BETA

896 Amendments of Alviina ALAMETSÄ

Amendment 2 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to the 2022 United Nations Universal Periodic Review of India,
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 7 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the EU and India intend to convene at leaders’ meeting in New Delhi, notably to reaffirm the commitments of both sides to their strategic partnership and to take stock of the implementation of the EU-India Roadmap 2025;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas in 2022, the EU and India marked the 60th anniversary of their bilateral partnership; whereas this partnership has gained momentum in recent years but has not yet reached its full potential; whereas both India and the EU will hold elections in 2024;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas bilateral and multilateral cooperation with India is placed against the backdrop of a polycrisis, including democratic backsliding worldwide, a spiralling climate crisis, heightened inequalities and increasing great power competition; whereas this partnership has therefore the potential to positively contribute to global and regional stability and the upholding of a rules-based multilateral order;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas India’s growing regional and global importance is reflected by its G20 Presidency in 2023 and its membership of the UN Security Council in 2021-2022 and of the UN Human Rights Council in 2022-2024;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the EU’s Strategy for Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific of 2021 emphasised partnerships and cooperation to respond to geopolitical competition in the Indo-Pacific, and identified cooperation with India as one of the EU priorities in the region; whereas the interests of the EU and India in the Indo- Pacific converge in keeping the region open, free and safe; whereas the EU and India share a common interest in de- risking the relationship with China and positioning themselves jointly towards the latter’s increasing influence in the Indo- Pacific and globally;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 31 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas EU and Indian leadership is needed to promote effective climate diplomacy, a global commitment to the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the global protection of the climate, the environment and biodiversity;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas local and international human rights monitors report that human rights defenders and journalists in India are subjected to harassment, arbitrary detention, serious criminal charges under repressive legislation (including counter- terrorism legislation), and other forms of reprisals for their work; whereas, despite being prohibited, caste-based discrimination remains a systemic problem in India;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 33 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) continue to broaden and deepen EU-India relations as strategic partners and to uphold the commitment to regular multi-level dialogues, including summits ; pursue a ‘Team Europe’ approach to the partnership;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 35 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) make tangible advances on priority issues of the partnership, notably climate change and green growth, digitalisation and new technologies, connectivity, trade and investment, foreign, security and defence policy and human rights and the rule of law;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 39 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) continue to promote and fully implement the EU Strategy on India of 2018 and the EU-India Roadmap to 2025 in close coordination with Member States’ own actions to engage with India; establish clear and public criteria for measuring progress on the roadmap;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 41 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) based on the review of the implementation of the EU-India Roadmap 2025, start preparations for an ambitious, multifaceted and revamped partnership thereafter;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 43 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) enable parliamentary oversight of the EU’s policy towards India through regular exchanges with its Committee on Foreign Affairs, its Subcommittee on Human Rights and other relevant committees;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) take creative steps to establish, finally, a more structured and multi-level inter-parliamentary dialogue between the European Parliament and its Indian counterparts;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 46 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d
(d) ensure the active and regular consultation and involvement of EU and Indian civil society representatives in the development, implementation and monitoring of EU-India relations; secure, as a matter of priority, the establishment of an EU-India Civil Society Platform for that purpose and of an EU-India Youth Summit as a side event at future EU-India summits, in order to strengthen relations between the younger generations;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) increase the EU’s public diplomacy efforts to improve mutual understanding among the EU, its Member States and India and substantially enhance the framework for people to people exchanges;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 53 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) further enhance the growing cooperation in foreign and security policy through the existing dialogue mechanisms; recognise that the first EU- India security and defence consultation is a sign of increasing importance of security cooperation as part of the partnership;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) hold the bilateral security dialogues on an annual basis, and with greater involvement of EU Member Statesdraw on the posting of the first military attaché in the EU delegation in New Delhi to facilitate closer military-to- military cooperation; hold the bilateral security dialogues on an annual basis, and with greater involvement of EU Member States, in order to strengthen the policy dialogue and produce tangible results through the effective buy-in of Member States; ensure, as well, that this increasingly prominent component of the partnership effectively promotes shared security, stability and peaceful development in the Indo-Pacific region;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 70 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g
(g) expand EU-India cooperation on maritime security as an area of considerable potential, also encouraged by the shared interest to counterbalance China’s expanding presence in the Indo- Pacific; follow-up on the first EU-India naval exercises in June 2021 in the Gulf of Aden, demonstrating commitment to security cooperation;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 76 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) continue the EU-India consultations on disarmament and non- proliferation, and encourage India to join EU efforts to promote nuclear safety and non-proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons in the region;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) build on the EU’s first ever space strategy for security and defence, and India’s increasing focus on space security, by taking a joint initiative to encourage partners to promote multilateral solutions to the peaceful use of space, and safe, secure and sustainable access to space, and to counter the risks of its increasing militarisation;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 81 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
(gc) advance on the plans to strengthen police cooperation, bearing in mind that such cooperation should be accompanied by high-level data protection safeguards and guarantees of lawfulness for data transfers, including an adequacy decision taken by the Commission;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 84 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point h
(h) coordinate positions and initiatives in multilateral fora, in particular the UN, the World Trade Organization and G20, by pushing for joint objectives based on shared international values and standards and effectively aligning positions in defence of human rights, multilateralism and an inclusive, rules-based international order; engage in discussions on a reform of the UN Security Council and working methods and support India’s bid for permanent membership of a reformed UN Security Council;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 89 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i
(i) urge India to join the international condemnation of Russia’s illegal war against Ukraine, while maintaining its political line of aiming for an end to hostilities and the resumption of diplomacy and dialogue; engage with India on its continued purchases of crude oil from Russia at low prices and its subsequent sale of refined products on international markets, including in the EU; press EU- based businesses to cease purchasing such products, which constitute in essence a circumvention of EU sanctions against Russia;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 96 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j
(j) underline that ensuring that a free and open, rules-based order comprising freedom of navigation, open and secure sea lines of communication, enhanced security of shipping and more robust response systems for natural disasters and non- traditional security threats should remain a priority for both partners; respond positively to the Indian proposal to the EU to join the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 99 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k
(k) continue to monitor closely the worrying situation in Indian-administered Kashmir, in particular the respect for the fundamental freedoms of the Kashmiri people; remain committed to supporting stability and de-escalation between India and Pakistan; promote the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions and the recommendations made by the reports of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Kashmir;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 105 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point l
(l) monitor closely the fragile situation around the unresolved border dispute between India and China, two nuclear powers , which has the potential to affect the wider security landscape in South Asia; underscore to the parties concerned the critical importance of resolving the issue peacefully through dialogue; in this regard, welcome recent talks between the leaders and the agreement to intensify efforts to disengage and de-escalate tensions along the border;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 114 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point m
(m) effectively enshrine human rights and democratic values at the heart of the EU’s engagement with India with the aim of a constructive and results-based dialogue, including on the range of shortcomings in these areas; develop a strategy and plan of action to address these issues, and to integrate them across the wider EU-India partnership;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 120 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n
(n) continue to express concern about India’s Citizenship Amendment Act, which, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, is fundamentally discriminatory in nature against Muslims and dangerously divisive; encourage India to guarantee the right to freely practice the religion of one’s choice enshrined in Article 25 of its constitution; counter and condemn hate speech;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 126 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o
(o) insist that India, as a founding member of the United Nations and a current member of the UN Human Rights Council, should act on all the recommendations in its Universal Periodic Review process, including to accept and facilitate the visits of and cooperate closely with UN special procedures, most of which have to date not been allowed to visit the country since 1999;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 128 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point p
(p) address the human rights situation of and challenges faced by civil society, including at the highest level of the partnership, concerns about the situation of human rights and civil society, with reference to mutual treaty obligations under various international law instruments, in particular the concerns raised by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN special rapporteurs at all levels of EU dialogue with the Indian authorities;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 130 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point p a (new)
(pa) encourage India to demonstrate its commitment to respect, protect and fully enforce the constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of expression for all, including online, media freedom, the right to peaceful assembly and association, and freedom of religion and belief;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 134 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point q
(q) engage with India in ordercall on India to secure a safe environment for the work of human rights defenders, environmental and, indigenous people and Dalit rights defenders, trade union activists, journalists and other civil society actors;, to cease to invokeing laws against sedition, foreign funding and terrorism as a means to restrict their legitimate activities, including in Indian- administered Kashmir, to release all political prisoners, to stop blanket restrictions of internet access, to review laws in order to avoid their possible misuse to silence dissent and amend laws that foster discrimination, and facilitate access to justice and ensure accountability for human rights violations, to address the harmful effects of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) on civil society organisations; step up EU and Member State support to civil society organisations and human rights defenders, including by facilitating and increasing funding;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 142 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r
(r) welcome the adoption of the Women’s Reservation Bill, which will reserve one third of the seats in national and state parliaments for women and constitutes a notable step forward in advancing the right to participation for women and gender equality in India; engage with India on its efforts to investigate and prevent gender-based violence and discrimination and promote gender equality and women’s empowerment;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 144 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point s
(s) address prevailing caste-based discrimination in India and the granting of rights under the Forest Rights Act to Adivasi communities; adopt in particular a country strategy to help fight caste- based discrimination and to mainstream caste-related perspectives across the EU and Member States partnership with India;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 148 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
(sa) recall the EU’s principled and long-standing rejection of the death penalty and reiterate its plea to India for a death penalty moratorium with a view to the permanent abolition of capital punishment;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 149 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t
(t) welcome India’s adoption of a national action plan on business and human rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and deepen cooperation with India in this area; recall the responsibilities of all companies to respect human rights in their value chains, encourage India to participate actively in the ongoing negotiations of a UN binding treaty regulating business enterprises under international human rights law;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 150 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t a (new)
(ta) ensure that operations of EU- based companies in or with India are strictly in line with relevant EU legislation, including the future directive on Corporate Sustainability and Due Diligence, and the future regulation on Forced Labour; take steps to ensure that all EU-related business activities involving extractive industries include a robust and fair consultative framework, which conforms with the right to free, prior and informed consent of any indigenous peoples impacted;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 151 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t b (new)
(tb) urge India to ratify the UN Convention against Torture and the Optional Protocol thereto, and the UN Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 152 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t c (new)
(tc) encourage India to further support international justice efforts by joining the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC);
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 153 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u
(u) upgrade the EU-India human rights dialogue to a bi-annual, headquarters-level dialogue and strive to make it meaningful through high-level participation and by setting concrete commitments and benchmarks for progress, addressing individual cases in line with the EU guidelines on human rights dialogues; facilitate the holding of an EU- India civil society dialogue ahead of the intergovernmental dialogue; strengthen the linkages between the dialogue and cooperation in multilateral fora; request that the EEAS regularly report to Parliament on the results achieved;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 156 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u a (new)
(ua) insist that any free trade agreement (FTA) with India should be based on a prior, thorough, effective and comprehensive human rights and sustainability impact assessments conducted by both sides, with a particular consideration for the potential impact on the most vulnerable groups; include and consult in a meaningful manner civil society organisations, including trade unions, and human rights defenders at all stages of the negotiations of the FTA; ensure transparency over all stages of the negotiations and regular public reporting on the status of the discussions; act upon the longstanding Parliament’s position as regards the importance of an enforceable and robust Trade and Sustainable Development chapter, aligned with the Paris Agreement, as well as appropriate provisions regarding investors’ rights and duties and human rights;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 158 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u b (new)
(ub) work towards the achievement of common and mutually beneficial objectives in the areas of trade and investment that could contribute to economic growth and innovation while complying with and contributing to respect for human rights, including labour rights, to promote the fight against climate change, and the pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals of the Agenda 2030;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u c (new)
(uc) make best use of India’s commitment to multilateralism and an international rules-based trading order; promote India’s decisive role in the ongoing efforts to reform the World Trade Organization;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 163 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point v
(v) welcome the EU-India Connectivity Partnership and the commitment to supporting sustainable digital, transport and energy networks to the flow goods, services, data and capital and exchange of people, contributing towards the wider EU’s Global Gateway strategy; note that the Connectivity Partnership has become one of the most important aspects of the EU-India partnership; insist on a rigorous assessment of the sustainability and human rights impact of projects funded through the partnership, including their commercial viability and transparency, ensuring a level-playing field for businesses, and respect for human rights, labour rights and environmental standards;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 166 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point w
(w) enhance cooperation on climate and energy issues with India as a key partner in the global fight against climate change and biodiversity degradation, with due regard to their impact on the most vulnerable, and in the green transition towards renewable energy and climate neutrality; recognise that India is providing globally an important example in showing that it is possible to simultaneously combat climate change and pursue a development agenda;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 169 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point w a (new)
(wa) make further progress on the EU- India Clean Energy and Climate Partnership in the areas of renewable energy, energy efficiency and climate change, bearing in mind that India’s energy needs are set to more than double in the next twenty years, with coal remaining as the main energy source; encourage further investment in India in order to provide secure, affordable and sustainable energy, and aiming to achieve its ambitious renewable energy targets; strengthen EU and India civil society voices towards the Partnership; jointly address impacts of Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM);
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 170 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point w b (new)
(wb) encourage joint partnering in promoting an ambitious common agenda and global action on biodiversity, and lead by example on how gender equality and the rights of indigenous communities are prioritised when implementing biodiversity targets; engage with India on the challenges for global commitments on deforestation, rapid urbanisation and industrial development;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 171 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point w c (new)
(wc) welcome India’s leadership and expansion of the Coalition for Disaster Resilient infrastructure, encouraging global investment and coordinated policy towards climate and disaster resilience; welcome that both the EU and EIB are now members of the coalition, contributing therefore to the EU-India Connectivity Partnership and the implementation of the EU Global Gateway Strategy;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 172 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point x
(x) step up engagement with India on health emergencies, pharmaceuticals and digital health innovations that will provide universal health coverage in India, as the largest producer and exporter of generic medicine and an active player in global health in multilateral fora; act upon the commitment to strengthen cooperation on health research and innovation; increase efforts to find a swift solution, without compromising on content, to promote universal access to affordable pharmaceutical products;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 173 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y
(y) welcome the establishment of the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) to provide a permanent structure for dialogue on digital issues; recognise the substantial potential of digital issues in the EU-India partnership such as digital infrastructure and connectivity, digital policy, data protection and flows and cybersecurity; step up cooperation in high performance computing and quantum technologies; acknowledge that in partnership with India, the EU is better placed to advance global standards in the digital sector; note the difference in views of the EU and India on data protection and cross-border data transfers; express concern that India links data protection with its national security, therefore creating an obstacle for the alignment of Indian and European data regulation; encourage, however, to work towards setting shared standards, as a key element of modern, trade and security relations;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 179 #

2023/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point aa
(aa) make progress on a shared commitment not to selectively restrict or ban social media platforms and limit freedom of expression therein, and or impose blanket bans on internet and telecommunications access, while setting joint standards for a digital economy rooted in human rights; express concern with reports related to the use and purchase of spyware by the Indian government;
2023/10/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas civilian crisis management has its basis in the Treaties and the Feira priorities of 2000;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 14 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the EU currently maintains 12 civilian missions in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, and has launched 24 missions in its 20 years of civilian crisis management;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 15 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas the civilian CSDP is a unique instrument for the EU to respond to most urgent crises with civilian means; whereas in the current geopolitical context, a more effective civilian CSDP is urgently needed;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the global political and security landscape, the nature of conflicts, and the environments, in which civilian crisis management operates, have changed considerably in recent years and continue to do so;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 24 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas climate change, environmental degradation, and biodiversity loss severely affect the operational environment of crisis management, and demand increasing attention in the planning and implementation of civilian missions and operations;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 25 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
C c. whereas the EU is committed to putting the Women, Peace, and Security agenda at the centre of its Common Foreign and Security Policy and Member States are committed to promoting better representation of women in CSDP missions, but the civilian CSDP compact (2018) fails to set a concrete target for women’s representation in civilian missions, and makes no reference to gender parity;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 26 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
C d. whereas many conflict affected areas have a large youth population; whereas youth should be actively engaged in creating sustainable peace and security, contributing to conflict prevention and peacebuilding, including the promotion of rule of law, justice, and reconciliation;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
C e. whereas the deteriorating security environment and humanitarian crisis in and around the European Union, has resulted in greater demands on CSDP missions,, thereby putting significant strain on the CFSP budget;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C f (new)
C f. whereas Member States agreed on their first Civilian Headline Goal (CHG) at the 2000 Feira Council and set targets of 5 000 police officers with 1 000 officers on high readiness, able to be deployed within 30 days;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C g (new)
C g. whereas the 2001 Gothenburg Council decided to deploy, by 2003, 200 judges and prosecutors a pool of experts in the area of civilian administration, and civil protection teams of up to 2 000 people, all deployable on very short notice; whereas the 2010 CHG added 285 experts on transitional justice, dialogue, and conflict analysis, and the creation of Civilian Response Teams (CRT), a 100- person strong pool of experts prepared for rapid deployment;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #

2022/2196(INI)

D. whereas the adoption of the Civilian CSDP Compact in 2018 was a significant step forward in strengthening the EU’s civilian crisis management, enhancing Member States’ ownership, responsibility and contribution of resources; whereas further political commitment is needed to deliver on the agreed objectives that are yet to be fulfilled;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 51 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that the threat analysis preceding the adoption of the Strategic Compass in 2022 was a unique effort to bring the EU’s security and defence doctrine up to date: invites Member states and the EEAS to take advantage of the analysis in their discussions on the future of civilian crisis management and the envisaged use of the civilian CSDP instrument;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 73 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the need to mainstream in a more proactive manner the concepts of human security, the security needs of the local population, gender sensitivity, parliamentary oversight, transparency, and accountability of the local security sector into the mission’s mandate and operations;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 75 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Stresses the importance of local ownership throughout the implementation of the mission’s mandate, from design to implementation, monitoring, and evaluation; welcomes the EEAS operational guidelines for proactive civil society engagement in CSDP missions; recommends safe formal, informal, and anonymous channels to be set up for mission feedback and complaints from civil society, to help EU develop a better understanding of the effectiveness of its operations;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Believes that civilian CSDP should be part of a broader political strategy addressing the root causes of conflict, including climate change; reminds that missions should be informed by climate sensitive conflict analyses and calls for further mainstreaming of climate change and environmental degradation in civilian crisis management; stresses that the climate-security nexus must be included into the Compact 2.0, outlining clearly how it can be operationalised in the context of civilian crisis management; reiterates the call of the Council (conclusion December 2022) for missions and operations to take concrete steps to reduce their environmental footprint with the aim to achieve climate-neutrality by 2050 in line with the goals set out under the European Green Deal;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 93 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the new Civilian CSDP Compact to be used to strive for the full, equal and meaningful participation of women in civilian CSDP, including, as a first step, to increase the participation of women to at least 40 % across missions and at all levels by 2024; recommends the Member States to endorse the CPCC’s Strategy and Action Plan to enhance women’s participation in civilian CSDP missions for 2021–24;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 97 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls for effective operationalisation of Youth, Peace and Security agenda in civilian crisis management, to actively engage youth in design and implementation of missions and operations, and to apply youth- sensitive approach to conflict analysis;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 99 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States, the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to develop a concrete plan on how to implement the integrated approach and ensure that all relevant EU instruments, missions and operations (Military CSDP, Global Europe, the Instrument for Pre- accession Assistance) are applied coherently to achieve the EU’s overall objectives; calls for further efforts to manage transition between different political and technical instruments of the EU;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 104 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the EU and its Member States to enhance their strategic communication on civilian crisis management, in order to garner political support within the EU and in countries where missions take place, and to support more effective recruitment of qualified personnel to civilian CSDP mission, including women;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 118 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. CTakes note of the number of long- running civilian CSDP operations, which highlight the need for well-defined objectives, both political and operational, exit-strategies, and their evaluation; calls for clear exit strategies for civilian missions, allowing for swifter closure of missions when operational and political objectives are met; calls for frank political discussion on closing missions which do not create desired impact;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 123 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the EEAS-Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC) operational guidelines to provide tools for civilian CSDP missions to be proactive in engaging with civil society actors as key partners at all levels and stages of processes; welcomes the EEAS operational guidelines on human rights mainstreaming and human rights due diligence, and calls for their effective implementation, in particular, by establishing clear internal procedures for managing human rights related risks associated with the security sector support.
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 127 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Regrets the fact that the only assessments of civilian CSDP missions currently in place are Strategic Reviews feeding into the renewal of the mission mandates; stresses the importance of developing and establishing a system and methodology to assess, inter alia, the performance of missions, their effectiveness and their financial management; stresses, in this regard, the importance of establishing an independent evaluation of the impact of missions; welcomes the options paper on evaluation presented by the EEAS towards this end; recalls that evaluation of civilian CSDP operations and their effectiveness must be adequately resourced, and that systematic evaluations should feed into the political decision making on both current and future missions;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 129 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Recalls the added-value that partnerships with third countries can bring to civilian CSDP missions, particularly in the case of Ukraine where countries such as Norway, Iceland, Australia, Switzerland, United States, Canada, New Zealand and United Kingdom could bring in considerable political and financial resources; invites the Commission to re-visit its framework for participation agreements with third country partners, as the number of third country seconded experts has decreased from 200 to 10 since 2010;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 131 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Recalls the ambitious targets set for 5 000 police at the 2000 Feira Council and acknowledges the value of the Civilian Headline Goals (CHG) agreed upon from 2008 onwards; urges the fulfilment of these goals, in particular regarding a rapid reaction capacity and the use of multinational formations in the context of Article 44 TEU;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 138 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Deplores the fact that in spite of being one of the core commitments in the Compact, civilian CSDP missions persistently suffer from Member States not delivering on their pledges to provide sufficient personnel, with 10 Member States currently providing 78 % of seconded personnel, and 17 Member States only 22 %; calls on all Member States to ensure that they provide seconded staff to fill 100 % of all operational positions and to provide at least 60 % of the seconded staff for non-operational positions; calls on Member States to harmonise their secondment of staff to reduce the disruptive impact of uncoordinated turnover of staff across missions; further calls on Member States to ensure seconded staff are rewarded for their participation in EU missions through career development policies; calls on EEAS to review the current situation and establish indicators for Member States that measure turnover and post- occupancy rates based on job category and employment type;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 142 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need to reform the human resources policy and management system, and to ensure that the working conditions in civilian CSDP missions contribute to a safer and more inclusive environment; welcomes the EEAS’s efforts to address weaknesses in the support provided to staff in missions, including the revision of the Code of Conduct, with a particular focus on human rights principles; stresses the need to assess its alignment with general principles of human rights, such as the right to a fair trial, including the provisions for protection of the rights of victims and witnesses, and the right to an effective remedy, and the setting up of a network of Confidential Counsellors;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 145 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls for a formalised and meaningful consultation with representatives of personnel serving in EU civilian security missions; believes that relevant personnel and unions representing them should be systematically consulted in EU policy making;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 148 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Deplores the stretched resources of the EEAS in the field of civilian CSDP in general, including CPCC, which currently provides support to 112 missions of 2 200 personnel with a staff of 110 people; calls for the Member States to ensure the rapid development of CPCC into a fully functional operational headquarters, by ensuring it has the necessary funds, personnel and expertise at its disposal; stresses the need to increase complementarity and synergies with military CSDP, while keeping the civilian and military chains of command separate;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 152 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that training is key for effectiveness, which is in turn essential for successful civilian CSDP missions; calls for a comprehensive assessment of the overall civilian CSDP training architecture in order to identify needs, gaps and overlaps in training within the Member States with a view to improving and harmonising the EU Policy on Training for CSDP, in particular with a focus on the needs of local populations; reminds that training for civilian CSDP missions needs to equip personnel with the knowledge, understanding, skills, and attitude required in complex cultural environments, including in relation to the needs of the local populations, and therefore should include sessions on international humanitarian law, human rights, gender equality, civilian-military cooperation, human security, conflict sensitivity, anti-racism, and intercultural communication;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 157 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Reminds that knowledge management (KM) is key, and forms an essential part of operationalising the Integrated Approach; Stresses the importance of developing a knowledge management architecture to retain expertise, foster best practices and learn lesson, in a more systematic way, as well as encourage a culture of learning among the staff working in and on civilian CSDP missions; takes a positive note of current efforts in the EEAS and CPCC towards this end; calls on Member States to support establishment of dedicated KM and evaluation experts in the field and in CPCC;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Stresses the need to develop a common platform for the sharing of knowledge, including between CPCC and operations in the field, making use of technological innovation, while strengthening the cyber awareness and resilience of CSDP missions; calls for enhancing cyber resilience of overall CPCC structures and CSDP missions;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 161 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19 b. Welcomes the swift deployment of EUMM Georgia monitors to the Armenia- Azerbaijan border as an important stabilising measure to reduce tensions between the two countries; considers this a positive example of modular and scalable mandates, as promoted in the Strategic Compass, which could be further enhanced by using rapid response tools such as Specialised Teams and Visiting Experts; stresses that all such innovations and improved flexibility must be based on a fully integrated approach in crisis response actions, in order to maximise impact on the ground and ensure efficient use of budgets;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 163 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19 c. Welcomes the revision of the mandate of EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine, to implement new tasks to support Ukraine in the face of Russia’s war of aggression; reminds that strong civilian security support to Ukraine will be instrumental to its reconstructions and a path towards EU membership; calls for the EU and its Member States to further step up their support to civilian capability development in Ukraine, including fighting corruption, establishing effective rule of law system and enhancing cyber and hybrid resilience;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 174 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Believes there is a need to establish a solid policy on necessary equipment and services needed by partner countries where civilian CSDP missions take place; calls for the establishment of a dedicated CFSP budget line in an overall increased CFSP budget, or "civilian support facility", to provide partner countries with equipment and services to enhance their civilian capabilities;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 177 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21 b. Calls for changing the structure of the CFSP budget and generation of one budget line per civilian CSDP mission, in order to allow for better scrutiny and increased transparency;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 181 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the EEAS and the Commission services to present multiannual budgetary forecasts, an assessment of ongoing activities and clear estimates of missions’ absorption rates; underlines that such measures are needed to help prepare decisions to downgrade ineffective activities, to enhance effectiveness and flexibility through clear mandates and to provide clearly defined transition and exit strategies; reminds that the operational and financial planning of missions should go hand in hand from the start; calls for tangible commitments from the Member States on contribution of personnel at the initial stages of approving a mission;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 182 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Invites Member States to integrate strategic level discussions on the future of civilian crisis management to its budgetary implications; calls on members to increase their political ambition on civilian crisis management and provide a budget that supports that policy, instead of allowing a limited budget to drive policy decisions;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 187 #

2022/2196(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Underlines the fundamental role of Parliament as a budgetary authority and in the scrutiny of CSDP, including civilian CSDP missions; strongly insists that it be provided with all the information necessary to carry out its responsibilities in accordance with the Treaties and towards its citizens; insists that the current provision of information is inadequate for the European Parliament to exercise its responsibilities and pending the revision of the 2002 Inter-institutional agreements access to information in the area of security and defence;
2023/02/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 6 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Welcomes the efforts of the Undertaking, based on its replies to the European Parliament’s discharge of 2020, to further develop synergies between the new partnership and existing funding mechanisms of the Union, including projects funded under Union programmes such as the Connecting Europe Facility, the Digital Europe Plan, the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, as well as InvestEU; notes that these efforts include activities planned to promote potential links with other Union programmes, work with Member States in the States Representatives Group, and the setting up of a Deployment Group to support the identification and alignment of deployment and investment plans with other Union funding instruments; underlines the importance of continuing this work in order to achieve a more sustainable, reliable and attractive railway system for the Union's long-term climate ambitions, as outlined in the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and the broader European Green Deal objectives;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 10 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Congratulates the Undertaking for the definition of key goals to strengthen the role of rail in the transport system in its Multi-Annual Action Programme, in order to maximise its contribution to reaching the goals of the European Green Deal and the defined climate goals therein;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the commitment of the Undertaking to facilitate research and innovation activities to deliver an integrated European railway network by design, eliminating barriers to interoperability and delivering smart, sustainable, and resilient rail system to ensure a harmonised approach to the evolution of the Single European Rail Area.; highlights the importance of supporting the Undertaking given rail’s inherent advantages in terms of environmental performance, land use, energy consumption, and safety;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 15 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Welcomes the fact that issues with the publication of the CVs and declarations of interest of the governing board of the Undertaking, which were raised in the European Parliament’s discharge procedure for 2020, have reportedly been solved with the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking and its new Governing Board, as stated in the Undertaking’s response to the European Parliment’s discharge for the year 2020; strongly stresses the importance that CVs as well as annual declarations of interests of all EU-Rail Governing Board members coming from the private sector are indeed publicly available in the Undertaking´s official website and encourages follow-up on this assurance;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 17 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Congratulates the Undertaking for its continued, active reporting on the undertaking’s contributions to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as well as its contribution to the goals outlined in the Commission’s Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and the Digital Decade, thereby maximizing its potential alignment with the EU strategic goals and the necessary shift of transport flows to rail;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 19 #

2022/2133(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Notes the continued effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the activities of the Undertaking, its predecessor, and the rail sector in general and the resulting further delays in some of the programme outputs, as reported in the Undertaking’s annual activity report; calls attention to the fact underlined by the Undertaking, that the pandemic will continue to affect certain operations in the rail sector even after its most severe effects are receding; congratulates and encourages, therefore, the Undertaking to continue the detailed risk analysis and mitigation plans that have been carried out by its Programme Team and Project Coordinators since the onset of the pandemic;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2022/2132(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Notes that in the Undertaking's Consolidated Annual Activity Report 2021, the Key Performance Indicator on gender balance either stayed the same or decreased in comparison to the previous year and remained low, with only 24 % of women participants in Horizon 2020 projects; notes that the percentage of women in Commission´s advisory groups, experts groups, evaluation panels, individual experts appears in the Undertaking's Consolidated Annual Activity Report 2021. Suggests that the Undertaking needs to continue to improve its gender balance;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 8 #

2022/2132(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes that the Undertaking did not hold a security exercise as called for in the indicator for the assessment of the internal control system implementing the SESAR 3 Joint Undertaking’s internal control strategy;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 9 #

2022/2132(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Notes that one of the most important goals of the Undertaking is to support a swift transition to greener aviation, in line with the European Green Deal. Laments therefore that from all of its Key Performance Areas, Environment / fuel efficiency (FEFF1) is furthest from completing the overall ambition. And even these relative benefits have been outpaced by sustained growth in air traffic;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 7 #

2022/2126(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Salutes the launch, in December 2021 of the Clean Aviation Joint undertaking that will run the Clean Aviation programme from 2022 to the end 2031 with projected funding of EUR 4.1 billion (including EUR 1.7 billion from the European Union); commends the preparatory work of the Undertaking in that regard and emphasises that its activities should be strictly geared towards the development of zero-emission technologies and their respective fuels;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2022/2126(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Notes the Joint Undertaking's high-level objective, as set out in the Council Regulation 2021/2085, to expand and foster integration of the climate- neutral aviation research and innovation value chains, including academia, research organisations, industry and SMEs, as well as the stated mission of developing disruptive new aircraft technology to pave the way towards the Union’s ambition of climate neutrality by 2050;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2022/2126(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Salutes the progress of the Undertaking in R&D related to technologies for engine manufacturing and SAF and calls to further intensify the research in order to contribute to the greening of aviation by technological advancements; recalls onthat the Commission to provide sufficient funding to implement those new technologies via retrofitting and renewal schemes.only way to efficiently and structurally green aviation and to avoid demand management measures is to invest massively in the production of currently available zero- emission fuels, particularly synthetic fuels with direct air capture, and considers that sufficient funding by the Commission should be provided to such production;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 18 #

2022/2126(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Welcomes that the Joint Undertaking's priorities include the development of hydrogen technology, as well as electric-powered architectures; stresses that hydrogen used in the aviation sector should also be based only on additional renewable sources;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2022/2126(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Recalls the increasing concerns due to the evidence of non-CO2 emissions impacting climate even to a higher extent and urges the Undertaking to incorporate this aspect as a priority in its work; insists on the importance of lowering aromatics, sulphur and naphthalenes as much as possible and in a timely manner; considers that the Joint Undertaking is well placed to contribute substantially to this endeavour;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2022/2113(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes that, following the full transposition of the technical pillar of the fourth railway package in October 2020, the Agency has successfully and in a timely manner delivered authorisations for placing 1260 railway vehicles on the market, 41 single safety certificates for railway undertakings and 2 ERTMS trackside approvals despite the significant increase in the number of applications received in 2021; recalls that the ERTMS is a horizontal priority within the Trans- European Transport Network and the importance of completion of ERTMS by 2030 as a matter of urgency;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 8 #

2022/2113(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Salutes that the Agency has continued to successfully deliver its tasks in the field of EU rail interoperability, safety and harmonisation; welcomes the continuous commitment from the Agency to the objective of creating a Single European Railway Area; recalls the important role of rail in ensuring sustainable travel and freight throughout the Union for decades to come, and the primary importance that should thus be attached to the agency's work;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 16 #

2022/2113(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Commends the Agency continuous effort to improve its efficiency and budget execution through its Strengthening Plan drafted in 2021; notes however that these efforts cannot compensate the insufficient budget of the Agency; notes the systematic budget outruns reported by the agency;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 18 #

2022/2113(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the Agency has the smallest budget among the transport agencies and that this trend continued even throughout the European Year of Rail, despite the outstanding environmental performance and other benefits of rail transport, which the Commission established as one of its priorities with the Action plan to boost long distance and cross-border passenger rail, as part of the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy; calls for an increase of the budget of the Agency in order to provide it with the necessary means to enable it to act as an efficient authority and to fulfil its tasks, particularly those with regard to increasing competitiveness, improving safety and cross-border interoperability; demands that the agency's budget progressively matches the level of other transport sector agencies, and that, at the very least, for the next Union budget it is above that of Joint Undertakings in other transport modes, such as SESAR and Clean Sky 2;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2022/2113(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Welcomes the efforts made by the agency to improve the gender balance within its Management Boards, Senior Management, and staff in general and commends the improvements achieved on this end so far; notes, however, that there still exists a significant imbalance in the gender ratio at all levels in the agency, and that no clear overview of staff figures at all levels of staff was presented in the consolidated staff figures of agencies; urges the agency to keep working on their improvements in this regard, and looks forward to seeing the results of the gender audit planned for Q4 2022;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 4 #

2022/2111(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the role of EMSA in successful implementation of transition to renewableCommends the contribution EMSA has done in giving technical support and data for initiatives related to the European Green Deal including the FuelEU Maritime initiative, the Zero Pollution Action Plan initiative and work at IMO on energy efficiency and low-carbon fuels in maritime transportintensity;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 11 #

2022/2111(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Salutes the work EMSA does in supporting the Search & Rescue efforts of Member States; encourages the Agency to look into widening the scope of this support to NGOs which work in the field of Search & Rescue efforts;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2022/2111(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Commends the Agency's efforts this year to increase the availability of its website in languages other than English;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2022/2111(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Notes the gender balance within the Agency’s senior management members, with 3 out of 5 (60%) being women; notes the lack of gender balance within the Agency’s management board members, with 47 out of 65 (72%) being men; further notes the lack of gender balance within the Agency’s overall staff, with 172 out of 268 (64%) being men; asks the Commission and the Member States to take into account the importance of ensuring gender balance when nominating their members to the Agency’s management board;
2022/12/06
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the Agency ended the year with a fees and charges surplus of EUR 11.2 million; notes that the ‘fees and charges’ surplus is added to the accumulated surplus, increasing it from EUR 60.9 million to EUR 72.1 million; considers that given the remarkable surplus, which amounts to nearly a third of the EU subsidy, while the most of the revenues are based on users' charges, the amount of the EU contribution could be lowered, in order to devote this amount instead to underfunded agencies for other transport modes, particularly ERA;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 5 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the continuation, in cooperation with global partners and industry, of the EASA Sustainable Aviation Programme (2020 - 2024) focusing efforts towards achieving a cleaner, quieter and more sustainable aviation system; salutes in particular, in 2021 the developments towards the uptake of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF); calls on providing sufficient funding and incentives for further research and development of SAF to make them more efficient and affordable and to enhance and open their market ; underlines that priority needs to go to optimising the production technologies for truly zero-emission SAF, namely synthetic fuels from RNFBOs and the CO2 direct air capture process therein, as well as renewable hydrogen and electric technologies;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 7 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Considers that in the framework of the current design of an eco-label for aviation, a clear comparison in terms of emissions with sustainable modes of transport, such as rail, should be included in an objective way; underlines the importance that this comparison is compulsorily provided to the customers at the moment of booking tickets through whichever channel or means;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 9 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Insists in the importance of further researching the impact on non-CO2 emissions of aviation into climate, prioritising the follow-up of its previous study and updated analysis on "Non-CO2 climate impacts of aviation and potential policy measures pursuant to EU Emissions Trading System Directive Article 30(4)"1a; _________________ 1a https://www.easa.europa.eu/document- library/research-reports/report- commission-european-parliament-and- council
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 11 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Requests the agency to get properly involved, devoting both its expertise and adequate resources, into the Pilot Project on a "European body for jet fuel standards and safety certification" under the 2023 Union budget, in order to ensure independence and public control over certification, with a particular emphasis into setting the appropriate requirements on aromatics, sulphur and naphthalenes content;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 18 #

2022/2097(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Welcomes that following the Parliament's request an EU-wide breakdown of gender by staff category in the Agency’s entry in the Consolidated Staff Figures has been provided for 2021; encourages the Agency to maintain this for coming publications;
2022/12/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the findings of the European Court of Auditors (‘the Court’) that the consolidated accounts of the European Union for 2021 present fairly, in all material respects, the Union’s financial position; regrets that the estimated level of error in expenditure has increased up to 3%, up from 2,7% last year, which was already noted and described as material and pervasive;
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 3 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls that the European Court of Auditors has once again found the level of error related to EU expenditure to be substantially higher for high risk expenditures, which are usually reimbursement based and subject to complicated rules (estimated level of error 4.7%), as opposed to low-risk expenditures, which are subject to simpler rules (estimated free from material error)1a; notes that both ERDF and CEF expenditures fall under the category of high risk expenditure; encourages clarification of rules and procedures for funding mechanisms, as well as improvement of monitoring mechanisms wherever possible, in order to minimise the risks entailed in high risk expenditure; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/auditinbrief-2021/auditinbrief- 2021_EN.pdf
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes the substantial discrepancy between the estimation of risk at payment in the Commission Annual Management and Performance Report for the EU budget (AMPR)(1.9%) and the European Court of Auditors’ Annual Report on the Implementation of the EU Budget (3%), as well as the weaknesses identified by the Court in the Commission risk assessment approach, and Commission’s reporting on financial corrections and recoveries in the AMPR1a; encourages the Commission to review these internal control mechanisms based on the recommendations made by the Court; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/ann ual-management-and-performance- report-2021_en
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 9 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Welcomes the finding by the Commission Annual report on internal audits carried out in 20211a that the Directorate-General of Mobility and Transport has an effective system of internal control in place to help ensure the support, monitoring, and enforcement of EU law in Member States; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/ 252903/annual_internal_audit_report_we b-10.06.pdf
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 21 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes new research and innovation projects launched in 2021 from both Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe, including landmark projects on green airportsrail and ports, new partnerships/joint undertakings, as well as the launch of climate-relevant missions, which accounted for 0.5 million DG MOVE spending in Horizon 2020 alone;
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 23 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the need to circumscribe EU funding to transport projects that fulfil the requirements of a future-proof, sustainable European transport network, in accordance with the EU taxonomy, and consequently to prioritise projects that significantly contribute to improving climate-friendliness in the transport sector;
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 24 #

2022/2081(DEC)

4 b. Welcomes the ambition to strive for carbon neutrality in European youth programmes, for instance through extra economic support for travel undertaken with low-carbon means of transport in the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes, as well as advanced carbon footprint tracking1a; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/ 258050/Detailed%20replies_EP%2027.10. 2022.pdf
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 25 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Court’s Review No 05/2021 on the Union framework for large transport infrastructure projects and regrets their findings related to major cost- overruns and time delays of the projects; requests the Commission, together with the Court, OLAF and EPPO, to further closely monitor the Union transport projects, improve the process and to submit an annual implementation report to the Parliament and national parliaments specifying the measures taken to guarantee the completion of the TEN-T network; highlights that the conclusions of the European Court of Auditors Review 05/2021 on “The EU framework for large transport infrastructure projects: an international comparison” align with its previous concerns; recalls that the Special Report10/2020 on “EU transport infrastructures: more speed needed in megaproject implementation to deliver network effects on time” already raised diverse serious socioeconomic and environmental concerns over different transport flagship mega-infrastructure projects across the Union, such as inaccurate estimations regarding traffic forecasts or the cumulative delays, remarkably impacting the related cost- benefit analysis as well as the life-cycle emissions calculations within the 2030 and 2050 horizons; considers that EU transport funding would be more effectively spent, also in terms of climate neutrality contribution, by considerably supporting smaller-scale regional cross- border rail missing links;
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 26 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Requests that the Commission, together with the Court and OLAF, closely monitor the EU transport projects, as public investment in infrastructure is particularly sensitive to fraud; considers this essential not only to ensure transparency that prevents corruption and misuse of taxpayers' money, but also to ensure that the highest safety standards for the users are not compromised;
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 27 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls attention to the renewed expression of concern by the European Court of Auditors regarding the climate reporting methodology used in the MFF 2021-2027, which is believed to overestimate the climate contribution of certain EU funding1a; urges the Commission to review this expenditure tracking system in order to obtain more reliable estimates of the climate contribution of EU policies; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/annualreport-Performance- 2021/annualreport-Performance- 2021_EN.pdf
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2022/2081(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Welcomes the analysis by the European Court of Auditors on the mainstreaming of five horizontal priority areas in EU legislation1a; notes with regret the weak level of integration of gender in the 11 programmes examined, which include Horizon Europe and European Regional Development Funds, under which transport related projects are funded; urges the Commission to better integrate gender mainstreaming at every step of programme implementation and design in all future transport related projects and, in particular, to develop a reliable methodology for the tracking of gender related expenditure corresponding to the minimum criteria set by the OECD Gender Equality Markers and the European Institute for Gender Equality; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/annualreport-Performance- 2021/annualreport-Performance- 2021_EN.pdf
2022/12/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 15 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas space security is essential to ensure global stability, and can help to mitigate the impact of conflict or to avoid conflict altogether;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas thosspace-based assets are dual-use, serving civilian purposes, while being crucial to security and defence; whereas space capabilities have become indispensable not only because they make it possible to make autonomous assessments and decisions and take autonomous action but also because they are essential to EU and Member State civilian and military operations;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 39 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas commercial actors are increasingly engaged in space domain, with commercial exploitation of space is growing exponentially, also affecting space security;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)
Hb. whereas space and cyber domains are intimately linked; whereas the war in Ukraine highlights issues that must be addressed by international space and cyber governance;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 55 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that 11 of the 27 Member States have already introduced national space laws; welcomes the Commission’s initiative to propose space legislation for the EU establishing a common, harmonised and coherent security framework to bolster the resilience of EU space services and prevent excessive fragmentation of the global space market; points out that this framework is eagerly awaited by the Member States and the main industrial players in the space sector; encourages the Commission to include matters of registration, liability and environmental standards into the new space legislation; reminds of Member States also to invest in operationalisation of existing commitments of space treaties;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 62 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the regulatory and capacity resources for space traffic management (STM) to be boosted with the aim of better protecting the EU’s infrastructure in orbit; calls on the Member States to consolidate their efforts in the field of space surveillance and the tracking of objects in an effort to reducing the risk of collision; reminds of the importance of enhancing cyber security of both space systems and ground terminals against cyberattacks; calls for the coordination of STM regulations with international players to set worldwide standards as space activities are by nature a global endeavour;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 73 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the IRIS² secure connectivity constellation to be swiftly set up and made ready for use with a view to providing constant access to secure and sovereign connectivity services that meet the Member States’ operational needs; calls for the inclusion of the entire European space sector in its implementation, in particular small and medium size enterprises;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 78 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for the secure, multi-orbital connectivity infrastructure to be developed into a genuinely global service, covering also areas that are poorly covered currently such as the Arctic; calls for ensuring access of public security and defence actors to common satellite services in strategically significant areas to support operation of critical infrastructure, crisis management, and situational awareness;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the Commission proposal to create EU Earth Observation Governmental Service that specifically complies with defence requirements; calls for an indebt feasibility study to guide decision-making to realise such a service, and ensuring sufficient funding for the purpose;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 94 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that capacity for autonomous access to space is an essential element of European space policy; takes the view, therefore, that a special, synergy- based effort must be made to further the long-term production of reusable, European launchers;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 112 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that space domain awareness (SDA) is essential to attributing a threat and enabling Member States to take appropriate decisions in the event of a space attack; encourages the Member States to supply the information needed to attribute hostile behaviour, for which secure, robust and reliable communication and exchange capabilities at EU level will need to be established; calls, similarly, to advance space situational awareness (SAA) sharing;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 114 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the proposal set out in the strategy to amend Decision 2021/698 with a view to attributing and addressing threats to space programme services; calls for more meaningful responses on solidarity mechanisms to be taken at EU level; calls for further work to be done to make the mutual assistance clause ready for use (Article 42(7) TEU), including discussion on identifying a threshold of an attack and what kind of attack merits a response; calls, similarly, the EU and Member States to increase their efforts to reach a common understanding of what types of space activities warrant the UN Security Council involvement;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 122 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for the EU and Member States to adopt policies on anti-satellite (ASAT) testing, specifically aiming at banning destructive testing;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 123 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Recalls that space systems and other critical infrastructure have been targeted repeatedly by cyberattacks by Russia during its illegal war against Ukraine, underscoring the intimate link between space and cyber domains; reminds therefore that EU responses and initiatives should be coherent from the point of view of both space and cyber issues;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 130 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for the EU to adopt a genuine industrial policy and to be able to draw upon a competitive industryfor the space sector; takes the view that EU support to enable Member States to develop their space based defence capacity must primarily benefit European industrial players (both long-established groups and innovative SMEs); supports, at the same time, heavy investment in key space and cyber technologies with the aim of reducing strategic dependence on third countries;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 139 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that, if space capabilities are to be developed, the resources allocated to space in the next multiannual financial framework must be stepped up; stresses, in particular, the need to increase funding for space traffic management and space surveillanceSDA with a view to protecting the EU’s space infrastructure and addressing potential threats; draws attention to the need to achieve coherence in and provide visibility for all the different types of funding allocated via instruments to European space policy;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 140 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for coherence between existing instruments to be improved with a view to preventing unnecessary duplication of investments; considers it essential for funding to be properly channelled into those instruments, taking into account the capacities available at both EU and commercial level; supports joint programming between the European Development Fund, the EU Space Programme and Horizon Europe in an effort to speed up the development of relevant capacities; stresses the importance of synergies between EU and national – civilian, space and defence –space programmes to meet capability needs;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 146 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Recalls that in order to maintain and strengthen the security, defence and stability of Europe it is important to prevent the export of sensitive space technology to countries which endanger regional or global security and stability; urges the Member States and the Commission to make sure that the eight criteria of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP and the rules of the Dual- Use-Regulation are being fully respected regarding the export of space related technology;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 149 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that EU and Member State resilience and their response to potential hostile actions in space must be underpinned by clear, flexible and responsive governance;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 151 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Reminds that EU policies on space and security must be consistent with other sectoral policies on space, and that the participation of defence sector operators in the different pillars of the EU space policies and related research programs should be ensured; calls for the input of the defence sector to be taken into account in new EU initiatives concerning space, for example in the development of data transmission systems, GPS technology, intelligence capabilities and the space situational awareness;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 153 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that governance is unique to each component of the space programme; stresses that those components, which have major implications for the security of the Member States, require harmonised governance that involves the Member States and makes it possible to protect information;deleted
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 170 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Notes the growing interdependency of space and terrestrial defence and security; deplores that simultaneously the international norms regulating space security has remained limited; calls on the EU to assume more active role as a facilitator in international norm-building in space, in order to also enhance its own security, and to simultaneously promote internal unity and coordination between EU member states;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 171 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Welcomes the international efforts of some EU member states to advance international principles for responsible behaviour in outer space; calls for the development of safeguards to prevent rising militarisation of space, including by addressing them in the forthcoming European space legislation;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 172 #

2022/2078(INI)

21c. Calls for the EU and Member States to reaffirm commitments to transparency and confidence building measures (TCBM) to advance new measures for space security in the light of threats today; reminds that TCBMs can significantly support growth of domestic and commercial space sectors; notes that Space Situational Awareness (SSA) is a promising avenue for cooperation and transparency;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 177 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses the importance of developing cooperation with strategic partners; supports the continuation of an enhanced dialogue with the United States, while remaining vigilant to the risk that it may seek to steer or dictate outlooks, standards and rules that the Member States have not helped to shape; calls for deeper cooperation and for alliances to be established with like-minded states (the UK, Canada, Japan, Norway) or other EU partners (India);
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 180 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that NATO is conducting strategic reflection in the space domain; notes, however, that the EU, in its own right and through its Member States, already has more developed programmes, capacities and institutions that do not compete with these advances; calls for considerably closer cooperation between the EU and NATO, based on shared threat analysis, to be pursued in areas of shared interest, while ensuring that the roles, competences and autonomy of the two organisations are scrupulously maintainedfor example through shared exercises, and sharing information on Space Domain Awareness and space threats; reminds that the EU and NATO already discuss space issues under “resilience dialogue”, and calls for the strengthening of this dialogue by setting up a dedicated “space dialogue”;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 185 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Reminds that commercialisation of space demands a new culture of space governance, both in defining norms and in implementation of those; calls therefore on the EU to create suitable platforms and institution where also non- state actors such as companies and civil society organisations are able to participate;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 190 #

2022/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Points out that the European Space Agency must continue to play itstakes on a role as a technical agency for European satellite projects and that cooperation with it must be carried out within a framework which protects the essential interests of the Union;
2023/07/06
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the original iproposals madea behindy the plenary of the Conference on the Future of Europe as regards, especially as they regard increasing transparency, upholding fundamental rights and citizens’ information and participation in democracy at Union level, aiming at making the Union more understandable and accessible;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 8 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that many of the proposals endorsed by the Conference on the Future of Europe do not require Treaty change but instead call for the strengthening of existing policies and instruments; takes the view that the division of competences provided for in the Treaties, and in particular Articles 4 and 5 TEU, should remain unchangedWelcomes the fact that the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe were drafted in a citizen- driven process and stresses the importance of citizens’ participation in European democracy; believes that the citizens’ panels of the Conference could serve as a basis for future citizens' panels on specific questions of political relevance;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 12 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that the expectations of most petitioners in relation to their rights conferred on them by the Charter of Fundamental Rights are high and go beyond their current scope of application; believes that in order to widen this scope, the abolition of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights should be considered;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 16 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Expresses its satisfaction with the ambitious and constructive proposals formulated by the Conference, based on the recommendations and ideas emerging from the European and national Citizens’ Panels, the European Youth Event and from the online platform; notes that many of the proposals endorsed by the Conference require treaty changes, while all means currently foreseen in the Treaties, such as the passerelle clauses, shall be used in the short- and medium- term to implement those proposals;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Points out that the Conference proposals, which require Treaty changes, include the simplification of the institutional architecture of the Union, changing from unanimity to qualified majority voting in relevant areas, more transparency and accountability in the decision-making process, improving the accessibility and effectiveness of the European Citizens Initiative, EU-wide referenda and the right for the Parliament to initiate, amend or revoke legislation;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 19 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Proposes to amend Articles 11, 15 and 16 TEU to improve the transparency of the Union’s decision-making process and institutions, and introduce a legal basis to legislate through ordinary legislative procedure on transparency and integrity;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 20 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Proposes to amend Article 24 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to improve rules on the legislative follow-up to be given to successful European Citizens initiatives;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 24 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Requests that Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union be amended to add foreign natural and legal persons not residing in a Member State to the list of persons who may file a petition on a matter within the field of activity of the Union.
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 25 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Requests amending Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to introduce that the Union and Member State institutions should respond to petitions sent by the Parliament in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation.
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 29 #

2022/2051(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses, therefore, the need to increase citizens’ knowledge of their right to petition as well as their understanding of the scope of the Union’s responsibilities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt measures to make public information and awareness more efficient at Union and national levels in order to improve access to the right to petition and to reduce the number of inadmissible petitions.;
2022/10/26
Committee: PETI
Amendment 6 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
— having regard to the Council conclusions of 5 June 2020 on Youth in external action,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
— having regard to the Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the establishment of a Civilian CSDP Compact of 19 November 2018,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 15 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
— having regard to the Council's Climate Change and Defence Roadmap of 9 November 2020,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 b (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 7 June 2022 on the EEAS’s Climate Change and Defence Roadmap (2021/2102(INI)),
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2018 on autonomous weapon systems,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 38 a (new)
— having regard to UN Security Council Resolutions 1325(2000), 1889 (2013), 2122 (2013), 2242 (2015) and 2493 (2019) on Women, Peace and Security and Resolutions 2250 (2015), 2419 (2018) and 2535 (2020) on Youth, Peace and Security,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 41 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of resolution of 12 March 2019 on building EU capacity on conflict prevention and mediation,
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 57 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the EU’s Integrated Approach to external conflicts and crises provides for a coherent use of the EU’s different capacities, within which its security and defence policy should complement and be complemented by other civilian tools to contribute to human security and sustainable peace in Europe and the wider world;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas industrial fragmentation and inefficiency in developing European military capability costs between EUR 25 and EUR 100 billion each year; whereas Member States only procurinvested some 11 % of their total equipment collaboratively in 2020collaboratively in 2020 and 8% in 2021 despite co-financing via EU budget funded programmes such as PADR and EDIDP; whereas the Member States have agreed on more and better defence spending;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 75 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas CSDP has 11 civilian missions and 7 military operations under way with around 5 000 personnel deployed on three continents; whereas total personnel deployed by the Member States has steadily declined in recent years, and missions and operations persistently suffer from Member States not delivering on their pledges to provide sufficient military or civilian personnel; whereas the level of ambition has constantly decreased military CSDP operations, in particular as regards executive operations;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas Civilian CSDP Compact is the key instrument to strengthen civilian CSDP; whereas the member state contributions to civilian mission has decreased considerably over the last 10 years, reinforcing the need to renew the civilian CSDP Compact in 2023;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 95 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas Parliament’s active role in framing CSDP policies bolsters the EU’s democratic foundations; whereas Parliament can legitimately exercise political control and oversight over the executive at EU level; whereas there is a lack of formal scrutiny powers as regards EPF and EDF; whereas Parliament’s diplomacy is a proven and complementary means of enhancing strategic communication, and the visibility and effectiveness of CSDP missions and operations;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 106 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the dramatic deterioration in European security accelerated by Russia’s unjustified and illegal war of aggression against Ukraine; stresses that this situation demands that the Member States generate the necessary political will to allow the EU step up its defence capacities and show greater willingness to act within its integrated approach in order to deliver the security expected by the EU’s citizens; underlines the unprecedented and united EU response to Russia’s war against Ukraine, including the provision of military equipment through the EPF; remains committed to supporting Ukraine’s defence of its territorial integrity and sovereignty; calls on the EU to sustain its efforts and provide Ukraine with all necessary financial, humanitarian and military aid;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 136 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes new EU initiatives to enhance defence, notably the Versailles Declaration, the Strategic Compass and Joint Communication on defence investment gaps; welcomnotes the Commission’s proposal for a regulation to incentivise joint procurement while stressing the need for budgetary resources, especially via the Member States and their increased defence budgets that genuinely meet the ambitious goals set; welcomes the upcoming previewsentation of the European defence investment programme regulation, the budget of which should be significantly increased as well;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 146 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses the urgent need to draw lessons from the changed security situation in Europe resulting from the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and to speed up military capability development processes, as well as projects to make military technology more independent from fossil fuels, while at the same time increasing mission effectiveness and fighting strength;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 149 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Strongly believes that military activities and technology have to contribute to the Union’s carbon neutrality targets in order to contribute to the fight against climate change without compromising mission security and without undermining the operational capabilities of the armed forces; underlines, in that regard, that the Union’s external action and the armed forces of the Member States should work towards reducing their own carbon footprint and their negative effects on natural resources and biodiversity;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 150 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Welcomes the Climate Change and Defence Roadmap; stresses the important role of the armed forces with respect not only to adaptation, but also to mitigating their effect on climate change and the environment, including by comprehensively measuring and mapping the environmental footprint of armed forces, as proposed in the Roadmap; urges the VP/HR to propose to the Member States an immediate action programme which consists of prioritised actions presented in the Roadmap which can be implemented in the short term;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 157 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the new ambition in the Strategic Compass and the Civilian CSDP Compact to enhance the CSDP to build resilience and make it more capable and responsive, so it can act rapidly to defend our interests, principles and values as enshrined in Article 21 TEU and protect the EU and its citizens; welcomes the strong commitment in the Strategic Compass to promoting and advancing human security across CSDP; considers the Strategic Compass a major step towards a genuine European Security and Defence Union enabling the EU to act as a credible partner; calls for the timely and sound implementation of the approximately 80 concrete actions and for them to be updated regularly along with the EU Threat Analysis; calls for the sustained political will of all Member States and EU institutions in this process;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 181 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses the urgent need to significantly increase investment in regional and global arms control, non- proliferation and disarmament, in particular multilateral approaches which reduce the spread of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery; calls for the EU and Member States to advance multilateral agreement to ban lethal autonomous weapons and to regulate weapons containing AI components;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 183 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Reminds the need to define arms exports policies as part of security policy and to urgently establish an effective EU- level arms exports policy which guarantees that EU Member States fully comply with the legally binding eight criteria on arms exports, that their national exports do not fuel regional tensions or undermine the security of other Member States, allies, partners and of the Union as a whole while fully supporting legitimate security and defence needs of allies and partner countries especially those whose territorial integrity is violated and which exercise their right to self-defence as enshrined in the UN Charter;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 192 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on Member States to assess the reform of the decision-making process with a view to realising untapped considerable potential within the Treaties, in particular by activating Article 31 TEU extending qualified majority voting (QMV) to areas relating to the civilian CSDP and pursuing full use of the ‘passerelle clauses’ and scope of articles that enhance EU solidarity and mutual assistance in the event of crises; proposes changes to the Treaties in the CSDP, to be discussed and decided upon within a convention following up on the Conference on the Future of Europe, primarily focusing on switching from unanimity to QMV for Council decisions with military implications and on defence matters for situations where passerelle clauses do not apply;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 201 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the urgent need to unleash the full potential of the Treaty as regards CSDP, in particular instruments such as the start-up fund and the importance of improving and activating the implementation procedures of Article 44 TEU on mission delegation to make the CSDP more flexible and efficient in the field, to make Article 42(7) TEU on mutual assistance an operational in the short run and to clarify the coherence between this and Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treatysolidarity policy in the short run;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 209 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Strengthening capabilities by moreincreasing spending that is greener and smarter spending
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 222 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the EU’s ambition to strengthen its military and civilian capabilities; stresses the need to make better and full use of EU capability- development initiatives and budgets, notably the Civilian CSDP Compact, EDIRPA, EDF, PESCO, the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) and Military Mobility, in order to fill critical capability gaps, reduce fragmentation in the defence-procurement sector, achieve full interoperability of our forces and strengthen a resilient, competitive and innovative European defence technological and industrial base; calls for ensuring maximum consistency between these initiatives which currently risk increasing fragmentation as they are not formally and sufficiently linked to each other;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 233 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Considers it important to fill the identified defence investment gaps such as replenishing stockpiles, in particular replacing Soviet- era systems, but also reinforcing air and missile defence systems, expanding existing main battle tank capabilities and armoured vehicles, strengthening naval forces and improving satellite-based secure connectivity; strongly calls on Member States to commit to a significant increase in funding for EU procurement mechanisms and to take swift and thorough action in this crucial field; reminds in this respect paragraph 1(m) of its recommendation of 8 June 2022 on the EU’s Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and urges the HR/VP and the Member States to establish another off-budget financial facility which would pool parts of national defence budgets and urgently address the entire life-cycle of military capabilities at EU level from collaborative R&D and joint procurement to joint maintenance, training and security of supply;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 251 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines the need for much more support for EU research and development to ensure that the defence industrial and technological base is able to meet increasing demands and ambitions; underlines the urgent need to establish a truly European defence equipment market, inter alia by consolidating industrial capacities, reducing industrial overcapacities, duplication and fragmentation and at the same time adapting the industrial basis, in particular its supply-chains, skilled work force to the new security environment in Europe which demands to rapidly ramp up production capacities;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 271 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Underlines the need to increase investments in ‘green’ defence, in particular by dedicating a higher share of military and dual-technology innovation (equipment, energy, etc.) R&D funded from the EU budget to carbon-neutral fuels and propulsion systems for military aircraft, ships and other vehicles, in particular as regards future major weapons systems (e.g. the future combat air system (FCAS) and the European main battle tank (EMBT)) and others which are developed within the frameworks provided by the EU; Calls on DG DEFIS, the Member States, the EEAS and the EDA to adopt an approach incorporating allow energy, carbon and environmental footprint by design when implementing relevant EU funds; welcomes the fact that the EDF contributes to the integration of climate actions into EU policies; recalls that the research and development actions can be directed at solutions to improve efficiency, reduce the carbon footprint and achieve sustainable best practices; welcomes the relevant investment of EUR 133 million provided for in the first annual work programme, but notes that this represents only 11 % of the overall annual EDF budget;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 280 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the need to significantly raise the ceiling of the EPF and create a separate EPF envelope for Ukraine which guarantees adequate support for the country without systematically neglecting other priority regions, including Africa; calls for significantly increased military support in all its aspects, including training and information sharing with other particularly vulnerable countries such as the Republic of Moldova, Georgia and Western Balkan countries; calls for all EPF support for the provision of equipment to be carried out in coordination with NATO to increase efficiency and avoid unnecessary duplication; calls for effective monitoring and tracking of arms that have been supplied with EPF assistance and planning for post-conflict disarmament; calls for effective evaluation of the implementation of EFP assistance measures and their impact on the conflict dynamics thereof in the partner countries;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 288 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses deep concern about developments in the Sahel region and the recent coups d’état in the region; condemns the increasing presence of the Kremlin- backed Wagner Group in the Sahel; firmly believes that the latter’s involvement in West Africa runs counter to the objective of bringing peace, security and stability to the region; acknowledges that the various international missions have not yet achieved their primary goal of lasting peace in the region and that a reflection process on the mandates and roles of international missions and policies is therefore needed; believes that any international security support in the region must prioritise improving the protection of civilians, alleviating conflict dynamics, and promoting good governance of the security sector; endorses the civilian and political surge agreed at the G5 Sahel 2021 N’Djamena Summit in light of the need to address root causes of insecurity in the Sahel and the limitations of a security-first approach; recognises the contribution of climate change as a threat multiplier in the Sahel and the need for conflict- sensitive action at the climate-security nexus; calls for more joined-up action and policy coherence between different EU and partner interventions in the Sahel; expresses similar concern over the increased presence and activity of Islamist terrorist groups, in particular Al-Qaeda, Daesh and Al- Shabaab in the Middle East and Africa;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 307 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Supports the review and reinforcement of all civilian and military CSDP missions and operations by providing them with more robust and flexible mandates; stresses the need to strengthen their resilience and effectiveness by enabling them to better address hybrid security challenges, promote human security and civilian protection, and contribute to sustainable peace, such as through better cooperrdination with other EU interventions, actors and those of like-minded partners outside the EU;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 320 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Considers it important that EU interventions are based onoperations and missions are based on a clear understanding of the expected positive impact on civilian protection and conflict dynamics and a robust theory of change, as well as a clear understanding of the types of crisis and conflict the EU seeks to respond to with civilian and military instruments, especially where others are not willing or able to intervene or in non-permissive environments in the future; reminds that all EU engagement, particularly in fragile context, must integrate conflict sensitivity in all its actions, paying specific attention to conflict dynamics; calls for more robust risk-assessment and -mitigation processes across all CSDP interventions with particular attention to ensuring conflict- sensitivity and mitigating risks associated with use and provision of lethal and dual- use equipment; calls for more impact- based monitoring and evaluation of CSDP interventions; calls for more consultation and feedback mechanisms with diverse community and civil society representatives on the risk assessment, design, implementation, and evaluation of CSDP interventions, with particular attention to gathering the input of more excluded groups, notably women and youth, in line with the Women, Peace and Security and Youth, Peace and Security Agendas;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 345 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls on the HR/VP and the Member States to rapidly work towards setting up a fully functional EU military headquarters which is allowed to plan and conduct executive operations taking into account the new security environment and while keeping civilian and military chains of command separate;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 359 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Reminds paragraph 1(r) of its recommendation of 8 June 2022 on the EU’s Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine which calls to urgently revise the rapid deployment capacity concept, which is not ambitious enough, and rework its complex structure, which does not respond adequately to the urgent need of the Union to have a very reliable permanent multinational military unit that should include a multinational land brigade of around 5 000 troops and air, maritime and special forces components, and whose leading elements should be ready to move within two to three days;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 368 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Highlights that women’s participation in CSDP missions contributes to the effectiveness of the mission and is a driver of the EU’s credibility as a proponent of equal rights for men and women worldwide; calls for meaningful gender mainstreaming in the formulation of the EU CSDP, notably via a better gender balance in the personnel and leadership of CSDP missions and operations and specific training of the personnel deployed; welcomes the fact that all civilian CSDP missions have now appointed a gender adviser and calls on the military CSDP missions to do the same; encourages EU Member States to put forward women as candidates for existing vacancies; calls for all EU deployed military and civilian personnel to be sufficiently trained on gender equality and the implementation of UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace and Security, and specifically on how to integrate a gender perspective into their tasks; regrets that the number of women working in CSDP missions and especially in military operations remains very low; urges the EEAS to promote the need for a concrete target for and political commitment to increasing the number of women in the EU’s crisis management missions and operations; urges the Member States to look at ways to strengthen recruitment and retention policies and promote women’s participation in peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions; stresses the need to include a new EU budget line that would finance the position of gender advisers in military CSDP missions;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 374 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Takes note of the recognition of the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda by the HR/VP; regrets, that EU is lagging behind in its efforts to ensure a meaningful role for young people in conflict prevention and resolution, prevention of violence, and in creating social cohesion; calls on the EEAS to commit to integrating youth into its wider peace and security agenda, and pursuing and adopting a strategic and comprehensive framework for the implementation of YPS agenda, as defined by the UNSCR 2250, UNSCR 2419, UNSCR 2535; calls for the EEAS to create mechanism to monitor and to report on the implementation of YPS agenda across EU programming and funding; calls on the EEAS to adopt actionable EU guidelines to the Member States on YPS and a regular reporting mechanism on their implementation; calls on the EEAS to involve youth as partners for designing and implementing Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) efforts, and to promote the participation, recovery, and sustainable reintegration of youth, taking into account the rights, aspirations, and needs of young ex-combatants and other young men and women affected by armed conflict;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 378 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Welcomes the commitment in the Strategic Compass to establish a regular and structured civilian capability development process by 2024; reminds that Civilian CSDP Compact, as agreed in November 2018, is the key process to strengthen civilian CSDP; regrets that the number of seconded personnel to civilian missions and operations from Member States is still not sufficient; reminds that it is crucial that the Civilian CSDP Compact 2.0 is adopted during the first half of 2023 to ensure a continuity in the process of development of civilian capacities and capabilities; calls on the Member States to identify a shared level of ambition to civilian crisis management to enhance national ownership; stresses that climate change and climate-security nexus must be included into the Compact 2.0, outlining clearly how it can be operationalised in the context of civilian crisis management; invites the Commission to re-visit the framework for participation agreements with Third Country partners to strengthen civilian missions, in which the number of third country seconded experts has decreased from 200 to 10 since 2010;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 380 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. Urges for a broad and public debate about regarding the Union's involvement in Mozambique and to publicly discuss how a meaningful integrated approach could look like which addresses the root-causes of unrest in Cabo Delgado; reminds reports about systematic and violent attacks by security forces against large parts of the local population, forceful displacements by security forces, high levels of inequality, regional neglect by the central government, battles over natural resources, high levels of corruption and the violations of various rights; notes that the absence of local redistribution of the benefits reaped from natural resources exploitation is a major driver of the unrest and deplores the role played by the project of natural gas exploitation by EU-based companies;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 382 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 f (new)
17 f. Stresses with regard to the maritime component of IRINI the international obligations regarding search and rescue of people in distress at sea; calls on Member States to ensure that IRINI acts in full compliance with the maritime law, in particular obligations related to search and rescue; reiterates its grave concern at the fate of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees in Libya, whose already dramatic situation continues to deteriorate; calls on the Libyan authorities and militias to close detention facilities for migrants; deplores that it is envisaged to withdraw ships from any given area with a significant presence of migrants; demands clarifications on the envisaged decision-making process and modalities on any future decision related to the so-called “pull factor effect” which lacks any scientific evidence to this point;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 384 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 g (new)
17 g. Deplores information sharing between IRINI and Frontex since the conclusion of the working agreement of 15 January 2021 endowing the EU’s policy of refoulement with military means of detection;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 401 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18 b. Expresses grave concern over China’s continued military belligerence, pressure, assault exercises, airspace violations and other grey-zone military actions including cyber and disinformation campaigns against Taiwan; urges China to stop all these actions, restore the full respect of the Taiwan Strait’s median line; reiterates any change to cross-strait relations must be neither unilateral nor against the will of the Taiwanese people; stresses that peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait has a direct impact on European security and prosperity;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 412 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines the fundamental shared democratic values at the heart of the EU and NATO; calls for the deepening of EU- NATO relations, such as through a third Joint EU-NATO Declaration; underlines the need to strongly upgrade the strategic partnership with NATO to base it on the strengthening of political unity and solidarity and enhanced political dialogue on all aspects of common challenges and strategically relevant issues;,; including particular attention to challenges related to climate change and rapid digitalisation, encourages coordinated responses in conflict prevention and crisis management mechanisms to counter emerging common threats;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 436 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the participation of the US, Canada and Norway in the PESCO project on military mobility as important to increase coherence between EU and NATO capability development efforts; welcomes the EU-NATO Structured Dialogue on Military Mobility; reminds that the implementation of operational and collaborative commitments of participating member states to PESCO is still not sufficient and calls for the Member States to swiftly work towards meeting their commitments;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 469 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Calls for stronger military-security, including civilian-military as well as police-military, cooperation with Western Balkan countries, in particular in areas such as resilience, cybersecurity, hybrid threats, counter-terrorism and countering disinformation provided that their foreign policy is in sync with the EU and there is a very high alignment with CFSP positions, in particular as regards sanctions against the Russian Federation;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 487 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 – introductory part
27. Stresses the need to involve Parliament more actively in CSDP and defence industrial policy decision-making, in particular with regard to the implementation of the Strategic Compass, EDF, EDIRPA and the EPF; encourages proposals for further action by Parliament, and in particular its Subcommittee on Security and Defence, to improve its impact on the CSDP, such as by:
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 489 #

2022/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 – indent -1 (new)
-1 using the mid-term review of the EDF and the upcoming negotiations on EDIRPA to implement adequate and meaningful parliamentary scrutiny rights via delegated acts for work programmes for the main defence industrial programmes;
2022/10/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Regrets that the EU, despite some progress made over the recent years, did not achieve yet the overall purpose of the CRPD;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 20 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Urges the Commission to conduct a cross-cutting and comprehensive review of the EU legislation in order to ensure its full harmonization with the provisions of the CRPD, including by adopting, without further delay, a plan detailing the overall strategy to achieve this goal;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 21 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Stresses the vital importance to enhance actions aimed at fully upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities, removing any obstacle preventing them from having a full and equal participation in society; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that all measures to implement at national and EU levels the Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 are in full compliance with the CRPD;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 22 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Strongly condemns violence against women stressing its life-long implications for their physical and mental health; is highly alarmed that violence against women threatens the security of over 250 million women in the EU, with women with disabilities facing 2 to 5 times higher risks to be victims of violence; calls on the Council to conclude, as a matter of priority, its work on the EU’s ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention) in order to strengthen the overall action to combat violence faced by all women and support all victims, thereby also contributing to the adequate implementation of the CRPD and of the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW);
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 30 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Is extremely concerned that persons with disabilities are still disproportionately affected by unemployment, leave labour markets earlier and that the employment gap between persons with and without disabilities remains high, contributing in the result of persons with disabilities having a very high risk of poverty and social exclusion;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 33 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Reiterates its request to the Commission to structurally integrate the Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 within the European Semester process with a view to enhancing employment and social protection of persons with disabilities in all related policies adopted by Member States; believes that the Commission should carry out a detailed annual review of disability mainstreaming under the European Semester process;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 36 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that independent living goes hand in hand with the freedom to choose one’s place of residence5 , inclusive education6 , a guarantee of democratic rights7 such as the right to vote8 , and, access to the open labour market with an adequate salary9 , adequate social benefits and support systems; _________________ 5 Petition No 0988/2020. 6 Petitions Nos 1340/2020 and 1529/2020. 7 Petition No 1132/2016. 8 Petition No 1135/2021; European Economic and Social Committee report of 20 March 2019 on the real rights of persons with disabilities to vote in European Parliament elections. 9 Petitions Nos 0608/2020 and 1280/2021.
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 50 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Member States to improve the accessibility of buildings, transport and communication, including web accessibility, in order toand remove physical, digital, logistical and social barriers in all areas, and in order to fully protect all fundamental rights of persons with disabilities, ensuring their active and equal participation in society; recalls that the Member States must speed up the transposition of the European Accessibility Act10 ; _________________ 10 Petitions Nos 0954/2019, 1491/2020,1135/21 and 1213/2021.
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 77 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that children with disabilities, including those with intellectual disabilities, have the right to inclusive education on the same footing as other children, including the possibility to access mainstream schools, as stipulated in Article 24 CRPD, and considers that accessible digital tools should be designed and used where possibleto ensure this12 ; _________________ 12 Petitions Nos 0956/2018 and 1340/2020.
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 88 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates that PwD, including those with mental disabilities, should have the right to the highest attainable state of both physical and mental health and access to healthcare, free from discrimination, of the same scope and quality as other EU citizens13 ; _________________ 13 Petitions Nos 0687/2020 and 0470/2020.
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 89 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that during the COVID-19 pandemic, severe gaps emerged in the capacity and preparedness of healthcare and social care systems of various Member States to adequately support persons with disabilities, including those with mental disabilities, due to lack of resources, weak governance and inadequate involvement of persons with disabilities in planning measures to counter the spread of the virus and provide the necessary assistance; strongly believes that Member States must greatly improve their healthcare and social care systems by addressing all existing shortcomings in order to ensure that, even during a crisis, full support is given to everyone, and notably to the most vulnerable, thereby adequately protecting health and social rights of all;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 94 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that PwD are exposed to discrimination most frequently, in particular those with intellectual, psychosocial and mental disabilities, and women and girls, migrants and members of the LGBTIQ community with disabilities; calls, in this respect, for improving the anti-discrimination legislation by also effectively covering multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination as well as strengthening equality bodies in order to protect the rights of PwD across the EU and for the horizontal Anti- Discrimination Directive to be unblocked in the Council14 ; _________________ 14 Petitions Nos 0164/2020 and 0226/2021.
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 98 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls on the Commission to put in place the set of measures recommended by the European Ombudsman in her inquiry in case OI/2/2021/MHZ1a aimed at ensuring that the use by Member States of EU Structural and Investment Funds as well as of the funds under the Recovery and Resilience Facility are in line with the EU’s obligations, under the CRPD, to promote the right of persons with disabilities to independent living; _________________ 1a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/de cision/en/155353
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 102 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Highlights the importance of ongoing legislative processes to regulate digital platforms and services and artificial Intelligence as they pertain to the rights of PwD; underlines the paramount importance to better ensure that these legislations comply with CRPD and improve the accessibility of digital technologies for PwD;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 103 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Highlights that PwD often face disproportionate hurdles in order to exercise their right to the free movement for working reasons due to, inter alia, lack of mutual recognition of disability assessment between Member States;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 114 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Believes that the EU must fully ratify without further delay the Optional Protocol to the CRPD, thus ensuring that citizens can denounce alleged violations of the CRPD's provisions by a State Party and allowing the CRPD Committee to initiate related confidential inquiries; urges those Member States that have not yet ratified the Optional Protocol to the CRPD to do so as a matter of priority;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 115 #

2022/2026(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Underlines that UN Disability Rights Committee found very recently that persons with disabilities in Hungary do not have a mechanism to make decision out of autonomy because of their disabilities and recommended Hungary to amend its legislation to ensure that the country’s supported decision-making mechanisms respect the dignity, autonomy and will and preferences of persons with disabilities in exercising their legal capacity; highlights that the UN Committee also stressed the importance of providing support to persons with disabilities to live independently and equally with others in the community, regardless of their type of impairment, suggesting Hungary to redesign its measures and redirect its effort and budgets into community-based support services; is firmly convinced that the Hungarian authorities must fully, consistently and swiftly implement the recommendations of the UN Disability Rights Committee;
2022/06/02
Committee: PETI
Amendment 2 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2021 on connectivity and EU- Asia relations,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 3 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 3 October 2017 on EU political relations with ASEAN,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 4 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)
— having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 1 December 2021 on 'The Global Gateway' (JOIN(2021) 30 final),
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
— having regard to the ASEM Summit of 25 and 26 November 2021,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
— having regard to the EU-US High Level Consultations on the Indo-Pacific on 3 December 2021,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 13 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
— having regard to ASEAN-EU Plan of Action 20218-2022,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 14 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
— having regard to the Partnership on Sustainable Connectivity and Quality Infrastructure between the EU and Japan of 27 September 2019,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 15 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 b (new)
— having regard to EU-ASEAN joint ministerial statement on connectivity of 1 December 2020,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 c (new)
— having regard to EU-India Connectivity Partnership of 8 May 2021,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 d (new)
— having regard to the Climate Change and Defence Roadmap of 9 November 2020,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 e (new)
— having regard to the Concept for an Integrated Approach on Climate Change and Security of 5 October 2021,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 f (new)
— having regard to the Council conclusions of 17 June 2020 and of 10 May 2021 on security and defence,
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the recently adopted joint communication on an EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo- Pacific, which is based on a principled engagement with a long-term perspective, reflects a deep evolution in the way the EU looks at its interests in the region and the potential role it can play; whereas building strong relations, sustainable trade links and security cooperation with Indo-Pacific regional organisations and countries is central to the strategy;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 55 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the climate crisis has generated effects on the international system where it has the potential to exacerbates geopolitical tensions, and to shift the balance between major powers; whereas the Union’s external action must increasingly incorporate climate change and environmental considerations as a major security risk, and accordingly adapt its strategies and concepts and procedures, including in the Indo-Pacific;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 65 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
E b. whereas China has shown a lack of transparency and reluctance to engage in talks on its potential participation in multilateral nuclear arms control instruments, which has allowed it to stockpile unhindered a large arsenal of technologically advanced intermediate- range ballistic missiles, such as Dong- Feng 26s;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 69 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
E c. whereas on 15 December 1995, ASEAN Member States signed the Treaty of Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ Treaty) as a commitment to preserve the Southeast Asian region as a region free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 78 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the recently adopted joint communication on an EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo- Pacific; recognises the added value of the strategy as the first foundation stone of the EU’s united approach to the region, and praises the inclusive and multifaceted nature of the strategy and the inclusion of security and defence as one of its seven priority areas; calls for the EU to use the strategy as a tool to effectively assertincrease its presence and influence in the region through furthering strategic ties and deepening cooperation on security- and defence-related matters with regional countries and organisations; believes that increased EU engagement in the region would contribute to regional security, and help overcome regional tensions and create more balanced relations among regional players; recalls that the strategy is a Team Europe project and it should strive for free and open Indo- Pacific;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 81 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls the principles, norms and values of Article 21 TEU which shall serve as normative framework for the Union's engagement in the Indo-Pacific; stresses the need to defend and promote, as a strategic objective, democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and the respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law in the region; equally underlines the Union's strategic objective to promote multilateral solutions to common problems and to seek to develop relations and build partnerships with third countries; believes that, due to rise of authoritarianism and geopolitical rivalry, the the Union should double its efforts to promote a rules based international order and the respect for the universal norms of international law;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 90 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the need to safeguardensure EU unity as a pre-condition to achieve the EU’s ambition of strategic sovereignty amid the increasing competition between the United States and Chinaforeign and security policy objectives in the Indo Pacific region; recalls that the EU’s unified approach must be underpinned by a pragmatic and principled foreign and security policy which seeks to cooperate with partners if possible, and act alone if needed in order to pursue its strategic solidarity and sovereignty;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 93 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the EU’s determination to promote an open, stable and rules-based regional security architecture, based on respect for democracy, the rule of law, human rights and international law, and including secure sea lines of communication, capacity-building and an enhanced naval presence, in accordance with the legal framework established by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); urges the EU to further engage with the countries and organisations of the Indo-Pacific to foster and further build inclusive and effective partnerships, and, therefore, strengthen multilateralism via the UN and other international organisations; recalls that non-compliance or an explicit violation of these values and principles would have negative repercussions on the EU’s engagement in bilateral and regional partnerships;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 108 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Encourages the EU to strengthen their mutual commitment with its Indo- Pacific partners to the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security, including the development of National Action Plans with appropriate budgetary allocations for effective implementation;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 110 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Encourage commitment to implementing UN Security Council Resolutions 2250, 2419 and 2535 on Youth, Peace and Security (YPS),including through the development of national YPS strategies and action plans with appropriate budgetary allocations and an emphasis on conflict prevention, and exploring ways to meaningfully engage young people in building positive peace and security;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 111 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Strategic sovereignty and solidarity based on multilateralism and the rules-based international order
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 122 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Expresses deep concerns about China’s rapid military build-up, including its test of a hypersonic missile, and its increasingly assertive behaviour, which aims, among other things, to advance its territorial claims in the East and South China Seas; highlights that security hotspots and unresolved issues, such as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear programme, the recent China-India border standoffs, the crackdown on democracy in Hong Kong, China’s failure to comply with its obligations under national and international law to respect human rights, including the rights of minorities in Xinjiang, Tibet and Inner Mongolia, and threats posed by China to the territorial integrity of Taiwan, exert further strain on regional security and stability; highlights that the EU’s approach towards China must be unified, pragmatic, multifaceted and principled, including cooperating on issues of shared interest, such as climate change, on the one hand, and competbased on HR and international law, and rivalling when it comes to providing economic, political and strategic alternatives to third countries, and confronting China on matters where our respective views diverge substantially, as the fundamental challenge in the pursuit of our values and interests, on the other hand;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 149 #

2021/2232(INI)

9. Highlights the fundamental role that connectivity plays in the geopolitical relations of the EU and its Member States, and welcomes the announcemEU´s Global Gateway strategy presented by Commission President von der Leyen to present the EU’s global gateway strategy; believes that connectivity cooperation is crucial in internationally promoting the security of infrastructure, for example via protecting and promoting the security of undersea cables, while taking into account the risks that connectivity could be weaponised; highlights the importance of connectivity cooperation for the EU and the Indo- Pacific region to successfully face up to the new security challenges, including cybersecurity, digital connectivity, critical infrastructure and the potential dual use of technology; underlines the importance of strengthening climate security and sustainable development via connectivity investments;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 162 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Enhancing partnerships with regional organisations and countriebilaterally with partners
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 175 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the longstanding cooperation between the EU and ASEAN on security and defence matters, and welcomes the recent upgrade of bilateral relations to a strategic partnership; reiterates its strong commitment to support ASEAN’s centrality and inclusive multilateral architecture; calls for the EU to anchor and extend its presence in the region by deepening cooperation with ASEAN and its members; invites the EU and ASEAN to identify wayscalls on ASEAN to involve the EU in the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus and in the East Asia Summit; underlines the fundamental role of the parliamentary dimension for strengthening democracy and promoting human rights in the region, and encouragerecalls, therefore, the demands for the establishment of an EU- ASEAN Parliamentary Assembly and more numerous and regular parliamentary exchanges and missions to the region;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 178 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Calls for the EU to strengthen dialogue and cooperation with ASEAN and bilateral partners on civilian conflict prevention, mediation, peacebuilding and reconciliation and facilitate dialogue on conflict-resolution, as well as democracy, rule of law and human rights; commends the efforts of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights for bringing human rights issues to the political agenda;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 192 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the well established cooperation between the EU and Japan in the area of security and defence, and connectivity and urges both partners to further advance the strategic partnership; calls for both partners to enhance cooperation in the area of maritime security and to further develop cooperation within the framework of the common security and defence policy (CSDP) in areas such as intelligence and capacity- building;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 194 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the commitments by the EU and India in the area of security and defence, and their recent launch of a dialogue on maritime security; invites both parties to further strengthen their operational cooperation at sea, including joint naval exercises and port calls, as well as actions to protect thand promote secure sea lines of communication, also as part of the recently established EU-India Connectivity Partnership;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 211 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the positive role Taiwan plays in fostering peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region and specifically in the Straight of Taiwan; underlines the necessity of closer coordination with like- minded partners to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait; stresses the need to enhance existing partnerships with Taiwan so as to promote common values, such as democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and good governance in the Indo-Pacific region; reminds that the status quo in the Strait of Taiwan may only be changed peacefully and by mutual agreement; reiterates its support for the participation of Taiwan in international organizations as an observer member;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 230 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the EU to invite like- minded Indo-Pacific partners to participate in selected PESCO projects; underlines that third country participation can only be exceptional, decided on a case-by-case basis and at the invitation of the EU Member States; stresses any such participation should provide added value to certain projects, and contribute to strengthening PESCO and the CSDP and to meeting more demanding commitments, subject to very strict conditions and on the basis of established and effective reciprocity;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 239 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights that maritime security and freedom of navigation, which must be ensured in accordance with international law and, in particular, the UNCLOS, are among the key challenges in the Indo- Pacific; calls for the EU tmore EU external action, in particular diplomatic efforts, to enhance the rule of law offshore and to also enhance maritime cooperation with countries in the Indo-Pacific byin that respect; welcomes also establishing systematic and coordinated frameworks, including joint exercises and port calls that would advance naval diplomacy and contribute to regional maritime security;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 246 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for the EU and its Members States to step-up their own maritime capacities in the region in a coordinated way as regards very concrete challenges and in cooperation with relevant regional partners, including by exploring ways to ensure a permanent European naval presence in the Indian Ocean; stresses the need to increase the EU’s capacity as an effective maritime security provider and stresses the need to discuss and decide on a selection of most relevant and pressing challenges which can realistically be addressed with the help of the EU in close cooperation with partners in the region; highlights the fact that France is the only Member State with a permanent military presence in the Indian Ocean; welcomnotes the fact thatpolitical signalling by the Netherlands and Germany have sentby sending frigates to the region; underlines that more such naval missions will be needed in the future; welcomes the joint naval exercises that EUNAFOR Atalanta has thus far undertaken with partner countries, and calls for the EU to consider expanding its geographical scope deeper into the Indian Ocean; invites the EU to establish a maritime area of interest in the Indo- Pacific with a view to extending its Coordinated Maritime Presences concept, building on the Member States’ individual assets while focussing on a number of most relevant challenges for which the EU has the willingness and capability to address them in an effective manner;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 253 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Reminds that effective maritime security requires broader vision of maritime stability, taking into account onshore problems of corruption, rule of law, and economic and social exclusion, root causes for illegal fishing, piracy and the environmental impact of commercial and industrial maritime activities including fossil energy sources extraction; calls on the EU to address these in parallel to more traditional maritime security measures;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 257 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Reminds that fisheries management contributes to the development of strategic landscape; calls on the EU to systematically include fisheries management on the agenda of maritime security dialogues with its Indo- Pacific partners;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 262 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Underlines the importance of information and cybersecurity as an element of the critical infrastructure of the global economy and for protecting democracies from disinformation and malicious attacks; welcomes the focus on enhanced cooperation to combat information manipulation and interference in the joint communication for an EU’s strategy for Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific; proposes to establish an EU strategic communications hub for the Indo-Pacific region with dedicated staff and resources as part of an EU Delegation in the region;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 284 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7
Non-traditionalOther key security challenges
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 293 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Reminds that human trafficking remains a challenge across Indo-Pacific; calls on the EU to cooperate with regional partners in combating human trafficking, and to support them in implementation of UN Trafficking Protocol and regional initiatives such as the ASEAN Convention Against Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 297 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Highlights that the risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons and the rapid build-up and deployment of new technologically advanced nuclear capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region remain major regional and global security concerns; believes that the EU should coordinate with like-minded partners to engage in intensive diplomacy with China, in order to develop functional arms control, disarmament and non- proliferation architecture, and protect EU and international security interests;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 304 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Reminds and supports the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ Treaty) as a commitment to preserve the Southeast Asian region as a region free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction and in particular to advance nuclear disarmament;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 306 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32 b. Notes with concerns the current modernisation and broadening of China’s nuclear arsenal, including hypersonic nuclear-capable missiles; calls on China to engage actively and in good faith in international arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation negotiations; believes that the extension of the New START Treaty should provide the foundation for negotiations on a new arms control agreement that would encompass both deployed and non- deployed, as well as strategic and non- strategic, nuclear weapons; calls for dialogue with other nuclear-weapon countries and their involvement in negotiations on any new arms control agreement, especially China, in the light of its continued increase and modernisation of its nuclear arsenal;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 309 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. EReminds of the security risks associated with the consequences of climate change; encourages the EU’s partners in the Indo-Pacific to intensify their actions to tackle climate change in accordance with the Paris agreement and encourages the EU to support these partners in implementing climate change mitigation measures, and to increase their capacities in assessing, anticipating and managing climate-security risks;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 314 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Calls on the EU to put climate and environmental security at the heart of its security cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, and fully implement EU Defence and Climate Roadmap in its engagement in the region;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 315 #

2021/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33 b. Welcomes the EU’s plan to reinforce its engagement with Indo- Pacific region on disasters and Member States’ willingness to contribute to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities; calls on the EU and its Indo-Pacific partners to making disaster prevention and resilience a priority and accelerating the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030;
2021/12/21
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Congratulates the slight increase of underrepresented Member States’ participants in the 2020 Call, thanks to the efforts made by the Undertaking and the increase of TRL of the Programme; welcomes the ongoing work on collaboration agreements with various European regions and European and international organizations and bodies in order to increase synergies with other Union programmes and funds; welcomes in particular the signature of a new Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Basque Region on 22 January 2020;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Welcomes the research and innovation efforts of the Undertaking to achieve a more sustainable, reliable and attractive railway system to Europe, thereby contributing to the resilience of the rail sector which enabled maintaining the supply chain during the COVID-19 outbreak;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 9 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Welcomes the fact that the Undertaking carried out a staff survey for the first time and that an action plan was drawn up as a consequence, in order to address the key aspects resulting from it, including the establishment of a “well being training programme” to accompany the staff during the pandemic situation;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 11 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Notes the Undertaking detailed reply in the framework of the 2020 ECA report on the status of the unfulfilled requirement to publish up-to-date CVs or conflict of interest declarations of its Governing Board members on its website, as required by the Governing Board’s Decision 07/2018 adopting the rules on the prevention and management of conflicts of interests applicable to the bodies of the JU;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Commends the Undertaking’s continued reporting, since 2018, on its contribution to the attainment of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals and in particular through the reduction of the life-cycle cost of the railway transport system as well as the negative externalities linked to railway transport; expects the same level of reporting and overall efforts from bodies related to other modes of transport, with higher negative externalities, as a necessary contribution towards their due internalisation;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5 f. Welcomes, in coincidence with the designation of 2021 as the European Year of Rail, the Undertaking's upgrade in the new Horizon Europe programme into a new partnership named Europe's Rail, in order to contribute further to a modal shift towards rail, in line with the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and the broader European Green Deal objectives;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 15 #

2021/2156(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the need to employ opportunities for funding of programmes andfurther develop synergies between the new partnership and existing funding mechanisms and to employ opportunities for projects funded under EU programmes such as Connecting Europe Facility, Digital Europe Plan, European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund., as well as InvestEU;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2021/2155(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes that one of the most important achievements claimed by the Undertaking is free routing, which is supposed to contribute to flight efficiency and reduce fuel emissions; welcomes the continued advancement towards more sustainable ATMs, yet acknowledges the limited scope of improved ATM in reducing the overall greenhouse gas emissions and that these relative benefits have been outpaced by a sustained growth in air traffic;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2155(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes that in the Undertaking's annual activity report, the key performance indicators on gender balance increased compared to previous years but nevertheless remained low, with 30 % of women in Horizon 2020 projects and 24 % of women as project coordinators in Horizon 2020. Notes the new statistics on women in the Administrative Board (7 %), the Evaluation panel (44 %), the Scientific committee (30 %), and External observers (33 %). Regrets the low gender balance especially in the Administrative board. Regrets the lack of data about gender balance in the Undertaking's staff;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the Undertaking attained a rate of implementation of 97.4 % for the commitment appropriations and 88.1 % for the payment appropriations; regrets the decreases in the implementation rate of the operational payment budget and the payment budget of the infrastructure and communication expenditure compared to the previous year with implementation rates of 82.6 % (compared to 97.2% in 2019) and 42.7 % (compared to 98.7 % in 2019) respectively at the end of 2020;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the fact that, despite the Covid-crisis, more than 80 % of Clean Sky’s key demonstrators will achieve their objectives by the end of the programme as planned; noteregrets however that delays of between 4 and 6 months are expected for one third of the demonstrators;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 11 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Regrets that, contrary to its financial rules, the Undertaking did not fully use the previous years' appropriation of EUR 13.3 million re-entered into its operational budget 2020, before using the payment appropriations of the year;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 12 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Notes with concern the significant increase in the Undertaking’s use of interim staff for tasks of non-temporary nature between 2017 and 2020. Highlights the risks that insufficient statutory staffing poses concerning retention of key competences, unclear accountability channels, and lower staff efficiency, and notes the Undertakings’s own explicit concern with a rigid staff establishment under increasing workload;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Welcomes the Undertaking's implementation of the Commission’s internal control framework (ICF) based on 17 internal control principles in 2020;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7 d. Welcomes the corrective action taken by the Undertaking to address the systemic errors related to declared personnel costs observed by the European Court of Auditors in the previous year;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. RegretNotes that the cancelled payment appropriations amounted to almost 5 % (mainly due to the Covid-19 crisis) while the implementation rate for current-year appropriations was 89,3 %;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 4 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes that, following a successful start in 2019, the Agency has continued to perform its role of EU single authority responsible for issuing authorisations for placing railway vehicles on the market, single safety certificates for railway undertakings and ERTMS trackside approvals, as stated in the legal framework of the 4th Railway Package; stresses that this has entailed a considerable increase of workload within the agency, beyond the forecasted level for 2020; points out that a number of the important tasks also mandated to the agency have not been resourced yet, in particular concerning NSA Monitoring, NoBo monitoring, cleaning up of national rules, registers [EVR, RINF2 development], and the One-Stop-Shop’s complete development; notes that these account for a workload gap of approximately 18 FTEs as estimated by the agency; concludes therefore that the agency urgently needs a considerable increase in funding, well beyond previous estimates based on assessments made before the new duties and related tasks were fully assumed;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 7 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Commends the agency on its progress with the safety culture model and with attracting more organisations to sign the safety declaration, for instance through its successful contribution to promoting the Risk Management Framework for the Transport of Dangerous Goods, and particularly focusing on the improvement of ERTMS robustness against cyber threats, as well as strengthening the cooperation with EC and ENISA aiming at developing a coherent approach at EU level;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 12 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Congratulates the agency’s recommendation to the Commission elements leading to a full revision of the TAP TSI and thereby aiding the facilitation of ticketing and multi-modal travel at national and domestic level.
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 21 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Notes that the change of mandate of confidential councillors as well as planned trainings for new councillors and staff at large were interrupted due to the pandemic in 2020; encourages that training and other necessary preparations are still carried out, even remotely should the circumstances in the coming terms require it; stresses that the enforcement of harassment prevention strategies are of particular importance in view of the 3 harassment cases reported in 2020;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 24 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Suggests the agency, as well as the other Union agencies and bodies, to present a clear overview of the percentage of women and men employed in every job category EU-wide;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 26 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the Agency has the smallest budget among the transport agencies despite the outstanding environmental performance and other benefits of rail transport contributing to the attainment of the European Green Deal objectives and the Climate Law targets; stresses in particular that the Agency should not be put in a position where it feels compelled to request additional support from the Commission, due to inadequate financial means, especially at a time when railways are a policy priority of the European Union, particularly within the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and as demonstrated by the designation of 2021 as the European Year of Rail; calls for an increase of the budget of the Agency in order to provide it with the necessary means to enable it to act as an efficient authority and to fulfil its tasks, particularly those with regard to increasing competitiveness, improving safety and, cross- border interoperability and particularly its enhanced role and responsibilities on the timely ERTMS deployment;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2021/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Suggests to consider the possibility to unify the premises of the agency into a single seat, if feasible, as this could positively contribute to further optimise efficiency and reduce overhead costs of the agency;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 3 #

2021/2134(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Agency’s 2020-2024 strategy that will enable it to fulfil its maritime surveillance, safety and security tasks while contributing efficiently to the Union’s digital and environmental priorities; welcomes in particular the Agency’s drafting - with the European Environment Agency - of the first European Maritime Transport Environmental Report, collecting verified information on the environmental footprint of shipping activities; commends the Agency's continued enhancement of the THETIS-MRV system and stresses the importance of giving EMSA the necessary powers and resources to monitor emission reporting from vessels. Points out, moreover, that with additional capacity the Agency could play an even more important role in mitigating sectorial greenhouse gas emissions as well as other shipping-related environmental risks, including fulfilling the expected tasks in the field of response to marine pollution caused by ships and oil and gas installations;
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 8 #

2021/2134(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that for the third full year of Remotely Piloted Aircrafts Services (RPAS) operations offered by EMSA, the Agency increased its RPAS services to 944 operational days (1 372 flight hours) in the scope of coast guard functions and supporting the Member States and EU agencies in maritime surveillance operations; welcomes the use of RPAS operations in marine pollution and ship emissions monitoring. Notes the concerns over the Agency’s maritime surveillance complicity in fundamental rights violations at the border in a number of Member States.
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2134(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes EMSA's new policy on relations with potential lobbyists and hopes it will be fully implemented in 2021.
2021/11/26
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2021/2121(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. NoteRegrets that the rate of cancelled appropriations relating to commitments carried over to 2020 increased to 5,46 % (3,7 % in 2019), above the 2,5 % target set by the Agency in its 2020 performance indicators and slightly above the 5 % ceiling set by the Commission. This was mainly due to the COVID-19 crisis and to the cancellations related to global travel restrictions, confinement measures, reduction in activities and cancellation of events;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 8 #

2021/2121(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Warmly welcomes the study published by the Agency in 2020 with an updated analysis on the “Non-CO2 climate impacts of aviation and potential policy measures pursuant to EU Emissions Trading System Directive Article 30(4)”1a, and stresses its relevant conclusions that the effects of those emissions, such as contrails, result into two to three times more impact in global warming than the CO2 ones alone; _________________ 1a https://www.easa.europa.eu/document- library/research-reports/report- commission-european-parliament-and- council
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 9 #

2021/2121(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the launch in cooperation with global partners and industry, of the EASA Sustainable Aviation Programme (2020 - 2024) focusing efforts towards achieving a cleaner, quieter and more sustainable aviation system; remains critical, however, towards the granting of eco-labels to aviation, especially in the absence of a more integrative such system allowing the comparison of all modes of transport in an objective way.
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2021/2121(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Regrets the lack of an EU-wide breakdown of gender by staff category in the Agency’s entry in the Consolidated Staff Figures for 2020. Encourages the Agency to fix this short-coming for coming publications.
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2121(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Welcomes the Agency’s investments in videoconferencing facilities in an effort to reduce business travel and encourages the agency to apply this as a sustained, long-term commitment.
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the need to allocate Union funding exclusively to transport projects that fulfil the requirements of a future- proof, sustainable European transport network, in accordance with the Union taxonomy, and consequently to prioritise projects that significantly contribute to reaching climate-neutrality in the transport sector;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 6 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in 2020, the 2019 multi annual call for proposals under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) was successfully completed, selecting 125 projects with an overall contribution of more than EUR 2 billion; underlines the importance of investing in sustainable transport networks to enable the necessary faster trend in the shift towards more sustainable modes of transport; underlines the target of at least 60% of the CEF2 related expenditure to be unambiguously contributing in reaching the Union climate targets;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets the low implementation rate of CEF during the 2014-2020 period: calls on Member States to significantly speed up investments, and on the Commission to step up its monitoring in view of the urgent need for infrastructure investment in order to facilitate a swift recovery from the Covid-19 crisis and to lay the groundwork for a transition to more sustainable transport; is concerned that a significant under- execution of payments for transport infrastructure financed by the Cohesion Fund contribution to CEF for 2021 is expected, and that implementation delays and decommitment of funds might occur;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Draws attention to the conclusions of European Court of Auditors' Special Report 10/2020, which raise diverse serious socioeconomic and environmental concerns over different transport flagship mega-infrastructure projects across the Union, such as inaccurate estimations regarding traffic forecasts or the cumulative delays, remarkably impacting the related cost-benefit analysis as well as the life-cycle emissions calculations within the 2030 and 2050 horizons; considers that EU transport funding would be more effectively spent, also in terms of climate neutrality contribution, by considerably supporting smaller-scale regional cross-border rail missing links;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 22 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Notes that the proportion of high- risk expenditure has grown, as opposed to the previous year, from 53,1% to 59% of all expenditure; stresses that such reimbursement-based expenditures increase the chances and potential impact of related material errors; underlines that this requires complex rules on eligibility and incurring of reimbursement; notes that largest share of these high-risk expenditures take place under Cohesion expenditure (48.8 billion), which is a relevant envelope of for the CEF Transport funding.
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 23 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Requests that the Commission, together with the Court and OLAF, closely monitor the EU transport projects, as public investment in infrastructure is particularly sensitive to fraud; considers this essential not only to ensure transparency that prevents corruption and misuse of taxpayers' money, but also to ensure that the highest safety standards for the users are not compromised;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the COVID-19 pandemic placed transport and tourism in Union under an unprecedented pressure and welcomes the Commission’s efforts to provide relief to the sectors and financing using the Coronavirus Response Investment Initiatives (CRII and CRII+), CEF, RRF, Cohesion Fund, InvestEU, ERDF; stresses that these funds should be used to rebuild the sectors in a truly sustainable form, adapted to the circumstances of a future-looking climate-neutral European economy;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 29 #

2021/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Reiterates the request for the creation of a new budgetary line for Sustainable Tourism, to support the recovery of a sector severely hit by the Covid-19 crisis by means of a green and digital transformation, making it resilient for the future and compliant with the European Green Deal ambitions; welcomes that in November 2020 the European Court of Auditors launched an audit to analyse tourism projects co- funded with EUR 6,4 billion in 2007-2013 and EUR 4 billion so far in 2014-2020 ERDF and Cohesion Fund money, as well as what the EU is doing to limit the negative impact of the COVID-19 crisis; looks forward still to the final report and its conclusions so as to assess whether EU funding for public investments in tourism was effective and provided suitable support for the sector prior to the pandemic, and ultimately to help improving EU Tourism policies in general;
2021/11/29
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the EU and Indian leadership affirmed their determination to promote effective multilateralism and a rules-based multilateral order with the United Nations(UN) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) at its core;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas leadership from EU and India is needed to promote effective climate diplomacy and global commitment to the implementation of the Paris Agreement and global protection of climate and the environment;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
B c. whereas bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the current context of heightened global risks and increasing great power competition should encompass reinforcement of international security, strengthening of preparedness and response for global health emergencies, such as the current COVID- 19 pandemic, enhancement of global economic stability and inclusive growth, and implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2021/2023(INI)

B d. whereas India’s regional and global importance is growing, and it has increasingly strengthened its position as a donor as well as an economic and military power; whereas India’s G20 Presidency in 2023, its membership in the UN Security Council in 2021-2022, and in the UN Human Rights Council in 2019-2021, reinvigorate the need for close cooperation;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
B e. whereas the EU’s strategic framework vested in its global strategy, strategy for India, strategy for EU-Asia Connectivity as well as the emerging Indo-Pacific Strategy have highlighted the vital importance of cooperating on the EU’s global agenda with India;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 36 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
B f. whereas the latest summit between EU and India agreed on principles of sustainable connectivity, including the G20 voluntary Principles for Quality Infrastructure Investment(QII), and agreed to explore ways to improve connectivity between the EU and India, and consequent connectivity with third countries, including in the Indo-Pacific region;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 38 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
-a) continue the positive improvement and deepening of EU-India relations as strategic partners, and uphold the commitment to regular multi-level dialogues, including summits;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 55 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) revive the Council’s 2018 request to modernise the institutional architecture of the 1994 EU-India cooperation agreement in line with new common aspirations and global challenges; reinvigorate the idea of negotiating a Strategic Partnership Agreement, including a strong parliamentary dimension;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 69 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g
g) promote greater synergy in foreign and security policy through the existing relevant dialogue mechanisms and within fora set up under the AgeEU-India for ActionRoadmap 20205, and in light of the EU’s recent strategic emphasis on enhanced security cooperation in and with Asia;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 100 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
k a) promote conflict prevention and economic cooperation by supporting regional integration initiatives in South Asia, including within the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC);
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 115 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n
n) underline that preserving peace, stability and the freedom of navigation in the Indo-Pacific region remains of critical importance to the interests of the EU and its Member States; intensify cooperation in maritime security in the Indo-Pacific regionencourage further common reading of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea including the freedom of navigation and intensify cooperation in maritime security in the Indo-Pacific region; launch an EU-India high level dialogue on maritime cooperation aimed at broadening the scope of the current consultations on anti- piracy and increasing interoperability and coordination between the Operation EUNAVFOR Atalanta, India’s Information Fusion Centre for the Indian Ocean Region (IFC-IOR) and the Indian navy in the field of maritime surveillance, disaster relief and joint training and exercises;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 122 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
n a) jointly encourage further dialogue in view of an early conclusion of a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea that would not prejudice the legitimate rights of any nation in accordance with international law;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 136 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o a (new)
o a) support comprehensive dialogue for developing stable and peaceful relations between India and Pakistan;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 137 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o b (new)
o b) take positive note of India’s long- running support to Afghanistan and its commitment to people-centered and locally-led peacebuilding efforts: recognise an opportunity for a constructive EU-India partnership as regards to the Afghan Peace Process;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 139 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o c (new)
o c) recall that the development of the digital sector is paramount to security, and must include diversification of the supply chain of equipment manufacturers, through the promotion of open and interoperable network architectures and digitalisation partnerships, with partners who share the EU’s values and utilise technology in compliance with fundamental rights;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 144 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point q
q) encourage a shared commitment to implementing UN Security Council Resolutions 2250, 2419 and 2535 on Youth, Peace and Security (YPS), including through the development of National YPS Strategies and Action Plans with appropriate budgetary allocations and an emphasis on conflict prevention; encourage India, together with EU Member States, to invest in young people's capacities and to partner with youth organisations in dialogue and accountability; explore new ways to include young people in building positive peace and security;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 186 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t
t) address the human rights situation and challenges faced by civil society in its dialogue with the Indian authorities, including at summit level; encourage India, as the world’s largest democracy, to demonstrate its commitment to respecting and protecting the freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, to end attacks against - and to releasincluding in relation to the latest, large- scale farbitrarily detained -mers' protests, to end attacks against human rights defenders and journalists, including in the Indian- administered part of and to cease invoking laws against sedition and terrorism to restrict their legitimate activities, including in Jammu and Kashmir, to repeal laws that may be used to silence dissent, and to ensure accountability for human rights violations;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 201 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u
u) act upon the commitment made in u) the EU-India Roadmap to resume the bilateral, local human rights dialogue and to upgrade it to a headquarters' level dialogue; make the dialogue meaningful by ensuring high- level participation, setting concrete commitments and criteria for progress, addressing individual cases and facilitating an EU-India civil society dialogue ahead of the intergovernmental dialogue; ensure that the human rights dialogue covers among others the situation of civil society organizations and human rights defenders, matters related to citizenship, discrimination, including gender- or caste-based, protection of religious and ethnic minorities, and the promotion of tolerance in preventing violence; request the EEAS to regularly report to the European Parliament on results achieved;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 207 #

2021/2023(INI)

u a) recall the EU’s principled and long-standing rejection of the death penalty and reiterate its plea to India for a death penalty moratorium with a view to the permanent abolition of capital punishment;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 209 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u b (new)
u b) urge India to ratify the UN Convention against Torture and its optional protocol and the UN Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 210 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u c (new)
u c) encourage India to support international justice efforts further by signing the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC);
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 211 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u d (new)
u d) encourage India to continue its tradition of granting protection to persons fleeing violence and persecution until conditions for safe, dignified and voluntary return are possible, and to take all measures needed to eliminate risks of statelessness for communities in India;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 226 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y
y) finalise negotiations on a connectivity partnership with India; support it by providing loans and guarantees to sustainable investment into digital and green infrastructural bi- and multilateral projects in India, by EU’s public and private entities such as the European Investment Bank (EIB), and the new external financing instrument, in line with the potential outlined in EU- Asia Connectivity strategy;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 230 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y a (new)
y a) ensure that connectivity initiatives are based on social, environmental and fiscal standards and the values of sustainability, transparency, inclusiveness, the rule of law, respect for human rights and reciprocity; stress the importance of sustainability as a vital condition for all connectivity initiatives and highlight that connectivity policies should reduce negative externalities such as environmental damage and pollution and be fully consistent with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and its legal instruments including the Paris Climate Agreement;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 231 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point z a (new)
z a) enhance cooperation on sustainable mobility via concrete measures such as the further development of electric transportation infrastructures, and investments in railway projects; highlight the vital importance of railways for relieving congestion and pollution in large urban areas, reaching climate objectives, and ensuring resilience of vital supply chains including during crises;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 232 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point z b (new)
z b) support further cooperation on challenges posed by the rapid urbanisation including via exchange of knowledge and best practices through shared platforms and city-to-city cooperation, cooperation on smart city technology, and continued financial support to projects in urban transport in India via the European Investment Bank;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 236 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ab
ab) raise the level of ambition on EU- India bilateral and multilateral cooperation on climate change notably by accelerating green growth and a just and safe clean energy transition, reaching climate neutrality by mid-century, and enhancing the ambition of nationally determined contributions; continue common global leadership in support of the Paris Agreement and focus on implementing the clean and renewable energy agenda;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 238 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ab a (new)
ab a) focus on implementing the clean and renewable energy agenda; note India’s leadership in renewable energy, and progress made through the EU – India Clean Energy and Climate Partnership; encourage cooperation to further advance electric mobility, sustainable cooling, next generation battery technology, distributed generation of electricity, and just transition in India; intensify the implementation of the sustainable water management partnership;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 246 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ad a (new)
ad a) align with the goals of the EU- Asia Connectivity strategy and coordinate with the G20 presidencies held by Italy in 2021 and India in 2023 in order to deliver on increasing connectivity between Europe and India;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 248 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ae
ae) step up the EU’s ambitions for digital connectivity with India in the context of the EU’s digital transformation strategy; invest in a partnership in digital services and the development of responsible artificial intelligence; continue to support data protection reform in India; strive for close cooperation on data protection with the aim of advancing adequacy decisions for data flows in compliance with fundamental rights; note that an alignment of the Indian and European data regulation significantly facilitates mutual cooperation, trade and the safe transmission of information and expertise; work towards replicating the EU’s international mobile roaming agreements with India;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 252 #

2021/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ae a (new)
ae a) take effective steps to facilitate EU-India mobility, including for migrants, students, high skilled workers and artists, considering the availability of skills and labour market needs in the EU and India; recognise the considerable talent pool in the fields of digitalisation and artificial intelligence in both India and the EU and the mutual interest to develop high level expertise and cooperation in this field;
2021/03/22
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1773 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2 - table - section FI (new)
Node name: Kaskinen Maritime port: Comprehensive
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1774 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2 - table - section FI
Node name: Kokkola Maritime port: Comprehensivre
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1775 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2 - table - section FI
Node name: Oulu / Uleåborg Maritime port: Comprehensivre (Oulu)
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 33 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The Commission’s Communication on a Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy33 identifies the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems (‘ITS’) as a key action in achieving connected and automated multimodal mobility, and therefore contributing to the transformation of the European transport system to reach the objective of efficient, safe, sustainable, smart and resilient mobility. This complements the actions announced under the flagship on greening of freight transport to foster multimodal logistics. The strategy also announced for 2022 a revision of the Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1926 on multimodal travel information services to include mandatory accessibility of dynamic datasets, as well as an assessment of the need for regulatory action on rights and duties of multimodal digital service providers together with an initiative on ticketing, including rail ticketing. This directive should ensure that ITS applications in the field of road transport enable seamless integration with other modes of transport, such as rail or active mobility, thus facilitating a shift to those modes whenever possible, while avoiding increased use of private car travel due to improved efficiency and accessibility. Data from all modes should be available, accessible, interoperable and in machine-readable format. __________________ 33 COM(2020)0789 final.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 39 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) In many Member States national applications of those systems and services are already being deployed in the road transport sector. However, despite improvements since its adoption in 2010, the evaluation of Directive 2010/40/EU38 found persistent shortcomings leading to remaining fragmented and uncoordinated deployment and lack of geographical continuity of ITS services throughout the Union and at its external borders. The development of ITS should cover the needs of suburban, rural and peripheral areas, by ensuring social and economic inclusion, as life in such areas largely depends on the availability of quality public services and infrastructure and as large gains can be expected from the development of these services and infrastructure in these areas through the deployment of ITS. __________________ 38 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport- themes/intelligent-transport- systems/road/action-plan-and-directive_en
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 41 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) In the context of the implementation of Commission Delegated Regulations39 supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU, Member States have established national access points40 (NAPs). The NAPs organise the access to and reuse of transport related data to help support the provision of EU-wide interoperable travel and traffic ITS services to end users. These NAPs are an important component of the common European mobility data space under the European strategy for data41 and should be relied upon in particular as regards the accessibility of data. Data on NAPs should be provided at no cost, as open data, including through open and standardised interfaces for the benefit of end users and commercial entities. Member States should ensure full compliance with the obligations set out in Directive 2010/40/EU and no later than 2024. __________________ 39 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 885/2013 of 15 May 2013 supplementing ITS Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the provision of information services for safe and secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles (OJ L 247, 18.9.2013, p. 1); Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013 of 15 May 2013 supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to data and procedures for the provision, where possible, of road safety-related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users (OJ L 247, 18.9.2013, p. 6); Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/962 of 18 December 2014 supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the provision of EU-wide real-time traffic information services (OJ L 157, 23.6.2015, p. 21); and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1926 of 31 May 2017 supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the provision of EU-wide multimodal travel information services (OJ L 272, 21.10.2017, p. 1). 40 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport- themes/intelligent-transport- systems/road/action-plan-and- directive/national-access-points_en 41 COM(2020) 66 final0066.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 46 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) The Commission should establish a common European access point for the access to and reuse of transport related data to help support the provision of EU- wide interoperable travel and traffic ITS services to end users and commercial entities. This common European access point should connect all National Access Points and offer access to all data covered by this Directive and the Delegated Regulation 2010/40/EU. The Commission should ensure that the common European access point is made available to the public and is easily accessible by way of providing open data, at no cost, and through opened and standardised interfaces. Member States should ensure that their National Access Points allow for an automated and uniform data exchange with the common European access point.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 59 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) The 2020 study “Mapping accessible transport for persons with reduced mobility”47 shows that the lack of sufficient data concerning accessibility features currently prevents reliable journey planning when using accessibility aspects as search variables and that setting minimum requirements and standards for information for persons with disabilities and reduced mobility should be considered as a priority at the European and Member State level. To further enhance the accessibility of the transport system and facilitate travel for people with disabilities and people with reduced mobility, multimodal digital mobility services require the availability of data on access nodes and their accessibility features. __________________ 47 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/dfa0c844-3b5f-11eb- b27b-01aa75ed71a1
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 62 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) The increased integration of ITS and advanced driver assistance systems, or vehicle and infrastructure systems in general, implies that such systems will rely more and more on the information they supply to each other. That is particularly the case for C-ITS. Such reliance will increase with higher levels of automation. These higher levels of automation are expected to make use of communication between vehicles and infrastructure to orchestrate manoeuvres and smoothen traffic flows, contributing also to more sustainable transport. Secure communication between vehicles and other entities in the transport system is an essential requirement and should ensure the reliability, accuracy and availability of data, without compromising the need for fair access to data by different stakeholders and end users. Compromising the integrity of ITS services could thus have a severe impact on road safety, for example when the wrong speed limit is communicated or a vehicle makes an emergency stop due to a non-existing danger. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in emergency situations where the integrity of ITS services is compromised, to adopt countermeasures to address the causes and the consequences of that situation. Those measures should be taken as quickly as possible and be immediately applicable. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council48 . In consideration of the need to ensure continuity of transport, it is appropriate to apply the prolongation of the validity of such measure beyond six months making use of the possibility provided under Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Such countermeasures should end as soon as an alternative solution is implemented or the emergency situation has been resolved. __________________ 48 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 63 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) The increased integration of ITS and advanced driver assistance systems, or vehicle and infrastructure systems in general, implies that such systems will rely more and more on the information they supply to each other. That is particularly the case for C-ITS. Such reliance will increase with higher levels of automation. These higher levels of automation are expected to make use of communication between vehicles and infrastructure to orchestrate manoeuvres and smoothen traffic flows, contributing also to more sustainable transport. Compromising the integrity of ITS services could thus have a severe impact on road safety, for example when the wrong speed limit is communicated or a vehicle makes an emergency stop due to a non-existing danger. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in emergency situations where the integrity of ITS services is compromised, to in one or more Member States or where the integrity of the ITS services in one or more Member States has cross-border implications. The Commission should thus adopt countermeasures to address the causes and the consequences of thatose situations. Those measures should be taken as quickly as possible and be immediately applicable. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council48 . In consideration of the need to ensure continuity of transport, it is appropriate to apply the prolongation of the validity of such measure beyond six months making use of the possibility provided under Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Such countermeasures should end as soon as an alternative solution is implemented or the emergency situation has been resolved. __________________ 48 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 70 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) Where they involve the processing of personal data, the specifications to be developed under this Directive should take the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC into account. In particular, wWhenever it is possible to equally achieve the purposes pursued using anonymous instead of personal data, anonymisation as one of the techniques for enhancing individuals’ privacy should be encouragused, in line with the principle of data protection by design.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 71 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Where the deployment and use of ITS applications and services entail the sharing of data held by commercial entities with other entities including public sector bodies, under obligations arising from Union or national law, such sharing arrangements shall, to the extent possible and unless further specified in Union or national law, respect the commercial interests of data holders; Such provisions should apply without prejudice to all other relevant Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, including the powers and competences of supervisory authorities;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 79 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) Member States, the European Parliament and other relevant stakeholders, including other Commission expert groups and committees dealing with digital aspects of transport, should be consulted in the drawing up of the working programmes adopted by the Commission under Directive 2010/40/EU.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 81 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) In order to achieve the objectives of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to amend the list of data types for which Member States are to ensure the availability of data and to amend the list of ITS services for which Member States are to ensure deployment, for a period of five years starting from the entry into force of this Directive. This period should be tacitly extended for periods of the same duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council oppose such an extension. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level and with stakeholders representing all types of road users and other parties concerned in an equal manner, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making59 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 59 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1).
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 84 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the following shall constitute priority areas for the development and use of specifications and standards, to be fulfilled by 2025 at the latest:
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 86 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1a (new)
1a. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, should it be considered crucial for the deployment of services, in particular those related to improving road safety, reducing environmental and health impacts or for developing efficient multimodal transport systems, mandates for collecting and making available data should be developed in order to achieve the objectives set out through the priority areas.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 89 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point -a (new)
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(-a) point (2) is replaced by the following: ‘(2) ‘interoperability’ means the capacity of systems and the underlying business processes to exchange data and share information and knowledge at all levels to guarantee the continuity of ITS services;’;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 109 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 6a – paragraph 2
Member States shall ensure the accessibility of that data on the National Access Points by the same date. Member States shall make it possible for the general public, end users, including transport operators and persons using different modes of transport, to interpret and understand data on National Access Points by providing an appropriate, free, open and standardised user interface, that is machine-readable and without prejudice to all relevant Union law.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 113 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 6a – paragraph 3 (new)
By 31 December 2026, the Commission shall establish a common European access point for the access to and reuse of transport related data to help support the provision of EU-wide interoperable travel and traffic ITS services to end users. This common European access point shall connect all National Access Points and offer access to all data covered by Directive 2010/40/EU. The Commission shall ensure that the common European access point is made available to the public and is easily accessible by way of providing open data, at no cost, and through open and standardised interfaces. Member States shall ensure that their National Access Points allow for an automated and uniform data exchange with the common European access and without prejudice to all relevant Union law.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 118 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 6b – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that the ITS services specified in Annex IV are deployed for the geographical coverage set out in that Annex by the date specified therein. and without prejudice to relevant Union law;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 119 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 7 – paragraph 1a
1a. Following a cost-benefit analysis and an impact assessment including appropriate consultations, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to amend the list of data types in Annex III, including the date of implementation and the geographical coverage for each data type. Those amendments shall be consistent with the data categories set out in the latest working programme adopted in accordance with Article 17(5). Consultations should be inclusive of representatives of all road users and other groups concerned in an equal manner.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 121 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 7 – paragraph 1b
1b. Following a cost-benefit analysis taking due account of market developments and technology evolution and an impact assessment including appropriate consultations, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to amend the list of ITS services in Annex IV, including the date of implementation and the geographical coverage for each ITS service. Those amendments shall be consistent with the list of ITS services set out in the latest working programme adopted in accordance with Article 17(5). Consultations should be inclusive of representatives of all road users and other groups concerned in an equal manner.;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 132 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Where specifications adopted pursuant to Article 6 concern the processing of traffic, travel or road data that are personal data as defined in Article 4, point (1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679*, they shall lay down the categories of those data and provide for appropriate personal data protection safeguards pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. Where appropriate, the use of anonymous datadata can be anonymised, it shall be encouraganonymised.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 133 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 10 –a (new)
(10a) The following Article 10-a is inserted: ‘Article 10-a Sharing of ITS-generated data by commercial entities Where the deployment and use of ITS applications and services entail the sharing of data held by commercial entities with other entities including public sector bodies, under obligations arising from Union or national law, such sharing arrangements shall, to the extent possible and unless further specified in Union or national law, respect the commercial interests of data holders; Such provisions shall apply without prejudice to all other relevant Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, and including the powers and competences of supervisory authorities.’;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 135 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Directive 2010/40/EU
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Following the initial report, Member States shall report every 32 years on the progress made in the implementation of this Directive and of all delegated acts supplementing this Directive, as referred to in paragraph 1.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 140 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.1 – paragraph 1 – point 2.1.4
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.1 – paragraph 1 – point 2.1.4
2.1.4. the availability of data and synergies with other initiatives aimed at harmonising and facilitating data sharing67 , as well as supporting multimodality, integration of modes and, optimising the modal balance on the European transport network and maximising the use of the most sustainable transport modes available. __________________ 67 Such as Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 on electronic freight transport information (OJ L 249, 31.7.2020, p. 33), and the work pursued by the Digital Transport and Logistics Forum (DTLF).
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 141 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.2.1
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.2.1
2.2.1. the availability and accessibility of existing and accur, in a standardised format, of existing, accurate and up-to-date road and multimodal travel and traffic data needed for mobility management, to the relevant public authorities without prejudice to data protection requirements;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 142 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2.4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The definition of the necessary requirements to support the realisation of ITS applications for freight transport logistics, in particular the tracking and tracing of freight and other visibility services along its journey and across modes of transport, and without prejudice to all relevant Union law, based on:
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 150 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3.4 – point 3.4.1
3.4.1. The definition of the necessary measures to support the safety of road users with respect to their on-board Human-Machine-Interface and the use of nomadic devices, including cell phones, to support the driving task and/or the transport operation, as well as the security of the in-vehicle communications which fall outside the scope of Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council69 , Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council70 and Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council71, . The definitions of the necessary measures shall also recognise the need to ensure mutual acceptance of ITS messages exchanged between modes of transport, whose ITS devices and attached sensors have been developed based on different functional safety standards. __________________ 69 Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC (OJ L 151, 14.6.2018, p. 1). 70 Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 February 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of agricultural and forestry vehicles (OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 1). 71 Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles (OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 52).
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 161 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table 1 column 4 – row 11
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex II – table 1 – column 4 – row 11
take into account the coordination of variousall modes of transport, where appropriate, when deploying ITS relevant to this Directive, and in particular cycling and walking, when deploying ITS by ensuring, although not limited to, interoperability of systems, data exchange and applications across modes;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 163 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table 1 – column 4 – row 13
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex II – table 1 – column 4 – row 13
ensure transparency of ranking when proposing mobility options to the customers. Always include information on environmental effects of each mobility option in the proposal to the customer in a form that is clear and easy to understand.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 164 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table 1 – column 4 – row 13
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex II – table 1 – column 4 – row 13
ensure transparency of ranking when proposing mobility options to the customers. Always include information on environmental effects of each mobility option in the proposal to the customer in a form that is clear and easy to understand;
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 165 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table 1 – row 13 a (new)
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex II – table 1 – row 13 a (new)
(ma) technology neutral – specifications should describe the result to be achieved, but not impose, or discriminate in favour of, the use of a particular type of technology to achieve the result, unless it is appropriate, justified or has the purpose of fulfilling a general interest objective in accordance with Union law including Directive (EU) 2018/1972*.
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 170 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of data on regulations and restrictions (as referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/9626 ): Static and dynamic traffic The entire road network of the 31 December regulations, where applicable, EU that is publicly accessible to 2028 including: 6 concerning the following data motorised traffic, with the and includes types: cycling infrastructure, with the - access conditions for tunnels exception of private roads. - access conditions for tunnels - access conditions for bridges - speed limits - freight delivery regulationsbridges Note : This amendment applies throughout the text - inclusion - speed limits of ‘including cycling - freight delivery regulations infrastructure’ - overtaking bans on heavy goods vehicles - direction of travel on reversible lanes
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 171 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of data on regulations and restrictions (as referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/9626 ): Static and dynamic traffic The entire road network of the 31 December regulations, where applicable, EU that is publicly accessible to 2025 including: motorised traffic, with the exception of private roads 2026 concerning the following data motorised traffic and includes types: cycling infrastructure, with the - access conditions for tunnels exception of private roads. - access conditions for bridges - speed limits - freight delivery regulations - overtaking bans on heavy goods vehicles - direction of travel on reversible lanes - traffic circulation plans permanent access restrictions The entire road network that is 31 December publicly accessible to motorised 20254 traffic - permanent access restrictions The entire road network that is 31 December publicly accessible to motorised 2025 traffic and including cycling infrastructure
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 172 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 1 to 5
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of data on regulations The entire road network of the 31 December and restrictions (as referred to EU that is publicly accessible to 20285 in Commission Delegated motorised traffic, with theand includes Regulation (EU) 2015/962): cycling infrastructure, with the exception of private roads. - road closures - lane closures - roadworks - temporary traffic management measurlocation and length of traffic queues - traffic volume - speed - travel times
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 174 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 6 to 8
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 6 to 8
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of data on the state of The trans-European network for 31 December the network (as referred to in roads, other motorways not 20254 Commission Delegated included in that network and Regulation (EU) 2015/962): primary roads., including all - road closures roads with cycling infrastructure. - lane closures - roadworks - temporary traffic management measures - road conditions - accidents and incidents including VRUs
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 175 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 6 to 8
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 6 to 8
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of data on the state of The entire road network that isof the 31 December the network (as referred to in EU that is publicly accessible to motorised 20287 Commission Delegated traffic, with the exception ofmotorised traffic, and includes Regulation (EU) 2015/962): cycling infrastructure, with the exception of private roads. - road closures - lane closures - roadworks - temporary traffic management measures - road conditions - accidents and incidents including VRUs
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 177 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 11 and 12
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 11 and 12
Data type Geographical coverage Date Data on detected road safety- related events or conditions (as referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013): - temporary slippery road The trans-Europeanentire road network forof the 31 December roads, other motorways not EU that is publicly accessible to 2026 5 - animal, people, obstacles, included in that network and motorised traffic and includes debris on the road primary roads. cycling infrastructure, with the - unprotected accident area exception of private roads. - short-term road works - reduced visibility - wrong-way driver - unmanaged blockage of a road road - exceptional weather conditions
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 179 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex III – table 1 – rows 13 and 14
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – rows 13 and 14
Data type Geographical coverage Date Date Types of multimodal static travel data (as referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1926): Location of identified access The entire transport network of 31 December nodes for all scheduled modes, the EU. 20265 including information on accessibility of access nodes and paths within an interchange (such as existence of lifts, escalators)
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 180 #

2021/0419(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 3 – Table 1 – Types of dynamic travel and traffic data (new)
Directive 2010/40/EU
Annex III – table 1 – Types of dynamic travel and traffic data (new)
Data type Geographical coverage Date Types of the dynamic travel and traffic data (as referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1926): Passing times, trip plans and The entire road network of the 31 December auxiliary information: EU that is publicly accessible to 2025 motorised traffic and includes cycling infrastructure, with the exception of private roads. - Disruptions - Real-time status information — delays, cancellations, guaranteed connections monitoring (all modes) - Status of access node features (including dynamic platform information, operational lifts/escalators, closed entrances and exit locations — all scheduled modes) Passing times, trip plans and auxiliary information (all modes): - Estimated departure and arrival times of services - Current road link travel times - Cycling network closures/diversions Information service: - Availability of publicly accessible charging stations for electric vehicles and refuelling points for CNG/LNG, hydrogen, petrol and diesel powered vehicles Availability check: - Car-sharing availability, bike sharing availability - Car parking spaces available (on and off-street), parking tariffs, road toll tariffs Trip plans: - Future predicted road link travel times
2022/06/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 74 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with Union values. This Regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest, such as a high level of protection of health, safety and, fundamental rights and the environment, and it ensures the free movement of AI- based goods and services cross-border, thus preventing Member States from imposing restrictions on the development, marketing and use of AI systems, unless explicitly authorised by this Regulation.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 75 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) A Union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development, use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests, such as health and safety, the environment, and the protection of fundamental rights, as recognised and protected by Union law. To achieve that objective, rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain AI systems should be laid down, thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. By laying down those rules, this Regulation supports the objective of the Union of being a global leader in the development of secure, trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence, as stated by the European Council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles, as specifically requested by the European Parliament34 . _________________ 33 European Council, Special meeting of the European Council (1 and 2 October 2020) – Conclusions, EUCO 13/20, 2020, p. 6. 34 European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 with recommendations to the Commission on a framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, 2020/2012(INL).
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 76 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a) Based on research, the training and use of artificial intelligence can furthermore have significant environmental impacts due to both the critical raw material needed to design infrastructures and microprocessors, as well as the energy required by the development, training, tuning and use of an AI system. In order to ensure the dual ecological and digital transition, to which also this act is meant to contribute, sustainability should therefore be at the core at the European AI framework. Artificial intelligence should not be employed, if it offers a less sustainable alternative than would otherwise be in use. Development and use of AI should be compatible with sustainable environmental resources, including sustainable data sources, power supplies and infrastructures, at all stages of the lifecycle of AI products. Unnecessary data acquisition and processing should be avoided.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 78 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) The notion of AI system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty, while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. The definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software, in particular the ability, for a given set of human-defineinputs and objectives, to generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts, be it in a physical or digital dimension. AI systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand- alone basis or as a component of a product, irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). The definition of AI system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development, which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the Commission to amend that list.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 79 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
(8 a) This Regulation should ensure the highest level of protection, in particular when use of biometrics data is involved, in line with the data protection framework of the Union, while fostering research and investment for the development and deployment of AI systems that can positively contribute to society.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 81 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) This Regulation should support research and innovation for the application of AI systems in the transport and tourism sectors, while ensuring a high level of protection of public interests, such as health, safety, fundamental rights, the environment and democracy from harmful effects of such systems.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 82 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety and, fundamental rights and the environment, common normative standards for all high-risk AI systems should be established. Those standards should be consistent with the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (the Charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the Union’s international trade commitments.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 84 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
(17 a) AI systems applied to digital labour platforms, platforms for the management of workers, including in the field of transport, can entail a number of risks such as unjust/unnecessary social scoring, rooted in biased data sets or intrusive surveillance practices, which can lead to violation of workers and fundamental rights. This Regulation should therefore aim at protecting the rights of transport workers managed by digital labour platforms and promote transparency, fairness and accountability in algorithmic management, to ensure that workers are aware of how algorithms work, which personal data is issued and how their behaviour affects decisions taken by the automated system.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 85 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 b (new)
(17 b) In addition, end-users and individuals should have the right to object to a decision taken solely by an AI system, or relying to a significant degree on the output of an AI system, which produces legal effects concerning him or her, or similarly significantly affects him or her.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 92 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. Those requirements should ensure that high-risk AI systems available in the Union or whose output is otherwise used in the Union do not pose unacceptable risks to important Union public interests as recognised and protected by Union law. AI systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health, safety and fundamental rights of persons in the Union or the environment and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade, if any.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 94 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) As regards high-risk AI systems that are safety components of products or systems, or which are themselves products or systems falling within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council39 , Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council40 , Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council41 , Directive 2014/90/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council42 , Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council43 , Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 , Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 , and Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , it is appropriate to amend those acts to ensure that the Commission takes into account, on the basis of the technical and regulatory specificities of each sector, and without interfering with existing governance, conformity assessment and enforcement mechanisms and authorities established therein, the mandatory requirements for high-risk AI systems laid down in this Regulation when adopting any relevant future delegated or implementing acts on the basis of those acts. In order to avoid substantial legal uncertainty, and to ensure that the provisions of this legal act apply to all sectors concerned by it without undue delays, those acts should be amended to integrate the provisions of this regulation no later than by the application date of this regulation, that is, 24 months after its entry into force. _________________ 39 Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation security and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 (OJ L 97, 9.4.2008, p. 72). 40 Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 February 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of agricultural and forestry vehicles (OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 1). 41 Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles (OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 52). 42 Directive 2014/90/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on marine equipment and repealing Council Directive 96/98/EC (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014, p. 146). 43 Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the interoperability of the rail system within the European Union (OJ L 138, 26.5.2016, p. 44). 44 Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC (OJ L 151, 14.6.2018, p. 1). 45 Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and amending Regulations (EC) No 2111/2005, (EC) No 1008/2008, (EU) No 996/2010, (EU) No 376/2014 and Directives 2014/30/EU and 2014/53/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 552/2004 and (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 (OJ L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1). 46 Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 on type-approval requirements for motor vehicles and their trailers, and systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, as regards their general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users, amending Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulations (EC) No 78/2009, (EC) No 79/2009 and (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 631/2009, (EU) No 406/2010, (EU) No 672/2010, (EU) No 1003/2010, (EU) No 1005/2010, (EU) No 1008/2010, (EU) No 1009/2010, (EU) No 19/2011, (EU) No 109/2011, (EU) No 458/2011, (EU) No 65/2012, (EU) No 130/2012, (EU) No 347/2012, (EU) No 351/2012, (EU) No 1230/2012 and (EU) 2015/166 (OJ L 325, 16.12.2019, p. 1).
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 95 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) As regards stand-alone AI systems, meaning high-risk AI systems other than those that are safety components of products, or which are themselves products, it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if, in the light of their intended purpose, they pose a high risk of harm to the health and, safety or the fundamental rights of persons or the environment, taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the Regulation. The identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk AI systems.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 96 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) Technical inaccuracies of AI systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects, which can have an effect on the health and safety of individuals, for instance in the context of operation and management of critical infrastructure. This is particularly relevant when it comes to age, ethnicity, sex or disabilities. Therefore, ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems should be classified as high-risk. In view of the risks that they pose, both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversight.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 99 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. In particular, AI systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk AI systems, since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing, electricity, and telecommunication services. AI systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example based on racial or ethnic origins, gender, disabilities, age, sexual orientation, or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. Considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market, it is appropriate to exempt AI systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. Natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. If AI systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied, reduced, revoked or reclaimed by authorities, they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights, such as the right to social protection, non- discrimination, human dignity or an effective remedy. Those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. Nonetheless, this Regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration, which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe AI systems, provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. Finally, AI systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high- risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 100 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
(43) Requirements should apply to high- risk AI systems as regards the quality of data sets used, technical documentation and record-keeping, transparency and the provision of information to users, human oversight, and robustness, accuracy and cybersecurity. Those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health, safety and, fundamental rights and the environment, as applicable in the light of the intended purpose of the system, and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available, thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 101 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
(44) High data quality is essential for the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of models are used, with a view to ensure that the high-risk AI system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by Union law. High quality training, validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. Training, validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant, representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. They should also have the appropriate statistical properties, including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. In particular, training, validation and testing data sets should take into account, to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose, the features, characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting or context within which the AI system is intended to be used. In order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers should ensure that databases contain adequate data on groups which are more vulnerable to discriminatory effects posed by AI, such as people with disabilities, and be able to process also special categories of personal data, as a matter of substantial public interest, in order to ensure the bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to high- risk AI systems.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 104 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47 a (new)
(47 a) Based on previous experience, it is particularly important to ensure clear requirements and guidelines for interoperability between AI systems both within and amongst different economic sectors, contributing to foster innovation and providing favourable conditions for smaller market actors.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 105 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) High-risk AI systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons can oversee their functioning. For this purpose, appropriate human oversight measures should be identified by the provider of the system before its placing on the market or putting into service. In particular, where appropriate, such measures should guarantee that the system is subject to in- built operational constraints that cannot be overridden by the system itself and is responsive to the human operator, and that the natural persons to whom human oversight has been assigned have the necessary competence, training and authority to carry out that role. These operational constraints should be allowed to be amended in the future, in case increased understanding and technological developments in the field lead to the conclusion that they do not constitute the safest possible option.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 114 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
(73) In order to promote and protect innovation, it is important that the interests of small-scale providers and users of AI systems are taken into particular account. To this objective, Member States should develop initiatives, which are targeted at those operators, including on awareness raising and information communication. Moreover, the specific interests and needs of small-scale providers shallould be taken into account when Notified Bodies set conformity assessment fees. Translation costs related to mandatory documentation and communication with authorities may constitute a significant cost for providers and other operators, notably those of a smaller scale. Member States should possibly ensure that one of the languages determined and accepted by them for relevant providers’ documentation and for communication with operators is one which is broadly understood by the largest possible number of cross-border users.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 123 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. This Regulation shall not provide a legal basis for AI development, deployment or use that is unlawful under Union or national law.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 124 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by other Union legal acts regulating the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Directive (EU) 2016/680, Regulation (EU)2018/1725, and Directive 2002/57/EC.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 129 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘artificial intelligence system’ (AI system) means software that is developed with one or more of the techniques and approaches listed in Annex I and can, for a given set of human-defineinputs and objectives, generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing the environments they interact with;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 131 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3 a) ‘AI subject’ means: any natural or legal person that is subject to a decision based on or assisted by an AI system, or subject to interaction with an AI system or treatment of data relating to them by an AI system, or otherwise subjected to analysis affected by an AI system;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 132 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘usdeployer’ means any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body using an AI system under its authority, except where the AI system is used in the course of a personal non- professional activity;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 134 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
(4 a) ‘end-user’ means any natural person who uses the AI system under the authority of the deployer;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 140 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
(35) ‘biometric categorisation system’ means an AI system for the purpose of assigning natural persons to specific categories, such as sex, age, disability, hair colour, eye colour, tattoos, ethnic origin or sexual or political orientation, on the basis of their biometric data;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 156 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
(ii) the prevention of a specific, substantial and imminent threat to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack;deleted
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 174 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the AI systems pose a risk of harm to the health andor safety, or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights or the environment, that is, in respect of its severity and probability of occurrence, equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm or of adverse impact posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 177 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When assessing for the purposes of paragraph 1 whether an AI system poses a risk of harm to the health and safety or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights or the environment that is equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III, the Commission shall take into account the following criteria:
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 180 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the extent to which the use of an AI system has already caused harm to the health and safety or adverse impact on the fundamental rights or the environment or has given rise to significant concerns in relation to the materialisation of such harm or adverse impact, as demonstrated by reports or documented allegations submitted to national competent authorities;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 182 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the potential extent of such harm or such adverse impact, in particular in terms of its intensity and its ability to affect a plurality of persons or the environment;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 183 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the extent to which the outcome produced with an AI system is easily reversible, whereby outcomes having an impact on the health or safety of persons, or an adverse impact on the environment shall not be considered as easily reversible;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 184 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall comply with the requirements established in this Chapter, taking into account sectoral legislation where applicable.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 188 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and analysis of the known and foreseeable risks associated with each high-risk AI system that might cause harm or damage to the environment or the health, safety or fundamental rights of persons in view of the intended purpose or misuse of the high-risk AI system.;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 207 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Environmental Impact 1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed making use of state-of-the- art methods to increase energy efficiency, and the overall efficiency of the system. They shall be developed and set up with capabilities enabling the measurement and logging of the energy consumption and other environmental impact the use of the systems may have over their entire lifecycle. 2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to detail the measurement and logging procedures, taking into account state-of-the-art methods, in particular, to enable the comparability of the environmental impact of systems, and taking into account the economies of scale.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 208 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The technical documentation shall be drawn up in such a way to demonstrate that the high-risk AI system complies with the requirements set out in this Chapter and provide national competent authorities and notified bodies with all the necessary information to assess the compliance of the AI system with those requirements. It shall contain, at a minimum, the elements set out in Annex IV and be kept up to date throughout its entire lifecycle, and where appropriate, beyond.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 215 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point b – point iii
(iii) any known or foreseeable circumstance, related to the use of the high-risk AI system in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse, which may lead to risks to the health and safety or, fundamental rights or the environment;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 217 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission may adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to amend paragraph 1 of this article, in case technological developments and understanding in the field lead to a situation in which, in a limited amount of circumstances, human oversight is proven to compromise the safety of a system.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 219 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Human oversight shall aim at preventing or minimising the risks to health, safety or, fundamental rights or the environment that may emerge when a high-risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse, in particular when such risks persist notwithstanding the application of other requirements set out in this Chapter.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 237 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
When issuing a standardisation request to European standardisation organisations in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation 1025/2012, the Commission shall specify that standards are coherent, easy to implement and drafted in a way that aims to fulfil, in particular, the following objectives: a) ensure that AI systems placed on the market or put into service in the Union protect public interests, such as health, safety, fundamental rights, the environment and democracy from harmful effects of such systems; b) enhance inclusive participation in governance that is representative of all relevant European stakeholders, most notably civil society and researchers, by actively facilitating access of such representatives to relevant fora and processes.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 242 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts to amend paragraphs 1 and 2 in order to subject high-risk AI systems referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III to the conformity assessment procedure referred to in Annex VII or parts thereof. The Commission shall adopt such delegated acts taking into account the effectiveness of the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control referred to in Annex VI in preventing or minimizing the risks to health and, safety, the environment and protection of fundamental rights posed by such systems as well as the availability of adequate capacities and resources among notified bodies.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 254 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
3. The AI regulatory sandboxes shall not affect the supervisory and corrective powers of the competent authorities. Any significant risks to health and, safety and, the environment or fundamental rights identified during the development and testing of such systems shall result in immediate mitigation and, failing that, in the suspension of the development and testing process until such mitigation takes place.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 257 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii
(iii) a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, with the prerequisite that the costs of developing the AI system shall not exceed the benefit of developing it for the purpose of protecting the environment;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 258 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – title
55 Measures for small-scale providers and users and start-ups
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 259 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) provide small-scale providers and users and start-ups with priority access to the AI regulatory sandboxes to the extent that they fulfil the eligibility conditions;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 260 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) organise specific awareness raising activities about the application of this Regulation tailored to the needs of the small-scale providers and users and start- ups;
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 261 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) where appropriate, establish a dedicated channel for communication with small-scale providers and user, start- ups and other innovators to provide guidance and respond to queries about the implementation of this Regulation.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 266 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4
4. The Board may invite external experts and observers to attend its meetings and may hold exchanges with interested third parties to inform its activities to an appropriate extent. To that end the Commission may facilitate exchanges between the Board and other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups. The Board shall make sure to actively reach out to and hear representatives from groups, which are more vulnerable to discriminatory effects posed by AI, such as people with disabilities.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 267 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that national competent authorities are provided with adequate financial and human resources to fulfil their tasks under this Regulation. In particular, national competent authorities shall have a sufficient number of personnel permanently available whose competences and expertise shall include an in-depth understanding of artificial intelligence technologies, data and data computing, fundamental rights, health and safety, safety and environmental risks and knowledge of existing standards and legal requirements.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 278 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1
1. AI systems presenting a risk shall be understood as a product presenting a risk defined in Article 3, point 19 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 insofar as risks to the health or, safety or the environment, or to the protection of fundamental rights of persons are concerned.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 279 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 1
1. Where, having performed an evaluation under Article 65, the market surveillance authority of a Member State finds that although an AI system is in compliance with this Regulation, it presents a risk to the health or safety of persons, to the environment, to the compliance with obligations under Union or national law intended to protect fundamental rights or to other aspects of public interest protection, it shall require the relevant operator to take all appropriate measures to ensure that the AI system concerned, when placed on the market or put into service, no longer presents that risk, to withdraw the AI system from the market or to recall it within a reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as it may prescribe.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 299 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Within [two years after the date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)] and every two years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the Regulation with regards to the energy use and other environmental impact of AI systems and evaluate bringing legislation to regulate the energy efficiency of ICT systems in order for the sector to contribute to EU climate strategy and targets.
2022/05/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 313 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform minimum legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with Union values. This Regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest, such as a high level of protection of health, safety and fundamental rights, and its well as the environment, society, rule of law and democracy, economic interests and consumer protection. It also ensures the free movement of AI- based goods and services cross-border, thus preventing Member States from imposing restrictions on the development, marketing and use of AI systems, unless explicitly authorised by this Regulation., or justified by the need to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of natural persons, or the ethical principles advocated by this Regulation
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 319 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) The term “artificial intelligence” (AI) refers to systems developed by humans that can, using different techniques and approaches, generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations and decisions. The context they are used in is decisive for how much and what kind of influence they can have, and whether they are perceived by an observer as “intelligent”. The term “automated decision-making” (ADM) has been proposed as it could avoid the possible ambiguity of the term AI. ADM involves a user delegating initially a decision, partly or completely, to an entity by way of using a system or a service. That entity then uses automatically executed decision-making models to perform an action on behalf of a user, or to inform the user’s decisions in performing an action
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 320 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) Artificial intelligence systems (AI systems) can be easily deployed in multiple sectors of the economy and society, including cross border, and circulate throughout the Union. Certain Member States have already explored the adoption of national rules to ensure that artificial intelligence is safe and is developed and used in compliance with fundamental rights obligations. Differing national rules may lead to fragmentation of the internal market and decrease legal certainty for operators that develop or use AI systems. A consistent and high level of protection throughout the Union should therefore be ensured, while divergences hampering the free circulation of AI systems and related products and services within the internal market should be prevented, by laying down uniform obligations for operators and guaranteeing the uniform protection of overriding reasons of public interest and of rights of persons throughout the internal market based on Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To the extent that this Regulation contains specific rules on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data concerning restrictions of the use of AI systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, it is appropriate to base this Regulation, in as far as those specific rules are concerned, on Article 16 of the TFEU. In light of those specific rules and the recourse to Article 16 TFEU, it is appropriate to consult the European Data Protection Board.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 334 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) At the same time, depending on the circumstances regarding its specific application and use, artificial intelligence may generate risks and cause harm to public interests and rights that are protected by Union law. Such harm might be material or immaterial. , whether individual, societal, environmental, economic, or to the rule of law and democracy. Such harm might be material or immaterial. Harm should be understood as injury or damage to the life, health, physical integrity and the property of a natural or legal person, economic harm to individuals, damage to their environment, security and other aspects defined in the scope of New Approach directives, complemented by collective harms such as harm to society, the democratic process and the environment, or going against core ethical principles. Immaterial harms should be understood as meaning harm as a result of which the affected person suffers considerable detriment, an objective and demonstrable impairment of his or her personal interests and an economic loss calculated having regard, for example, to annual average figures of past revenues and other relevant circumstances. Such immaterial harm can therefore consist of psychological harm, reputational harm or change in legal status. Harm can be caused (i) by single events and (ii) through exposure over time to harmful algorithmic practices, as well as (iii) through action distributed among a number of actors where the entity causing the harm is not necessarily that which uses the AI or (iv) through uses of AI which are different than intended for the given system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 347 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) A Union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development, use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time mguaranteets a high level of protection of public interests, such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights, as recognised and protected by Union law as well as the environment, society, rule of law and democracy, economic interests and consumer protection. To achieve that objective, rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain AI systems should be laid down, thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. By laying down those rules, this Regulation supports the objective of the Union of being a global leader in the development of secure, trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence, as stated by the European Council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles, as specifically requested by the European Parliament34 . _________________ 33 European Council, Special meeting of the European Council (1 and 2 October 2020) – Conclusions, EUCO 13/20, 2020, p. 6. 34 European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 with recommendations to the Commission on a framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, 2020/2012(INL).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 362 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) The notion of AI system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty, while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. The definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the softwareystem, in particular the ability, for a given set of human-defined objectives, to generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts, be it in a physical or digital dimension. AI systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand- alone basis or as a component of a product, irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). The definition of AI system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development, which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the Commission to amend that list.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 370 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) The notion of biometric data used in this Regulation is in line with and should be interpreted consistently with the notion of biometric data as defined in Article 4(14) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council35 , Article 3(18) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council36 and Article 3(13) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 . The notion of “biometrics-based data” is broader, covering situations where the data in question may not, of itself, confirm the unique identification of an individual. _________________ 35 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 36 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39) 37 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (Law Enforcement Directive) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 378 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The notion of remote biometric identification system as used in this Regulation should be defined functionally, as an AI system intended for the identification of natural persons at a distance through the comparison of a person’s biometric data with the biometric data contained in a reference database, and without prior knowledge whether the targeted person will be present and can be identified, irrespectively of the particular technology, processes or types of biometric data used. Considering their different characteristics and manners in which they are used, as well as the different risks involved, a distinction should be made between ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ rirrespectively of the particular technology, processes or types of biometric data used. The notion of ‘at a distance’ in Remote bBiometric iIdentification systems. In(RBI) means the cause of ‘real-time’ systems, the capturing of the biometric data, the comparison and the identification occur all instantaneously, near-instantaneously or in any event without a significant delay. In this regard, there should be no scope for circumventing the rules of this Regulation on the ‘real-time’ use of the AI systems in question by providing for minor delays. ‘Real-time’ systems involve the use of ‘live’ or ‘near-‘live’ material, such as video footage, generated by a camera or osystems as described in Article 3(36), at a distance great enough that the system has the capacity to scan multiple persons in its field of view (or the equivalent generalised scanning of online / virtual spaces), which would mean that the identification could happen without one or more of ther device with similar functionality. In the ata subjects’ knowledge. Because of ‘post’ systems, in contrast, the biometric data have already been capturRBI relates to how a system is designed and installed, and the comparison and identification occur only after a significant delay. This involves material, such as pictures or video footage generated by closed circuit television cameras or private devices, which has been generated before the usnot solely to whether or not data subjects have consented, this definition applies even when warning notices are placed in the location that is under the surveillance of the RBI system in respect of the natural persons concerned, and is not de facto annulled by pre-enrolment.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 380 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Regulation the notion of publicly accessible physical or virtual space should be understood as referring to any physical or virtual place that is accessible to the public, on a temporary or permanent basis, irrespective of whether the place in question is privately or publicly owned. Therefore, the notion does not covers places that are both private in nature, used for private purposes only, accessed completely voluntarily and normally not freely accessible for third parties, including law enforcement authorities, unless those parties have been specifically invited or authorised, such as homes, private clubs, offices, warehouses and factories. Online spaces are not covered either, as they are not physical space and private clubs. However, the mere fact that certain conditions for accessing a particular space may apply, such as admission tickets or age restrictions, does not mean that the space is not publicly accessible within the meaning of this Regulation. Consequently, in addition to public spaces such as streets, relevant parts of government buildings and most transport infrastructure, spaces such as cinemas, theatres, shops and shopping centrports grounds, virtual gaming environments, schools, universities, hospitals, amusement parks, festivals, shops and shopping centres, offices, warehouses and factories are normally also publicly accessible. Whether a given space is accessible to the public should however be determined on a case- by-case basis, having regard to the specificities of the individual situation at hand.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 385 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) In order to ensure the rights of individuals and groups, and the growth of trustworthy AI, certain principles should be guaranteed across all AI systems, such as transparency, the right to an explanation and the right to object to a decision. This requires that discrimination, and detrimental power and information imbalances be prevented, control and oversight guaranteed, and that compliance is demonstrable and subject to ongoing monitoring. Decision- making by, or supported by, AI systems, should be subject to specific transparency rules, as regards the logic and parameters on which decisions are made.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 386 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 b (new)
(9 b) Requirements on transparency and on the explicability of AI decision-making should contribute to countering the deterrent effects of digital asymmetry, power and information imbalance, and so-called ‘dark patterns’ targeting individuals and their informed consent.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 387 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) In order to ensure a level playing field and an effective protection of rights and freedoms of individuals across the Union, the rules established by this Regulation should apply to providers of AI systems in a non-discriminatory manner, irrespective of whether they are established within the Union or in a third country, and to usdeployers of AI systems established within the Union. This Regulation and the rules it establishes should take into account different development and business models and the fact that standard implementations, or Free and Open Source software development and licensing models might entail less knowledge about and little to no control over further use, modification, and deployment within an AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 392 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) In light of their digital nature, certain AI systems should fall within the scope of this Regulation even when they are neither placed on the market, nor put into service, nor used in the Union. This is the case for example of an operator established in the Union that contracts certain services to an operator established outside the Union in relation to an activity to be performed by an AI system that would qualify as high-risk and whose effects impact natural persons located in the Union. In those circumstances, the AI system used by the operator outside the Union could process data lawfully collected in and transferred from the Union, and provide to the contracting operator in the Union the output of that AI system resulting from that processing, without that AI system being placed on the market, put into service or used in the Union. To prevent the circumvention of this Regulation and to ensure an effective protection of natural persons located in the Union, this Regulation should also apply to providers and usdeployers of AI systems that are established in a third country, to the extent the output produced by those systems is used in the Union. Nonetheless, to take into account existing arrangements and special needs for cooperation with foreign partners with whom information and evidence is exchanged, this Regulation should not apply to public authorities of a third country and international organisations when acting in the framework of international agreements concluded at national or European level for law enforcement and judicial cooperation with the Union or with its Member States. Such agreements have been concluded bilaterally between Member States and third countries or between the European Union, Europol and other EU agencies and third countries and international organisations or affects people in the Union.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 397 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) This Regulation should also apply to Union institutions, offices, bodies and agencies when acting as a provider or user of an AI system. AI systems exclusively developed or used for military purposes should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation where that use falls under the exclusive remit of the Common Foreign and Security Policy regulated under Title V of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU)deployer of an AI system. This Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions regarding the liability of intermediary service providers set out in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [as amended by the Digital Services Act].
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 408 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety, and fundamental rights, as well as the environment, society, rule of law and democracy, economic interests and consumer protection, common normative standards for all high- risk AI systems should be established. Those standards should be consistent with the Charter of fFundamental rRights of the European Union (the Charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the Union’s international trade commitments.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 411 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) AI systems and related ICT technology require significant natural resources, contribute to waste production, and have a significant overall impact on the environment. It is appropriate to design and develop in particular high-risk AI systems with methods and capabilities that measure, record, and reduce resource use and waste production, as well as energy use, and that increase their overall efficiency throughout their entire lifecycle. The Commission, the Member States and the European AI Board should contribute to these efforts by issuing guidelines and providing support to providers and deployers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 415 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Aside from the many beneficial uses of artificial intelligence, that technologyI systems can also be misused and provide novel and powerful tools for manipulative, exploitative and social control practices. Such practices are particularly harmful and should be prohibited because they contradict Union values of respect for human dignity, freedom, equality, democracy and the rule of law and Union fundamental rights, including the right to non-discrimination, data protection and privacy and the rights of the child. All uses of AI systems which interfere with the essence of the fundamental rights of individuals should in any case be prohibited. The prohibitions listed in this Regulation should apply notwithstanding existing Union law and do not provide a new legal basis for the development placing on the market, deployment or use of AI systems. To keep up with rapid technological development and to ensure future-proof regulation, the Commission should keep the list of prohibited and high-risk AI systems under constant review.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 420 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) The European Union and its Member States as signatories to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are obliged to protect persons with disabilities from discrimination and to promote their equality. They are obliged to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems and to ensure respect for the fundamental rights, including that of privacy, of persons with disabilities.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 423 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 b (new)
(15 b) Providers of AI systems should ensure that these systems are designed in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Directive (EU) 2019/882 and guarantee full, equal, and unrestricted access for everyone potentially affected by or using AI systems, including persons with disabilities.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 425 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of certain AI systems intended towith the effect or likely effect of distorting human behaviour, whereby physical, economic or psychological harms to individuals or society are likely to occur, should be forbidden. SuchThis includes AI systems that deploy subliminal components that individuals cannot perceive or exploit vulnerabilities of children and people due to their age, physical or mental incapacities. They do so with the intention tomay not be able to perceive or understand, or exploit vulnerabilities of individuals. They materially distort the behaviour of a person and, including in a manner that causes or is likely to cause harm to that or another person. The intenphysical, psychological or economic harm to that or another person, or to society, or lead them to make decisions they would not otherwise have taken. Manipulation may not be presumed if the distortion of human behaviour clearly results from factors external to the AI system which are outside of the control of the provider or the user and are not reasonably foreseeable at or during the deployment of the AI system. Research for legitimate purposes in relation to such AI systems should not be stiflunduly limited by the prohibition, if such research does not amount to use of the AI system in non-supervised human- machine relations that exposes natural persons to harm and such research is carried out in accordance with recognised ethical standards for scientific research. If necessary, further flexibilities in order to foster research, and thereby European innovation capacities, should be introduced by Member States under controlled circumstances only and with all relevant safeguards to protect health and safety, fundamental rights, environment, society, rule of law and democracy.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 435 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) AI systems providing social scoring of natural persons for general purpose by public authorities or on their behalfthat evaluate, classify, rate or score the trustworthiness or social standing of natural persons may lead to discriminatory outcomes and the exclusion of certain groups. They may violate the right to dignity and non-discrimination and the values of equality and justice. Such AI systems evaluate or classify the trustworthiness or social standing of natural persons based on multiple data points related to their social behaviour in multiple contexts or known, inferred or predicted personal or personality characteristics. The social score obtained from such AI systems may lead to the detrimental or unfavourable treatment of natural persons or whole groups thereof in social contexts, which are unrelated to the context in which the data was originally generated or collected or to a detrimental treatment that is disproportionate or unjustified to the gravity of their social behaviour. Such AI systems should be therefore prohibited.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 438 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
(17 a) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of certain AI systems that can be used or foreseeably misused for intrusive monitoring and flagging to identify or deter rule-breaking or fraud should be forbidden. The use of such intrusive monitoring and flagging in a relationship of power, such as the use of e-proctoring software by education institutions to monitor students and pupils, or the use of surveillance- or monitoring software by employers on workers poses an unacceptable risk to the fundamental rights of workers, students and pupils, including minors. Notably, these practices affect the right to private life, data protection and human dignity of students and pupils, including minors.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 444 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 b (new)
(17 b) Insofar as such systems could ever function as intended, AI-based emotion recognition systems carry unacceptable risk for the essence of fundamental rights, such as human dignity and freedom of expression and must be prohibited. Exceptions for therapeutic tools or assistive technologies for personal use only could, nonetheless, be envisaged. However, this should only be permitted if the scientific basis and clinical validity of such systems have been demonstrated, where it can be shown that affected groups were active participants in the development process, and where the rights of everyone that is likely to be affected by the system, and not just the deployer , are clearly respected. Such systems should always be subject to careful oversight and transparency.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 445 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 c (new)
(17 c) Similarly, ostensible truth- detection technologies, such as polygraphs, have a long and unsuccessful history of abuse, misselling, miscarriages of justice and failure. The problems underlying these failures are exacerbated in the field of migration, which thusfar has been tarnished by new failings due to, inter alia to incorrect cultural assumptions. Such technologies therefore cannot be used while protecting the essence of all relevant fundamental rights.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 449 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is consideredis particularly intrucorrosive into the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it ma and can ultimately affect the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of constant surveillanceleave society with a justifiable feeling of constant surveillance, give parties deploying biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces a position of uncontrollable power and indirectly dissuade individuals from the exercise of their freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities at the core to the Rule of Law. Biometric identification not carried out in real time carries different but equally problematic risks. Due to the increase in pervasiveness, functionality and memory capacities of relevant devices, this would amount to a "surveillance time machine", which could be used to track movements and social interactions stretching back an indeterminate period into the past.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 459 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) The use of data collected or generated by practices prohibited under this Regulation should also be prohibited. Within the framework of judicial and administrative proceedings, the responsible authorities should establish that data collected or generated by practices prohibited under this regulation should not be admissible.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 470 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The use of thoseAI systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest, the importance of which outweighs the risks. Those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime, including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA38 if those criminal offences are punishable in the Member State concerned by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined in the law of that Member State. Such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. Moreover, of the 32 criminal offences listed in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others, in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionate to highly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness, probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. _________________ 38 Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1).remote biometric identification of individuals should therefore be prohibited
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 476 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that those systems are used in a responsible and proportionate manner, it is also important to establish that, in each of those three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, certain elements should be taken into account, in particular as regards the nature of the situation giving rise to the request and the consequences of the use for the rights and freedoms of all persons concerned and the safeguards and conditions provided for with the use. In addition, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to appropriate limits in time and space, having regard in particular to the evidence or indications regarding the threats, the victims or perpetrator. The reference database of persons should be appropriate for each use case in each of the three situations mentioned above.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 484 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority of a Member State. Such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use, except in duly justified situations of urgency, that is, situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. In such situations of urgency, the use should be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions, as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the law enforcement authority itself. In addition, the law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible, whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 492 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide, within the exhaustive framework set by this Regulation that such use in the territory of a Member State in accordance with this Regulation should only be possible where and in as far as the Member State in question has decided to expressly provide for the possibility to authorise such use in its detailed rules of national law. Consequently, Member States remain free under this Regulation not to provide for such a possibility at all or to only provide for such a possibility in respect of some of the objectives capable of justifying authorised use identified in this Regulation.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 502 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric and biometrics- based data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context and Article 9 of Regulation 2016/679, thius Rregulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to itng such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 513 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Any processing of biometric data, biometrics-based data and other personal data involved in the use of AI systems for biometric identification, other than in connection to the use of ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement as regulated by this Regulation, including where those systems are used by competent authorities in publicly accessible spaces for other purposes than law enforcementas regulated by this Regulation, should continue to comply with all requirements resulting from Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, as applicable.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 519 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. Those requirements should ensure that high-risk AI systems available in the Union or whose output is otherwise used in the Union do not pose unacceptable risks to important Union public interests as recognised and protected by Union law. AI systems identified as high-risk should be limited to thoseclassified as such when thatey have a significant harmful impact on the health, safety, economic status and fundamental rights of personindividuals in the Union, and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international traalso on the environment, society, rule of law, democracy or consumer protection. Given the rapid path of technological development, but also given the potential changes in the use and the aim of authorised AI systems, regardless of whether they are high-risk or lower risk, the limited list of high-risk systems and areas of high risk systems in Annex III should nonetheless be subject to permanent review through the exercise of regular assessment as provide,d if anyn Title III of this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 530 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) AI systems could produce adverse outcomes to health and safety ofhave an adverse impact on persons, in particular when such systems operate as components of products. Consistently with the objectives of Union harmonisation legislation to facilitate the free movement of products in the internal market and to ensure that only safe and otherwise compliant products find their way into the market, it is important that the safety risks that may be generated by a product as a whole due to its digital components, including AI systems, are duly prevented and mitigated. For instance, increasingly autonomous robots, whether in the context of manufacturing or personal assistance and care should be able to safely operate and performs their functions in complex environments. Similarly, in the health sector where the stakes for life and health are particularly high, increasingly sophisticated diagnostics systems and systems supporting human decisions should be reliable and accurate. The extent of the adverse impact caused by the AI system on the fundamental rights protected by the Charter is of particular relevance when classifying an AI system as high-risk. Those rights include the right to human dignity, respect for private and family life, protection of personal data, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, and non- discrimination, consumer protection, workers’ rights, rights of persons with disabilities, right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, right of defence and the presumption of innocence, right to good administration. In addition to those rights, it is important to highlight that children have specific rights as enshrined in Article 24 of the EU Charter and in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (further elaborated in the UNCRC General Comment No. 25 as regards the digital environment), both of which require consideration of the children’s vulnerabilities and provision of such protection and care as necessary for their well-being. The fundamental right to a high level of environmental protection enshrined in the Charter and implemented in Union policies should also be considered when assessing the severity of the harm that an AI system can cause, including in relation to the health and safety of persons.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 531 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) The risk-assessment of AI systems as regards their environmental impact and use of resources should not only focus on sectors related to the protection of the environment, but be common to all sectors, as environmental impacts can stem from any kind of AI systems, including those not originally directly related to the protection of the environment, in terms of energy production and distribution, waste management and emissions control.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 539 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) As regards stand-alone AI systems, meaning high-risk AI systems other than those that are safety components of products, or which are themselves products, it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if, in the light of their intended purpose, they pose a hsighnificant risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons, as well as the environment, society, rule of law, democracy, economic interests and consumer protection, taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre- defined areas specified in the Regulation. The identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk AI systems. Such classification should take place before the placing onto the market but also during the life-cycle of an AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 551 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) Technical inaccuracies of, as well as conscious or subconscious design decisions, and the use of training data which codify and reinforce structural inequalities, mean that AI systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. This is particularly relevant when it comes to age, ethnicity, sex or disabilities. ThereforeAs a result, ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems should be classified as high-risk. In view of the risks that they pose, both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversightundermine the essence of fundamental rights and therefore must be prohibited.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 552 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 a (new)
(33 a) Human oversight should target high-risk AI systems as a priority, with the aim of serving human-centric objectives. The individuals to whom human oversight is assigned shall be provided with adequate education and training on the functioning of the application, its capabilities to influence or make decisions, and to have harmful effects, notably on fundamental rights. The persons in charge of the assignment of these individuals shall provide them with relevant staff and psychological support.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 557 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) AI systems used in education or vocational training, notably for determining access or assigning persons to educational and vocational training institutions or to evaluate persons on tests as part of or as a precondition for their education should be considered high-risk, since they may determine the educational and professional course of a person’s life and therefore affect their ability to secure their livelihood. When improperly designed and used, such systems mayAI systems that are designed to constantly monitor individuals are particuarly intrusive and violate the right to education and training as well as, the right not to be discriminated against and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination and should therefore be prohibited.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 560 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) AI systems used in employment, workers management and access to self- employment, notably for theaffecting the initiation, establishment, implementation and termination of an employment relationship, including AI systems intended to support collective legal and regulatory matters should be high risk. Particularly AI affecting recruitment and selection of persons, for making decisions on promotion and termination and for task allocation, monitoring for measuring and monitoring of performance or for evaluation of persons in work-related contractual relationships, should also be classified as high-risk, since those systems may appreciably impact future career prospects and livelihoods of these persons. AI systems used for constant monitoring of workers pose an unacceptable risk to their fundamental rights, and should be therefore prohibited. Relevant work-related contractual relationships should meaningfully involve employees and persons providing services through platforms as referred to in the Commission Work Programme 2021. Such persons should in principle not be considered users within the meaning of this Regulation. Throughout the recruitment process and in the evaluation, promotion, or retention of persons in work-related contractual relationships, such systems may perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example against women, certain age groups, persons with disabilities, or persons of certain racial or ethnic origins or sexual orientation. AI systems used to monitor the performance and behaviour of these persons may also impact their rights to data protection and privacyundermine the essence of their fundamental rights to data protection and privacy. This Regulation applies without prejudice to Union and Member State competences to provide for more specific rules for the use of AI- systems in the employment context.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 571 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. In particular, AI systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk AI systemsprohibited, since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing, electricity, and telecommunication services. AI systems used for this purpose may lead to an unacceptably high risk of discrimination ofagainst persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example based on racial or ethnic origins, disabilities, age, sexual orientation, or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. Considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market, it is appropriate to exempt AI systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. Natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. If AI systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied, reduced, revoked or reclaimed by authorities, they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights, such as the right to social protection, non- discrimination, human dignity or an effective remedy. Those systems should therefore be classified as high-riskprohibited. Nonetheless, this Regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration, which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe AI systems, provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. Finally, AI systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high- risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 578 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) Actions by law enforcement authorities involving certain uses of AI systems are characterised by a significant degree of power imbalance and may lead to surveillance, arrest or deprivation of a natural person’s liberty as well as other adverse impacts on fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter. In particular, if the AI system is not trained with high quality data, does not meet adequate requirements in terms of its accuracy or robustness, or is not properly designed and tested before being put on the market or otherwise put into service, it may single out people in a discriminatory or otherwise incorrect or unjust manner. Furthermore, the exercise of important procedural fundamental rights, such as the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial as well as the right of defence and the presumption of innocence, could be hampered, in particular, where such AI systems are not sufficiently transparent, explainable and documented. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk a number of AI systems intended to be used In addition, some applications, such as to make predictions, profiles, or risk assessments based on data analysis or profiling of groups or individuals for the purpose of predicting the law enforcement context where accuracy, reliability and transparency is particularly important to avoid adverse impacts, retain public trust and ensure accountability and effective redress. In view of the nature of the activities in question and the risks relating thereto, those high-risk AI systems should include in particular AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities for individual risk assessments, polygraphs and similar tools or to detect thoccurrence or recurrence of actual or potential offences or rule- breaking undermine the essence of fundamental rights and should be prohibited. Furthermore, the exercise of important procedural fundamental rights, such as the right to an effective remotional state of natural person, to detect ‘deep fakes’, for the evaluation of the reliability of evidence in criminal proceedings, for predicting the occurrence or reoccurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence based on profiling of natural persons, or assessing personality traits and characteristics or past criminal behaviour of natural persons or groups, for profilingedy and to a fair trial as well as the right of defence and the presumption of innocence, could be hampered, in particular, where such AI systems are not sufficiently transparent, explainable and documented. It ins the course of detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences, as well as for crime analytics regarding natural persons. AI systems specifically intended to be used for administrative proceedings by tax and customs authorities should not be considered high-risk AI systems used by law enforcement authorities for the purposes of prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal offencerefore appropriate to classify as prohibited a number of AI systems intended to be used in the law enforcement context as well as for crime analytics regarding natural persons.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 589 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
(39) AI systems used in migration, asylum and border control management affect people who are often in a particularly vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the competent public authorities. The accuracy, non-discriminatory nature and transparency of the AI systems used in those contexts are therefore particularly important to guarantee the respect of the fundamental rights of the affected persons, notably their rights to free movement, non- discrimination, protection of private life and personal data, international protection and good administration. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk AI systems intended to be used by the competent public authorities charged with tasks in the fields of migration, asylum and border control management as polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of a natural person; for assessing certain risks posed by natural persons entering the territory of a Member State or applying for visa or asylum; for verifying the authenticity of the relevant documents of natural persons; for assisting competent public authorities for the examination of applications for asylum, visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the objective to establish the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status. AI systems in the area of migration, asylum and border control management covered by this Regulation should comply with the relevant procedural requirements set by the Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49 , the Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and other relevant legislation. _________________ 49 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 50 Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 591 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The use of AI systems in migration, asylum and border control management should in no circumstances be used by Member States or European Union institutions as a means to circumvent their international obligations under the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the Protocol of 31 January 1967, nor should they be used to in any way infringe on the principle of non- refoulement, or or deny safe and effective legal avenues into the territory of the Union, including the right to international protection;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 596 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) Certain AI systems intended for the administration of justice and democratic processes should be classified as high-risk, considering their potentially significant impact on democracy, rule of law, individual freedoms as well as the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. The use of Artificial Intelligence tools can support, but should not interfere with the decision-making power of judges or judicial independence, as the final decision-making must remain a human- driven activity and decision. In particular, to address the risks of potential biases, errors and opacity, it is appropriate to qualify as high-risk AI systems intended to assist judicial authorities in researching and interpreting facts and the law and in applying the law to a concrete set of facts. Such qualification should not extend, however, to AI systems intended for purely ancillary administrative activities that do not affect the actual administration of justice in individual cases, such as anonymisation or pseudonymisation of judicial decisions, documents or data, communication between personnel, administrative tasks or allocation of resources.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 603 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
(40 a) Certain AI-systems used in the area of healthcare that are not covered by Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (Regulation on Medical Devices) should be high-risk. Uses such as software impacting diagnostics, treatments or medical prescriptions and access to health insurance can clearly impact health and safety, but also can also obstruct access to health services, impact the right to health care and cause physical harm in the long run.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 607 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 b (new)
(40 b) Certain AI-systems used in the area of media, particularly in the area of social media, due to their potentially large reach and the specific risk of large scale spread of disinformation and exacerbation of societal polarisation should be high-risk due to their potential impact on individuals’ rights, but also on society and democracy at large.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 610 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) The fact that an AI system is classified as high risk under this Regulation should not be interpreted as indicating that the use of the system is necessarily lawful under other acts of Union law or under national law compatible with Union law, such as on the protection of personal data, on the use of polygraphs and similar tools or other systems to detect the emotional state of natural persons. Any such use should continue to occur solely in accordance with the applicable requirements resulting from the Charter and from the applicable acts of secondary Union law and national law. This Regulation should not be understood as providing for the legal ground for processing of personal data, including special categories of personal data, where relevant.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 615 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
(42) To mitigate the risks from high-risk AI systems placed or otherwise put into service on the Union market for usdeployers and affected personAI subjects, certain mandatory requirements should apply, taking into account the intended purpose of the , the potential or reasonably foreseeable use or misuse of the system, and according toshould be in accordance with the risk management system to be established by the provider.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 618 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
(43) Requirements should apply to high- risk AI systems as regards the quality and relevance of data sets used, technical documentation and record-keeping, transparency and the provision of information to users, human oversight, and robustness, accuracy and cybersecurity. Those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health, safety and fundamental rights, as applicable in the light of the intended purpowell as the environment, society, rule of law, democracy, economic interests and consumer protection, as applicable in the light of the intended purpose, the potential or reasonably foreseeable use or misuse of the system, and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available, thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 628 #

2021/0106(COD)

(44) High data quality is essential for the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of models are used, with a view to ensure that the high-risk AI system performs as intended and safely and it does not become thea source of discrimination prohibited by Union law. High quality training, validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. Training, validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant, representative and free of errors and complete, statistically complete and relevant in view of the intended purpose of the system and the context of its use. They should also have the appropriate statistical properties, including as regards the persons or groups of persons on whichin relation to whom the high- risk AI system is intended to be used. In particular, training, validation and testing data sets should take into account, to the extent requirednecessary in the light of their intended purpose, the features, characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting or context within which the AI system is intended to be used. ISolely in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers should be able to process also special categories of personal data, as a matter of substantial public interest, in order to ensure the bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to high- risk AI systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 635 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) Having information on how high- risk AI systems have been developed and how they perform throughout their lifecycle is essential to verify compliance with the requirements under this Regulation. This requires keeping records and the availability of a technical documentation, containing information which is necessary to assess the compliance of the AI system with the relevant requirements. Such information should include the general characteristics, capabilities and limitations of the system, algorithms, data, training, testing and validation processes used as well as documentation on the relevant risk management system. The technical documentation should be kept up to date throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 637 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
(47) To address the opacity that may make certain AI systems incomprehensible to or too complex for natural persons, a certain degree of transparency should be required for high-risk AI systems. UsDeployers should be able to interpret the system’s goals, priorities and output and use it appropriately. High-risk AI systems should therefore be accompanied by relevant documentation and instructions of use and include concise and clear information, including in relation to possible risks to fundamental rights and discrimination, where appropriate. Where individuals are passively subject to AI systems (AI subjects), information to ensure an appropriate type and degree of transparency should be made publicly available, with full respect to the privacy, personality, and related rights of subjects.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 643 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) High-risk AI systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons can oversee their functioningmeaningfully oversee and regulate their functioning or investigate in case of an accident. For this purpose, appropriate human oversight measures should be identifiensured by the provider of the system before its placing on the market or putting into service. In particular, where appropriate, such measures should guarantee that the system is subject to in- built operational constraints that cannot be overridden by the system itself and is responsive to the human operator, and that the natural persons to whom human oversight has been assigned have the necessary competence, training and authority to carry out that role.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 647 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
(49) High-risk AI systems should perform consistently throughout their lifecycle and meet an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness, reliability and cybersecurity in accordance with the generally acknowledged state of the art. The level of accuracy and accuracy metrics should be communicated to the usdeployers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 648 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
(50) The technical robustness is a key requirement for high-risk AI systems. They should be resilient against risks connected to the limitations of the system (e.g. errors, faults, inconsistencies, unexpected situations) as well as adequately protected against malicious actions that may compromise the security of the AI system and result in harmful or otherwise undesirable behaviour. Failure to protect against these risks could lead to safety impacts or negatively affect the fundamental rights, for example due to erroneous decisions or wrong or biased outputs generated by the AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 653 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
(51) Cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that AI systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use, behaviour, performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third parties exploiting the system’s vulnerabilities. Cyberattacks against AI systems can leveratarget AI specific assets, such as training data sets (e.g. data poisoning) or trained models (e.g. adversarial attacks), or exploit vulnerabilities in the AI system’s digital assets or the underlying ICT infrastructure. To ensure a level of cybersecurity appropriate to the risks, suitable measures should therefore be taken by the providers of high-risk AI systems, also taking into account as appropriate the underlying ICT infrastructure.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 656 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
(53) It is appropriate that a specific natural or legal person, defined as the provider, takes the responsibility for the placing on the market or, putting into service or deploying of a high-risk AI system, regardless of whether that natural or legal person is the person who designed or developed the system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 657 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
(54) The provider and, where applicable, deployer should establish a sound quality management system, ensure the accomplishment of the required conformity assessment procedure, draw up the relevant documentation and establish a robust post-market monitoring system. Public authorities which put into service high-risk AI systems for their own use may adopt and implement the rules for the quality management system as part of the quality management system adopted at a national or regional level, as appropriate, taking into account the specificities of the sector and the competences and organisation of the public authority in question. Deployers should have strategies in place to ensure that the data management, including data acquisition, data collection, data analysis, data labelling, data storage, data filtration, data mining, data aggregation, data retention and any other operation regarding the data during the deployment lifetime of high-risk AI systems, complies with applicable rules and ensure regulatory compliance, in particular regarding modifications to the high-risk AI systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 665 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
(58) Given the nature of AI systems and the risks to safety and fundamental rights possibly associated with their use, including as regards the need to ensure proper monitoring of the performance of an AI system in a real-life setting, it is appropriate to set specific responsibilities for users. Usdeployers. Deployers should in particular use high-risk AI systems in accordance with the instructions of use and certain other obligations should be provided for with regard to monitoring of the functioning of the AI systems and with regard to record- keeping and quality management, as appropriate.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 667 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58 a (new)
(58 a) To ensure that fundamental rights, the environment and the public interest are effectively protected where an AI- system is classified as high-risk under Annex III, both producers and deployers before each deployment should perform a fundamental rights impact assessment of the systems’ impact in the context of use throughout the entire lifecycle and include measures to mitigate any impact on fundamental rights, the environment or the public interest. The fundamental rights impact assessment should be registered in the public EU database for stand-alone high-risk AI systems and be publicly accessible. The supervisory authority should have the power to review these fundamental rights impact assessments.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 670 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
(59) It is appropriate to envisage that the usdeployer of the AI system should be the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body under whose authority the AI system is operated except where the use is made in the course of a personal non- professional activity.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 672 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
(60) In the light of the complexity of the artificial intelligence value chain, relevant third parties, notably the ones involved in the sale and the supply of software, software tools and components, pre-trained models and data, or providers of network services, should cooperate, as appropriate, with providers and usdeployers to enable their compliance with the obligations under this Regulation and with competent authorities established under this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 676 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61 a (new)
(61 a) As part of the new legal framework on corporate sustainable reporting and due diligence, minimum common standards for the reporting of businesses on the societal and environmental impacts of the AI systems that they develop, sell or distribute should be established and used at an early stage of the development and life-cycle of AI systems. Such common standard obligations should notably consist of mandatory human rights due diligence rules, thus enabling a level-playing field among European businesses and non- European businesses operating in the EU.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 679 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
(62) In order to ensure a high level of trustworthiness of high-risk AI systems, those systems should be subject to a third party conformity assessment prior to their placing on the market or putting into service.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 684 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
(64) Given the more extensive experience of professional pre-market certifiers in the field of product safety and the different nature of risks involved, it is appropriate to limit, at least in an initial phase of application of this Regulation, the scope ofessential to ensure, particularly in the period before application of this Regulation, the development of adequate capacity for the application of third-party conformity assessment for high-risk AI systems other than those related to products. Therefore, the conformity assessment of such systems should be carried out as a general rule by the provider under its own responsibility, with the only exception of AI systems intended to be used for the remote biometric identification of persons, for which the involvement of a notified body in the conformity assessment should be foreseen, to the extent they are not prohibited.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 686 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
(65) In order to carry out third-party conformity assessment for AI systems intended to be used for the remote biometric identification of persons, notified bodies should be designated under this Regulation by the national competent authorities, provided they are compliant with a set of requirements, notably on independence, competence and absence of conflicts of interests.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 690 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
(65 a) Third party conformity assessments for products listed in Annex III are essential as a precautionary measure and to ensure that trust is not lost in AI products, to the detriment of innovation, competition and growth. Due to the particularly sensitive nature of the tasks at hand, third party conformity assessments in the fields of law enforcement, asylum and immigration should be carried out by the market surveillance authority.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 694 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
(66) In line with the commonly established notion of substantial modification for products regulated by Union harmonisation legislation, it is appropriate that an AI system undergoes a new third party conformity assessment whenever a change occurs which may affect the compliance of the system with this Regulation or when the intended purpose of the system changes. In addition, as regards AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service (i.e. they automatically adapt how functions are carried out), it is necessary to provide rules establishing that changes to the algorithm and its performance that have been pre-determined by the provider and assessed at the moment of the conformity assessment should not constitute a substantial modification.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 699 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
(68) Under certain conditions, rapid availability of innovative technologies may be crucial for health and safety of persons and for society as a whole. It is thus appropriate that under exceptional reasons of public security or protection of life and health of natural persons and the protection of industrial and commercial property, Member States could authorise the placing on the market or putting into service of AI systems which have not undergone a conformity assessment.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 705 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
(69) In order to facilitate the work of the Commission and the Member States in the artificial intelligence field as well as to increase the transparency towards the public, providers of high-risk AI systems other than those related to products falling within the scope of relevant existing Union harmonisation legislation,and deployers of high- risk AI systems should be required to register their high- risk AI system in a EU database, to be established and managed by the Commission. The Commission should be the controller of that database, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council55 . In order to ensure the full functionality of the database, when deployed, the procedure for setting the database should include the elaboration of functional specifications by the Commission and an independent audit report. _________________ 55 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 711 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
(70) Certain AI systems intended to interact with natural persons or to generate content may pose specific risks of impersonation or deception irrespective of whether they qualify as high-risk or not. In certain circumstances, the use of these systems should therefore be subject to specific transparency obligations without prejudice to the requirements and obligations for high-risk AI systems. In particular, natural persons should be notified that they are interacting with an AI system, unless this is obvious from the circumstances and the context of use. Moreover, natural persons should be notified when they are exposed to an emotion recognition system or a biometric categorisation system. Such information and notifications should be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities. Further, usdeployers, who use an AI system to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, places or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic, should disclose that the content has been artificially created or manipulated by labelling the artificial intelligence output accordingly and disclosing its artificial origin. Additionally, the use of an AI system to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles a natural person should be permitted only when used for freedom of expression and artistic purposes and while respecting the limits of these purposes, or with the explicit consent of that person.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 719 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
(71) Artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight andbenefits from clear rules and legal certainty, and requires regulatory oversight. In order to fulfill its potential to benefit society, a safe space for controlled experimentation, while ensuring respect for Union law and the protection of fundamental rights, can help foster responsible innovation and integration of appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation measures. To ensure a legal framework that ispromotes sustainable innovation-friendly,, is future-proof and resilient to disruption, national competent authorities from one or more Member States should be encouraged to cooperate in establishing artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative AI systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 724 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
(72) The objectives of the regulatory sandboxes should be to foster AI innovation for the benefit of society by establishing a controlled experimentation and testing environment in the development and pre-marketing phase with a view to ensuring respect for and protection of fundamental rights, compliance of the innovative AI systems with this Regulation and other relevant Union and Member States legislation; to enhance legal certainty for innovators and the competent authorities’ oversight and understanding of the opportunities, emerging risks and the impacts of AI use, and to accelerate access to markets, including by removing barriers for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups. To ensure uniform implementation across the Union and economies of scale, it is appropriate to establish common rules for the regulatory sandboxes’ implementation and a framework for cooperation between the relevant authorities involved in the supervision of the sandboxes. This Regulation should provide the legal basis for the use of personal dataPersonal data that had originally been collected for otherdifferent purposes for developing certain AI systems in the public interest within the AI regulatory sandbox, in line with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, and without prejudice to Article 4(2) of Directive (EU) 2016/680should be processed in a sandbox only under specified conditions and within the limits of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Such further processing should be considered as for statistical purposes in the meaning of Article 5(1)(b) of that Regulation. Participants in the sandbox should ensure appropriate safeguards and cooperate with the competent authorities, including by following their guidance and acting expeditiously and in good faith to mitigate any high-risks to safety and fundamental rights that may arise during the development and experimentation in the sandbox. The conduct of the participants in the sandbox should be taken into account when competent authorities decide over the suspending or banning them from participating in the sandbox, or whether to impose an administrative fine under Article 83(2) of Regulation 2016/679 and Article 57 of Directive 2016/680. This Regulation should also provide the legal basis for the use of data protected by intellectual property or trade- secrets for developing certain AI systems in the public interest within the AI regulatory sandbox, without prejudice to Directive (EU) 2019/790 and to Directive (EU) 2016/943. The authorised use of data protected by intellectual property or trade-secrets under Article 54 of this Regulation should be covered by Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2019/790.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 732 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
(73) In order to promote and protect innovation, it is important that the interests of small-scale providers and usdeployers of AI systems are taken into particular account. To this objective, Member States should develop initiatives, which are targeted at those operators, including on awareness raising and information communication, and including the cooperation across borders. Moreover, the specific interests and needs of small-scale providers shall be taken into account when Notified Bodies set conformity assessment fees. Translation costs related to mandatory documentation and communication with authorities may constitute a significant cost for providers and other operators, notably those of a smaller scale. Member States should possibly ensure that one of the languages determined and accepted by them for relevant providers’ documentation and for communication with operators is one which is broadly understood by the largest possible number of cross-border usdeployers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 737 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
(74) In order to minimise the risks to implementation resulting from lack of knowledge and expertise in the market as well as to facilitate compliance of providers and notified bodies with their obligations under this Regulation, the AI- on demand platform, the European Digital Innovation Hubs and the Testing and Experimentation Facilities established by the Commission and the Member States at national or EU level should possibly contribute to the implementation of this Regulation. Within their respective mission and fields of competence, they may provide in particular technical and scientific support to providers and notified bodies.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 740 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 76
(76) In order to facilitate a smooth, effective and harmonised implementation of this Regulation a European Artificial Intelligence Board should be established. The Board should be independent and responsible for a number of advisory and enforcement tasks, including issuing decisions, opinions, recommendations, advice or guidance on matters related to the implementation of this Regulation, including on technical specifications or existing standards regarding the requirements established in this Regulation and providing advice to and assisting the Commission on specific questions related to artificial intelligence. In order to ensure a consistent and appropriate enforcement vis-à-vis very large undertakings, the Board should be the supervisory authority for undertakings that meet the criteria of 'community dimension' as defined in Article 1(3) of Regulation 139/200 (Merger Regulation). The Board should have a secretariat with sufficient resources and expertise to be able to fulfil its role. In this respect, the secretariat should establish a European Centre of Excellence for Artificial Intelligence (ECE-AI).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 744 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 77
(77) Member States hold a key role in the application and enforcement of this Regulation. In this respect, each Member State should designate one or more national competent authorities for the purpose of supervising the application and implementation of this Regulation. In order to increase organisation efficiency on the side of Member States and to set an official point of contact vis-à-vis the public and other counterparts at Member State and Union levels, in each Member State one national authority should be designated as national supervisory authority. In order to avoid duplication and combine expertise and competences, this should be a supervisory authority established under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation). The supervisory authorities should have sufficient investigative and corrective powers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 748 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
(78) In order to ensure that providers of high-risk AI systems can take into account the experience on the use of high-risk AI systems for improving their systems and the design and development process or can take any possible corrective action in a timely manner, all providers should have a post-market monitoring system in place. This system is also key to ensure that the possible risks emerging from AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service can be more efficiently and timely addressed. In this context, providers should also be required to have a system in place to report to the relevant authorities any serious incidents or any breaches to national and Union law, including those protecting fundamental rights and consumer rights, resulting from the use of their AI systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 750 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79
(79) In order to ensure an appropriate and effective enforcement of the requirements and obligations set out by this Regulation, which is Union harmonisation legislation, the system of market surveillance and compliance of products established by Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 should apply in its entirety. Where necessary for their mandate, national public authorities or bodies, which supervise the application of Union law protecting fundamental rights, including equality bodies, should also have access to any documentation created under this Regulation. A reasonable suspicion of breach of fundamental rights, which may arise from a complaint from an individual or a notification of a breach submitted by a civil society organisation, should be deemed as a sufficient reason for the commencement of an evaluation of an AI system at national level.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 751 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 a (new)
(79 a) As the rights and freedoms of individuals can be seriously undermined by AI systems, it is essential that affected individuals have meaningful access to reporting and redress mechanisms. They should be able to report infringements of this Regulation to their national supervisory authority and have the right to be heard and to be informed about the outcome of their complaint and the right to a timely decision. In addition, they should have the right to an effective remedy against competent authorities who fail to enforce these rights and the right to redress. Where applicable, deployers should provide internal complaints mechanisms to be used by affected individuals and should be liable for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages in cases of breaches of individuals’ or groups’ rights. Collective representation of affected individuals must be possible.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 754 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 80
(80) Union legislation on financial services includes internal governance and risk management rules and requirements which are applicable to regulated financial institutions in the course of provision of those services, including when they make use of AI systems. In order to ensure coherent application and enforcement of the obligations under this Regulation and relevant rules and requirements of the Union financial services legislation, the authorities responsible for the supervision and enforcement of the financial services legislation, including where applicable the European Central Bank, should be designated as competent authorities for the purpose of supervising the implementation of this Regulation, including for market surveillance activities, as regards AI systems provided or used by regulated and supervised financial institutions. To further enhance the consistency between this Regulation and the rules applicable to credit institutions regulated under Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council56 , it is also appropriate to integrate the conformity assessment procedure and some of the providers’ procedural obligations in relation to risk management, post marketing monitoring and documentation into the existing obligations and procedures under Directive 2013/36/EU. In order to avoid overlaps, limited derogations should also be envisaged in relation to the quality management system of providers and the monitoring obligation placed on users of high-risk AI systems to the extent that these apply to credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/EU. _________________ 56 Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 760 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 81
(81) The development of AI systems other than high-risk AI systems in accordance with the requirements of this Regulation may lead to a larger uptake of trustworthy artificial intelligence in the Union. Providers of non-high-risk AI systems should be encouraged to create codes of conduct intended to foster the voluntary application of the mandatory requirements applicable to high-risk AI systems. Providers should also be encouraged to apply on a voluntary basis additional requirements related, for example, to energy efficiency, resource use and waste production, and environmental sustainability, accessibility to persons with disability, stakeholders’ participation in the design and development of AI systems, and diversity, equal representation and gender-balance of the development teams. The Commission may develop initiatives, including of a sectorial nature, to facilitate the lowering of technical barriers hindering cross-border exchange of data for AI development, including on data access infrastructure, semantic and technical interoperability of different types of data.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 761 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 82
(82) It is important that AI systems related to products that are not high-risk in accordance with this Regulation and thus are not required to comply with the requirements set out hereinfor high-risk AI systems are nevertheless safe when placed on the market or put into service. To contribute to this objective, the Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council57 would apply as a safety net. _________________ 57 Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 December 2001 on general product safety (OJ L 11, 15.1.2002, p. 4).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 762 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 83
(83) In order to ensure trustful and constructive cooperation of competent authorities on Union and national level, all parties involved in the application of this Regulation should aim for transparency and openness. Where necessary for individual cases and internal deliberations, they should also respect the confidentiality of information and data obtained in carrying out their tasks.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 771 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 85
(85) In order to ensure that the regulatory framework can be adapted where necessary, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to amend the techniques and approaches referred to in Annex I to define AI systems, the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex II, the high-risk AI systems listed in Annex III, the provisions regarding technical documentation listed in Annex IV, the content of the EU declaration of conformity in Annex V, the provisions regarding the conformity assessment procedures in Annex VI and VII and the provisions establishing the high-risk AI systems to which the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation should apply. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making58 . These consultations should involve the participation of a balanced selection of stakeholders, including consumer organisations, associations representing affected persons, businesses representatives from different sectors and sizes, as well as researchers and scientists. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 58 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 774 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 86 a (new)
(86 a) Given the rapid technological developments and the required technical expertise in conducting the assessment of high-risk AI systems, the Commission should regularly review Annex III, at least every six months, while consulting with the relevant stakeholders, including ethics experts and anthropologists, sociologists, mental health specialists and any relevant scientists and researchers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 776 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 86 b (new)
(86 b) When adopting delegated or implementing acts concerning high-risk sectors of AI development, notably those raising concerns with respect to ethical principles or entailing risks to the health or safety of humans, animals or plants, or the protection of the environment, Member States should also assume greater responsibility in the decision- making process. In particular, the abstentions of Member States representatives’ should be counted within a qualified majority, each Member State representative should give substantive reasons for votes and abstentions, each of their vote and abstention should be accompanied by a detailed justification, on the basis of Regulation XX/XX amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 777 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 87 a (new)
(87 a) As reliable information on the resource and energy use, waste production and other environmental impact of AI systems and related ICT technology, including software, hardware and in particular data centres, is limited, the Commission should evaluate the impact and effectiveness of this Regulation regarding these criteria and further evaluate bringing legislation for the sector to contribute to EU climate strategy and targets.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 778 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 89
(89) The European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Data Protection Board were consulted in accordance with Article 42(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and delivered an opinion on […]18.6.2021”.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1553 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall comply with the requirements established in this Chapter throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system. This includes their placing on the market as well as their deployment and use. Providers and deployers of AI systems shall ensure compliance by establishing technical and operational measures in line with this Chapter.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1560 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Where a deployer discovers non- compliance of a high-risk AI system with this regulation during reasonably foreseeable use, the deployer shall have the right to obtain the necessary modifications from the provider to the high-risk AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1561 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Prospective deployers of high-risk AI systems shall have certified third parties assess and confirm the conformity of the AI system and its use with this Regulation and relevant applicable Union legislation before putting it into use. The conformity certificate shall be uploaded to the database pursuant to Article 60.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1562 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Where personal data is processed or is expected to be processed in the use of a high-risk AI system, this shall be understood as constituting a high risk in the meaning of Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1565 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The intended purpose, the potential or reasonably foreseeable use or misuse of the high- risk AI system and the risk management system referred to in Article 9 shall be taken into account when ensuring compliance with those requirements.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1578 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. A risk management system shall be established, implemented, documented and maintained in relation to high-risk AI systems throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1581 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The risk management system shall consist of a continuous iterative process run throughout the entire lifecycle of a high-risk AI system, requiring regular systematic review and updating. It shall comprise the following steps:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1586 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and analysis of the known and foreseeable risks associated with each high-risk AI system, including by means of a fundamental rights impact assessment as provided for in Article 9a;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1596 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) estimation and evaluation of the risks that may emerge when the high-risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose and under conditions of reasonably foreseeable use or misuse;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1606 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The risk management measures referred to in paragraph 2, point (d) shall give due consideration to the effects and possible interactions resulting from the combined application of the requirements set out in this Chapter 2. They shall take into account the generally acknowledged state of the art, including as reflected in relevant harmonised standards or common specifications.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1610 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The risk management measures referred to in paragraph 2, point (d) shall be such that any residual risk associated with each hazard as well as the overall residual risk of the high-risk AI systems is judged acceptable, provided that the high- risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse. Those residual risks shall be communicated to the userand the reasoned judgements made shall be communicated to the deployer and made available to AI subjects.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1625 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) where appropriate, implementation of adequate mitigation and control measures in relation toaddressing risks that cannot be eliminated;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1630 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) provision of adequate information pursuant to Article 13, in particular as regards the risks referred to in paragraph 2, point (b) of this Article, and, where appropriate, training to users.deployers. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1631 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) the governance structures to mitigate risks.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1632 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
In eliminating or reducing risks related to the use of the high-risk AI system, due consideration shall be given to the technical knowledge, experience, education, training to be expected by the user and the environmendeployer, to the socio-technical context in which the system is intended to be used, and to reasonably foreseeable use or misuse.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1642 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. High-risk AI systems shall be tested for the purposes of identifying the most appropriate risk management measures. Testing shall ensure that high-risk AI systems perform consistently for their intended purpo, safely during reasonably foreseeable conditions of use or misuse, and they are in compliance with the requirements set out in this Chapter.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1645 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6
6. Testing procedures shall be suitable to achieve the intended purpose of the AI system and do not need to go beyond what is necessary to achieve that purpose.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1656 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 7
7. The testing of the high-risk AI systems shall be performed, as appropriate, at any point in time throughout the development process, and, in any event, prior to the placing on the market or the putting into service. Testing shall be made against preliminarily defined metrics and probabilistic thresholds that are appropriate to the intended purpouse or reasonably foreseeable misuse of the high-risk AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1660 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8
8. When implementing the risk management system described in paragraphs 1 to 7, specific consideration shall be given to whether the high-risk AI system is likely to be accessed by or have an impact on children.:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1662 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point a (new)
(a) adversely affect specific groups of people, in particular on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, age, ethnicity, disability, religion, socio-economic standing, religion or origin, including asylum seekers including migrants, refugees and asylum seekers;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1663 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point b (new)
(b) have an adverse impact on the environment, or;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1664 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point c (new)
(c) be implemented on children;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1665 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point d (new)
(d) have an adverse effect on mental health, individual’s behaviour;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1666 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point e (new)
(e) amplify the spread of disinformation and amplify polarisation;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1667 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – point f (new)
(f) amplify the spread of disinformation and amplify polarisation;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1671 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a Fundamental rights impact assessments for high-risk AI systems 1. Providers, and deployers at each proposed deployment, must designate the categories of individuals and groups likely to be impacted by the system, assess the system’s impact on fundamental rights, its accessibility for persons with disabilities, and its impact on the environment and broader public interest. Deployers of high-risk AI systems as defined in Article 6(2) shall, prior to putting the system into use, publish a fundamental rights impact assessment of the systems’ impact in the context of use throughout the entire lifecycle. This assessment shall include at least: a) the intended purpose for which the system will be used; b) the intended geographic and temporal scope of the system; c) the potential risks of the use to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, including any indirect impacts or consequences of the systems; d) the categories of natural persons and groups likely or foreseen to be affected; e) the proportionality and necessity of the system’s use; f) verification of the legality of the use of the system in accordance with Union and national law; g) any specific risk of harm likely to impact marginalised, vulnerable persons or groups at risk of discrimination, and risk of increasing existing societal inequalities; h) the foreseeable impact of the use of the system on the environment over its entire life cycle, including but not limited to energy consumption; i) any other negative impact on the public interest and clear plans relating to how the harms identified will be mitigated, and how effective this mitigation is expected to be; and j) the governance system the deployer will put in place, including human oversight, complaint-handling and redress. 2. If adequate steps to mitigate the risks outlined in the course of the assessment in paragraph 1 cannot be identified, the system shall not be put into use. Market surveillance authorities, pursuant to Articles 65 and 67, may take this information into account when investigating systems which present a risk at national level. 3. The obligation outlined under paragraph 1 applies for each new deployment of the high-risk AI system. 4. Deployers shall consult with relevant stakeholders, in particular groups of natural persons exposed to heightened risks from the AI system, civil society and social partners when preparing the impact assessment. The impact assessment shall be repeated on a regular basis throughout the entire lifecycle. 5. Publication of the results of the impact assessment shall be part of the registration of use pursuant to Article 51(2). 6. Where the deployer is already required to carry out a data protection impact assessment under Article 35 of Regulation(EU) 2016/679 or Article 27 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, the impact assessment outlined in paragraph 1 shall be conducted in conjunction to the data protection impact assessment and be published as an addendum. 7. Deployers of high-risk AI systems shall use the information provided under Article 13 to comply with their obligation under paragraph 1.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1684 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Training, validation and testing data sets shall be subject to appropriate data governance and management practices. throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system. Those practices shall concern in particular,
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1710 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(g a) verification of the legality of the sources of the data.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1722 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Training, validation and testing data sets shall be relevant, representative, free of errors and statistically complete. They shall have the appropriate statistical properties, including, where applicable, as regards the persons or groups of persons on whichin relation to whom the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. These characteristics of the data sets may be met at the level of individual data sets or a combination thereof.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1735 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. To the extent that it is strictly necessary for the purposes of ensuring bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to the high-risk AI systems, the providers of such systems may process special categories of personal data referred to in Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680 and Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, subject to appropriate safeguards for the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, including technical limitations on the re-use and use of state- of-the-art security and privacy-preserving measures, such as pseudonymisation, or encryption where anonymisation may significantly affect the purpose pursued.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1746 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Environmental Impact of high-risk AI systems 1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed making use of state-of-the- art methods to reduce energy use, resource use and waste, as well as to increase energy efficiency, and the overall efficiency of the system. They shall be designed and developed and set up with capabilities enabling the measurement and logging of the consumption of energy and resources, and other environmental impact the deployment and use of the systems may have over their entire lifecycle. 2. Member States shall ensure that relevant national authorities issue guidelines and provide support to providers and deployers in their efforts to reduce the environmental impact and resource use of high-risk AI systems. 3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to detail the measurement and logging procedures, taking into account state-of-the-art methods, in particular to enable the comparability of the environmental impact of systems, and taking into account the economies of scale.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1749 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The technical documentation of a high-risk AI system shall be drawn up before that system is placed on the market or put into service and shall be kept up-to date throughout its entire lifecycle, and where appropriate, beyond.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1768 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed with capabilities enabling the automatic recording of events (‘logs’) while the high-risk AI systems is operating. Those logging capabilities shall conform to the state of the art and recognised standards or common specifications.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1788 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – title
Transparency and provision of information to userdeployers and AI subjects
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1791 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed in such a way to ensure that their operation is sufficiently transparent to enable usdeployers to interpret the system’s output and use it appropriately. An appropriate type and degree of transparency shall be ensured, with a view to achieving compliance with the relevant obligations of the usdeployer and of the provider set out in Chapter 3 of this Title. Where individuals are passively subject to AI systems (AI subjects), information to ensure an appropriate type and degree of transparency shall be made publicly available, with full respect to the privacy, personality, and related rights of subjects.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1794 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. High-risk AI systems shall be accompanied by instructions for use in an appropriate digital format or otherwise that include concise, statistically complete, correct and clear information that is relevant, accessible and comprehensible to usdeployers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1803 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point b – point iii
(iii) any known or foreseeable circumstance, related to the use of the high-risk AI system in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable use or misuse, which may lead to risks to the health and, safety or, fundamental rights, the environment, or democracy;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1806 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the human oversight measures referred to in Article 14, including the technical measures put in place to facilitate the interpretation of the outputs of AI systems by the usdeployers;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1809 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)
(e a) the level of extraction and consumption of natural resources.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1814 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed in such a way, including with appropriate human-machine interface tools, that they can be effectively overseen by natural persons during the period in which the AI system is in use, and to allow for thorough investigation after an incident.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1817 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Human oversight shall aim at preventing or minimising the risks to health, safety or, fundamental rights, democracy, or the environment that may emerge when a high-risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable use or misuse, in particular when such risks persist notwithstanding the application of other requirements set out in this Chapter.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1821 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Human oversight shall be ensured through either one or allboth of the following measures:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1822 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) measures identified and builby the provider building human oversight, when technically feasible, into the high-risk AI system by the provider before it is placed on the market or put into service;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1824 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) other measures identified by the provider before placing the high-risk AI system on the market or putting it into service and that are appropriate to be implemented by the userdeployer, such as user guides.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1835 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) remain aware of the possible tendencymitigate the risk of automatically relying or over- relying on the output produced by a high- risk AI system (‘automation bias’), in particular for high- risk AI systems used to provide information or recommendations for decisions to be taken by natural persons;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1839 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) be ablfree to decide, in any particular situation, not to use the high-risk AI system or otherwise disregard, override or reverse the output of the high-risk AI system;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1842 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – point e
(e) be able to intervene oin the operation of the high-risk AI system or interrupt the system through a “stop” button or a similar procedure that allows the system to come to a halt in a safe state.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1845 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. For high-risk AI systems referred to in point 1(a) and 1(b) of Annex III, the measures referred to in paragraph 3 shall be such as to ensure that, in addition, no action or decision is taken by the usdeployer on the basis of the identification resultingoutput from the system unless this has been verified and confirmed by at least two natural persons.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1851 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed in such a way that they achieve security by design and by default, in the light of their intended purpose, an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurieliability, robustness, resilience, safety, and perform consistently in those respectscybersecurity throughout their lifecycle.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1853 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The levels of accuracy and the relevant accuracy metrics of high-risk AI systems shall be assessed by an independent entity and declared in the accompanying instructions of use. The language used shall be clear, free of misunderstandings or misleading statements.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1859 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. High-risk AI systems shall be resilienobust as regards errors, faults or inconsistencies that may occur within the system or the environment in which the system operates, in particular due to their interaction with natural persons or other systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1861 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
High-risk AI systems that continue to learn after being placed on the market or put into service shall be developed in such a way to ensure that possibly biased outputs due to outputs used as an input for future operations (‘feedback loops’) are duut into service shall ensure that 'feedback loops' caused by biased outputs are adequately addressed with appropriate mitigation measures.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1866 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. High-risk AI systems shall be resilient as regardsadequately protected against attempts by unauthorised third parties to alter their use or performance by exploiting the system vulnerabilities.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1869 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The technical solutionand orgaisational measures aimed at ensuring the cybersecurity of high-risk AI systems shall be appropriate to the relevant circumstances and the risks.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1871 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The technical solutionand orgaisational measures to address AI specific vulnerabilities shall include at least, where appropriate, measures to prevent and control for attacks trying to manipulate the training dataset (‘data poisoning’), inputs designed to cause the model to make a mistake (‘adversarial examples’), or model flaws.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1872 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. High risk AI shall be accompanied by security solutions and patches for the lifetime of the product it is embedded in, or in case of the absence of dependence on a specific product, for a time that needs to be stated by the manufacturer and cannot be less then 10 years.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1874 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Title III – Chapter 3 – title
3 OBLIGATIONS OF PROVIDERS AND USDEPLOYERS OF HIGH-RISK AI SYSTEMS and other parties
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1875 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Obligations of providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1877 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Providers and, where applicable, deployers of high-risk AI systems shall:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1885 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) include name and contact information;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1889 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) when under their control, keep the logs automatically generated by their high- risk AI systems for a period of at least two years, or as long as is appropriate in the light of the intended purpose of high-risk AI system and applicable legal obligations under Union or national law;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1895 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ensure that the high-risk AI system undergoes the relevant third party conformity assessment procedure, prior to its placing on the market or putting into service;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1912 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers and, where applicable, deployers of high-risk AI systems shall put a quality management system in place that ensures compliance with this Regulation. That system shall be documented in a systematic and orderly manner in the form of written policies, procedures and instructions, and shall include at least the following aspects:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1923 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical specifications, including standards, to be applied and, where the relevant harmonised standards are not applied in full, or do not cover all of the relevant requirements, the means to be used to ensure that the high-risk AI system complies with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1925 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) systems and procedures for data management, including data acquisition, data collection, data analysis, data labelling, data storage, data filtration, data mining, data aggregation, data retention and any other operation regarding the data that is performed before and for the purposes of the placing on the market or, putting into service, and deployment of high-risk AI systems;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1939 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The implementation of aspects referred to in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate to the size of the provider’s organisation.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1942 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. For providers that are credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/ EU, the obligation to put a quality management system in place shall be deemed to be fulfilled by complying with the rules on internal governance arrangements, processes and mechanisms pursuant to Article 74 of that Directive. In that context, any harmonised standards referred to in Article 40 of thiThis Article applies without prejudice to the obligations for providers that are credit institutions Rregulation shall be taken into accounted by Directive 2013/36/ EU.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1948 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall draw up the technical documen-tation referred to in Article 11 in accordance with Annex IV and make it available at the request of a national competent authority.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1957 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall keep the logs automatically generated by their high-risk AI systems, to the extent such logs are under their control by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the usdeployer or otherwise by law. The logs shall be kept for a period that is appropriate in the light of the intended purpose of high- risk AI system and applicable legal obligations under Union or national law.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1960 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Providers of high-risk AI systems which consider or have reason to consider that a high-risk AI system which they have placed on the market or put into service is not in conformity with this Regulation shall immediately inform the competent authorities and take the necessary corrective actions to bring that system into conformity, to withdraw it, to disable it, or to recall it, as appropriate. They shall inform the distributors and deployers of the high-risk AI system in question and, where applicable, the authorised representative and importers accordingly.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1966 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Where the high-risk AI system presents a risk within the meaning of Article 65(1) and that risk is known to the provider of the system becomes aware of that risk, that provider shall immediately inform the national competent authorities of the Member States in which it made the system available and, where applicable, the notified body that issued a certificate for the high-risk AI system, in particular of the non-compliance and of any corrective actions taken.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1972 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Providers of high-risk AI systems shall, upon request by a national competent authority, provide that authority with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of the high- risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, in an official Union language determined by the Member State concerned. Upon a reasoned request from a national competent authority, providers shall also give that authority access to the logs automatically generated by the high- risk AI system, to the extent such logs are under their control by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 1988 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) provide a national competent authority, upon a reasoned request, with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, including access to the logs automatically generated by the high-risk AI system to the extent such logs are under the control of the provider by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2002 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. Importers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark, and the address at which they can be contacted on the high-risk AI system or, where that is not possibleand, on its packaging or its accompanying documentation, aswhere applicable.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2005 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 5
5. Importers shall provide national competent authorities, upon a reasoned request, with all necessary information and documentation to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title in a language which can be easily understood by that national competent authority, including access to the logs automatically generated by the high-risk AI system to the extent such logs are under the control of the provider by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law. They shall also cooperate with those authorities on any action national competent authority takes in relation to that system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2013 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. Where a distributor considers or has reason to consider that a high-risk AI system is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, it shall not make the high-risk AI system available on the market until that system has been brought into conformity with those requirements. Furthermore, where the system presents a risk within the meaning of Article 65(1), the distributor shall inform the competent authorities and the provider or the importer of the system, as applicable, to that effect.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2017 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
4. A distributor that considers or has reason to consider that a high-risk AI system which it has made available on the market is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title shall take the corrective actions necessary to bring that system into conformity with those requirements, to withdraw it or recall it or shall ensure that the provider, the importer or any relevant operator, as appropriate, takes those corrective actions. Where the high-risk AI system presents a risk within the meaning of Article 65(1), the distributor shall immediately inform the national competent authorities of the Member States in which it has made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the non-compliance and of any corrective actions taken.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2021 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5
5. Upon a reasoned request from a national competent authority, distributors of high-risk AI systems shall provide that authority with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title. Distributors shall also cooperate with that national competent authority on any action taken by that authority.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2025 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – title
Obligations of distributors, importers, usdeployers or any other third-party
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2027 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Any distributor, importer, usdeployer or other third-party shall be considered a provider for the purposes of this Regulation and shall be subject to the obligations of the provider under Article 16, in any of the following circumstances:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2030 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) they deploy a high-risk system for a purpose other than the intended purpose;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2032 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) they modify the intended purpose of an AI system which is not high-risk and is already placed on the market or put into service, in a way which makes the modified system a high-risk AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2035 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – title
29 Obligations of usdeployers of high- risk AI systems (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2038 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. UsDeployers of high-risk AI systems shall usetake appropriate technical and organisational measures and ensure that the use of such systems is in accordance with the instructions of use accompanying the systems and enables human oversight and decision-making, pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 5.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2043 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Deployers shall identify the categories of natural persons and groups likely to be affected by the system before putting it into use.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2045 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Human oversight following paragraph 1 shall be carried out by natural persons having the necessary competences, training, authority and independence.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2047 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. The obligations in paragraph 1 are without prejudice to other usdeployer obligations under Union or national law and to the usshall take due account of the deployer's discretion in organising its own resources and activities for the purpose of implementing the human oversight measures indicated by the provider.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2089 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 7
7. Notifying authorities shall have a sufficient number of competent personnel at their disposal for the proper performance of their tasks. Where applicable, competent personnel shall have necessary expertise in supervision of fundamental rights.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2103 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4
4. Notified bodies shall be independent of the provider of a high-risk AI system in relation to which it performs conformity assessment activities. Notified bodies shall also be independent of any other operator having an economic interest in the high-risk AI system that is assessed, as well as of any competitors of the provider. Notified bodies and their employees should not have provided any service to the provider of a high-risk system for 12 months before the assessment. They should also commit not to work for the provider of a high-risk system assessed or a professional organisation or business association of which the provider of a high-risk system is a member for 12 months after their position in the auditing organisation has ended.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2111 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall, where necessary, investigate all cases where there are reasons to doubt whether a notified body complies with the requirements laid down in Article 33.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2113 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission ascertains that a notified body does not meet or no longer meets the requirements laid down in Article 33, it shall adopt a reasoned decision requesting the notifying Member State to take the necessary corrective measures, including withdrawal of notification if necessaryapplicable. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74(2).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2136 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. Where harmonised standards referred to in Article 40 do not exist or where the Commission considers that the relevant harmonised standards are insufficient or that there is a need to address specific safety, accessibility, or fundamental right concerns, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, adopt common specifications in respect of the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74(2).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2152 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
1. Taking into account their intended purpose, high-risk AI systems that have been trained and tested on data concerning the specific geographical, behavioural and functional setting within which they are intended to be used or are reasonably foreseeable to be used shall be presumed to be in compliance with the requirement set out in Article 10(4).
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2156 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – title
CThird party conformity assessment
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2160 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For high-risk AI systems listed in point 1 of Annex III, where, in demonstrating the compliance of a high- risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, the provider has applied harmonised standards referred to in Article 40, or, where applicable, common specifications referred to in Article 41, the provider shall follow one of the following procedures:Annex III the provider shall have a conformity assessment carried out by an independent third-party, following the conformity assessment procedure set out in Annex VII.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2165 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control referred to in Annex VI;deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2169 #

2021/0106(COD)

(b) the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation, with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VII.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2172 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where, in demonstrating the compliance of a high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, the provider has not applied or has applied only in part harmonised standards referred to in Article 40, or where such harmonised standards do not exist and common specifications referred to in Article 41 are not available, the provider shall follow the conformity assessment procedure set out in Annex VII.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2177 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of carrying out the conformity assessment procedure referred to in Annex VII, the provider may choose any of the notified bodies. However, when the system is intended to be put into service by law enforcement, immigration or asylum authorities as well as EU institutions, bodies or agencies, the market surveillance authority referred to in Article 63(5) or (6), as applicable, shall act as a notified body.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2181 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. For high-risk AI systems referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III, providers shall follow the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control as referred to in Annex VI, which does not provide for the involvement of a notified body. For high-risk AI systems referred to in point 5(b) of Annex III, placed on the market or put into service by credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/EU, the conformity assessment shall be carried out as part of the procedure referred to in Articles 97 to101 of that Directive.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2186 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where the legal acts listed in Annex II, section A, enable the manufacturer of the product to opt out from a third-party conformity assessment, provided that that manufacturer has applied all harmonised standards covering all the relevant requirements, that manufacturer may make use of that option only if he has also applied harmonised standards or, where applicable, common specifications referred to in Article 41, covering the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2192 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. High-risk AI systems shall undergo a new third party conformity assessment procedure whenever they are substantially modified, regardless of whether the modified system is intended to be further distributed or continues to be used by the current usdeployer.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2204 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts to amend paragraphs 1 and 2 in order to subject high-risk AI systems referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III to the conformity assessment procedure referred to in Annex VII or parts thereof. The Commission shall adopt such delegated acts taking into account the effectiveness of the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control referred to in Annex VI in preventing or minimizing the risks to health and safety and protection of fundamental rights posed by such systems as well as the availability of adequate capacities and resources among notified bodies.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2210 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
3. Where a notified body finds that an AI system no longer meets the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, it shall, taking account of the principle of proportionality, suspend or withdraw the certificate issued or impose any restrictions on it, unless compliance with those requirements is ensured by appropriate corrective action taken by the provider of the system within an appropriate deadline set by the notified body. The notified body shall give reasons for its decision.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2213 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3
3. Each notified body shall provide the other notified bodies carrying out similar conformity assessment activities covering the same artificial intelligence technologiesystems with relevant information on issues relating to negative and, on request, positive conformity assessment results.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2216 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 43, any market surveillance authority may request a judicial authority to authorise the placing on the market or putting into service of specific high-risk AI systems within the territory of the Member State concerned, for exceptional reasons of public security or the protection of life and health of persons, environmental protection and the protection of key industrial and infrastructural assets. That authorisation shall be for a limited period of time, while the necessary conformity assessment procedures are being carried out, and shall terminate once those procedures have been completed. The completion of those procedures shall be undertaken without undue delay.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2218 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. The authorisation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be issued only if the market surveillance authority and judicial authority concludes that the high-risk AI system complies with the requirements of Chapter 2 of this Title. The market surveillance authority shall inform the Commission and the other Member States of any request made and any subsequent authorisation issued pursuant to paragraph 1.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2219 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3
3. Where, within 15 calendar days of receipt of the information referred to in paragraph 2, no objection has been raised by either a Member State or the Commission in respect ofto the request of the maret surveillance authority for an authorisation issued by a market surveillance authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1, that authorisationrequest shall be deemed justified.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2221 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
4. Where, within 15 calendar days of receipt of the notification referred to in paragraph 2, objections are raised by a Member State against an authorisation request issued by a market surveillance authority of another Member State, or where the Commission considers the authorisationrequest to be contrary to Union law or the conclusion of the Member States regarding the compliance of the system as referred to in paragraph 2 to be unfounded, the Commission shall without delay enter into consultation with the relevant Member State; the operator(s) concerned shall be consulted and have the possibility to present their views. In view thereof, the Commission shall decide whether the authorisationrequest is justified or not. The Commission shall address its decision to the Member State concerned and the relevant operator or operators.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2222 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 5
5. If the authorisationrequest is considered unjustified, this shall be withdrawn by the market surveillance authority of the Member State concerned.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2223 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. The provider shall draw up a writtennotifying authority after third party conformity assessment shall draw up a written physical and machine-readable electronic EU declaration of conformity for each AI system and keep it at the disposal of the national competent authorities for 105 years after the AI system has been placed on the market or put into service. The EU declaration of conformity shall identify the AI system for which it has been drawn up. A copy of the EU declaration of conformity shall be given to the relevant national competent authorities upon request.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2227 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 4
4. By drawing upAfter receiving the EU declaration of conformity, the provider shall assume responsibility for continuous compliance with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title. The provider shall keep the EU declaration of conformity up-to-date as appropriat throughout the entire lifecycle.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2240 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The provider shall, for a period ending 10 5 years after the AI system has been placed on the market or put into service, keep at the disposal of the national competent authorities:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2247 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Before placing on the market or putting into service a high-risk AI system referred to in Article 6(2), the provider or, where applicable, the authorised representative shall register that system in the EU database referred to in Article 60.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2253 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Before each deployment of, or substantial modification to, a high-risk AI system referred to in Article 6, the deployer or, where applicable, the authorised representative shall register that system in the EU database referred to in Article 60.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2257 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 b (new)
In case the provider or deployer is a public authority they shall register both high-risk AI systems and all other AI systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2259 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Title IV
TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS FOR CERTAIN AI SYSTEMS
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2260 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – title
Transparency obligations for certain AI systems
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2264 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Providers shall ensure that AI systems intended to interact with natural persons are designed and developed in such a way that natural persons are informed without delay that they are interacting with an AI system, unless this is obvious from the circumstances and the context of use. This obligation shall not apply to AI systems authorised by law to detect, prevent, investigate and prosecute criminal offences, unlessshall also include information on which components and functions are supported through AI, information which main parameters the AI system takes into account, and information on human oversight and which person is responsible for decisions made or influenced by those systems are available for the public to report a criminal offences well as information on rectification, redress rights and options.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2266 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2
2. UsDeployers of an remotione biometric recognition system or a biometric categorisation system shall inform of the operation of the system the natural persons exposed thereto. This obligation shall not apply to AI systems used for biometric categorisation, which are permitted by law to detectshall also include information on which components and functions are supported through AI, information which main parameters the AI system takes into account, and information on human oversight and which person is responsible for decisions made or influenced by the system as well as information on rectification, prevent and investigate criminal offencedress rights and options.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2272 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. UsDeployers of an AI system other than those in paragraphs 1 or 2, that generates or manipulates image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful (‘deep fake’), shall disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2273 #

2021/0106(COD)

However, the first subparagraph shall not apply where the use is authorised by law to detect, prevent, investigate and prosecute criminal offences or it is necessary for the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of the arts and sciences guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, and subject to appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of third parties.deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2280 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The obligations in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be without prejudice to Union law on delaying information of subjects in ongoing criminal investigations, and be without prejudice to the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of the arts and sciences guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, and subject to appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of third parties.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2282 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 4
4. PThe information in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be provided in an accessible, easy to understand, yet comprehensive manner, at least in one of the languages of the Member State in which the system was made available, and shall not affect the requirements and obligations set out in Title III of this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2285 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 a (new)
Article 52 a Limitations for deep fakes of persons Notwithstanding Article 52 and subject to appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of third parties, the use of AI systems that generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful (‘deep fake’), shall be permitted only (a) when used for the exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and to artistic expression, or (b) with the explicit consent of the affected persons.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2289 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. AI regulatory sandboxes established by one or more Member States competent authorities or the European Data Protection Supervisor shall provide a controlled environment that facilitates the development, testing and validation of innovative AI systems for a limited time before their placement on the market or putting into service pursuant to a specific plan. TFollowing a fundamental rights impact assessment, as laid out in Article 9a, this shall take place under the direct supervision and guidance by the competent authorities with a view to identifying risks in particular to the environment, health and safety, and fundamental rights, ensuring compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and, where relevant, other Union and Member States legislation supervised within the sandbox. Access to the regulatory sandboxes shall require providers to apply for participation. Supervising authorities shall inform applicants of their decision within 3 months of the application, or, in justified cases, of an extension of this deadline by at most another 3 months. The supervising authority shall inform the European Artificial Intelligence Board of the provision of regulatory sandboxes.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2308 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that to the extent the innovative AI systems involve the processing of personal data, or otherwise fall under the supervisory remit of other national authorities or competent authorities providing or supporting access to data, the national data protection authorities and those other national authorities are associated to the operation of the AI regulatory sandbox and involved in the control of those aspects of the sandbox it supervises to the full extent of its respective powers.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2313 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
3. The AI regulatory sandboxes shall not affect the supervisory and corrective powers of the competent authorities. Any significant risks to democracy, the environment, health and safety and fundamental rights identified during the development and testing of such systems shall result in immediate mitigation and, failing that, in the suspension of the development and testing process until such mitigation takes place, or, where mitigating measures cannot be identified that stop and remedy such significant risk or harm, Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities have the power to permanently suspend the development and testing process. In the case of abuse, competent authorities shall have the power to ban providers from applying for and participating in the regulatory sandbox for a limited amount of time or indefinitely. Decisions to suspend or ban providers from participating in regulatory sandboxes shall be submitted without delay to the European Artificial Intelligence Board. Applicants shall have access to remedies.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2327 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 5
5. Member States’ competent authorities that have established AI regulatory sandboxes shall coordinate their activities and cooperate within the framework of the European Artificial Intelligence Board. They shall submit annual reports to the Board and the Commission on the results from the implementation of those schemes, including good practices, lessons learnt and recommendations on their setup and, where relevant, on the application and possible revision of this Regulation and other Union legislation supervised within the sandbox, in particular with regards to easing burdens and introducing further regulation where additional risks and potential harms are identified.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2335 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6
6. The modalities and the conditions of the operation of the AI regulatory sandboxes, including the eligibility criteria and the procedure for the application, selection, participation and exiting from the sandbox, and the rights and obligations of the participants shall be set out in implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74(2)by the European Artificial Intelligence Board in close cooperation with the Member States’ and competent authorities. A list of planned and current sandboxes, including the modalities, conditions, eligibility criteria and application, selection, participation procedure shall be made publicly available by the European Artificial intelligence Board.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2346 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In the AI regulatory sandbox personal data and data protected by intellectual property rights or trade secrets lawfully collected for other purposes shall be processed solely for the purposes of developing and testing certain innovative AI systems in the sandbox under the following conditions:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2349 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) the innovative AI systems shall be developed for safeguarding substantial public interest in one or more of the following areas:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2351 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security, under the control and responsibility of the competent authorities. The processing shall be based on Member State or Union law;deleted
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2353 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii
(iii) a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, and to counter and remedy the climate crisis;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2356 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) there are effective monitoring mechanisms to identify if any high risks to the fundamental rights of the data subjects and holders of intellectual property rights or trade secrets may arise during the sandbox experimentation as well as response mechanism to promptly mitigate those risks and, where necessary, stop the processing;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2357 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) any personal data or data protected by intellectual property rights or trade secrets to be processed in the context of the sandbox are in a functionally separate, isolated and protected data processing environment under the control of the participants and only authorised persons have access to thatose data;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2359 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) any personal data or data protected by intellectual property rights or trade secrets processed are not be transmitted, transferred or otherwise accessed by other parties;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2362 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) any personal data or data protected by intellectual property rights or trade secrets processed in the context of the sandbox are deleted once the participation in the sandbox has terminated or the personal data has reached the end of its retention period;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2364 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the logs of the processing of personal data or data protected by intellectual property rights or trade secrets in the context of the sandbox are kept for the duration of the participation in the sandbox and 1 year after its termination, solely for the purpose of and only as long as necessary for fulfilling accountability and documentation obligations under this Article or other applicationble Union or Member States legislation;
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2366 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) a short summary of the AI projectsystem developed in the sandbox, its objectives and expected results published on the website of the competent authorities.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2368 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 further specifies Article 89 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and is without prejudice to Union or Member States legislation excluding processing for other purposes than those explicitly mentioned in that legislation or to Union or Member States legislation excluding the use of data protected by intellectual property or trade secrets under the conditions covered by Paragraph 1.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2371 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – title
Measures for small-scale providers and usersdeployers (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2415 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) propose amendments to Annexes I and III to the Commission.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2430 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the national supervisory authorities, who shall be represented by the head or equivalent high-level official of that authority, and the European Data Protection Supervisor. Other national authorit, the Chair of the European Data Protection Board, the Director of the Fundamental Rights Agency, the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity or their respective representatives. Other national authorities or Union agencies and bodies may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2445 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a simple majority of its members, following the consent of the Commissiontwo-thirds majority and shall take decisions by a simple majority of its members. The rules of procedure shall also contain the operational aspects related to the execution of the Board’s tasks as listed in Article 58. The Board may establish sub-groups as appropriate for the purpose of examining specific questions.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2456 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3
3. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commissionelect a chair and two deputy chairs from among its members. Their term of office shall be five years and be renewable once. . The Chair shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance with the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure. The Commission shall provide administrative and analytical support for the activities of the Board pursuant to this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2463 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4
4. The Board may invite external experts and observers to attend its meetings and may hold exchanges with interested third parties to inform its activities to an appropriate extent. To that end the Commission mayhair shall facilitate exchanges between the Board and other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups. The Board shall ensure a balanced representation of stakeholders from academia, research, industry and civil society when it invites external experts and observers, and actively stimulate participation from underrepresented categories.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2470 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 a (new)
Article 57 a Secretariat 1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the European Data Protection Supervisor. 2. The secretariat shall perform its tasks exclusively under the instructions of the Chair of the Board. 3. The staff of the European Data Protection Supervisor involved in carrying out the tasks conferred on the Board by this Regulation shall be subject to separate reporting lines from the staff involved in carrying out tasks conferred on the European Data Protection Supervisor. 4. Where appropriate, the Board and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall establish and publish a Memorandum of Understanding implementing this Article, determining the terms of their cooperation, and applicable to the staff of the European Data Protection Supervisor involved in carrying out the tasks conferred on the Board by this Regulation. 5. The secretariat shall provide analytical, administrative and logistical support to the Board. 6. The secretariat shall be responsible in particular for: (a) the day-to-day business of the Board; (b) communication between the members of the Board, its Chair and the Commission; (c) communication with other institutions and the public; (d) the use of electronic means for the internal and external communication; (e) the translation of relevant information; (f) the preparation and follow-up of the meetings of the Board; (g) the preparation, drafting and publication of opinions, guidelines, and other texts to be adopted by the Board. 7. For the exercise of point (g) of paragraph 6, the secretariat shall, under the guidance of the Chair and the deputy Chairs, establish a European Centre of Excellence for Artificial Intelligence (ECE-AI, “the Centre”). The Centre shall be provided with sufficient resources and facilities to attract the highest level of expertise on artificial intelligence from technical and humanities sciences. In particular it shall have a sufficient number of personnel permanently available whose competences and expertise shall include an in-depth understanding of artificial intelligence technologies, data and data computing, fundamental rights, health and safety risks and environmental risks, and knowledge of existing standards and legal requirements, including competition law.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2478 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 The Board shall ensure the consistent application of this Regulation and shall the competent supervisory authority to enforce this Regulation where one of the following criteria is met: (a) The aggregate worldwide turnover of an undertaking or the undertaking to which another undertaking belongs is more than EUR 2 500 million; (b) in each of at least three Member States, the aggregate turnover of an undertaking or the undertaking to which another undertaking belongs is more than EUR 100 million; (c) in each of at least three Member States included for the purpose of point (b), the aggregate turnover of an undertaking or the undertaking to which another undertaking belongs is more than EUR 25 million;and (d) the aggregate Union-wide turnover of an undertaking or the undertaking to which another undertaking belongs is more than EUR 100 million, unless each of the undertakings concerned achieves more than two-thirds of its aggregate Community-wide turnover within one and the same Member State.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2479 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph -1 a (new)
-1 a In order to ensure consistent application of this Regulation, the Board shall, on its own initiative or, where relevant, at the request of the Commission, in particular: (a) monitor and ensure the correct application of Title III of this Regulation without prejudice to the tasks of national supervisory authorities; (b) advise the Commission on any issue related to the development and use of artificial intelligence in the in the Union, including on any proposed amendment of this Regulation; (c) issue guidelines, recommendations, and best practices on procedures, information and documentation as referred to in Titles III and VIII; (d) examine, on its own initiative, on request of one of its members or on request of the Commission, any question covering the application of this Regulation and issue guidelines, recommendations and best practices in order to encourage consistent application of this Regulation; (e) draw up guidelines for supervisory authorities concerning the application of this Regulation; (f) draw up guidelines for supervisory authorities concerning the setting of administrative fines pursuant to Article 72; (g) review the practical application of the guidelines, recommendations and best practices referred to in points (e) and (f); (h) encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct pursuant to Article 69; (i) issue opinions on codes of conduct drawn up at Union level pursuant to Article 69(3a); (j) issue decisions pursuant to Articles 66 and 67; (k) promote the cooperation and the effective bilateral and multilateral exchange of information and best practices between the supervisory authorities; (l) promote common training programmes and facilitate personnel exchanges between the supervisory authorities and, where appropriate, with the supervisory authorities of third countries or with international organisations; (m) promote the exchange of knowledge and documentation on relevant legislation and practice with supervisory authorities whose scope includes artificial intelligence worldwide; (n) maintain a publicly accessible electronic register of decisions taken by supervisory authorities and courts on issues handled pursuant to Chapter 3 of Title VIII.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2481 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph -1 c (new)
-1 c The Board shall forward its opinions, guidelines, recommendations, and best practices to the Commission and to the committee referred to in Article 73 and make them public.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2482 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph -1 d (new)
-1 d The Board shall, where appropriate, consult interested parties and give them the opportunity to comment within a reasonable period. The Board shall make the results of the consultation procedure publicly available.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2483 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph -1 e (new)
-1 e When providing advice and assistance to the Commission in the context of Article 56(2), the Board shall in particular: (a) collect and share expertise and best practices among Member States; (b) contribute to uniform administrative practices in the Member States, including for the functioning of regulatory sandboxes referred to in Article 53; (c) issue opinions, recommendations or written contributions on matters related to the implementation of this Regulation, in particular on (i) technical specifications or existing standards regarding the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2, (ii) the use of harmonised standards or common specifications referred to in Articles 40 and 41, (iii) the preparation of guidance documents, including the guidelines concerning the setting of administrative fines referred to in Article 71, (iii a) amendments to the Annexes I and III.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2487 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. When providing advice and assistance to the Commission in the context of Article 56(2), the Board shall in particular:
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2554 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 a (new)
Article 58 a Independence of the Board 1. The Board shall act with complete independence in performing its tasks and exercising its powers in accordance with this Regulation. 2. The members of the Board shall, in the performance of their tasks and exercise of their powers in accordance with this Regulation, remain free from external influence, whether direct or indirect, and shall neither seek nor take instructions from anybody. 3. The members of the Board shall refrain from any action incompatible with their duties and shall not, during their term of office, engage in any incompatible occupation, whether gainful or not.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2560 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1
1. National competent authorities shall be established or designated by each Member State for the purpose of ensuring the application and, implementation and enforcement of this Regulation. National competent authorities shall be organised so as to safeguard the objectivity and impartiality of their activities and tasks.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2564 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2
2. 2. Each Member State shall designate athe national data protection authority as tthe national supervisory authority among the national competent authorities. The national supervisory authority shall act as notifying authority and market surveillance authority unless a Member State has organisational and administrative reasons to designate more than one authority.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2571 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that national competent authorities are provided with adequate financial and human and technical resources to fulfil their tasks effectively under this Regulation. In particular, national competent authorities shall have a sufficient number of personnel permanently available whose competences and expertise shall include an in-depth understanding of artificial intelligence technologies, data and data computing, fundamental rights, competition law, health and safety risks and knowledge of existing standards and other legal requirements.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2577 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall report to the Commission on an annual basis on the status of the financial and human resources of the national competent authorities with an qualified assessment of their adequacy. The Commission shall transmit that information to the Board for discussion and possible recommendations and formally accept or reject the assessments. Where an assessment is rejected, a new assessment shall be requested.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2586 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 6
6. The CommissionBoard shall facilitate the exchange of experience between national competent authorities.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2590 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 7
7. National competent authoritiesThe Board may provide guidance and advice on the implementation of this Regulation, including to small-scale providers. Whenever national competent authoritiesthe Board intends to provide guidance and advice with regard to an AI system in areas covered by other Union legislation, the competent national authorities under that Union legislation shall be consulted, as appropriate. Member States may also establish one central contact point for communication with operators.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2598 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 a (new)
Article 59 a Independence 1. Each supervisory authority shall act with complete independence in performing its tasks and exercising its powers in accordance with this Regulation. 2. The member or members of each supervisory authority shall, in the performance of their tasks and exercise of their powers in accordance with this Regulation, remain free from external influence, whether direct or indirect, and shall neither seek nor take instructions from anybody. 3. The member or members of each supervisory authority shall refrain from any action incompatible with their duties and shall not, during their term of office, engage in any incompatible occupation, whether gainful or not. 4. Each Member State shall ensure that each supervisory authority chooses and has its own staff which shall be subject to the exclusive direction of the member or members of the supervisory authority concerned. 5. Each Member State shall ensure that each supervisory authority is subject to financial control which does not affect its independence and that it has separate, public annual budgets, which may be part of the overall state or national budget.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2599 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 b (new)
Article 59 b Powers 1. Each supervisory authority shall have all of the following investigative powers: (a) to order the provider or deployer of an AI system, and, where applicable, their representative, to provide any information it requires for the performance of its tasks; (b) to carry out investigations of providers or deployers of AI systems in the form of (i) audits; (ii) reviews of fundamental rights impact assessments; (iii) reviews of certifications of conformity; (iv) any other investigation to assess compliance with this Regulation; (c) to carry out a review on certifications issued pursuant to Article 44; (d) to notify the provider or deployer of an AI system of an alleged infringement of this Regulation; (e) to obtain, from the provider or deployer of an AI system, access to all data and to all information necessary for the performance of its tasks; (f) to obtain access to any premises of the provider or deployer of an AI system, including to any data processing equipment and means, in accordance with Union or Member State procedural law. 2. Each supervisory authority shall have all of the following corrective powers: (a) to issue warnings to a provider or deployer of an AI system that the use or reasonably foreseeable misuse of that system is likely to infringe provisions of this Regulation; (b) to issue reprimands to a provider or deployer of an AI system where they have infringed provisions of this Regulation; (c) to order the provider or deployer of an AI system to comply with a subject's request to exercise his or her rights pursuant to this Regulation; (d) to order the provider or deployer of an AI system to bring operations into compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, where appropriate, in a specified manner and within a specified period; (e) to order the controller to communicate an infringement of this Regulation to the affected subject; (f) to impose a temporary or definitive limitation including a ban of the operation of an AI system; (g) to order the erasure of all data and of the related logic underlying automated processing, which had been generated as part of the development, training, or operation of an AI system that was subsequently found in breach of this Regulation; (h) to withdraw a certification or to order the certification body to withdraw a certification issued pursuant to Articles 44, or to order the certification body not to issue certification if the requirements for the certification are not or are no longer met; (i) to impose an administrative fine pursuant to Article 71, in addition to, or instead of measures referred to in this paragraph, depending on the circumstances of each individual case; (j) to order the suspension of the placing on the market of an AI system or of its export to a third country or to an international organisation. 3. The exercise of the powers conferred on the supervisory authority pursuant to this Article shall be subject to appropriate safeguards, including effective judicial remedy and due process, set out in Union and Member State law in accordance with the Charter. 4. Each Member State shall provide by law that its supervisory authority shall have the power to bring infringements of this Regulation to the attention of the judicial authorities and where appropriate, to commence or engage otherwise in legal proceedings, in order to enforce the provisions of this Regulation. 5. Each Member State may provide by law that its supervisory authority shall have additional powers to those referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3. The exercise of those powers shall not impair the effective operation of this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2607 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Title VII
EU DATABASE FOR STAND-ALONE HIGH-RISK AI SYSTEMS
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2611 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – title
EU database for stand-alone high-risk AI systems
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2618 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall, in collaboration with the Member States, set up and maintain a public EU database containing information referred to in paragraph 2 concerning high-risk AI systems referred to in Article 6(2) which are registered in accordance with Article 51.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2621 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2
2. The data listed in Annex VIII shall be entered into the EU database by the providers, and, where relevant, deployers. The Commission shall provide them with technical and administrative support.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2623 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 3
3. Information contained in the EU database shall be freely available and accessible to the public, comply with the accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive 2019/882, and be user-friendly, navigable, and machine-readable, containing structured digital data based on a standardised protocol.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2634 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall be the controller of the EU database. It shall also ensure to providers and, where relevant, deployers, adequate technical and administrative support.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2642 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2
2. The post-market monitoring system shall actively and systematically collect, document and analyse relevant data provided by usdeployers or collected through other sources on the performance of high- risk AI systems throughout their lifetime, and allow the provider to evaluate the continuous compliance of AI systems with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2. Post-market monitoring shall include continuous analysis of the AI environment, including other devices, software, and other AI systems that interact with the AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2656 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of high-riskand deployers of AI systems placed on the Union market shall report any serious incident or any malfunctioning of those systems which constitutes a breach of obligations under Union law intended to protector of fundamental rights to the market surveillance authorities of the Member States where that incident or breach occurred.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2658 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Such notification shall be made immediately after the provider has established a causal link between the AI system and the incident or malfunctioning or the reasonable likelihood of such a link, and, in any event, not later than 15 day72 hours after the providers becomes aware of the serious incident or of the malfunctioning.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2666 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 2
2. Upon receiving a notification related to a breach of obligations under Union law intended to protector of fundamental rights, the market surveillance authority shall inform the national public authorities or bodies referred to in Article 64(3). The Commission shall develop dedicated guidance to facilitate compliance with the obligations set out in paragraph 1. That guidance shall be issued 123 months after the entry into force of this Regulation, at the latest.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2671 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 3
3. For high-risk AI systems referred to in point 5(b) of Annex III which are placed on the market or put into service by providers that are credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/EU and for high-risk AI systems which are safety components of devices, or are themselves devices, covered by Regulation (EU) 2017/745 and Regulation (EU) 2017/746, the notification of serious incidents or malfunctioning shall be limited to those that that constitute a breach of obligations under Union law intended to protector fundamental rights.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2685 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1
1. Access to data and documentation iIn the context of their activities, the market surveillance authorities shall be granted full access to the comprehensive training, validation and testing datasets used by the provider, including through application programming interfaces (‘API’) or other appropriate technical means and tools enabling remote access.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2695 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 2
2. Where necessary to assess the conformity of the high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2 and upon a reasoned request, the market surveillance authorities shall be granted access to the source code of the AI system.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2701 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 5
5. Where the documentation referred to in paragraph 3 is insufficient to ascertain whether a breach of obligations under Union law intended to protector fundamental rights has occurred, the public authority or body referred to paragraph 3 may make a reasoned request to the market surveillance authority to organise testing of the high- risk AI system through technical means. The market surveillance authority shall organise the testing with the close involvement of the requesting public authority or body within reasonable time following the request.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2741 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1
1. Where, within three months of receipt of the notification referred to in Article 65(5), objections are raised by a Member State against a measure taken by another Member State, or where the CommissionBoard considers the measure to be contrary to Union law, the CommissionBoard shall without delay enter into consultation with the relevant Member State and operator or operators and shall evaluate the national measure. On the basis of the results of that evaluation, the CommissionBoard shall decide whether the national measure is justified or not within 9 months from the notification referred to in Article 65(5) and notify such decision to the Member State concerned.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2742 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 2
2. If the national measure is considered justified, all Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the non-compliant AI system is withdrawn from their market, and shall inform the CommissionBoard accordingly. If the national measure is considered unjustified, the Member State concerned shall withdraw the measure.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2756 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 3
3. The Member State shall immediately inform the CommissionBoard and the other Member States. That information shall include all available details, in particular the data necessary for the identification of the AI system concerned, the origin and the supply chain of the AI system, the nature of the risk involved and the nature and duration of the national measures taken.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2760 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 4
4. The CommissionBoard shall without delay enter into consultation with the Member States and the relevant operator and shall evaluate the national measures taken. On the basis of the results of that evaluation, the CommissionBoard shall decide whether the measure is justified or not and, where necessary, propose appropriate measures.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2763 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 5
5. The CommissionBoard shall address its decision to the Member States.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2764 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The Board shall adopt guidelines to help national competent authorities to identify and rectify, where necessary, similar problems arising in other AI systems.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2771 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 a (new)
Article 68 a Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority 1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, AI subjects and any natural or legal person affected by an AI system shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement if the subject considers that the use of a particular AI system, he or she is affected by, infringes this Regulation. Such a complaint may be lodged through a representative action for the protection of the collective interests of consumers as provided under Directive (EU) 2020/1828. 2. Complainants shall have a right to be heard in the complaint handling procedure and in the context of any investigations or deliberations conducted by the competent authority as a result of their complaint. 3. Supervisory authorities shall inform complainants or their representatives about the progress and outcome of their complaints. In particular, supervisory authorities shall take all the necessary actions to follow up on the complaints they receive and, within three months of the reception of a complaint, give the complainants a preliminary response indicating the measures they intend to take and the next steps in the procedure, if any. 4. The supervisory authority shall take a decision on the complaint, including the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Article 68b, without delay and no later than six months after the date on which the complaint was lodged.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2780 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 b (new)
Article 68 b Right to an effective judicial remedy against an authority 1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, individuals and their representatives shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against any legally binding decision concerning them, whether by a market surveillance authority or a supervisory authority. 2. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, individuals shall have the right to a an effective judicial remedy where the authority which is competent does not handle a complaint, does not inform the individual on the progress or preliminary outcome of the complaint lodged within three months pursuant to Article 68a (3), does not comply with its obligation to reach a final decision on the complaint within six months pursuant to Article 68a (3) or its obligations under Article 65. 3. Proceedings against a market surveillance authority shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the authority is established.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2782 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 c (new)
Article 68 c Remedies 1. Without prejudice to any available administrative or non-judicial remedy and the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 68a, any natural person shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against a provider or deployer where they consider that their rights under this Regulation have been infringed or has been subject to an AI system otherwise in non-compliance with this Regulation. 2. Any person who has suffered material or non-material harm, as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation from the provider or deployer for the damage suffered. Individuals and their representatives shall be able to seek judicial and non-judicial remedies against providers or deployers of AI systems, including repair, replacement, price reduction, contract termination, reimbursement of the price paid or compensation for material and immaterial damages, for breaches of the rights and obligations set out in this Regulation. 3. Providers and deployers of AI systems which may affect individuals, including AI-subjects, or consumers must provide an effective complaint handling system which enables complaints to be lodged electronically and free of charge, and ensure that complaints submitted through this system are dealt with in an efficient and expedient manner. 4. Providers and deployers of AI systems shall ensure that their internal complaint- handling systems are easy to access, user- friendly and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints. 5. Where an AI system infringes this Regulation, any natural or legal person affected by said AI system may ask the supervisory authority or judicial authorities to stop the use of this system. 6. Member States shall ensure that where infringements of an AI system are imminent or likely, any affected natural or legal person may seek a prohibitory injunction under national law.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2784 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 d (new)
Article 68 d Representation of individuals 1. Without prejudice to Directive 2020/1828/EC, individuals shall have the right to mandate a body, organisation or association to exercise the rights referred to in Articles 68a, 68b and 68c and, where relevant, the rights of AI subjects, on their behalf, provided that the body, organisation or association meets all of the following conditions: a) It operates on a not-for-profit basis; b) It has been constituted in accordance of the law of a Member State; c) Its statutory objectives include a legitimate interest in ensuring that this Regulation is complied with. 2. Without prejudice to Directive 2020/1828/EC, the bodies, organisations or associations referred to in paragraph 1 shall have the right to exercise the rights established in Articles 68a, 68b and 68c independently of an individual’s mandate, if they consider that a provider or user of an AI system has infringed any of the rights or obligations set out in this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2801 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) intellectual property rights, and confidential business information or trade secrets of a natural or legal person, including source code, except the cases referred to in Article 5 of Directive 2016/943 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure apply.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2808 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, information exchanged on a confidential basis between the national competent authorities and between national competent authorities and the Commission shall not be disclosed without the prior consultation of the originating national competent authority and the usdeployer when high-risk AI systems referred to in points 1, 6 and 7 of Annex III are used by law enforcement, immigration or asylum authorities, when such disclosure would jeopardise public andor national security interests.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2816 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1
1. In compliance with the terms and conditions laid down in this Regulation, Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties, including administrative fines, applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are properly and effectively implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. They shall take into particular account the interests of small-scale providers and start-up and their economic viability.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2851 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 4
4. The non-compliance of the AI system with any requirements or obligations under this Regulation, other than those laid down in Articles 5 and 10, shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 20 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 46 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2857 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 5
5. The supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information to notified bodies and national competent authorities in reply to a request shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 10 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 24 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2860 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Where trade secrets, intellectual property rights or data protection rights have been infringed in the development of an AI system, competent authorities may order the definitive deletion of that system and all associated training data and outputs.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2924 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult with the relevant institutions and stakeholders in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2927 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 4
4. Once the Commission decides to draft a delegated act, it shall notify the European Parliament of this fact. This notification does not place an obligation on the Commission to adopt the said act. I As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2937 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 81 a (new)
Article 81 a Amendment to Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 In Article 14.4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 the following paragraph is added: “(l) The power to implement the powers provided for in this Article remotely, where applicable.”
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2948 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation shall not apply to the AI systems which are components of the large-scale IT systems established by the legal acts listed in Annex IX that have been placed on the market or put into service before [12 months afterstarting [ on the date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], unless the replacement or amendment of those legal acts leads toor as soon as there is a significant change in the design or intended purpose of the AI system or AI systems concerned. in which case it shall apply from [the date of application of this Regulation]
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2954 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The requirements laid down in this Regulation shall be taken into account, where applicable, in the evaluation of each large-scale IT systems established by the legal acts listed in Annex IX to be undertaken as provided for in those respective acts.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2959 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to the high-risk AI systems, other than the ones referred to in paragraph 1, that have been placed on the market or put into service beforefrom [date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], only if, from that date, those systems are subject to significant changes in their design or intended purpose.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2963 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 a (new)
Article 83 a AI systems deployed in the context of employment Member States may, by law or by collective agreements, decide to prohibit or limit the use of certain AI systems in the employment context or provide for more specific rules for AI systems in employment, in particular for the purposes of the recruitment, the performance of the contract of employment, including discharge of obligations laid down by law or by collective agreements, management, planning and organisation of work, equality and diversity in the workplace, health and safety at work, protection of employer's or customer's property and for the purposes of the exercise and enjoyment, on an individual or collective basis, of rights and benefits related to employment, and for the purpose of the termination of the employment relationship.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2969 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall assess the need for amendment of the list in Annex III , including the extension of existing area headings or addition of new area headings, once a year following the entry into force of this Regulation.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2980 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Within [two years after the date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)] and every two years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the Regulation with regards to the resource and energy use, waste production and other environmental impact of AI systems and evaluate the need for proposing legislation to regulate the resource and energy efficiency of AI systems and related ICT systems in order for the sector to contribute to EU climate strategy and targets.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2987 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 6
6. In carrying out the evaluations and reviews referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the Board, of the European Parliament, of the Council, and of other relevant bodies or sources, including from academia and civil society.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2992 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals to amend this Regulation, in particular taking into account the effect of AI systems on fundamental rights, equality, and accessibility for persons with disabilities, developments in technology and in the light of the state of progress in the information society.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 2995 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. By three years from the date of application of this Regulation at the latest, the Commission shall carry out an assessment of the enforcement of this Regulation and shall report it to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee, taking into account the first years of application of the Regulation. On the basis of the findings that report shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a proposal for amendment of this Regulation with regard to the structure of enforcement and the need for an EU agency to resolve any identified shortcomings.
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 3003 #

2021/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply from [246 months following the entering into force of the Regulation].
2022/06/13
Committee: IMCOLIBE
Amendment 99 #

2020/2207(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Expresses grave concern at the recent escalations of tensions on some potential flashpoints in Indo-Pacific region, such as India-China disputed border, the East and South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait, including China’s increasingly provocative military manoeuvres aimed at Taiwan; calls for all parties concerned to resolve their differences through peaceful means to de- escalate the tensions and to refrain from taking unilateral action to change the status quo; underlines the importance of the peaceful development across the Taiwan Strait to maintain peace, stability and prosperity for China and Taiwan, as well as in the Asia-Pacific region, which remains of critical importance to the interests of the EU; calls for the EU and it Member States to revisit their engagement policy with Taiwan and to collaborate with international like-minded partners to protect democratic Taiwan free from foreign threats; ˙Expresses concern about the disinformation campaign launched by malicious third countries to disrupt the efforts in fighting COVID-19 pandemic against democracies in the Indo-Pacific region, including Taiwan; calls on the EU and its Member States to support Taiwan’s meaningful and pragmatic participation as an observer in the WHO meetings, mechanisms and activities, so as to jointly fight against the global public health crisis;
2020/11/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls that continued adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights was one of the Parliament’s prerequisites for the WA. Regrets proposals from the UK Government such as the Bill of Rights, that would have allowed UK courts to disregard judgments of and interim rulings by the European Court of Human Rights;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 25 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the EU Settlement Scheme’s requirement that EU citizens with pre-settled status have to make a second application to the scheme in order to be provided with the indefinite right to remain in the UK is problematicagainst the principles of Withdrawal Agreement and puts citizens at a higher risk of missing deadlines; highlights the difficulties that EU citizens may encounter in attempting to apply for settled or pre-settled status owing to the UK Home Office’s insistence on a digital-only approach to the application process; is concerned about the ongoing and growing delays in issuance of residence documents and entry visas;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 30 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the absence of a physical document creates the risk that many EU citizens and, in particular, the elderly and vulnerable and digitally challenged people will struggle to prove their rights, given the UK's policy, which requires immigrants to prove their immigration status to obtain housing, employment, or access to healthcare, welfare benefits or education; points out that the complexity of proving digital status may lead to the risk of discrimination against EU citizens;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 33 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Considers that creation of the additional option of requesting physical documents for holders of settled or pre- settled status, which would complement their existing digital status, would be of particular benefit to those currently disadvantaged by digital-only status;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 34 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. Remains concerned at the level of assistance to be provided to older and vulnerable citizens, including those who may have difficulty using digital applications;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 36 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Regrets the UK’s decision to charge different fees to visa applicants for EU citizens depending on their country of origin;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 37 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Condemns incidents where EU citizens trying to enter the UK without a visa have been detained and held in immigration removal centres, often for disproportionately long periods;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 41 #

2020/2202(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Calls on the UK authorities to fully respect the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts as stated in the WA and to ensure that there is no weakening of rights for citizens in Northern Ireland;
2022/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 10 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to ensure proper implementation of the EU-Asia Connectivity Strategy by providing an effective political governance mechanism that could makeaiming at fostering the EU a rule setter in transport connectivity, while promoting EU principles such as transparency, good governance and sustainability; based on transparency, a level-playing field, good governance and sustainability, as well as an increased focus on climate mitigation contributing to the goals laid down in the Paris agreement;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 24 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomeSupports the ongoing extension of the EU’s Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) with close observance to finding sustainable solutions to traffic connections in the Western Balkans and the Eastern Partnership countries, and calls on the Commission to speed up the review process of TEN-T and its external dimension and to come up with a comprehensive transport initiative to connect TEN-T wclosely observe and coordinate countries' efforts to implement existing TEN-T extension plans, iths strategic networks in Asiaature and its external dimension;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 26 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission, with the help of the ERA (European rail agency), to foster Euro Asian Rail transport by harmonising existing differences in legal rules for Euro-Asian rail transport;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 29 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission to propose EU co-financing possibilities for the installation and upgrading of transhipment terminals in order to increase capacity on the existing trans- Eurasian rail corridors;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 30 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Commission to exploit the superior safety record of dangerous goods transport by rail and ensure that in particular Chinese authorities confirm the opening of China - EU rail services to the transport of dangerous goods under consideration of the safety measures and observance of the corresponding guidelines according to OTIF Annex 2 SMGS;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 31 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of the ongoing negotiations of comprehensive air transport agreements with partner countries in Asia; calls in particular for a swift conclusion of the agreement between the EU and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which is expected to connect more than a billion citizens; highlights the importance of EU support to Asian countriesleadership in mitigating the impact of civil aviation on climate change;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 37 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to pursue further progress in its maritime transport initiatives and to include all in bound, outbound and intra-EEA maritime shipping into the ETS as well as emissions at EU berth; furthermore, to digitalise and simplify administrative formalities and strengthen maritime security at ports in Asia via the International Maritime Organization and through maritime transport agreements;
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 49 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the importance of the ongoing work of the EU-China Connectivity Platform in its efforts to explore opportunities for cooperation in the agreater transparency, sustainability, reciprocity in market access and a level playing field for businesses in the area of transport infrastructure development with Asian countries, as well as the enforcement of these principles through concrete measureas of transport between the EU’s TEN-T network and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI); acknowledges the importance of working towards greater transparency, reciprocity in market access and a level playing field for businesses in the area of transport infrastructure development with Chinaconditionality. Welcomes collaboration based on these principles between different EU and Asian initiatives, such as the EU-China Connectivity Platform, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Transport Corridor Europe Caucasus Asia (TRACECA) and the EU-Japan Partnership on Sustainable Connectivity and Quality Infrastructure.
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 61 #

2020/2115(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Highlights furthermore the importance of new, sustainable transport initiatives with strategically important Asian countries, such as the promotion of railway connections between Europe, Central Asia and India.
2020/10/14
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 3 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
— having regard to the Council Conclusions on Indigenous Peoples of 15 May 2017 and the Joint Staff Working Document - Implementing EU External Policy on Indigenous Peoples of 17 October 2016,
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
— having regard to the three legally binding agreements negotiated under the auspices of the Arctic Council, namely the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic of 2011, the Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic of 2013, and the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation of 2017,
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas since the end of the Cold Warover the past decades, the Arctic has been a zregione of peace andful international cooperation, and the goal of the international community should be to keep it as suchone in which states display a willingness to cooperate and to resolve contentious issues in accordance with the principles of international law;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 35 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the circumpolar Arctic is home to over four million people, including more thanover 40 different indigenous ethnic grouppeoples and local communities and half a million EU citizens;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 36 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Arctic has been particularly and increasingly affected by the dramatic impact of climate change and biodiversity degradation, including rising temperatures, changes in ice conditions, wild fires, rising sea levels, changing weather patterns, invasive alien species, severe biodiversity losses and the thawing of permafrost, which in turn are affecting the entire planet; whereas local adaptation strategies and the protection of the Arctic ecosystem cannot be addressed in isolation from the global framework of climate action;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 48 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the mostly extraneous effects of climate change in the Arctic and the re-emergence of geopolitical competition in the region may impact thconstitute economicmplicating factors for sustainable development of and the northern hemispherepreservation of traditional livelihoods in the fragile environment of the Arctic;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 58 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas the region’s geo-economic importance is quickly growing due to competition for itsthe increasing interest in its abundant natural resources and the emerging new maritime routes; whereas the exploration and exploitation of Arctic resources entail substantial risks for the vulnerable ecosystems and local populations;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 74 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas cooperation in the field of scientific research is now, more than ever, crucial to overcoming the challenges brought about by pollusevere environmental degradation and climate change;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas the remit and functioning of the Arctic Council is limited, givinggives it the flexibility to adapt to new challenges but also making it less able to respond to all the issues affectand to take on new responsibilities, thus making it the Arcticprimary venue for Arctic cooperation;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 98 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas the EU’s engagement with the Arctic is based on history, geography, economy and research, and whereas the EU has consistently demonstrated its commitment to a peaceful, environmentally cleansustainable and cooperative Arctic;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 107 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas Russian obstruction has since 2014 denied the EU formal observer status to the Arctic Council; the EU actively participates in the work of the relevant groups, task forces and expert groups of the Arctic Council; whereas it has applied for formal observer status to the Arctic Council; whereas the EU is also engaged in other regional and sub-regional fora, including the Northern Dimension and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 120 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M
M. whereas the military importance of the Arctic is rapidly increasing due to the progressive and steady re-militarisation of the Russian Federation, significantly increasing the likelihood of military confrontstability of the Arctic has long been relatively preserved, but it is increasingly affected by the growing international interest in the region and the changing security landscape, including the progressive re-militarisation of the Russian Federation in the region;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 138 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas China has engaged in a long-term effort to enhance its position in the Arctic, declaring itself a ‘near-Arctic state’, with the ambition of becoming a ‘polar power’;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 147 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Arctic plays a crucial role in keeping the environmental balance of the planet and aims to maintain the region as a zone of peace and international cooperationStresses the critical importance to maintain the Arctic as a region of peace and international cooperation; expresses its alarm at the dramatic and growing impact of climate change on Arctic realities and its consequences for the region, its inhabitants and ecosystem, as well as the planet at large; stresses that the EU, as an Arctic stakeholder and a global actor, should urgently step up its engagement in the Arctic and place the preservation of the vulnerable ecosystem and the livelihood of its peoples at its core;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 165 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Notes, however, that interest in the Arctic and its resources is growing because of the negative effects of climate change and resource scarcityoverexploitation, creating new opportunities for economic development but also increasing the risk of confrontation and further disruption to the fragilized Arctic ecosystems;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 174 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the Arctic states hold the primary responsibility for tackling issues within their territories; reiterates that international law is the cornerstone of the legal framework regulating inter-state relations in the Arctic and underlines the importance of the UNCLOS as the basis of all maritime activity; in this context, calls on the USA to ratify UNCLOS;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 185 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that the prospect of Arctic militarisation carries substantial security risks in and beyond the region; notes that the Arctic plays a crucial role in the security of Europe as whole; insists on the need to preserve the Arctic as a low- tension area, notably by enhancing regional dialogue, cross-border cooperation and encouraging demilitarization; encourages, moreover, all Arctic states to ensure that any military activity is carried out in a way that promotes security and stability, and to ensure predictability and transparency of such activity;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 195 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Urges all actors engaged in the Arctic, including the Russian Federation to enact its Arctic policies in full respect of international law and to be mindful of the consequences of itstheir actions; is therefore worried by the military build-up pursued by Russia, including theexpresses it concerns about the destabilising effect of an increasing deveplopyment of anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) capabilitimilitary capabilities in the Arctic; urges the circumpolar nations not to build up military outposts or scientific outposts, which are protected by the military forces;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 204 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that cooperation withBelieves that the current deterioration in the relationship between Russia inand the ArcticEU should be consistent with the principle of selective engagement and should not jeopardise the goals of sanctions against Russian actions elsewherenot hamper cooperation on Arctic; insists that constructive collaboration on Arctic issues with Russia, as the largest Arctic state, must actively be sought; believes that the EU and Russia have substantial common interests in a number of areas related to the Arctic, including in the field of maritime security and cross-border cooperation on environmental issues;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 211 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Considers thatTakes note of the inclusion of the Arctic by China in its economic development programmes, with the aspiration to integrate the Arctic’s northern sea route into its Belt and Road Initiative (as a ‘Polar Silk Road’), as well as the Arctic’s prominent place in the military strategy of the Russian Federation, are cause for concern and challenge any idea that the Arctic could be dealt with as a self-contained regionnd calls on the EU to factor this development into its updated Arctic policy;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 218 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes with concern the opening and the fast growing naval traffic and energy extraction along the North Sea Route, and its impact notably on the environment and marine biodiversity, as well as a source of geopolitical tensions; expresses concern at the EU’s intention to integrate the North Sea Route into its logistical routes; urges the EU to seek the exclusion of the Arctic from transoceanic global shipping routes and its limitation to local cargo traffic and research purposes; calls on all EU-based companies to uphold the highest environmental standards in all their business activities related to the North Sea Route;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 228 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Insists that it is crucial that the right of innocent passage of foreign ships through territorial seas be preserved and regrets all efforts made by the Russian Federation aimed at closing its navigable Arctic routes;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 234 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Insists that companies based in or operating within the EU strictly comply with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in relation to all their business operations and relationships with the Arctic region and ensure effective human rights and environmental due diligence processes; calls upon these entities to ensure effective, meaningful and informed consultations at all stages of the process with both affected and potentially affected stakeholders, including Indigenous Peoples;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 249 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines the importance of the Arctic for EU energy security;deleted
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 278 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Notes the signing and entry into force of the CAOF Fisheries agreement, which represents an ambitious and innovative step towards tackle the problems of the Arctic;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 284 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines the importance of taking precautionary approach to Arctic fisheries, at all stages, and encourages the adoption of a sustainable, science-based approach; is concerned by the inability of Arctic coastal states to agree on how to divide quotas on transboundary fish stocks and expresses its support for existing regional fisheries management organisations;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 291 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. ICalls concerned by the persistent intention of the Russian Federation and China to pursue far-reaching and highly impactful exploitation projects without the EU to promote strict precautionary regulatory standards in the field of environmental protection and safety in the Arctic; calls for a ban on mineral resource prospection and production in the Arctic waters and for the promotion by the EU of comparable precautionary standards across the Artic region; urges all Arctic states to ensure appropriate ex ante assessment of their environmental impact of any exploitation projects;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 300 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Highlights the importance of addressing the aspirations, needs and challenges faced by local populations, notably in terms of people-to-people cooperation, connectivity, access to internet, education, health care and employment, particularly for the youth and marginalized groups; highlights the need for the updated Arctic policy to incorporate an ambitious gender dimension;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 303 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Reiterates its call to actively involve all the inhabitants of the Arctic, and particularly indigenous peoples, in decision-making processes concerning development choicesUnderlines the fact that, in application of the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) enshrined in UNDRIP, the development of any project which could concern the indigenous peoples of the Arctic or their territory must be the subject of an appropriate consultation process, that once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any time and that the consultation process must allow them to negotiate the conditions under which in the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 307 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls on Arctic States to comply with their commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in particular article 8 on in-situ conservation, and to support the recommendations made by Indigenous Peoples in the process of climate change, relating to the respect of their rights and welfare in measures and programmes for climate change mitigation and adaptation;. calls on all states, particularly the EU and the Member States, to ensure that indigenous peoples and local communities of the Arctic are included in the deliberations and decision-making processes of relevant international climate diplomacy; encourages the Commission to continue to promote dialogue and collaboration between indigenous peoples and the European Union as well as with international fora, notably in relation to climate change; supports the recommendation of Indigenous Peoples to have direct access to funds of the Green Climate Fund-GCF for their sustainable mitigation and adaptation initiatives;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 312 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Stresses the need to ensure the preservation of Indigenous Peoples’ culture, traditions and languages by establishing capacity building programmes to increase awareness about the diversity, history and rights of the Indigenous Peoples, not only for Indigenous youth but also for non- Indigenous populations across the region;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 314 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Calls on EU delegations in the Arctic States to engage in a genuine and inclusive dialogue with Indigenous Peoples at national and regional levels and to serve as focal points on Indigenous Peoples issues; highlights the need for the staff of these EU delegations to be versed on Indigenous Peoples rights as affirmed under UNDRIP;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 317 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Welcomes the growing acknowledgement of the rights of indigenous peoples in the EU’s external policies; calls for an enhanced coherence between the EU’s internal and external Arctic policies in this area;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 350 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the ongoing process of updating of the EU’s Arctic policy, which should also rlow the EU to play an eflfect new security realities; is of the opinion that the EU should engage with stakeive and a more ambitious role in the region, taking into account the pressing challenges relating to climate change and the growing geopolitical significance of the Arctic; insists that this policy must reflect both the internal and external dimensions of the relations of the EU with the Arctic; believes that the updated policy shoulders which have a vested interest in promoting regional stability and prosperity incorporate a comprehensive approach to security, which includes notably the notions of environment and health; also, calls for the EU to include a sustainable connectivity dimension to its updated Arctic policy, in order to solve key issues faced by Arctic inhabitants, such as ensuring quality internet connections;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 358 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Expresses support for the EU programmes dedicated to the region, particular in the field of research, education and cross-border cooperation, which should be enhanced under the updated Arctic policy and the new EU external financial instrument, notably in addressing the Arctic youth; calls on the Commission to provide a comprehensive overview of EU funding dedicated to the region and the Arctic components of horizontal EU programmes;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 362 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Underscores that the EU approach to the Northern Dimension policy with its partnerships and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council with its activities should be an integral part of the EU´s updated Arctic strategy and support the implementation of its goals;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 366 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Regrets Russia’s veto ofSupports efforts to secure the EU's observer status in the Arctic Council; and supports the EU’s continued de facto membership of Arctic Council working groups;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 370 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the need for the EU and its Member States to maintain constructive relations with all non-European Arctic states and underlines the need for the EU to keeppursue and promote a rights-based approach in its engagingement with the indigenous peoples of the Arctic; calls on the EU to involve local and regional levels of governance to a greater extent in the development of its policies affecting the region;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 381 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Is of the opinion that issues of security in the Arctic should also be part of consultations and cooperation with NATO, which can use the framework of the NATO-Russia Council to resolve misunderstandings, de-escalate tensions and prevent crises;deleted
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 389 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the Arctic to be included as one of the objectives of the EU’s Strategic Compass, similarly to the NATO Reflection Process;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 394 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the aims of the new Arctic Strategy to be reflected in the EU’s strategic policies such as the EU Green Deal, its Connectivity Strategy, Biodiversity Strategy and its Global Strategy, but also in its programmes, projects, finances and relevant legislation, as well as in the work of the relevant EU agencies;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 400 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Urges the European External Action Service and the Commission to allocate adequate resources to reflect the ambition of the EU’s Arctic policy; welcomes the work of the EU Special Envoy for Arctic matters and calls for enhanced support to his mandate;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 403 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Calls for the reinforcement of the parliamentary dimension of the EU’s Arctic policy; in this regard, supports the establishment of a delegation on Arctic Matters and Northern Cooperation, as envisaged in the 2016 Joint Communication;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 406 #

2020/2112(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23c. Reiterates the call to establish in the Council a specific working party covering Northern Europe and the Arctic in a comprehensive manner, as suggested already in 2016 joint communication;
2021/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the Council's 'EU Concept for ESDP support for Security Sector Reform (SSR)' of 13 October 2005, the Commission Communication 'A Concept for European Community support for security sector reform' of 24 May 2006, the Joint Communication 'Elements for an EU-wide strategic framework to support security sector reform' of 5 July 2016 and to the Council conclusions on an 'EU-wide strategic framework to support Security Sector Reform (SSR)' of 14 November 2016,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 15 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
- having regard to the strategic framework for the Horn of Africa of 11 November 2011, and to the EU Horn of Africa regional action plan 2015-2020,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 c (new)
- having regard to the EU strategy on the Gulf of Guinea of 2014,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 d (new)
- having regard to the EU strategy for security and development in the Sahel of 2011 which was presentedby the High Representative and the Commission, upon the Council's request,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 e (new)
- having regard to the Annual Joint Consultative Meetings of the Political and Security Committee of the European Union and of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 f (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 7 June 2016 on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 g (new)
- having regard to the Plan of Action to enhance EU CSDP support to UN peacekeepingof 14 June 2012 and on Strengthening the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management: Priorities 2015-2018’of 27 March 2015,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 22 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 h (new)
- having regard to the Joint Africa- EU Strategy (JAES) agreed at the 2nd EU-Africa Summit held in Lisbon on 8-9 December 2007and the JAES Roadmap 2014-2017 agreed at the 4th EU-Africa Summit held in Brussels on 2-3 April 2014,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 i (new)
- having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report No 3 on The Efficiency and Effectiveness of EU Contributions channelled through United Nations organisations in Conflict-affected Countries of 2011,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 24 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 j (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on the 10th anniversary of UN Security Council resolution 1325(2000) on Women, Peace and Security,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 25 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 k (new)
- having regard to the EU Strategic Approach to Women, Peace and Security (WPS) and its Action Plan 2019-2024,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 26 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 l (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 22 November 2012 on the role of the Common Security and Defence Policy in case of climate-driven crises and natural disasters,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 m (new)
- having regard to the 2011 and 2012 reports of the United Nations Environment Programme entitled ‘Livelihood security: Climate change, conflict and migration in the Sahel’,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 n (new)
- having regard to the Council’s Concept on Strengthening EU Mediation and Dialogue Capacities of 10 November 2009,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 o (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2019 on building EU capacity on conflict prevention and mediation,
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2020/2002(INI)

A. whereas security is a preconditiondevelopment and sustainable peace will only be achieved by addressing the root causes of poverty and hunger; whereas human security is a key factor for development; whereas without development and poverty eradication, there will be no sustainable peace; whereas in order to ensure its security and development, each country must have or acquire adequate capacities in all essential sectors, including security and defence andn efficient, effective, transparent, accountable, democratically controlled security sector which is able deliver security for its citizens based on the rule of law and in full compliance with international humanitarian law and international human rights law; whereas this will not only stabilise that country, but will also enable it to contribute constructively to peace, stability and crisis prevention in its region;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 42 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the security and development approach promotes an economic vision of development (employment, infrastructure construction) and risks obscuring the important dimensions of food and nutrition insecurity, failing governance and lack of access to essential services, human rights violations, climate change, unequal wealth distribution and gender inequality;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 53 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean in the east, Africa is struggling to contend withsome regions of Africa are affected by conflicts, poverty, climate challenges, such as historical underdevelopment compounded by the destruction of the traditional agro- pastoral economy as a result of climate change, population growth and deforestationfood and nutrition insecurity, lack of access to basic social services, poor governance, inequalities and inappropriate agricultural models in which Europe has its share of responsibility; whereas another major challenge is the emergence of new forms of mafia economy, including human and drug trafficking and the uncontrolled export of gold deposits, which, combined with the abandonment, inefficiency and corruption of the administration, is producing a hybridisation between terroristarmed groups, traffickers and traditional community and regional conflicts, with the phenomenon of jihadist religious extremism appearing as a false response for the societies concerned;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 58 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the nature of security challenges, violent conflicts and political violence varies between different African regions, countries and provinces; while in the Sahel or the Horn of Africa regions, armed Islamist groups and terrorism, but also to a minor degree security forces, various criminal groups and militia cause major casualties in particular amongst civilians; whereas the situation is very different in most of West Africa's 19 countries, where some countries experience lasting stability and security, others political violence or ethnic conflict;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 73 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas poverty and insecurity feed off each other and push young people to migrate to Europe in search of a better life, impoverishing states by depriving them of their best human resourcelarge groups of young people to flee and leave their homes and families for safer regions or, exceptionally, other continents;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 77 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas according to reports of the United Nations Environment Programme climate change has had and is having negative effects in particular in the Sahel region; whereas climate change effects are a risk factor of destabilization, violence and conflict;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas gender equality is a prerequisite for peace, security and sustainable development; whereas the EU Strategic Approach to Women, Peace and Security stresses the need of integration of a gender perspective into all fields and activities in the domain of peace and security in order to ensure the effectiveness of EU’s policies;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 105 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas after years of training, some of the above-mentioned EU missions have been hampered in their sustainability and effectiveness due to restrictions on their mandate, training programmes, and a lack of basic equipment, including weapons, ammunition and vehiclesthe fact that they were not incorporated in a wider comprehensive and strategic approach aiming at building a reliable security sector which first and foremost aims at delivering security benefits to the entire local population while respecting the rule of law and in particular international humanitarian law;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 110 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas there are there are only a very limited number of EU financed activities in the field of conflict prevention, mediation, dialogue and reconciliation in the Sahel region, West Africa and the Horn of Africa; whereas unfortunately the EU plans to reduce its financial means for such actions for 2021-2027;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 123 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas neither the Somali army, nor the Malian army nor the Central African Armed Forces (FACA) have been able to contribute effectively to the fight against jihadists or hold and secure the ground cleared with the aid of friendly international forces, the result being that the local populations feel abandbecame sustainable security actors able to act aloned and fear being accused of collaborating with the government by the jihadists or the armed groups in the CAR once they return and reoccupy the space from which they were expelledfter years of EU training and divers EU investments;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 132 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J
J. whereas after years of involvement in the above-mentioned civil and military missions, the general situation has become worse and worse and a new and comprehensive strategy therefore needs to be implementedin the Sahel region and some other theatres while others have improved, and a new and comprehensive strategy therefore needs to be implemented with regards to those places where the EU engagement has not been effective or even been counterproductive; whereas this strategy should address the root causes of the crisis, including failed governance, equal access to resources and services, improve the existing asymmetric civil- military dialogue in the region further exacerbating already fragile humanitarian access to communities;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 141 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas Russia has sent hundreds of instructors to train and arm FACA soldierssince many years foreign, but also African private military and security companies have often played a very negative role, in particular in regions with a lot of mineral resources, in particular rare earth; whereas recently Russia has sent hundreds of instructors to train and arm FACA soldiers; whereas China has installed its first military base abroad in Djibouti in 2017; whereas also Gulf countries and Turkey have increased their presence on the continent;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 151 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas the European Development Fund and the African Peace Facility (APF) provide support to the African Union, financing, among other things, the operational cost of military peacekeeping operations in Africa, in particular of AMISOM in Somalia;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 183 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the European Union’s development and security missions and programmes should be coordinated by the VP/HR under the authority of the Council in accordance with Article 43(2) of the TEU a; reminds that a centralised doctrine centre should be established coverthe VP/HR has the duty according to the Treaty, as Vice-President of the Commission, as chair of the Commissioners’ Group on a ‘Stronger Europe ing the Military Planning and Conduct Capability and the Civilian PWorld’, and the chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, and as highest authority as regards all civilian and military CSDP planning and Cconduct Capability training missions, and projects supporting or reforming thestructures in the EEAS, to design a coherent and consistent approach for an effective and sustainable security cooperation with African partners which comprises as dimensions of security sector;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 191 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Repeats its call for a White Book on European Defence, which designs and outlines very precise scenarios for possible EU military interventions and underlying doctrines in compliance with the military tasks of Article 43(1) TEU;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 192 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Strongly believes that only security assistance which puts human security at its centre will be effective in the medium and long term as without tangible security gains for the local population all civilian and military assistance will sooner or later fail or even produce negative unintended consequences;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 195 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Strongly believes that the EU should invest to a maximum in processes aiming at conflict prevention by triggering a multitude of very concrete mediation, dialogue and reconciliation processes and projects in parallel to other security measures; underlines the need to also pursue non-state centric approaches aiming at fostering stability and security, in particular as regards inter-Community tensions;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 208 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the revision of Article 3a(4)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) No 230/2014 in the light of the grave and profound degradation in the security conditions in the region and in order to fill any gaps in EU missions and projects wTakes note of the Commission proposal and the ongoing inter- institutional negotiations aiming at establishing a regulation entitled Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) comprising all tasks of the current Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP), in particular Communithy a view to supportctions ing the capacity- building of partners in the security sector, including through funding for military spending and the provision of weapons, ammunition or lethal equipment, transport and training essential for improving the combat capability of African armed forces fighting against jihadism; supportfield of peace, security, stability, security sector reform (SSR), demobilisation, disarmament and reintegration (DDR), peacebuilding, counter-terrorism, organised crime, child soldiers, conflict prevention, mediation, reconciliation and the provision of non- lethal military capacity building (CBSD); notes the Joint Communication of the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 28 April 2015 entitled ‘Capacity building in support of security and development – Enabling partners to prevent and manage crises’4 ; _________________ 4; JOIN(2015)0017.
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 219 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the VP/HR to propose a Council decisionNotes the 18 June 2018 proposal of the High Representative onf the establishment of a specific service to oversee the supply and use of such equipment and training; calls for funding from the EU budget to be provided for the administrative expenditure arising from that Council decision, including for personnel; calls on the Council to charge the Member States for the expenditure arising from the supply and use of such equipment and training; calls on the Member States that do not participate in funding the supply and use of such material to abstain from the vote in the CouncilUnion for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, with the support of the Commission, to the Council for a Council Decision establishing a European Peace Facility (EPF); reminds that the EPF aims at incorporating the African Peace Facility and establishing a CBSD component which would allow the EU to transfer arms and ammunitions to partner countries, complementing the CBSD component under the NDICI; recalls its recommendation of 28 March 2019 on the establishment of the European Peace Facility; notes that since June 2018 Member States are working on a Council Decision establishing the EPF, latest in January 2021;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 221 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses that in the context of EPF a new EU-level instrument would potentially deliver joint risk assessments prior to any decision to transfer arms and ammunitions to third countries in the context of the military capacity-building pillar of EPF, assess individual measures against the eight criteria of the Common Position, and establish safeguards and possible sanctions with a view on the end- user; is concerned about the potential effects of inadequate safeguards in this context;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 226 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Considers that the sustainability and effectiveness of EU civilian and military missions in Africa have been hampered by the lack of basic equipment in the countries affected and that it is therefore necessary:a comprehensive medium and long-term strategy which integrates those individual measures in a wider long-term security sector reform process;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 234 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point a
a) for the EU budget be large enough to effectively address the current challenges relating to training and military equipment (including weapons, munitions and transport);deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 241 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point b
b) to adapt the APF in order to overcome the current limitations on the acquisition of arms and munitions;deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 249 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Reminds that EU primary law prohibits the acquisition of arms and ammunitions via the Community’s budget; recalls numerous decisions of the ECJ in this respect; reminds that the legal services of Parliament, Council and Commission have reached different legal positions as whether even the financing by the Community of non-lethal military capacity building in the context of the current IcSP is compliant with EU primary law, in particular Article 209 TFEU, and ECJ case law;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 251 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that all funding instruments should be explored with a view to supporting the development of security capabilities in the affected African countries, as per Articles 209 and 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in the light of the very serious security crisis in the Sahel- Saharan region;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 257 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Recommends that the EU considers contributing to the operational and logistical costs of the operations against jihadist terrorism conducted by the national armed forces of Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Chad, within the framework of peacekeeping operations in the Sahel-Saharan area and by taking a similar approach to the one it takes to financing the G5 Joint Forces and the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISON)supporting Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Chad, within the framework of peacekeeping operations in the Sahel-Saharan area in various and effective and sustainable ways in the area of security;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 263 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Agrees to apply to existing training programmes the same facilities for the procurement of military equipment, including weapons, as those currently provided for the deployment and training of the G5 Sahel force, including financial support if needed;deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 269 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Recommends that any financing of capacity-building operations for African countries is conditional on an action plan with reasonable deadlines with the possibility of further adjustments depending on the evolution of the situation;deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 272 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Is deeply concerned about the high amount of cases of very serious human rights abuses committed by Malian security forces, as investigated and reported by the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission in Mali (MINUSMA), which could amount to war crimes under humanitarian law; urges the VP/HR to suspend EUTM Mali and any other EU assistance to the Malian security sector until all crimes have been brought to justice and guarantees and mechanisms have been put in place which make sure that the EU’s partners strictly comply with international humanitarian and human rights law; calls on the EEAS to report to Parliament about all violations committed by EU military and security partners as a matter of urgency;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 274 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Notes the UN Evaluation Reports on Enforcement and Remedial Assistance Efforts for Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by the United Nations and Related Personnel in Peacekeeping Operations; is deeply shocked by the alarming scope of these crimes, and the failure to hold perpetrators to account; is equally shocked by sexual child abuse allegations against European and UN troops, in particular in the Central African Republic in 2016 and calls for justice; urges the UN, EU Member States and the EU's CSDP organs to investigate, prosecute and sentence any UN, national and EU personnel who committed acts of sexual violence without delay and with firmest resolve; stresses the urgent need to reform relevant structures in a way to end impunity of UN and EU personnel and by establishing functioning and transparent oversight and accountability mechanisms; finds it unacceptable that currently legal actions regarding alleged abuses remain purely voluntary and depended of the troop-contributing country; is convinced that also via training and education such grave crimes could be reduced and prevented; strongly; reminds the urgency to prevent such crimes in the future also in order to reinstate trust of the local population in international peacekeeping;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 278 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
10. Calls for the format of the EUTM Mali, EUTM CAR and EUTM Somalia training missions to be redefined to better adapt them to the real needs of the armed forces of the beneficiary countries byand medium and long term security needs of the local population:
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 280 #

2020/2002(INI)

a) developing and applying an overarching security sector reform policy which has human security at its centre and puts the security needs of the entire population at the heart of all components; harmonising training methods and rules of procedure and engagement and ensuring they are unique;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 285 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a a (new)
a a) training in how to apply humanitarian law and human rights law in war fighting in order to prevent war crimes and other serious crimes and therefore prevent that the EU finances security forces which generate negative unintended consequences;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 286 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a b (new)
a b) training on gender equality and women’s rights, including the Women, Peace and Security agenda
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 289 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point b
b) ensuring that instructors are able, in coordination with the local military authorities, to select soldiers from among those proposed by the local governments, to train them to be capable fighters, knowledgably of IHL and IHRL, and to supervise and accompany them on the ground once they have finished their training in order to assess them and prevent units from disbanding and soldiers from dispersing;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 293 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point c
c) supplying training centres with both shared and individual equipment, including weapons (if the country concerned does not provide them), if the EU can put safeguards in place which guarantee compliance with the eight criteria of Common Position 944 when transferring arms to third countries, and if the EU can guarantee post-shipment control, end-use control and therefore prevent diversion to armed groups including terrorists, to make sure appropriate training can be given;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 305 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the EU must conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the EUCAP Sahel Mali, EUCAP Sahel Niger, EUCAP Somalia and EUAM CAR civilian missions, adapting them to real needs in order to make them fully operational and effective; integrate them into a wider security sector reform effort at the service of the local population's security;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 310 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the Government of Somalia is unable to perform its duties and that the Somali army is also unable to counter al-Shabab’s terrorist activities and is not yet ready to take over from AMISOM; rRecalls that the Somali army was supposed to take over from AMISOM in December 2021; underlines that the achievement of that objective requires a new and comprehensive assistance programme;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 317 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Requires the Malian signatories to the Algiers agreementsAgreement for Peace and Reconciliation in Mali to abide by and implement them without further delay;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 320 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that the European Union should continue its financial support to AMISON via the APF, maintain the presence of the three but revised EU military missions (ATALANTA, EUTM Somalia and EUCAP Somalia), support democratic institutions and continue any training of the national army not linked to regional interestthe establishment of transparent, accountable and democratically controlled security sectors;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 322 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for the EU to help the joint forces of the G5 Sahel to become operational through the direct provision of financial assistance for the acquisition of adequate weapons and military equipment; calls on the partners who made pledges at the Brussels Donors’ Conference on 22 February 2018 to implement them expeditiously;deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 328 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the African states have to take responsibility for fulfilling their sovereign duties in all areas cleared of jihadists, traffickers and banditsunder their effective control by providing basic services (administration, water and power supply, health, justice, education), even if some of these services should be temporarily provided by the army or security forces, until such time as the civil administration takes over;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 334 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Supports the African request to the United Nations Security Council for the G5 Sahel joint force and AMISON to be placed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter in order to benefit from sustainable funding;deleted
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 344 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that coordination with the countries of North Africa is desirable as well as an effective contribution to peace and reconciliation in Libya in order to prevent it from becoming a hotspot for the spread of jihadism, arms and human traffickingof insecurity;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 348 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Believes that a comprehensive and medium to long term security policy for these regions should also focus on fostering resilience;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 350 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the efforts of Mauritania to take a social and development approach to its military and security response; expresses its solidarity with Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, countries that are deeply affected by terrorism; compliments the efforts and sacrifices of the international community, the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali, the Multinational Joint Task Force, the G5 and the French Armed Forces (Operation Barkhane), EUTM Mali and the Chadian Army, which is the essential force in the central and east sectors of the G5 requiring special support for its battalions;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 365 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Encourages thNotes that some Member States to support and cooperate with the Barkhane and Takuba operations;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 371 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls foron the EU to pay particular attention to the spread of jihadviolent extremism, in particular Islamist terrorism, in areas such as the Indian Ocean and West Africa and to lend cooperation and establish aid programmes when required;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 383 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. States that there can be no security strategy without joint development action; reminds the divers root causes of terrorism and armed conflict; calls for fostering human capital and human development, meeting the needs of the most vulnerable communities and building people’s resilience capacities;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 394 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Believes that the European Union should ensure that development plans are multi-sectoral and provide a global solution to the challenges of the region concerned; is of the opinion that these plans must be adopted by the administration in agreement with the local beneficiary communities and implemented with the participation of humanitariancontext-based and multisector; is of the opinion that these plans must be in line with the principles of aid effectiveness (local ownership, harmonization, inclusion of civil society organisations, to ensure effective coordinationransparency) reaffirmed in the European Consensus of Development;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 419 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point b
b) empowering women by recognising their role as the centre of gravity of African families and promoting their participation in local and national institutions;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 425 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point c
c) providing basic services such as health and educ, water, sanitation and hygiene, social housing and safety nets, mental health support and protection, education and support for the displaced population to increase people’s confidence in the state;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 436 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point d a (new)
d a) tackling climate change effects by taking into consideration climate change mitigation and adaptation measures to ensure livelihoods become sustainably resilient to environmental threats;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 442 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point d b (new)
d b) promoting sustainable agricultural practices like agro-ecology and supporting small scale producers and farmers;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 443 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point d c (new)
d c) implementing a nutritional nexus to address all forms of malnutrition in all contexts and continue funding for activities bridging humanitarian and development interventions to tackle the root causes;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 451 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Expresses its deep concern that the current security crisis in Africa could lead to a massive displacement of the population, undermining North African states and affecting EuropeRecognize the impact of conflicts, poverty, inequalities and climate change on forced displacements and calls the European Union to facilitate regular, safe and dignified migration;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 454 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Calls for dedicated funding under the NDICI for the implementation of the EU Strategic Approach to Women, Peace and Security and its Action Plan; stresses the importance of focused EU actions on gender equality and women empowerment, including by ensuring the participation of African women in local, regional and national institutions;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 457 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Stresses that the NDICI should facilitate access to funds for small African NGOs, especially women’s organisations but also organisations focusing on young people, disabled, indigenous people, LGBTI people, and any discriminated and marginalised communities; stresses that many small organisations are unable to overcome the bureaucratic obstacles to apply for needed funding; recalls Parliament’s position to not support financing and investments operations which are linked to the military or state security sector or might result in violation of HR in partners countries;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 461 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26 c. Calls for implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 (UNSCR 2250) on youth, peace and security in EU-African security cooperation; emphasizes the importance of youth as agents of change in the maintenance and promotion of peace and security; calls for enabling young people’s meaningful and effective participation in conflict prevention and resolution, peacebuilding, post-conflict processes and humanitarian action; stresses the importance of EU actions to ensure youth participation in local, regional and national institutions; calls for training, dedicated funding under the NDICI and increased financial support to youth led peacebuilding initiatives for implementation of UNSCR 2250;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 464 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26 d. Urges all military actors in the Sahel to respect International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and to implement a comprehensive response focusing on alleviating the suffering of the most vulnerable section of the population, in particular by considering the protection of civilians as a key indicator of success of any integrated security strategy; stresses the importance that the implementation of all security operations should not worsen the humanitarian situation; calls on all security actors to monitor the impact of their military operations and security measures on access to services – including food and nutrition - and forced displacement, with the aim of minimising their adverse effects on humanitarian needs;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 472 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Recommends that the EU, together with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, intervenes on a financial level to help; control debt and the payment of interest; alls on the EU and its Member States to abide by the call from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to suspend all debt payments by the poorest countries to other governments as well as the call of African Finance Ministers to suspend all interest payments in 2020, and all principal and interest payments by fragile states including for 2021; urges the Commission and Member States to develop anew debt relief initiative regarding the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries affected by COVID-19; recalls that rising debt levels limit the capacity of these countries to provide basic health care systems and services designed to guarantee basic human rights; accordingly, stresses the need to link debt relief measures with additional mobilisation of Official Development Aid (ODA); calls for the creation of a multilateral debt workout mechanism to address both the impact of the crisis and the financing requirements of the Agenda 2030; calls on the EU to help fighting corruption that hinders an important part of the financial aid to reach the population, thus preventing a lot of countries to develop in a sustainable way;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 483 #

2020/2002(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Recommends that the countries concerned adopt the necessary measures ensure accountability for IHL violations committed by all parties, to allow free access to humanitarian aid and basic services for people in need, including those living in territories outside government control, consider amending their anti-terrorist legislation to include humanitarian exemptions allow negotiations of humanitarian access with all parties to the conflict, and stresses the importance that the delivery of humanitarian aid be perceived as neutral and impartial to, and ensure the safety of humanitarian workers;
2020/05/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) Despite existing measures at Union19 and national level aimed at supporting the protection of critical infrastructures in the Union, the entities operating those infrastructures are not adequately equipped to address current and anticipated future risks to their operations that may result in disruptions of the provision of services that are essential for the performance of vital societal functions or economic activities, as well as the free movement and safety of citizens. This is due to a dynamic threat landscape with an evolving terrorist threat and growing interdependencies between infrastructures and sectors, as well as an increased physical risk due to natural disasters and climate change, which increases the frequency and scale of extreme weather events and brings long-term changes in average climate that can reduce the capacity and efficiency of certain infrastructure types if resilience or climate adaptation measures are not in place. Moreover, relevant sectors and types of entities are often not recognised consistently as critical in all Member States which can mean a lack of adequate coordination between Member States in the protection of important cross-border and intersectoral critical infrastructures such as those in the transport and energy sectors. _________________ 19European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP).
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 25 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) It is therefore necessary to lay down harmonised minimum rules to ensure the provision of essential services in the internal market and enhance the resilience of critical entities whilst also ensuring the need to dedicate significant resources to the maintenance of existing critical infrastructure, such as rail connections, roads and ports, in order to maximise their life times and ensure their resilience in face of climate change. Special focus should be given to cross-border links, such as regional cross-border rail connections or disused rail links, that might have been neglected in the absence of a concerted union level approach.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 32 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) The actions of Member States to identify and help ensure the resilience of critical entities should follow a risk-based approach that targets efforts to the entities most relevant for the performance of vital societal functions or economic activities. In order to ensure such a targeted approach, each Member State should carry out, within a harmonised framework, an assessment of all relevant natural and man- made risks that may affect the provision of essential services, including accidents, natural disasters, climate change, public health emergencies such as pandemics, and antagonistic threats, including terrorist offences. Such assessments should be based on and regularly updated with latest scientific knowledge on evolving threats such as climate change in order to ensure timely adaption to an evolving threat landscape. When carrying out those risk assessments, Member States should take into account other general or sector- specific risk assessment carried out pursuant to other acts of Union law and should consider the dependencies between sectors, including from other Member States and third countries. The outcomes of the risk assessment should be used in the process of identification of critical entities and to assist those entities in meeting the resilience requirements of this Directive.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 40 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) In order to be able to ensure their resilience, critical entities should have a comprehensive understanding of all relevant risks to which they are exposed and analyse those risks. To that aim, they should carry out risks assessments, whenever necessary in view of their particular circumstances and the evolution of those risks, yet in any event every four years. The risk assessments by critical entities should be based on the risk assessment carried out by Member States. In particular, risk assessments should fully incorporate the latest scientific evidence concerning future climate change impacts on critical entities.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 43 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
(23) Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 and Directive 2005/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30 establish requirements applicable to entities in the aviation and maritime transport sectors to prevent incidents caused by unlawful acts and to resist and mitigate the consequences of such incidents. While the measures required in this Directive are broader in terms of risks addressed and types of measures to be taken, critical entities in those sectors should reflect in their resilience plan or equivalent documents the measures taken pursuant to those other Union acts. Moreover, when implementing resilience measures under this Directive, critical entities mayshould consider referring to non- binding guidelines and good practices documents developed under sectorial workstreams, such as the EU Rail Passenger Security Platform31 . _________________ 28 Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation security and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 (OJ L 97/72, 9.4.2008, p. 72). 29 Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security (OJ L 129, 29.4.2004, p. 6.). 30Directive 2005/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on enhancing port security (OJ L 310, 25.11.2005, p. 28). 31Commission Decision of 29 June 2018 setting up the EU Rail Passenger Security Platform C/2018/4014.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 50 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)
(34 a) Member States and the Commission should ensure the necessary training and tools are in place for authorities and wider stakeholders to successfully implement this Directive with a special attention to rapidly evolving risks such as those related to cyber security and climate change.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 51 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 b (new)
(34 b) In order to fully ensure an adequate approach is being taken to reduce vulnerabilities and increase the resilience of Member States in view of the threats to critical entities, it is important to recognise the role of local communities and local authorities inbeing able to provide and offer safeguards in the case of a significant disruption or disruptions to critical entities. Member States and the Commission should therefore consider the local level context, and in particular the decentralisation of energy and the role of alternative energy networks, in the implementation of this Directive to ensure a comprehensive approach is being taken to reduce all risks that threaten societal and economic activities.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 52 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 c (new)
(34 c) In accordance with applicable Union and national law, including Regulation 2019/452 that provides a framework for the screening of foreign direct investments into the Union, the potential threat posed by foreign ownership of critical infrastructures within the Union must be acknowledged as services, the economy, free movement and the safety of EU citizens depends on the proper functioning of critical infrastructure. Member States and the Commission should remain vigilant to the financial investments being made by foreign countries into the operation of critical entities within the Union and the consequences that such investments could have on the ability to prevent significant disruptions.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 61 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) a description of measures necessary to enhance the overall resilience of critical entities, including a national risk assessment, the identification of critical entities and of entities equivalent to critical entities, the maintenance requirements associated with critical entities, and the measures to support critical entities taken in accordance with this Chapter;
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 62 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(d a) an approach to increasing the resilience of local and regional communities in Member States and which recognises, but is not limited to, the role of decentralised local renewable energy supplies, energy storage systems and back-up energy storage systems such as battery electric vehicles, in offering alternative access to energy should a critical entity in the energy sector be significantly disrupted.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 64 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
a roadmap that details the necessary measures to be taken by the critical entities in order for them to increase their resilience to the impacts of climate change by way of achieving climate neutral operations by 2050 at the latest, and to meet national and Union objectives for climate adaptation.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 65 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Incorporation of the latest scientific understanding of risks posed to critical entities. In particular, the strategies should fully incorporate for the latest scientific evidence concerning future climate change impacts on critical entities.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 66 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall communicate their strategies, and any updates of their strategies, to the Commission within three months from their adoption, and be made publicly available.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 69 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The risk assessment shall account for all relevant natural and man-made risks, including accidents, natural disasters, climate change, public health emergencies, antagonistic threats, including terrorist offences pursuant to Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . The risk assessment must be based on most recent scientific knowledge on evolving threats such as climate change in order to ensure timely adaptation to an evolving threat landscape. _________________ 34Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 73 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(d a) an assessment of existing national level plans, strategies or other initiatives designed to increase the resilience of local and regional communities in view of the potential consequences of a significant disruption or disruptions to critical entities.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 74 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Each Member State shall provide the Commission with data on the types of risks identified and the outcomes of the risk assessments, per sector and sub-sector referred to in the Annex, by [three years after entry into force of this Directive] and subsequently where necessary and at least every four years, and be made publicly available.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 76 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission may, in cooperation with the Member States, develop a voluntary common reporting template for the purposes of complying with paragraph 4, and shall provide a publicly available report reviewing the risk assessments made by Member States.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 78 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Member States and the Commission shall ensure the necessary resources, capabilities and technologies are in place to handle the exchange of information and data pursuant to this Article. Special attention should be given to the handling of sensitive data, including by means of secure data exchange protocols, and to avoid data misuse, whilst recognising the need for non-sensitive data to be made publicly available to ensure transparency.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 104 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) ensure the adequate maintenance and up keep of existing physical infrastructure related to the transport and energy sectors, especially in the face of increased potential for natural threats exacerbated by climate change, in order to avoid neglect and increase the lifetimes of such infrastructures which can in turn reduce costs associated with new builds and lower environmental impacts. Special focus should be given to cross-border links, such as regional cross-border rail connections or disused rail links, that might have been neglected in the absence of a concerted union level approach.
2021/05/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 131 #

2020/0365(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1- table - 2. Transport - point e new
2.Transport a) Air — Air carriers referred to in point (4) of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 300/200856 — Airport managing bodies referred to in point (2) of Article Article 2 of Directive 2009/12/EC57 , airports referred to in point (1) in point (1) of Article 2 of that Directive, including the core airports listed core airports listed in Section 2 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 1315/201358 , (EU) No 1315/201358 , and entities operating ancillary installations contained within installations contained within airports — Traffic management control operators providing air traffic traffic control (ATC) services referred to in point (1) of Article 2 of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 549/200459 (b) (b) Rail — Infrastructure managers referred to in point (2) of Article 3 Rail Article 3 of Directive 2012/34/EU60 — Railway undertakings referred to in point (1) of Article 3 of 3 of Directive 2012/34/EU, including operators of service facilities facilities referred to in point (12) of Article 3 of Directive 2012/34/EU (c) (c) Water — Inland, sea and coastal passenger and freight water Water transport companies, referred to for maritime transport in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 725/200461 , not including the the individual vessels operated by those companies — Managing bodies of ports referred to in point (1) of Article Article 3 of Directive 2005/65/EC62 , including their port facilities facilities referred to in point (11) of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 725/2004, and entities operating works and equipment works and equipment contained within ports — Operators of vessel traffic services referred to in point (o) (o) of Article 3 of Directive 2002/59/EC63 of the European European Parliament and of the Council (d) (d) Road Road authorities referred to in point (12) of Article 2 of Road Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/96264 responsible for traffic management control — Operators of Intelligent Transport Systems referred to in in point (1) of Article 4 of Directive 2010/40/EU65 (e) public —Public transport authorities and service operators transport referred to in point (b,c and d) of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No1370/2007
2021/05/27
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 71 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 7
(7) While the share of passenger rail in the Union land transport has only slightly increased since 2007, the share of freight has decreased. Many obstacles remain to achieve a true Single European Rail Area, including in respect of the need to foster interoperability and digitalisation, accelerate the implementation of European wide modern train management systems (ERTMS) for both on-board and track-side equipment, to internalise the external costs and to minimise noise. Overcoming these obstacles together with cost reduction and accelerated innovation will allow rail to realise its full potential, while ensuring the functioning of the internal market, increasing traffic and maintaining or improving the high safety levels. Rail therefore needs a further boost to become more attractive to travellers and businesses alike.
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 164 #

2020/0035(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall support the development of railways as a sustainable part of Union mobility policy by renewing efforts to complete the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) in respect of both on-board rolling stock and infrastructure, and to minimise noise, while ensuring the functioning of the internal market and maintaining or improving the high safety levels;
2020/07/07
Committee: TRAN