23 Amendments of Barbara KUDRYCKA related to 2017/2131(INL)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Articles 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 35, 41, 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
Citation 1 b (new)
- having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)
Citation 1 c (new)
- having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)
Citation 1 d (new)
- having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted in New York on 20 November 1989,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 e (new)
Citation 1 e (new)
- having regard to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention), and to the Council Decisions(EU) 2017/865 and (EU) 2017/866 of 11 May 2017 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 f (new)
Citation 1 f (new)
- having regard to the signing of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention) by Hungary on 14 March 2011,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to OLAF annual 2016 report,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Citation 8 b (new)
- having regard to FRA annual reports of 2016 and 2017,
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
(12a) Protection of the acquired rights;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 12 b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 12 b (new)
(12b) The functioning of the new electoral law;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes the outcome of the parliamentary elections in Hungary, which took place on the 8th April 2018, which ensured the re-election of the previous ruling party - Fidesz, however highlights the fact that the new electoral law, introducing the system of single- member constituencies, was implemented in order to favour of the governing party. The new system is undermining the ability of candidates to compete on an equal basis.
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
Annex I – point 9
(9) In 2011, Fidesz politician János Lázár, has proposed a redesign to Hungarian voting districts; considering the territorial results of previous elections, this redesign is favouring the right-wing politicians according to the opposition. Since then, the law has been passed by the Fidesz-majority Parliament. Formerly it took twice as many votes to gain a seat in some election districts as in some others. Gerrymandering is a practice intended to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries. In its statement adopted on 9 April 2018, the limited election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights concluded that the 2018 parliamentary elections were characterised by a pervasive overlap between state and ruling party resources, undermining the ability of candidates to compete on an equal basis. Voters had a wide range of political options but intimidating and xenophobic rhetoric, media bias and opaque campaign financing constricted the space for genuine political debate, hindering the ability of voters to make a fully informed choice. It also expressed concerns about the delineation of single- member constituencies. Similar concerns were expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18 June 2012 on the Act on the Elections of Members of Parliament of Hungary adopted by the Venice Commission and the Council for Democratic Elections.
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 20 a (new)
Annex I – point 20 a (new)
(20a) In 2016 OLAF published its report where completed its investigation of the EUR 1.7 billion euro transport project in Hungary, in which the main participants were international companies. By using its cross-border powers, OLAF conducted investigations in Hungary and traced the links between projects and enterprises. The investigation showed very serious irregularities, as well as, possible fraud and corruption in the implementation of the projects. OLAF also launched an investigation into European Union- funded projects, run by a company controlled by the son-in-law of the Prime Minister - Viktor Orban. There is a treat that the tender could have been set up.
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 37
Annex I – point 37
(37) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to start legal proceedings against Hungary for failing to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital, due to provisions in the NGO Law which indirectly discriminate and disproportionately restrict donations from abroad to civil society organisations. In addition, the Commission concluded that Hungary had violated the right to freedom of association and the rights to protection of private life and personal data enshrined in the Charter, read in conjunction with the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital, defined in Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and art. 26 points 2 and 63 of the Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – subheading 8 a (new)
Annex I – subheading 8 a (new)
Right to strike
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 38 a (new)
Annex I – point 38 a (new)
(38a) Since December 2010 Strikes in Hungary are illegal in principle, when the government of Victor Orban passed an amendment to the so-called Act on strikes. The changes mean that strikes will, in principle, be allowed in companies associated with governmental administration through public service contracts. The amendment does not apply to professional groups that simply do not have such a right, such as train drivers, police officers, medical personnel and air traffic controllers. The problem lies somewhere else, mainly in the percentage of employees who must take part in the strike referendum, to make it important - up to 70%. Then the decision on the legality of strikes will be taken by a labour court that is completely subordinate to the state. In 2011, nine applications for strike permits were submitted. In seven cases they were rejected without giving a reason; two of them were processed, but it proved impossible to issue a decision.
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 39
Annex I – point 39
(39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practice visited Hungary. In its report, the Working Group indicated that a conservative form of family, whose protection is guaranteed as essential to national survival, should not be put in an uneven balance with women’s political, economic and social rights and the empowerment of women. The Working Group also pointed out that a woman’s right to equality cannot be seen merely in the light of protection of vulnerable groups alongside children, the elderly and the disabled, as they are an integral part of all such groups. Additionally, there is a clear verbal discrimination against women in the school publishing.
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 40
Annex I – point 40
(40) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed regret that patriarchal stereotyped attitudes still prevail in Hungary with respect to the position of women in society, and noted with concern discriminatory comments made by political figures against women. It also noted that the Hungarian Criminal Code does not fully protect female victims of domestic violence. Parliament highlights the fact that Hungary has signed the Istanbul Convention and that the European Union has acceded to it.
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 42
Annex I – point 42
(42) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the constitutional ban on discrimination does not explicitly list sexual orientation and gender identity among the grounds of discrimination and that its restrictive definition of family could give rise to discrimination as it does not encompass certain types of family arrangements, including same-sex couples. The Committee was also concerned about acts of violence and the prevalence of negative stereotypes and prejudice against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, particularly in the employment and education sectors. It also mentioned forced placement in medical institutions, isolation and forced treatment of large numbers of persons with mental, intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, as well as reported violence and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and allegations of a high number of non- investigated deaths in closed institutions.
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 42 a (new)
Annex I – point 42 a (new)
(42a) Also in the same concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about forced placement in medical institutions, isolation and forced treatment of large numbers of persons with mental, intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, as well as reported violence and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and allegations of a high number of non-investigated deaths in closed institutions.
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 43
Annex I – point 43
(43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015. Notes the answer to those accusations made by the Hungarian Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister during the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee meeting, held on 26 April 2018, however does not put faith in those explanations. According to Fundamental Rights Agency annual report, 2017 the situation of Roma people in Hungary worsen since 2016.
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 44
Annex I – point 44
(44) In its Fourth Opinion on Hungary adopted on 25 February 2016, the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities noted that Roma continue to suffer systemic discrimination and inequality in all fields of life, including housing, employment, education, access to health and participation in social and political life. In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended the Hungarian authorities to make sustained and effective efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the inequality and discrimination suffered by Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma representatives, the living conditions, access to health services and employment of Roma, take effective measures to end practices that lead to the continued segregation of Roma children at school and redouble efforts to remedy shortcomings faced by Roma children in the field of education, ensure that Roma children have equal opportunities for access to all levels of quality education, and continue to take measures to prevent children from being wrongfully placed in special schools and classes. In its Report of the Field Assessment Visit to Hungary, 29 June – 1 July 2015, ODIHR stated that the worst situation of Roma people occurred in the town called Miskolc. The local authorities adopted a model of anti- Roma measures, even before the change of the local decree of 2014, and that public figures in the city often made anti- Roma statements. For example, it was reported that in February 2013, Ákos Kriza - Mayor of Miskolc - said he wanted to clean the city of “anti-social, perverted Roma” who allegedly illegally benefited from the Nest program (Fészekrakó program) for housing benefits and people living in social flats with rent and maintenance fees. His words meant the beginning of a series of evictions, and during this month, fifty apartments were removed from 273 apartments in the appropriate category - also to clean up the land for are novation of a stadium.
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 56
Annex I – point 56
(56) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, which allows for the automatic removal to transit zones of all asylum applicants for the duration of their asylum procedure, with the exception of unaccompanied children identified as being below the age of 14, does not meet the legal standards as a result of the lengthy and indefinite period of confinement allowed, the absence of any legal requirement to promptly examine the specific conditions of each affected individual, and the lack of procedural safeguards to meaningfully challenge removal to the transit zones. The Committee was particularly concerned about reports of the extensive use of automatic immigration detention in holding facilities inside Hungary and was concerned that restrictions on personal liberty have been used as a general deterrent against unlawful entry rather than in response to an individualised determination of risk. In addition, the Committee was concerned about allegations of poor conditions in some holding facilities. It noted with concern the push-back law, which was first introduced in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion by the police of anyone who crosses the border irregularly and was detained on Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of the border, which was subsequently extended to the entire territory of Hungary, and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as a “safe third country” allowing for push- backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The Committee noted with concern reports that push-backs have been applied indiscriminately and that individuals subjected to this measure have very limited opportunity to submit an asylum application or right to appeal. It also noted with concern reports of collective and violent expulsions, including allegations of heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily on visual examination by an expert and is inaccurate, and about reports alleging the lack of adequate access by such asylum seekers to education, social and psychological services and legal aid. Notes that now, according to the new the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU (COM(2016)0467 – C8-0321/2016 – 2016/0224(COD)) the medical age assessment will be a measure of a last resort. Therefore the Parliament calls on Hungary to provide proper age assessments of asylum seekers.