Activities of Heidi HAUTALA related to 2021/2161(INL)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT with recommendations to the Commission on Digitalisation and Administrative Law
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (14)
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas Parliament engaged in public consultation with regard to the need to establish the European law on administrative procedure, whereby 76% of respondents supported taking additional measures at Union level to enhance and simplify Union administrative procedures, noted improving efficiency and transparency among the top reasons for EU intervention and identified operational incoherence and the administrative burden costs among the most problematic issues; whereas the Commission should further launch adequate public consultation in 2023 with all relevant actors, and should in particular make use of the special knowledge and expertise of the European Ombudsman, since it is to the European Ombudsman that public complaints about abuses within the bodies and institutions of the Union are made;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas consultations with academia, practitioners and the legal community were undertaken by the Parliament in preparation of its 2016 resolution for an open, efficient and independent European Union administration; whereas, in its follow-up adopted on 24 April 2013 to the Parliament’s resolution of 15 January 2013, the Commission stated that it would launch a detailed stocktaking of the existing body of EU administrative law and of possible shortcomings across all of the institutions, that it would assess the approaches taken to these issues in the Member States and would consult academia, practitioners and the legal community in order to carry out an in- depth analysis of all aspects of the issue; whereas ten years later, the Commission has yet to inform the Parliament about the results of the announced stocktaking and in-depth analysis; whereas the Commission should deliver such stocktaking, and should further launch adequate and regular public consultation with all relevant actors, and should in particular make use of the special knowledge and expertise of the European Ombudsman, since it is to the European Ombudsman that public complaints about abuses within the bodies and institutions of the Union are made;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas the case law of the Court of Justice has developed well-established procedural principles which apply to Member States' procedures in Union matters and which should a fortiori apply to direct administration by the Union; whereas it can be expected that the case law of the Court of Justice will soon develop further to cover phenomena related to the development of digitalisation in administrative procedures, such as automated decision-makingand in judicial procedures having administrative effects;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
W. whereas the development of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence and automated decision making systems (ADMSs), can play an important role in the modernisation and improvement of the functioning of public administration provided that the technologies used are human-centered and have a high degree of reliability and of trustworthiness; whereas the possibility of recourse to such new technologies by public administration, including the Union’s administration, should, however, be limited by the principle of legality and the need to ensure the respect for citizens’ rights; whereas use of new technologies, such as AI and ADMSs may pose specific problems for the principle of good administration and right to legal review and therefore requires particular analysis with regard to elements such as transparency, accountability, compliance and non-discrimination, in particular by addressing the risk of algorithmic bias;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas the risks of using artificial intelligence and machine learning, in particular in the context of the Union’s administration where a significant power gap can exist between citizens and the administration, should be acknowledged; whereas therefore the use of machine learning by the Union’s administration should priorily aim at improving the efficiency of administrative services and at alleviating the workload of the administration staff, and should be limited to the collection, organisation, structuring, conversion, combination and adaptation of data, such as optical character recognition, object recognition or speech- to-text;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Y
Recital Y
Y. whereas in 2022 the European Law Insitute presented a report with Model Rules on Impact Assessment of Algorithmic Decision-Making Systems Used by Public Administration, where the model rules are proposed when such algorithmic decision making systems make a decision or support human decision- making - that is a determination by a human-led public authority (including at Union level) to take or not to take action - that is likely to have significant impacts on the public15 ; _________________ 15 https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/filead min/user_upload/p_eli/Publications/ELI_M odel_Rules_on_Impact_Assessment_of_A DMSs_Used_by_Public_Administration.pd f
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas access to digital administration services for Union citizens is affected by factors such as age, confidencedisability, confidence, economic means or willingness to embrace technological solutions; whereas therefore the Union’s administration should take this into consideration when developing digital solutions for services it provides in order not to lose citizens’ trust and to allow citizens to adjust to the existence of the digital service, in order to bridge the digital divide;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AB
Recital AB
AB. whereas the following principles for digital public services and administration have already been identified: (i) human-centric and accessible digital public services at all levels, (ii) the possibility for every person to engage in the creation and improvement of digital public services that are tailored to their needs and preferences, (iii) the ‘once only’ principle, namely that every person should submit their data or information only once when they are digitally interacting with public administrations across the Union, (iv) interoperability of digital services offered by the public sector such as digital identity solutions with data portability allowed across the Union, (v) wide-ranging engagement of and with people enabled by digital technologies and solutions and stimulation of the development of participatory initiatives at all levels, (vi) contribution of digital technologies and solutions to better levels of legal certainty, public security and safety;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that after 70 years of constant development of the Union’s public administration and 13 years since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which lays down the legal basis of Article 298 TFEU, there is no justification not to enshrine the principles of good administration in binding legislation, notably to make it fit with the digital age; ;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that citizens’ rights such as right to good administration and right to access to documents, enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, are not static but evolving, and that technological advancements such as digitalization should also lead to better and more effective realization of these rights.
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the requested proposal does not have negative financial implications; as limited administrative costs caused by the implementation of the proposal would be hugely outweighed its benefits such as improved efficiency and cost savings to the EU administration and to the public;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point iii
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point iii
(iii) contribution of digital technologies and solutions to higher levels of legal certainty, public security and safety;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
(v) digital public services should also be accessible through a wide range of devices, supporting interconnectivity features;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) Union staff should be at the heart of the development process, as they have the best understanding of administrative procedures and edge-cases, namely problems or situations that only happen at the highest or lowest end of a range of possible values or in extreme situations; administration staff should therefore be consulted when developing digital tools for the administration, and should be duly trained to be able to use these tools in an efficient manner;