Activities of Renate WEBER related to 2013/0255(APP)
Plenary speeches (2)
European Public Prosecutor's Office (debate)
European Public Prosecutor's Office (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
INTERIM REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office PDF (301 KB) DOC (176 KB)
Amendments (30)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to other instruments in the area of criminal justice which have been adopted in co-decision by the European Parliament together with the Council, such as Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate upon arrest, the Directive regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters etc.,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
– having regard to Articles 263, 265, 267, 268 and 340 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the opinion of European Parliament’s Legal Service,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 b (new)
Citation 7 b (new)
– having regard to the 14 reasoned opinions expressed by the Member States’ national parliaments,
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital –A (new)
Recital –A (new)
– A. whereas the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union expressly provides in its Article 86 the possibility of establishing a European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital –A a (new)
Recital –A a (new)
-Aa. whereas the main objectives of establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is to contribute to the strengthening of the protection of the Union’s financial interests, to enhance the trust of EU businesses and citizens in the Union’s institutions and to ensure a more efficient and effective investigation and prosecution of offences affecting the EU financial interest, while fully respecting the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that the proposal of the Commission exceeds the limits envisaged by Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which is the legal basis of the proposal. Therefore, considers that the European Commission should have used this proposal in order to initiate the creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; believes that a different proposal should be issued later, on the scope of competences, powers and procedures according to which the European Public Prosecutor and its delegates will act, based on legal provisions which according to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union involve the European Parliament as co-legislator;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Council to extensively involve the European Parliament in its legislative work through a constant flow of information and ongoing consultation of Parliament to achieve an outcome that is in line with the changes brought to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union after the Lisbon process and which is essentially welcomed by both parties;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the European legislator, considering that the consistency of overall EU action in the field of justice is vital for its effectiveness, to deal with this proposal in the light of others that are closely linked to it, such as the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law and, the proposal for a regulation on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and other relevant instruments which already have been adopted in the field of criminal justice, in order to be able to ensure that it is fully compatible and consistently implemented;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
(ia) the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should fully respect the principle of the right to a fair trial, as provided for by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In this respect, when deciding the national competent court, it should be guaranteed that binding and foreseeable criteria are considered, in order to avoid discretionary powers to be given to the European Public Prosecutor. Consequently, Article 27 (4) of the proposal should be redrafted with this aim;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point ii a (new)
(iia) the Directive 2013/xx/EU, as provided for in Article 12 of the proposal, according to which the offences for which the European Public Prosecutor will be competent is not yet adopted. Therefore, the text of the proposal should specifically mention that the European Public Prosecutor cannot prosecute offences which are not yet set out in the relevant Member States’ law, already at the time of the offence;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii b (new)
Paragraph 4 – point ii b (new)
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii c (new)
Paragraph 4 – point ii c (new)
(iic) The drafting of Article 13(1), first sub-paragraph, of the proposal, exceeds the limits of Article 86(1) to (3) TFEU, as interpreted in the light of paragraph 4 thereof. Therefore, it should be redrafted in order to define terms like "ancillary" and "predominant" and ensure respect for the principle of ne bis in idem, by making a reference to the identity of conduct and also requiring unity of offender. The text of the mentioned article should specifically mention that the powers of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office extend to offences other than those affecting the Union’s financial interests only where cumulatively: - one particular conduct simultaneously constitutes offences affecting the Union’s financial interests and other offence(s); and - where the offence(s) affecting the Union’s financial interests is/are predominant and the other(s) is/are merely ancillary; and - where the other offence(s) would be barred from further trying and punishment if they were not prosecuted and brought to judgment together with the offence(s) affecting the Union’s financial interests;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii d (new)
Paragraph 4 – point ii d (new)
(iid) the trial court should be able to judicially review the determination of competence in accordance with the above- mentioned criteria. Therefore, Article 13(4) of the proposal should be redrafted accordingly;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii e (new)
Paragraph 4 – point ii e (new)
(iie) the establishment of competence under Article 12 of the proposal and the choice of a jurisdiction, should be checked by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office continuously in advance of the initiation, and throughout the investigation, until each participating Member State has implemented the future Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iv a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point iv a (new)
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v a (new)
(va) The right to an effective judicial remedy should be upheld at any time during the Public Prosecutor’s activity throughout the Union. Therefore, the provisions of Article 36 (1) should be redrafted because the Commissions’ current text, by denying the European Public Prosecutor’s Office the status of Union body interferes with the provisions of Article 263, 265 and 268 of the TFEU. In the same time, Article 36 (2) raises serious concerns about legality. It should, therefore, be redrafted, to the extent it seeks to withhold judicial review questions on the validity of acts and omissions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, as foreseen in Article 267(1)(b) TFEU, and to the extent it potentially withholds judicial review questions on the interpretation of the Treaties and of the Regulation in legal situations arising from the application of provisions of national law.
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v b (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v b (new)
(vb) the existence of mandatory dismissal grounds should be checked as soon as possible in the course of the investigation, and dismissal should follow without undue delay upon the finding that one of the mandatory grounds applies;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v c (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v c (new)
(vc) before dismissing a case for lack of relevant evidence, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office must carry out proportionate investigative steps to gather evidence, in accordance with its investigative powers and applicable procedural rights;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v d (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v d (new)
(vd) if the European Public Prosecutor decides to dismiss a case, on the basis of Article 28 (2) of the proposal, the national prosecution authorities should not be prevented from further investigating and prosecuting the case if they deem it necessary and the national law allows it;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v e (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v e (new)
(ve) in order to fully uphold the right to a fair trial and the defence rights, dismissal of a case upon transaction should be limited to the phase of criminal proceedings, before indictment;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v f (new)
Paragraph 4 – point v f (new)
(vf) transaction under Article 29 should not be possible in cases where mandatory dismissal is also required or otherwise possible under Article 28 of the proposal and when the conduct or offence at stake are lacking in seriousness;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point i b (new)
Paragraph 5 – point i b (new)
(ib) with a view to respecting the principle of equality of arms, the national law applicable to a suspect or accused person to which this regulation applies, should be the one which also applies to the investigative or prosecutorial acts of the European Public Prosecutor;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii a (new)
(iiia) Articles 56(2) and 60 of the proposed Regulation should be redrafted in order to ensure specification and foreseeability when personal data is further transmitted to the entities mentioned in those articles, thus ensuring compliance with the principle of purpose limitation;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii b (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii b (new)
(iiib) Article 61(2) of the proposed Regulation should be redrafted in order to ensure transparency and foreseeability, according to the provisions of Article 8(1) and (2) of the European Convention on Human Rights, in cases when personal data is transferred by the European Public Prosecutor to third countries or international organisations;
Amendment 98 #
(iiic) Article 61(3) of the proposed Regulation should be entirely redrafted in order to avoid discretionary powers to the European Public Prosecutor with respect to the entities where the transfer of data is envisaged, the need for the transfer etc. under the provisions of this article. The European Data Protection Supervisor and/or the European Commission should be fully involved in the decision making process;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii d (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii d (new)
(iiid) any individual should have the possibility to address a national competent court or authority within the Member State in which the individual is resident whenever his or her rights are infringed by data processing or decision making within the scope of this Regulation;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii e (new)
Paragraph 5 – point iii e (new)
(iiie) when personal data are transferred to third countries or international organisations, according to Article 61 of the proposal, the concerned individuals should be informed and should have access to remedies like the possibility to bring an action before the courts or the authority competent under the law of any Member State to access, correct, delete or obtain information or to obtain compensation in connection with an investigation or any other procedure under this Regulation relating to him;