BETA

11 Amendments of Jiří MAŠTÁLKA related to 2015/2041(INI)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that reinforcing the legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness of the EU institutions, together with the level of trust among EU citizens, is of the utmost importance, and believes that rules of good administration of the EU are key to achieving this objective through the provision of swift, clear and visible answers in response to citizens’ concerns;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) Points out that it is the duty of the institutions to carry out regularly an open and transparent dialogue with civil society so as to enable citizens to become more informed and actively involved in the EU democratic process and exercise public scrutiny. Recalls that transparency is the key factor to restore the lack of citizens' trust in the EU and to increase the legitimacy of the EU institutions. Calls in this context on the Commission to revise the legislating regarding the ECI and is of the opinion that the Commission should not have the veto right, because of the potential conflict of interest, but its legal assessment should be advisory in nature. The revision of the ECI should also remove Art. 4(2)(b), which restrictively limits the admissibility of ECIs;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
(2) Deplores that little progress has been made to implement Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 as regards the obligation for the institutions to keep complete registers of documents, is convinced that Members of the European Parliament should have access to all the Commission's documents, points out in this relation the lack of transparency while negotiating the TTIP;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that although the right to good administration is established in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the lack of a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of administrative law makes it difficult for citizens to know and understand their administrative rights under EU law;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that although the right to good administration is established in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,granting to every person the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union is established in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and that this article also includes the right of every person to be heard before any individual measure which also includes the right of access to files while respecting the legitimate interests of confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy, and the duty of the administration to give reasons for its decisions, stresses that the lack of a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of administrative law makes it difficult for citizens to understand their administrative rights under EU law;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses further that despite the fact that the right of access to documents is established in Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and further specified in Regulation 1049/2001, the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the European Union (the "EU institutions") have failed to fully implement it, resulting in arbitrary denials of access to documents thus increasing the inscrutability of the relevant institutions; calls for immediate and full compliance of the EU institutions with the aforementioned provisions;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that a European Law of Administrative Procedure applicable to EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies in their relations with the public would contribute to a high level of transparency and accountability and, increase citizens’ confidence in an open, efficient and independent EU administration with respect towards their rights and enhance their procedural rights vis-à-vis the EU institutions;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that a European Law of Administrative Procedure applicable to EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies in their relations with the public would contribute to a high level of transparency and accountability and increase citizens’ confidence in an open, efficient and independent EUto convincing citizens that the Union institutions work on their behalf and are accountable to them administration;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls, in this connection, that in its resolution of 15 January 2013, adopted by an overwhelming majority, Parliament called for the adoption of an EU regulation on a European Law of Administrative Procedure; regrets that no steps have been taken by the Commission in this regard; calls again on the Commission to submit a proposal for a clear and binding set of rules for EU administration on the basis of Article 298 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which calls for openness, efficiency and independence, as well as on the basis of the general principles of EU law, as specified in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice (CJEU);
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls, in this connection, that in its resolution of 15 January 2013, adopted by an overwhelming majority, Parliament called for the adoption of an EU regulation on a European Law of Administrative Procedure; calls again on the Commission to submit a proposal for a clear and binding set of rules for EU administration on the basis of Article 298 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU); as well as an ambitious plan of action regarding transparency and public access to documents in the shortest delay, for transparency is the cornerstone of better regulation, calls the EU institutions to ensure that their internal administrative procedures achieve the aim;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls the EU Agencies to adopt Guidelines for a coherent policy on the prevention and management of conflicts of interest for members of the Management Board and Directors, experts in scientific committees, and members of Boards of Appeal and to adopt and implement a clear policy on conflicts of interest, in accordance with the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies;
2015/12/16
Committee: JURI