Activities of Jorge BUXADÉ VILLALBA related to 2020/2143(DEC)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2019, Section IV – Court of Justice
Amendments (5)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the average length of proceedings before the Court of Justice decreased in 2019 (14.4 months as against 15.7 months in 2018) and that the average length of proceedings before the General Court fell markedly (16.9 months as against 20 months in 2018); observes, however, that the figure for the General Court is still higher than in 2017 (16.4 months) and considers that it should give priority to the most important cases and reach its judgments more rapidly;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the fact that the proportion of women in managerial posts – 39 % in 2019 – has continued to increaNotes that women occupied 39% of managerial posts in 2019 compared with 37.5% in 2018; points out that the best candidate for a position should always be chosen, and encourages the Court of Justice to continue the process by actively promoting gender parity in the appointment of judgregardless of gender or race, as only their previous experience, their CV and their suitability for the position should be considered; expresses its concern about the interference of ideology in staff selection, bearing in mind also that the public wants the highest judicial instance to be made up of the best possible professionals regardless of their physical attributes.;
Amendment 14 #
10a. Considers it worrying that judgments of the Court have been misinterpreted by other Community bodies, especially as regards the scope of their application beyond the individual concerned;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Regrets that the Court has not seen fit to take the initiative in clarifying its own judgments and the implementation thereof, especially in cases where this has made it possible to alter the composition of the EU institutions; believes that the Court should assess the consequences of misinterpretations of its judgments by third parties and even consider clarifying them in order to avoid dubious interpretations that could undermine the prestige of an institution such as the European Parliament;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)