemicals, nano-plastics, pesticides, CO2 and other greenhouse gases emissions, should also be held liable; further stresses that causality requirements should not constitute a hurdle to recognise liability in case of diffuse or cumulative damage, such as climate change or biodiversity loss; consequently calls on the Commission to make sure that the scope of its future proposal of Environmental Liability Regulation and ECD also covers diffuse forms of pollution or to propose a rapidly needed new legislation to establish a liability regime for diffuse pollution, consistently with the Polluter-Pays principle;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. AskCalls the Commission to undertake a study to establish whether extending the scope of the ELD to align it with other pieces of EU legislation, including the ECD, could limit short- and long-term damage to the environment, human health and air qualityextend the scope of the ELD strict liability to non- Annex III activities to cover all environmental damage, as well as to human health, such as air pollution by cars violating EU car emissions legislation so as to improve the effectiveness of the legislation in implementing the ‘polluter pays’ principle; considers that such extension of scope would streamline the ELD with other pieces of EU legislation on protecting human health and environment, including the ECD, and would facilitate adding provisions to the ELD, such as including a requirement to carry out preventive measures and emergency remedial action, either in the directive itself or in national law implementing it; asks the Commission, furthermore, to assess wthether the precautionary principle approach properly presupposes potentially dangerous risks or effects; potential damage that the so-called industry-led ‘innovation principle’ can have on the short and long term, and the danger it poses to the established precautionary principle and its ability to limit liability in environmental damage;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes that the activities listed in Annex III do not sufficiently cover the sectors that could potentially give rise to environmental damage; points out that there are activities with potential negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment, such as the pipeline of transport of hazardous substances outside of industrial establishments covered by Annex III, mining, the introduction of invasive alien species and shale gas operations, that are currently not covered by the requirement for strict liability;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11 d. Notes that in Article 1 ELD, the framework of environmental liabilityshould be broadened to include environmental rehabilitation and ecological restoration to the baseline condition after occupational activities have ended, even when environmental damage is caused by activities or emissions expressly authorised by the competent authorities;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 g (new)
11 g. Stresses that pure environmental damage should entail administrative, civil and criminal liability of responsible companies; also stresses that those forms of liability coexist with other liability regimes in business law, such as consumer law or competition law, which can also be triggered by some companies’ conducts resulting in environmental damage;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 j (new)
11 j. Calls on the Commission to take action, including legal action where applicable, to ensure that the lengthy procedures in Member States deciding on liability for environmental burdens do not jeopardise the objective of high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment as enshrined in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 m (new)
11 m. Calls on the Commission to harmonise and considerably strengthen the level of criminal sanctions imposed under the ECD by recognizing environmental crimes as intrinsically linked with money laundering, corruption or other types of organised crimes as defined in art 83(1) TFUE; considers in particular that a provision linking the amount of the fine to the profit made or losses avoided as a result of the offence and/or the extent of environmental damage or cost of remediation should be included, and that the level of fines should be linked to the annual turnover or take the financial situation of the legal persons into account; considers that these sanctions should also be accompanied by the removal of illegal gains; further believes that aggravating circumstances, such as objective links with organised crime, should be taken into account;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to assess whether it would be appropriate to introduceintroduce a secondary liability regime, that is parental and chain liability for damage caused to human health and the environment20 ; _________________ 20See, for instance, Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 September 2009, Akzo Nobel NV and Others v Commission of the European Communities, C-97/08 B, ECLI:EU:C:2009:536.
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. believes that Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) and Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER) could play a complementary role to environmental liability, as duly compliance with CSR and CER can reduce the likelihood of environmental harm; considers important in this sense that these commitments should be connected to mandatory obligations towards sustainable value creation, including the enforcing of non-financial reporting obligations;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. considers that a new legislation is urgently needed in order to establish clear, robust and enforceable cross- sectoral requirements on business enterprises to respect human rights, good governance and the environment and to carry out due diligence; stresses that such legislation should follow a cross- commodity approach, apply to all economic sectors in the supply chain, including the financial sector, both upstream and downstream, be accompanied by a robust reporting, disclosure and enforcement mechanism, including effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions for non-compliance;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the opinion that the optional permit and Calls for the revised environmental liability regime to restrict the scope of application of the ‘permit defence’ and the ‘state- of- the art defences should only be maintained when a company can prove that it could not have known about the danger of its activity (reversed burden of proof)’ under the ELD, also through a reversal of the burden of proof upon moderators, in order to promote the ‘polluter pays’ principle while improving the effectiveness of same environmental liability regime;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. AsksCalls on the Commission to look into the possibility of introducinge a mandatory financial security system (covering insurance, bank guarantees, company pools and bonds or funds) with a maximum threshold per case, aiming to prevent taxpayers from having to bear the costs resulting from remediation of environmental damage; asks the Commission, in addition, to develop a harmonised EU methodology for calculating the maximum liability threshold, taking into account the activity and the impact on the environmenthighlights that insurance cannot be designed to limit liability, but only to address costs of clean-up;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Calls on the Commission to include in its legislative proposal revising the ELD regime a fund for ELD liabilities at EU or national level; also calls on the Commission to study the possibility of using this fund as a basis for a renewed regime for socio-environmental protection;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Reiterates that according to the ELD, persons adversely affected by environmental damage should be entitled to ask the competent authorities to take action; believes in this regard that a compensatory collective redress mechanism should be available to any individual or organisation that has suffered due to environmental damage or impairment of right within the scope of the ELD;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Welcomes the Commission legislative proposal amending the Aarhus Regulation1367/2006 (COM(2020) 642 final) to allow for better public scrutiny of EU acts affecting the environment; taking into account that the European law stipulates that European citizens should be guaranteed effective and timely access to justice(Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Regulation, Article 6 TEU and relevant provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights) and that the costs of the environmental harm should be borne by the polluter (Article 191TFEU), calls on the Council in its capacity as a co-legislator for the effective implementation of the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention to guarantee access to courts for natural persons and NGOs for representative action to directly file a lawsuit against an operator potentially liable for environmental harm;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that in cases of extremely widespread pollution, not just environmental liability instruments, but a multitude of instruments, including administrative measures, financial penalties and in some cases criminal prosecution, should be applied to remedy the problem; notes that criminal penalties alone are often ineffective as they may lead to large dismissals of environmental cases especially in Member States where there is no criminal liability of the corporate entity; also notes that in many Member States administrative financial penalties are increasingly used; calls therefore on the Commission to facilitate, and on Member States to use, administrative fines as a complementary tool alongside criminal sanctions;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Considers in particular that in cases of serious diffuse pollution and of large-scale incidents, the strict liability of the responsible company should be established and result in sanctions which may include temporary or definitive closure of the responsible company or its premises, and may entail the directors’ and board members’ personal liability;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Calls for the scope of the ECD to be reviewed to ensure that it covers all relevant environmental legislation taking into account new types and patterns of environmental crime, including illegal logging and timber trade, illegal fishing, human-made fires and carbon credit fraud and all activities that contribute to cover-up environmental crimes;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Calls for minimum rules under the ECD with regard to the definition of sanctions and on the Commission to issue guidance on what constitutes effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions and a uniform application of sanctions in the EU and minimum standards for national authorities on the frequency and quality of checks on operators; the ECD should include requirements for Member States on data collection, publication and reporting, while using synergies with existing reporting obligations for Member States under the EU sectoral legislation listed in the annexes to the Directive;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Deplores the lack of effective implementation and enforcement of EU acts that aim to establish the criminal liability of legal persons for environmental offences and remediate environmental damages resulting therefrom; Recalls that there are cases of public institutions or state enterprises responsible for action infringing the environmental legislation which could constitute criminal offence; Calls on the Member States to effectively apply the provision on criminal prosecution of the respective private persons acting in the name of a legal entity;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Calls for further clarification and guidance on the interpretation of some legal terms of the ECD, such as “substantial damage”, “non-negligible quantity”, “negligible quantity” and “negligible impact”, “dangerous activity” and “significant deterioration” to ensure consistent application in individual Member States and facilitate cross-border cooperation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of a legislative proposal for the crime of ecocide and calls on the EU and Member States to work in order to extend the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to the ecocide as well; this extension would make it possible to recognize that large- scale environmental crimes are comparable to voluntary violations of human rights or to outright warlike actions;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of establishing a European Environmental Criminal Court with powers similar to those of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which enforces the 'polluter pays' principle, including compensation for victims;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 e (new)
18 e. Stresses the importance of independent auditors to ensure that businesses behave in an environmentally sustainable way; calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage European companies to regularly conduct independent environmental audits; suggests that Recommendation 2001/331 which provides in detail how environmental inspections should be conducted should be transposed into a binding document or regulation;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 f (new)
18 f. Considers that companies convicted for environmental crimes should not been allowed to benefit from any of the measures foreseen for registrants into the transparency register; suggests, to this end, to revise the scope and the code of conduct of the transparency register in order to include provisions on the removal of companies convicted for environmental crimes;
2020/12/18
Committee: JURI