BETA

59 Amendments of Christian SAGARTZ related to 2020/2129(INL)

Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. Whereas the globalisation of economic activity has in many instances given rise to and aggravated adverse impacts on human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment and the good governance of states and the environment;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. Whereas companies should respect human rights, and the environment and good governance and should not cause or contribute to causing any adverse impacts in this regard;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. Whereas some Member States, such as France and the Netherlands, have adopted legislation to enhance corporate accountability and have introduced mandatory due diligence frameworks;deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that voluntary due diligence standards have severe limitations and that the Union should urgently adopt minimumadopt clear requirements for undertakings to identify, prevent, cease, mitigate, and monitor, disclose, account, address and remediate human rights, and environmental and governance risks in their entire value chainrisks in the first tier of their supply chain outside of the EU; believes that this would be beneficial for stakeholders, as well as for businesses in terms of harmonization, legal certainty and a level playing field; stresses that this would enhance the reputation of EU undertakings and of the Union as a standard setter; stresses that any framework should be based on an obligation of means rather than an obligation of results
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. RStresses that it is the responsibility of states and governments to safeguard human rights in their countries and that this responsibility shall not be transferred to private actors; recalls that due diligence is primarily a preventative mechanism and that companies should be first and foremost required to identify risks or adverse impacts and adopt policies and measures to address them; highlights that if an undertaking causes or contribumitigates to an adverse impact it should provide for a remedy; hem;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that human rights abuses and breaches of social and environmental standards can be the result of a company’s own activities or of those of its business relationships; underlines therefore that due diligence should encompass the entire value chain;direct suppliers in the first tier of the supply chain outside the European Union.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that sound due diligence requires that all stakeholders be involved and consulted effectively and meaningfully;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 127 #
10. Considers that, to enforce due diligence, Member States should designate national authorities to share best practices as well as to supervise and impose sanctions, including criminal sanctions in severe castaking into account the severity and repeated nature of the infringements; considers that the Commission shall set up a European Due Diligence Network to ensure, together with the national competent authorities, the coordination and convergence of regulatory and supervisory practices, and monitor the performance of national competent authorities;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Further considers that in order to enable victims to obtain remedy, undertakings should be held liable for the damage the undertakings under their control have caused or contributed to where the latter have, in the course of their business relationships with the former, committed violations of internationally recognized human rights or have caused environmental harm;deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that conducting due diligence should not absolve undertakings from liability for the harm they have caused or have contributed to; further considers, however, that having a robust due diligence process in place may help undertakings to avoid causing harm;deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that, in line with the UN ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy' Framework considerations on the rights of victims to a remedy, the jurisdiction of EU courts should be extended to business- related civil claims brought against EU undertakings on account of harm caused within their value chain on account of human rights violations; further considers necessary the introduction into EU law of a forum necessitatis to give access to a court to victims who risk being denied justice;deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 2
2. Within a context of mounting evidence of human rights violations and environmental degradation, concern grew about ensuring businesses respected human rights, in particular when operating in countries with weak legal systems and enforcement, and holding them accountable for causing or contributing to harm. In this light, the UN Human Rights Council in 2008 unanimously welcomed the “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. This framework rests on three pillars: the state duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including businesses, through appropriate policies, regulation, and adjudication; the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, which means acting with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others and to address adverse impacts that occur, and greater access by victims to effective remedy, both judicial and non- judicial.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 4
4. Businesses thus currently have at their disposal an important number of international due diligence instruments that can help them fulfil their responsibility to respect human rights. While it is difficult to overstate the importance of these instruments for businesses that take their duty to respect human rights seriously, their voluntary nature can hampers their effectiveness and their effect has indeed proved limited, with a restricted number of businesses voluntarily implementing human rights due diligence in relation to their activities and those of their business relationships. Respect for human rights continues to play a marginal role in undertakings’ policies and strategies. This is exacerbated by many undertakings’ excessive focus on short-term profit maximisation.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 8
8. In order to ensure a level playing field the responsibility for companies to respect human rights under international standards should be transformed into a legal duty at Union level. By coordinating safeguards for the protection of human rights, and the environment and good governance, this Directive will ensure that all undertakings operating in the iInternal mMarket are subject to harmonised minimum due diligence obligations, which will improve theits functioning of that market.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 9
9. The establishment of mandatory due diligence requirements at EU level willcan be beneficial to businesses in terms of harmonization, legal certainty and the securing of a level playing field, and willmight give companies subject to them a competitive advantage in the EU, inasmuch as societies are increasingly demanding from undertakings that they become more ethical and sustainable. This Directive, by setting a European due diligence standard, could help foster the emergence of a global standard for responsible business conduct.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 10
10. This Directive is aimeds at preventing and mitigating adverse human rights, governance and environmental impacts throughout the value chainfirst tier of the supply chain outside the EU, as well as ensuring that undertakings can bhave theld accountable for these risks and that anyone who has suffered harm in this regard can effectively exercise the right to obtain remedy obligation to identify these risks.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 16
16. Due diligence is defined in this Directive as the process put in place by an undertaking in order to identify, cease, prevent, mitigate, monitor, disclose, account for, address and remedy the risks posed to human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment, including climate change, and to governancemitigate and monitor the risks posed to human right and the environment, both by its own operations and its direct contractual business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 17
17. In relation to human rights risks, Annex I to this Directive lists a number ofthe instruments undertakings should take into consideration when assessing their potential risks. The list is conceived as non-exhaustive, undertakings being strongly encouraged to take into consideration other human rights instruments that would enable them to carry out a complete due diligence process to prevent any risk for human rightsexhaustive and can be reviewed by the Commission by means of a delegated act where necessary to include the reference to human rights instruments that may be adopted in the future.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 19
19. This Directive establishes a non-n exhaustive list of environmental risks. To contribute to the internal coherence of EU legislation and to provide legal certainty, this list is based on Regulation (EU) 2020/852 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment in which undertakings may find guidance for assessing their risks by means of a reference to a list of relevant Union acts set out in Annex II to this Directive.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 20
20. This Directive also requires undertakings to carry out due diligence in order to prevent any adverse impact on the good governance of the countries, regions or territories in which they carry out their business activities. In particular, undertakings should comply with the OECD anti-bribery convention and take measures to prevent any undue influence being exercised on public officials with a view to obtaining privileges or unfair favourable treatment that is in breach of the law. Undertakings should also abstain from improperly influencing local political activities and should strictly comply with the applicable tax legislation.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 21
21. Environmental, governance and human right risks are not gender-neutral. Undertakings should be encouraged to integrate the gender perspective into their due diligence processes. They can find guidance in the UN booklet Gender Dimensions of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 22
22. AThe adverse impacts or violations of human rights and social and environmental standards by undertakings can be the result of their own activities or of those of their direct contractual business relationships, in particular suppliers, sub-contractors and investee undertakings. In order to be effective, undertakings’ due diligence should encompass the entire value chain.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 23
23. Due diligence is primarily a preventative mechanism that requires companies to identify potential or actual adverse impacts and to adopt policies and measures to cease, prevent, mitigate, monitor, disclose, address, remediate them, and account fmitigate and monitor how they address those impactsese. Undertakings shouldmay be required to produce a document in which they make explicit their due diligence strategy with reference to each of those stages. This. Any due diligence strategyframework should be duly integrated into the company’s overall business strategybased on an obligation of means rather than an obligation of results.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 24
24. Due diligence should not be a ‘box- ticking’ exercise but shouldmay consist of an ongoing assessment of risks, which are dynamic and may change on account of new business relationships or contextual developments. Undertakings should therefore in an ongoing manner monitor and adapt their due diligence strategies accordingly. Those strategies should cover every actual or potential adverse impacts, although the severity of the risk shouldmust be considered if the establishment of a prioritisation policy is required.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 26
26. Sound due diligence requires that all stakeholders may be consulted effectively and meaningfully, and that trade unions in particular be appropriately involved. The consultation and involvement of stakeholders can help companies to identify risks more precisely and to set up a more effective due diligence strategy. This Directive therefore requires the consultation and involvement of stakeholders in all stages of the due diligence process. Furthermore, their involvement and consultation may help to push back against pressure from financial markets and short-term investors and give voice to those with a strong interest in the long-term sustainability of the company. Stakeholder participation may help improve the long- term performance and profitability of companies, as their increased sustainability would have positive aggregate economic effects.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 27
27. The concept of stakeholder should be broadly interpreted and include all persons whose rights and interests may be affected by the decisions of the company, which includes, but is not limited to, workers, local communities, indigenous peoples, citizens’ associations and shareholders, and organisations whose statutory purpose is to ensure that human and social rights, environmental and good governance standards are respected, such as trade unions and civil society organisations.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 28
28. To avoid the risk of critical stakeholder voices remaining unheard or marginalised in the due diligence process, the Directive grants stakeholders the right to safe and meaningful consultation as regards the company’s due diligence strategy, and ensure the appropriate involvement of trade unions.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 30
30. This Directive requires undertakings to make all necessary efforts to identify all their suppliers. In order to be fully effective, due diligence should not be limited to the first tier downstream and upstream in the supply chain but should encompass all suppliers and sub- contractors, particularly those that, during the due diligence process, might have been identified by the undertaking as posing major risks. This Directive, however, recognises in the first tier of the supply chain outside the EU. This Directive, however, does not lose sight of the fact that not all undertakings have the same resources or capabilities to identify all their suppliers and therefore makesubjects thatis obligation subject to the principles of reasonableness and proportionality, taking into account the severity and repeated nature of the infringements, which in no case should be interpreted by undertakings as a pretext not to comply with their obligation to make all necessary efforts in that regard.;
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 31
31. For due diligence to be embedded in the culture and structure of a company, it is necessary that the members of the administrative, management and supervisory bodies of the company be responsible for the adoption and implementation of the due diligence strategy. The board of directors should have the appropriate knowledge, training and experience in due diligence matters. The Directive requires that large companies have an advisory committee from whose expertise on due diligence matters the undertaking should benefit. This Directive also requires that remuneration policies be brought in line with the objectives of this Directive.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 32
32. Coordination of undertakings’ due diligence efforts at sectoral level could enhance the consistency and effectiveness of their due diligence strategies. To this end, this Directive provides that Member States could encourage the adoption of due diligence action plans at sectoral level. To avoid sStakeholders’ views being ignored, the Directive requires that stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the definition of these plans.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 33
33. In order to be effective, a due diligence framework shouldcan include grievance mechanisms at company or sector level and in order to ensure that such mechanisms are effectivefor the effectiveness of which the participation of stakeholders should be ensurcouraged. . Thoese mechanisms shcould allow stakeholders to raise concerns and should function as early-warning risk-awareness systems. Grievance mechanisms should be entitled to make suggestions as to how risks should be addressed by the undertaking. They should also be entitled to propose an appropriate remedy when it is brought to their attention that the undertaking has caused or contributed to harm.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 1 – paragraph 9 – point 39
39. Member States should introduce further legislation to ensure that undertakings can be held liable for damage caused by undertakings under their control where they have, in the course of business, committed violations of internationally recognized human rights or international environmental standards. They should not be held liable however if they can prove that they took all due care to avoid the loss or damage, or that the damage would have occurred even if all due care had been taken. When introducing liability regimes, Member States should consider adopting appropriate limitation periods and introducing the loser pays principle.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 400 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 1 – point 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive is aimed at ensuring that by adhering to reasonable due diligence policies and procedures, undertakings operating in the internal market fulfil their duty to respect human rights, and the environment and good governance and do not cause or contribute to risks to human rights, and the environment and good governance in their activities and those of their direct contractual business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 408 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 1 – point 1 – paragraph 1
To this end, it establishes minimum requirements for undertakings to identify, prevent, cease, mitigate, monitor, disclose, account, address and remediatemitigate and monitor the human rights, and environmental and governance risks that those activities may pose. By coordinating safeguards for the protection of human rights, and the environment and good governance, thoese due diligence requirements are aimedim at improving the functioning of the internal market.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 454 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
- 'due diligence' means the process put in place by an undertaking aimed at identifying, ceasing, preventing, mitigating, monitoring, disclosing, accounting for, addressing, and remediating the risks posed to human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment, including through climate change, and to governance, bothfirst, an obligation of means and second, a business process imposed on such undertaking to take reasonable precautions to identify, mitigate and monitor the risks posed to human rights and the environment by its own operations and by those of its direct business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 464 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
- ‘stakeholders’ means individuals and groups of individuals whose rights or interests may be affected by the human rights, environmental and good governance risks posed by an undertaking or its business relationships, as well as organisations whose statutory purpose is the defence of human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment and good governance, and includes but is not limited to workers and their representatives, local communities, indigenous peoples, citizens’ associations, trade unions, civil society organisations and the undertakings’ shareholder have a direct interest to take legal action in relation to human rights and environmental risks posed by an undertaking or its direct contractual business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 477 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
- ‘supplier’ means all business relationshipundertakings that provide a product or service directly to an undertaking, either directly or indirectly in the context of a business relationship.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 479 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
- ‘value chain’ means all activities, operations, business relationships and investment chains of an undertaking inside or outside the EU. Value chain includes entities with which the undertaking has a direct or indirect business relationship, upstream and downstream, and which either (a) supply products or services that contribute to the undertaking’s own products or services, or (b) receive products or services from the undertaking.first tier of the supply chain outside the EU’ means an upstream network characterized by direct contractual business relationships between a company and its suppliers located outside the EU to produce and distribute a specific product to the final buyer
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 502 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 9
- ‘environmental risk’ means any potential or actual adverse impact as regards climate change, air and water pollution, deforestation, loss in biodiversity, and greenhouse emissions that may impair the right to a healthy environment, whether temporarily or permanently, and of whatever magnitude, duration or frequency. These include, but are not limited to, adverse impacts on the climate, the sustainable use of natural resources, and biodiversity and ecosystems. These risks include climate change, air and water pollution, deforestation, loss in biodiversity, and greenhouse emissions, in breach of the applicable legal obligations provided for in the Union acts listed in Annex II. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18(a), to amend this exhaustive list.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 516 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 1
1. Member States shall lay down rules to ensure that undertakings carry out due diligence with respect to human rights, and environmental and governance risks in their operations and direct contractual business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 523 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 2
2. Undertakings shall in an ongoing manner identify and assess by means of an appropriate monitoring methodology whether their operations and direct business relationships cause or contribute to any human rights, or environmental or governance risks.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 537 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 4 – point ii
(ii) publicly disclose detailed, relevant and meaningful information about the undertaking’s value chain, including names, locations, and other relevant information concerning subsidiaries, suppliers and business partners in its value chain;deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 552 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 5
5. Undertakings shall make all reasonable efforts to identify subcontractors and suppliers in their entire value chain first tier of the supply chain outside the EU.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 555 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 6
6. Undertakings shall indicate how their due diligence strategy relates to and integrates with their business strategy, their policies, including purchase policies, and procedures.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 567 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 9
9. Undertakings shall ensure by means of contractual clauses and the adoption of codes of conduct that their business relationships in the first tier of the supply chain outside the EU put in place and carry out human rights, and environmental and governance policies that are in line with their due diligence strategy.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 577 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 5 – point 2
2. Member States shall ensure that stakeholders are entitled to request from the undertaking that they are consulted within the terms of paragraph 1.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 587 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 5 – point 6
6. Member States shall ensure that where an undertaking refuses to carry out consultations with stakeholders, fails to involve trade unions in good faith, or does not adequately inform and consult workers or their representatives, stakeholders and trade unions may refer the matter to the competent national authoritydeleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 590 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 6 – point 1
1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings make their due diligence strategy publicly available, accessible and free of charge, especially on the undertakings’ websites.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 614 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 7 – paragraph 1
This Directive is without prejudice to the obligations imposed on certain undertakings by Directive 2013/34/EU to include in their management report a non-financial statement including a description of the policies pursued by the undertaking in relation to, as a minimum, environmental, social and employee matters, respect for human rights, anti- corruption and bribery matters, and the due diligence processes implemented.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 618 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 8 – point 1
1. Undertakings shall revaluateiew the effectiveness and appropriateness of their due diligence strategy at least once a year, and review it accordingly when necessary.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 620 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 8 – point 2
2. The evaluation and review of the due diligence strategy shall be carried out in consultation with stakeholders and the involvement of trade unions in the same manner as when establishing the due diligence strategy.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 627 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 8 – point 3
3. In large companies, the advisory committee referred to in Article 12 shall be consulted in the evaluation and review of the due diligence strategy.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 645 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 9 – point 4
4. Undertakings shall publish concerns raised via their grievance mechanisms as well as remediation efforts and regularly report on progress made in those instances.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 653 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 9 – point 6
6. Grievance mechanisms shall be encouraged to be developed in partnership with stakeholders, in particular workers representatives, and be managed in cooperation with them. Workers representatives shall be given the necessary resources to carry out their responsibilities in this area, including in order to establish connections with trade unions and workers in the undertakings with which the main undertaking has business relationships.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 660 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 10
Extra-judicial remedies 1. Member States shall ensure that when an undertaking identifies, in particular through its grievance mechanism, that it has caused or contributed to harm, it provides for or cooperates with- remediation. 2. The remedy may be proposed via the grievance mechanism laid down in Article 9. 3. The remedy shall be determined in consultation with the affected stakeholders and may consist of one or more of the following non-exhaustive list of remedies: financial or non-financial compensation, reinstatement, public apologies, restitution, rehabilitation or contribution to investigation. 4. Undertakings shall prevent additional harm through guarantees of non- repetition. 5. Member States shall ensure that proposal of a remedy by an undertaking does not prevent affected stakeholders from bringing civil proceedings in accordance with national law.Article 10 deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 674 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 11 – point 2
2. Member States shall ensure that their laws, regulations and administrative provisions on liability, at least towards the undertaking, apply to the members of the administrative, management and supervisory bodies of the undertakings, as regards breach of the duties referred to in paragraph 1.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 678 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 12
Expertise on due diligence 1. Member States shall ensure that the governing body of the undertaking has the necessary qualifications, knowledge and expertise as regards due diligence. 2. Large undertakings shall set up an advisory committee tasked with advising the governing body of the undertakings on due diligence matters and propose measures to cease, monitor, disclose, address, prevent and mitigate risks. Advisory committees shall include stakeholders and experts in their composition.Article 12 deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 697 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 13 – point 5
5. Trade unions shall be given the necessary resources to carry out their responsibilities in this area, including in order to establish connections with trade unions and workers in the undertakings with which the main undertaking has business relationships.deleted
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 775 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a Exercise of delegation 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of 5 years from (date of entry into force of this Regulation). 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 3 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated act already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law Making.5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of three months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or, if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
2020/10/09
Committee: JURI