19 Amendments of Rainer WIELAND related to 2011/2317(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
A. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has acquired legally binding force through the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the right of citizens to petition the European Parliament has already been enshrined in the Treaty since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty on 1 November 1993;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas – subject to Protocol 30 of the Treaty – the Charter of Fundamental Rights has become legally binding since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009; whereas the Lisbon Treaty also establishes the legal basis for the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as the European Citizens’ Initiative;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Committee on Petitions has the duty to constantly review and, where possible, to enhance its role, notably with regard to the development of democratic principles, and whereas in its regular activity the Committee works closely with the Commission acting as the ‘Guardian of the Treaty’ which defines the Commission’s role and prevents it from intervening in matters not covered by EU legislation;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. welcomes the case law of the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which emphasises in respect of the Equal Rights Trust that the institutions of the Member States shall be bound by the overriding fundamental rights of the Union even if they wish to use national measures to restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU);
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas European citizens and residents have legitimate expectations that the issues they raise with the Committee on Petitions may find a solution within the legal framework of the European Union, which they look upon to uphold their rights as citizens of the Union, in particular to defend their natural environment, health, freedom of movement, dignity and fundamental rights;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. considering that individuals and local communities, as well as voluntary associations and businesses, are well placed to assess the effectiveness of European legislation as it applies to them, and to signal possible loopholes that need to be analysed in order to ensure better, more uniform and comparable implementation of EU law in all the Member States;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas the judgment of the EU Tribunal of 14 September 2011 in case T- 308/07 upheld the petitioner’s (0095/2007) complaint against the Committee’s decision to declare his petition inadmissible and in so doing laid down clear parameters for dealing with petitions which are declared inadmissiblemade it clear that procedural decisions by Parliament in relation to petitions are also subject to legal review;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas the efficiency of the Committee’s work is largely characterised by swiftness and thoroughness and could be further improved in particular by optimising the time taken to process petitions and by systematising the procedure for their assessment;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Confirms the key role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying non-judicial remedies for citizens, inby providing a reality check on the way in which the European Union is seen by the people of Europe, and as a reflection of citizens’ viewsenabling conclusions to be drawn regarding whether European legislation actually delivers the expected result and responds to what people expect of the Union;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes, therefore, that this role and responsibility should lead Parliament to consider ways of revitalising this fundamental part of parliamentary work both in terms of its visibility and in terms of improving its ability to raise issues of importance to European citizens in plenary, as well as by reinforcing its competence to call witnesses and investigate more independently issues raised by citizens; welcomes the increased opportunities available to Parliament to take a more independent approach in relation to issues raised by citizens through the instrument of the committees of inquiry;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point a (new)
(a) Calls on the Committee on Petitions to examine the effects of the Equal Rights Trust case law on the reliability of petitions and to investigate the question of what actual obstacles exist for citizens of the Union in obtaining a reliable interpretation of central issues under European legislation in cases before the national courts by applying for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the Spanish Government to revise the Ley de Costas in such a way as to guarantee title to those who have properly and in good faith acquired property within the reach of the jurisdiction of the Ley de Costas; in particular, calls for a reform of the Ley de Costas which ensures due process, a right of appeal with interim legal protection, a right of appeal, access to the preliminary ruling procedure of the European Court of Justice, proper compensation, and the right to information and which protects against retroactive or discriminatory actions;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a (new)
(a) Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at a procedural level;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point b (new)
Paragraph 17 – point b (new)
(b) Emphasises the need for continuity in processing petitions, despite changes in legislative periods and the resulting changes in personnel;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point c (new)
Paragraph 17 – point c (new)
(c) Regards the participation of Members of Parliament in fact-finding missions not just as a participatory parliamentary right, but also as an obligation in relation to petitioners;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point d (new)
Paragraph 17 – point d (new)
(d) As part of the efforts to improve the work of the Committee, calls for a procedure involving fact-finding missions that on the one hand ensures the right of all members of a fact-finding mission to present the facts from their point of view, while also guaranteeing all Committee Members the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process in regard to the conclusions to be drawn by the Committee on Petitions;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point e (new)
Paragraph 17 – point e (new)
(e) Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry, the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Ombudsman, play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizen;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point f (new)
Paragraph 17 – point f (new)
(f) Calls on the Conference of Presidents to examine the extent to which an amendment to the Rules of Procedure would seem appropriate for the implementation of these formal requirements in relation to the petitioning procedure;